Poll on preferential voting

[Fmr. Gov. NickG]

This way you need to appeal to more voters. In the election I won, Keystone Phil had the support of 1/3 of the voters but I guess he was too polarizing or something because he didn't get any second or third place votes and it cost him the election.  

And doesn't the fact that losing the popular vote make you a bit polarizing, Akno?

If you want to call it that, call it that. I was saying you might be polarizing due to the fact that out of the 16 people who voted, 6 placed you first, and 8 placed you last. (2 did not fill out all their choices). As for me I had 4 first places, but only 3 4th places.

I support the system as it stands, and do belive we should focus on issues concerning the well-being of Atlasians.

I support focusing on the issues too and I hope you address the issues we care about (even though I might not like your opinion, we need a voice). However the current system is unfair to a candidate that works their hardest, regardless of party, gets the 1st place vote and then actually loses the election.

If we still had the FTPT system on this forum, I would not have run for the Senate and Akno would have won on 1st place votes alone.  Under the old system, the Dems and the Progressives (as my party was called then) never ran candidates against each other.  The PV system just lets every party run a candidate...it makes the campaigns more interesting without hurting the final election result.

[Fmr. Gov. NickG]

This way you need to appeal to more voters. In the election I won, Keystone Phil had the support of 1/3 of the voters but I guess he was too polarizing or something because he didn't get any second or third place votes and it cost him the election.  

And doesn't the fact that losing the popular vote make you a bit polarizing, Akno?

If you want to call it that, call it that. I was saying you might be polarizing due to the fact that out of the 16 people who voted, 6 placed you first, and 8 placed you last. (2 did not fill out all their choices). As for me I had 4 first places, but only 3 4th places.

I support the system as it stands, and do belive we should focus on issues concerning the well-being of Atlasians.

I support focusing on the issues too and I hope you address the issues we care about (even though I might not like your opinion, we need a voice). However the current system is unfair to a candidate that works their hardest, regardless of party, gets the 1st place vote and then actually loses the election.

Why does getting the most 1st place votes mean you worked the hardest?  Under the PV system, you also have to work hard getting the 2nd and 3rd place votes of people who don't necessarily agree with you on everything.

Phil, you knew how the system worked, and yet didn't work hard enough to get anything but last-place votes from everyone who wasn't a Republican.  Why should our system elect someone who has no appeal to anyone but those in his own party?

[Fmr. Gov. NickG]

This way you need to appeal to more voters. In the election I won, Keystone Phil had the support of 1/3 of the voters but I guess he was too polarizing or something because he didn't get any second or third place votes and it cost him the election.  

And doesn't the fact that losing the popular vote make you a bit polarizing, Akno?

If you want to call it that, call it that. I was saying you might be polarizing due to the fact that out of the 16 people who voted, 6 placed you first, and 8 placed you last. (2 did not fill out all their choices). As for me I had 4 first places, but only 3 4th places.

I support the system as it stands, and do belive we should focus on issues concerning the well-being of Atlasians.

I support focusing on the issues too and I hope you address the issues we care about (even though I might not like your opinion, we need a voice). However the current system is unfair to a candidate that works their hardest, regardless of party, gets the 1st place vote and then actually loses the election.

Phil, you knew how the system worked, and yet didn't work hard enough to get anything but last-place votes from everyone who wasn't a Republican.  Why should our system elect someone who has no appeal to anyone but those in his own party?

I don't know Nick, ask the majority of people that voted for me as Senator. Now because I'm not liked by the opposition means I shouldn't be a Senator? Should candidates now be looking to satisfy every single voter? I don't think so. That's how candidates become fake and lie about positions to get elected.

Ok I didn't get the most 2nd votes but I got the most 1st. Akno gets the most 2nd votes but not the 1st. I have to hear about how not winning the 2nd vote is too polarizing but we hear nothing about Akno losing the 1st vote.  Shouldn't we be considering that? The first vote should be the only vote. THAT is the fair system.

Listen we need to try to solve this problem but our real focus is on the district and the issues. Lets have this debate but we have to remember the important forum issues should concern the members and our new Senator.

You don't need to satisfy every voter, just half.   Of all the candidates, Phil, you satified the fewest.  Of the 13 voters that ranked the candidates, 8 ranked you last.  Do you really think you should be the one to represent them?

[Fmr. Gov. NickG]

I satisfied the fewest? Actually on the first vote, the people's selection for who they want FIRST, I received the most. To correct you, Bullmoose received the fewest.

Why can't a person be satisfied with more than one candidate?  Although I did not vote for Akno first, I am very satisfied that he won.  

[Fmr. Gov. NickG]

And since we aren't doing one vote per person, why aren't we allowed to do the following...

1) Keystone Phil
2) Keystone Phil

See what I'm saying? I could have won that way while others would be divided on the second ballot. But wait...that is unfair, though! You're voting for someone more than once! Yep, I am. Just as others did in this election. One vote per person.

You wouldn't have won by doing that.  You clearly don't understand how preferential voting works.  Only the 2nd place votes of previously eliminated candidates are counted!

[Fmr. Gov. NickG]

And since we aren't doing one vote per person, why aren't we allowed to do the following...

1) Keystone Phil
2) Keystone Phil

See what I'm saying? I could have won that way while others would be divided on the second ballot. But wait...that is unfair, though! You're voting for someone more than once! Yep, I am. Just as others did in this election. One vote per person.

You wouldn't have won by doing that.  You clearly don't understand how preferential voting works.  Only the 2nd place votes of previously eliminated candidates are counted!

My second vote would go to my second vote count. I DO know how this works. Akno's second vote tally added to his first had him win. If everyone that supported me did that, it would have been added on and I could have won. It's unfair though. Just like preferential voting.

No, this is not how PV works.

There is no "2nd vote count".   Here are the votes that were counted in the final run-off in the Senate race:

- 1st place votes for you
- 1st place votes for Akno
- The 2nd and 3rd place votes of those who voted for me or Bullmoose.

PV simply makes sure that everyone's vote is counted...but each voter's vote is only counted once in the final run-off.    It doesn't matter who your supporters ranked 2nd...they were already having their vote counted for you.

[Fmr. Gov. NickG]

And since we aren't doing one vote per person, why aren't we allowed to do the following...

1) Keystone Phil
2) Keystone Phil

See what I'm saying? I could have won that way while others would be divided on the second ballot. But wait...that is unfair, though! You're voting for someone more than once! Yep, I am. Just as others did in this election. One vote per person.

You wouldn't have won by doing that.  You clearly don't understand how preferential voting works.  Only the 2nd place votes of previously eliminated candidates are counted!

My second vote would go to my second vote count. I DO know how this works. Akno's second vote tally added to his first had him win. If everyone that supported me did that, it would have been added on and I could have won. It's unfair though. Just like preferential voting.

  It doesn't matter who your supporters ranked 2nd...they were already having their vote counted for you.

No what I'm saying is that 2nd vote, just like how it was for Akno, would count as a totally different vote. Is that fair? Nope. And my point is neither is preferential voting.

The 2nd place votes of your supporter's (and Akno's) never counted for anything, because you made the final run-off.   It didn't matter who you ranked 2nd or 3rd or 4th.  The only time your 2nd place vote matters is if the candidate you supported 1st get eliminated at some point during the counting.

[Fmr. Gov. NickG]

Hey all you guys say how this is what the people want and I respect your opinions. However, how do you feel about the poll located on this thread? We've been arguing but have you looked at the results of this? The people obviously don't like this system, contrary to what some here belief.

The poll is currently tied.  PV has always been a contentious issue.  I remember when we first tried to bring it up it passed by one vote, but basically caused a constitutional crisis and was repealed in a re-vote just to keep peace on the forum.

It will always be controversial because it can be confusing and a lot of people don't understand it.  But unlike FPTP, it allows people to vote honestly and not have to worry about throwing away their vote.

And if we didn't have PV, the forum would soon revert to the same boring two-party structure the real US has (because the voting system necessitates it), and our elections would be a lot less interesting.