The October 29 issue of the Lexington (Kentucky) Herald-Leader has this op-ed by Howard Dean, advocating Instant Runoff Voting. Dean is former chair of the Democratic National Committee, and has been advocating IRV for many years.
Ballot Access News
Edited By Richard Winger
What an idiot!
Before Burlington, VT held its initiative to eliminate IRV for its mayoral elections, those opposing the initiative brought in Howard Dean for a press conference. He was going on about how IRV eliminated negative campaigning, when someone asked him about an incident that happened during the first mayoral election using IRV.
He then asserted that Burlington had only had one election under IRV. When everyone corrected him, he went on to say that the result demonstrated that the voters don’t “like the rough stuff”, when it may have actually demonstrated that negative campaigning is effective under IRV.
He also wrote an editorial (or had one written for him) that claimed that he had made a special effort to get back to Burlington to vote in the first election since he was such a backer of IRV.
IRV manages to snuff out choices with less than 50% plus one vote of support.
The Sainte-Lague parliament seat distibution system however, immediately lowers the threshold to 33.33% plus one vote in a two-member district.
The more members per district, the more people are working together. For example, a 100-member district is 100 names elected with 1/101ths of the votes plus one vote each.
Dean is one more Donkey math MORON — in election systems and economics.
IRV = THE method to elect Stalin/Hitler clones for single offices — when the Middle is divided (as it is most of the time)
34 S–M–H
33 H–M–S
16 M–S–H
16 M–H–S
99
A mere 67 votes for M in 2nd place — but M loses with IRV.
P.R. legislative and nonpartisan App.V. executive/judicial.