: Who benefits from better The Root of Electoral Evils methods? Our current choose-one method allows voters to express an opinion about only one candidate. This works fine—when there are only two candidates. Add a third, and you get vote splitting: the most similar candidates split their common supporters’ votes, and can lose to another less preferred Major-party supporters candidate—possibly even the least preferred! • Better primaries, without vote The Vote-Splitting Cycle What Makes a Good Voting Method splitting and spoilers A good voting method has several essential Fear of being a “spoiler” deters many candidates • Less negative campaigning, qualities, starting with the fundamental two: from entering the race, denying voters a real choice. more post-primary unity Often enough more candidates run anyway, forcing Accuracy and Simplicity. Over the expected voters to play a game: guessing how other voters range of scenarios, the voting method • No minor-party spoilers will vote. For this they consider candidates’ “viabilty” must produce results that accurately reflect the — not only their qualifications, but their popularity, will of the electorate, at an acceptable logistical Minor-party supporters funding, and media support. Campaign money cost. To produce such results, we need three more becomes necessary not just to make candidates qualities: Expressiveness, Sincerity, and Equality. • Other parties see minor-party candidates as allies, not spoilers known, but to signal that they are serious. Facing Voters must be able and willing to express a the “wasted-vote dilemma,” many voters abandon reasonably full and sincere opinion, and the • Results reflect a party’s true their favorite candidates for the few who seem to presence of similar candidates should not hurt or support have the best chances — the bandwagon effect. help them. The Equality criterion in particular is key to preventing vote splitting. Finally, we need a The general public Any third candidate who nevertheless does get way to measure and support Consensus (e.g. significant votes succeeds only in splitting the vote majority or super-majority under choose-one • Compromise results more and spoiling the election, giving victory to a less Plurality Voting) for groups or important decisions accurately reflecting “the will of favored candidate. Whatever the outcome, most that require it. the people” voters are left dissatisfied. Plurality Voting is not merely simple, but simplistic—it gathers too little • More civility and consensus, less How would this !"#$!"#$%! polarization and acrimony information to reliably elect the candidate with the look to voters? $#&'('#)"! % & ' ( ) * *+,-!.!),!/ most support. • Parties compete to serve voters, Every voting method +",-.-"#$/0 Spoiler Example 0#+)1!2 6 6 7 6 6 6 not deep-pocketed funders can be implemented +",-.-"#$/1 Gore would have won the 2000 physically in different 0#+)1!3 6 6 6 6 6 7 US presidential election against ways, but the common +",-.-"#$/+ 0#+)1!4 7 6 6 6 6 6 Bush had left-wing spoiler favored format is the +",-.-"#$/2 “ Nader not split the vote. grid : 0#+)1!5 6 6 7 6 6 6 Make things as simple as possible, but no simpler.” ~Albert Einstein Evaluative Voting Methods Reduce Vote Splitting

Voting methods fall into three categories: allocative 8+D/%$&,-)1&,-"3FG&,,3$)C"32'&+,)?3'@+7=)H()*1C)%,7)8+D/"3E&'( (where you “give your vote” to a candidate), comparative 6%=37)+,)6%(3=&%,F$3-$3')2+D/#'3$)=&D#"%'&+, (usually expressed by ranking), and evaluative (expressed 8+,7+$23')?3'@+7)A5!B by rating). In the Voter Satisfaction Efficiency (VSE) chart, all the colored bars represent rating methods, while all the gray Complexity: Difficulty of explain- <,='%,')5#,+>>)*+'&,- bars are ranking methods. Choose-one Plurality Voting is ing, understanding, voting, tallying, markedly worse than the others because allocative voting and recounting. 9:; methods tend to split. Evaluative methods tend not to split, VSE: Normalized Bayesian regret. because candidates are rated independently. 6+$7%)8+#,' Bars: Voting-method performance, What are these relatively good voting methods? 14.5)*+'&,- with the left edge showing the

53"%'&03)8+D/"3E&'( worst case, and the right edge is the mother of evaluative voting methods: 12+$3)*+'&,- rate each candidate individually on a scale (typically 0-5). showing the best, based on the degree of strategic voting. STAR Voting is Score Voting with a second tallying stage. .//$+0%")*+'&,-

The two highest rated candidates are finalists; the winner !"#$%"&'()*+'&,- is the one preferred by the majority. STAR Voting better resists strategic voting. !"# $"# %"# &"# '"# h/t Equal Vote (""# *+'3$)1%'&=>%2'&+,)C>>&2&3,2()A*1CB 3-2-1 Voting grades candidates on a 3-value Likert scale. Of the three candidates with the most “Likes”, select the two with the fewest “Dislikes”, and then the one more When friends choose a movie, or businesses choose a supplier, they often use some often preferred to the other. 3-2-1 Voting both resists form of Score Voting, because good results matter: friends want to stay friends, and strategy and promotes consensus. ;<..&<3&9,"&=*==."&>#$&"0:, businesses want to stay in business. So why do we use choose-one Plurality Voting :037<709"&2,#&1#*&055$#?"&#> !"#$%"&'(&)*+, in ? is the simplest form !"#$%&'()*+,)-./ 7 -.&!#$" of Score Voting, on a binary scale of 0 0"12(-).'(+,)-./ 6 Fortunately the US and state constitutions seldom mention voting methods, let /0$$1&)$#23" or 1: approve as many candidates as 3'%"-.)-')*+,)-./ 7 alone mandate one, so reform is possible at the state and local levels. However, few 40.5,&607"$ you like. AV can use today’s 4-""*+,)-./ 6 people know that alternative voting methods even exist. We need to raise awareness, 809&)*:,0303 and software! !"52-1+,)-./ 7 in our schools and colleges; among journalists, politicians, and party activists; and throughout the electorate.

Honeybees are the only other animals known Join us! Like us on Facebook and learn more at to vote, and they use an evaluative method! unsplitthevote.org