Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
If voters are arranged on a sole 1-dimensional axis, such as the left-right political spectrum for a common example, and always prefer candidates who are more similar to themselves, a majority-rule winner always exists and is the candidate whose ideology is most representative of the electorate, a result known as the median voter theorem. [7]
Condorcet winner [Tn 1] Condorcet loser Smith [Tn 1] Smith-IIA [Tn 1] IIA/LIIA [Tn 1] Cloneproof Monotone Participation Later-no-harm [Tn 1] Later-no-help [Tn 1] No favorite betrayal [Tn 1] Ballot type First-past-the-post voting: Yes No No No No No No No No Yes Yes Yes Yes No Single mark Anti-plurality: No Yes No No No No No No No Yes Yes ...
An electoral system (or voting system) is a set of rules that determine how elections and referendums are conducted and how their results are determined.. Some electoral systems elect a single winner (single candidate or option), while others elect multiple winners, such as members of parliament or boards of directors.
Candidate B would win with a total of 80 × 9 + 20 × 10 = 720 + 200 = 920 rating points, versus 800 for candidate A. Because candidate A is rated higher than candidate B by a (substantial) majority of the voters, but B is declared winner, this voting system fails to satisfy the criterion due to using additional information about the voters ...
The classic example of a positional voting electoral system is the Borda count. [1] Typically, for a single-winner election with N candidates, a first preference is worth N points, a second preference N – 1 points, a third preference N – 2 points and so on until the last (N th) preference that is worth just 1 point. So, for example, the ...
When mentioned without A voting system is winner-consistent if and only if it is a point-summing method; in other words, it must be a positional voting system or score voting (including approval voting). [3] [2]
Candidate B would win with a total of 80 × 9 + 20 × 10 = 720 + 200 = 920 rating points, versus 800 for candidate A. Because candidate A is rated higher than candidate B by a (substantial) majority of the voters, but B is declared winner, this voting system fails to satisfy the criterion due to using additional information about the voters ...
First-preference votes are used by psephologists and the print and broadcast media to broadly describe the state of the parties at elections and the swing between elections. [ 4 ] [ 5 ] [ 6 ] The term is much-used in Australian politics, where ranked voting has been universal at federal, state, and local levels since the 1920s.