SUSA: Franken would win by a decisive 1 point margin in a re-vote

[Lief 🗽]

If another election for U.S. Senate was held again today who would you vote for? Dean Barkley? Norm Coleman? Or Al Franken?
Franken 41%
Coleman 40%
Barkley 15%
Not Sure 3%

http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReport.aspx?g=214a21c2-f5f3-4e9e-bffc-d0980f2f81c3

[ilikeverin]

Take a look at the age distribution on that "should the losing candidate start a legal challenge if he thinks the process was unfair" question

65+: 38-57
50-64: 33-64
35-49: 29-66
18-34: 61-36

[Holmes]

The young'uns love their Franken.

[Lief 🗽]

The young'uns love their Franken.

Yes, I have high hopes for my generation.

[Eraserhead]

I support a re-vote.

[Lunar]

A run-off would be democratically just here...

Barkley voter's second preference should matter...

[bullmoose88]

The young'uns love their Franken.

They obviously don't remember how terribly unfunny he is/was.

[Nixon in '80]

A run-off would be democratically just here...

Barkley voter's second preference should matter...

[Padfoot]

A run-off would be democratically just here...

Barkley voter's second preference should matter...

Instant run-off voting is the only way to go. 

[Lunar]

I mean, it'd be unfair to the candidates to force a surprise run-off.  But if Minnesota law allowed it*, it'd be noble for them to both agree to it.

*It almost certainly doesn't

[Tender Branson]

You got this wrong:

Coleman leads by 1 point ...

[emailking]

A run-off would be democratically just here...

Barkley voter's second preference should matter...

Instant run-off voting is the only way to go. 

I think Vote Fair is better.

http://www.votefair.org/

IRV gauges preferences much better than first place plurality voting, but not as well as possible and it still allows for strategic voting.

[minionofmidas]

A run-off would be democratically just here...

Barkley voter's second preference should matter...

Instant run-off voting is the only way to go. 

I think Vote Fair is better.

http://www.votefair.org/

Sounds very close to Condorcet... and doesn't really sound like an improvement on it.

IRV gauges preferences much better than first place plurality voting, but not as well as possible and it still allows for strategic voting.
[/quote]That's part of the beauty of it.

[emailking]

I suppose the advantage over condorcet is that there are no circular logic problems. (e.g. The Raiders beat the Jets who beat the Pathers who beat the Jets...). Condorcet doens't always declare a winner and some alternative methodology must be employed.

Vote Fair just gives a score to each permutation of candidates based on how well it reflects voter preferences. The head of the highest scoring lineup wins. At worst you have a tie, but with no more liklihood than a tie in plurality voting.

Yeah to each his own, but I think it's better if the voters don't have to worry about anything other than who they prefer over whom. Not...how can we game this so I am best served. You know?