When you have two candidates running for office it is easy to understand the winner — the person who receives more than 50% of the vote — even if by just one vote.
I’m looking at the March 7th Democratic primary ballot with 7 choices for mayor and 6 choices for alderman in my ward — it’s highly unlikely the winner of either race will get more than 35% of the vote. In other cities, this would require a runoff vote among the top candidates until one receives a majority of the votes.
In lieu of holding runoff elections some cities use instant runoff voting — candidates are ranked by voters to pick a winner with a majority of votes. This voting method has pros & cons:
- No need for expensive runoff elections.
- Politicians tend to adopt a more civil tone in campaigns.
- Enough with the strategy games.
- Majority wins.
- Many cities do not have the proper equipment to count the ballots.
- It’s confusing.
- Elections for multiple positions become complex.
- Voters need to know their stuff.
What do you think, should we try it? Vote in the poll below.
The poll will close at 8pm.
— Steve Patterson