'majority winner' - compare RCV and STAR
-
In my state of North Carolina - RCV website https://www.betterballotnc.org makes this claim ‘RCV always produces majority winners’?
What simulations compare different voting methods - especially RCV vs STAR - from the perspective of 'Majority Winner'?
What should be a fair and balanced statement for RCV and STAR in the context of Majority Winner?
What helpful links deal with Majority Winner? Here is what I found so far:
The Majority Criterion - if a candidate receives a majority of the 1st-place votes in an election, then that candidate should be the winner of the election.
https://electionscience.org/voting-methods/runoff-election-the-limits-of-ranked-choice-voting/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Majority_criterion
Some methods that comply with this criterion include any Condorcet method, Instant-runoff voting, Bucklin voting, and Plurality voting.The criterion was originally defined in relation to methods which rely only on ranked ballots (voted preference orders of the candidates), so while ranked methods such as the Borda count fail the criterion under any definition, its application to methods which give weight to preference strength is disputed.
For these methods, such as STAR voting, Score (Range) voting, Approval voting and Majority Judgment, the system may pass or fail depending on the definition of the criterion which is used.https://www.fairvote.org/why-irv-produces-a-majority-winner
Survey: Majority Criterion
Youtube VideoWhat is Mutual Majority???
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutual_majority_criterionhttps://ballotpedia.org/Majority_voting_system
A majority voting system is an electoral system in which the winner of an election is the candidate that received more than half of the votes cast. In the event that no candidate wins an outright majority, a runoff election is held between the top two vote-getters. For this reason, majority systems are sometimes referred to as two-round systems.https://www.starvoting.us/glossary
Majority Criteria: a controversial criteria that states that a slim majority that agrees on its first choice should be able to overpower another larger majority that may not agree on their first choice but have come to a compromise. This is the inverse of Tyranny-Of-The-Majority Criteria. Majority Criteria and Tyranny-Of-The-Majority Criteria are mutually exclusive. -
@masiarek said in 'majority winner' - compare RCV and STAR:
RCV website https://www.betterballotnc.org makes this claim ‘RCV always produces majority winners’?
This is just playing with words. The winner is clearly not the candidate that a majority of the voters wanted in all cases.
@masiarek said in 'majority winner' - compare RCV and STAR:
What simulations compare different voting methods - especially RCV vs STAR - from the perspective of 'Majority Winner'?
I am not aware of a specific metric. I do not think "majority winner" is a well defined concept.
@masiarek said in 'majority winner' - compare RCV and STAR:
What should be a fair and balanced statement for RCV and STAR in the context of Majority Winner?
IRC/RCV is a very majoritarian system and because of which it often fails to get good winners. STAR is based off the utilitarian score system so it is majoritarian out of the top to utilitarian winners. This means STAR is much more likely to get a better winner under metrics like condorset but will not always produce the most majoritarian/polarizing winner.
@masiarek said in 'majority winner' - compare RCV and STAR:
What helpful links deal with Majority Winner?
Electowiki is always good
https://electowiki.org/wiki/MajorityHere is my take on the topic
https://forum.electionscience.org/t/utilitarian-vs-majoritarian-in-single-winner/602 -
Here is another good article
https://psephomancy.medium.com/a-majority-of-voters-1d990a53b089
