Celritannia wrote:Nobel Hobos 2 wrote:
You could explain that some more.
2 Rounds or more gives minor parties nothing more than "signal" support: people will vote for them more often if they know they will get a second chance to vote if (when!) their preferred minor candidate is eliminated. So you might get 15% signalling that they would prefer the Libertarian, if only they had a chance. But when they're knocked out those voters can (if they wish) choose between the lesser of two evils.
Multi-round raised the profile of each minor party which might some day lead to them winning some seats, but it DOES NOT deliver them 15% of the seats. The Australian parliament uses IRV (as many rounds as there are candidates, but the voter only has to fill out one ballot) but is nonetheless dominated by two major parties. There is 1 Green (out of 151 seats) though nationally the Greens got a little over 10% of the vote. Multi-round voting but still for seats that are a head-to-heat contest for one place, barely weakens the Two Party System at all.
Proportional Representation is basically the idea that the vote for all parties is matched in seats in some kind of parliament. It requires that every voter sees the same ballot. The only detail worth mentioning is there is usually a minimum (say 2%) below which no seats are awarded.
I was of course just refering to the Presidential election, not the legislature.
OK. 2 round voting doesn't make it proportional. Making the EC proportional is something I've explored, but as third parties found their feet and started to take a bigger role, it would almost always end with a "hung" college and off to the House. The requirement for an absolute majority is in the Constitution.
So you're saying hold the Presidential election with the EC, but twice if the first time doesn't produce a result? With only the top two on the second ballot?
I never like that kind of run-off. I think it's asking too much patience and effort from the voters. I would always advise using Instant Runoff, so the voters only fill out a ballot once. All the first preference votes are counted, then the candidate with the least is eliminated and all the second preferences from those ballots are distributed (to the other candidates the second vote is for). Then the candidate left with the least is eliminated, and their second preferences are distributed (or third preference, if their second pref was the candidate already eliminated). This proceeds until one candidate has an absolute majority. Which can happen right at the start of course.
But how to make that work with the EC?
Sending delegates with a "virtual" 2nd round preference (of the voters who they represent) might produce some Electors for a minor party. Presumably (being minor) they would be eliminated after the first vote, but be expected to vote again with the second preferences they carry. But this introduces a new problem: if there's only one Green elector from that state, and 75% of their second preferences are for Blue with 25% for Red, can they cast three-quarters of a vote for Blue and a quarter of a vote for Red? Probably not (Americans don't like math!) so they'll have to cast their one vote on the second ballot, for Blue. This gives Red voters in that state, who can guess how the Green preferences will go on the second ballot, a strong disincentive to vote Green at all.
This problem of wanting their vote to just die before it will ever count towards their least-favored candidate, is usually dealt with by allowing voters in a direct election, to just put a 1 beside their favourite and leave the others blank. But mediated through the EC I can see no solution besides the fractional votes. It's common in non-proportional systems to have votes "just die". For instance if you voted for Biden in Utah, they count up the vote and when your guy loses in that state, your vote does not count for President. All the electors will be for Trump (tho who knows!). That's bad, already, but far worse would be flipping votes in the system. You vote Red and it gets counted as Blue, is a hard fail.
All that said, I have no objection to making the Presidential vote a 2 round one, from the national popular vote. Multi-round with one election would be better, but neither kind works well with the Electoral College.
