> > Jan Kok wrote: > > > > >The statistical evidence at http://rangevoting.org/TTRvIRVstats.html > > >seems pretty good that IRV leads to two party domination in IRV > > >elections, while (delayed) top two runoff tends to lead to a strong > > >multiparty system. > > > > > >Why do those two methods, which seem strategically quite similar, lead > > >to such different results? > > > > In 2-balloting top-2 Runoff, the CW can't lose if s/he comes in 1st or >2nd > > in the first balloting. > >Ok. How does that lead away from 2 party domination? Can you show a >scenario where voter incentives are different for IRV and TTR?
Well, the more reliable win for the CW means less need for defensive strategy, such as insincerely ranking a top-2 candidate in 1st place. Not doing that will help avoid two party domination. >Are there any Australian web sites, blogs, newspaper or magazine >editorials, etc. that criticize IRV? I reply: I don't know. Mike Ossipoff ---- election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
