CRV correction to Vermont report's "section 7"

Misleading quote: "This is not a difficulty with systems such as IRV, however, since voters who select second or subsequent choices will not thereby help defeat their first choice."

Correction: This is actually very very carefully worded so that it is technically true. However, it is misleading. First of all, in IRV, voters who vote for their first choice, can thereby cause him to lose. (Example) Don't you think that is a slightly more serious problem than voters who (optionally) describe their second choice, possibly hurting their first?

Second, the Vermont Report's quote leaves readers with the mistaken impression that specifying 2nd choices can never hurt you in IRV, so voters should happily do it. In fact this election example (see note 2 there) shows that IRV voters, by foolishly mentioning their honest second choice, can cause their most-hated candidate to be elected. If they had refused to specify a second choice, then the election winner would have been better in their view.

Return to main page

Return to Vermont Report Table of Contents