Plurality reads only the top
Each ballot counts once, for its first choice. The candidate with the most first places wins, with a majority or without one, and the rest of every ballot is ignored.
Plurality counts first places. The two-round runoff counts first places and then holds a head-to-head contest, instant runoff removes one candidate at a time, and the Borda count adds points for every position on every ballot. Run on one profile they can elect different candidates, and each answers a different question about the voters. The wrong model is that the candidate with the most first choices is the people's choice.
Core ideas
Every rule in this lesson takes the same input, a profile of rankings, and returns a winner. What differs is what the rule reads off the ballots.
Each ballot counts once, for its first choice. The candidate with the most first places wins, with a majority or without one, and the rest of every ballot is ignored.
The two-round runoff keeps the two candidates with the most first places and lets the voters choose between them. Instant runoff removes the candidate with the fewest first places, passes those ballots to their next choice, and repeats until someone holds a majority.
With three candidates a ballot gives 2 points to its first choice, 1 to its second and 0 to its last, and the points are added over all ballots. A candidate who is rarely ranked low can win without being ranked first often.
The material
A nine-voter profile in which most rules agree, one in which they split three ways, and one in which plurality elects the candidate most voters rank last.
The previous lesson asked whether majorities can be assembled into a ranking and found that sometimes they cannot. Real elections need a winner anyway, and the rules in use answer in different ways. The way to compare them is to hold the ballots fixed and change only the rule.
Take nine voters and three candidates. Four voters rank them A B C, three rank them B C A, and two rank them C B A.
Plurality reads the first column. A has 4 first places, B has 3 and C has 2, so A wins with fewer than half the voters. The two-round runoff keeps A and B, the two with the most first places, and asks the voters to choose between them using their whole ballots: 4 rank A above B and 5 rank B above A, so B wins. Instant runoff reaches the same place by another road. C has the fewest first places and is removed, its two ballots pass to their next choice, which is B, and B holds 5 of the 9 ballots.
The Borda count does not eliminate anyone. Each ballot gives 2, 1 and 0 points down the ranking, and the voters' points are summed. The sums below are the arithmetic the lab leaves to you; it prints the winner.
B wins the Borda count with 12 points against 8 and 7. B is also the Condorcet winner: it beats A by 5 to 4 and C by 7 to 2. So three of the four counts elect B, and plurality is the one that elects A, a candidate who loses the head-to-head contest with B.
Change one ballot group. Let four voters rank the candidates A C B, three B C A and two C B A. Plurality still elects A, with 4 first places against 3 and 2. The runoff and instant runoff elect B: A meets B and loses 4 to 5, and C is removed first. The Borda count elects C, with 11 points against 8 and 8. C is also the Condorcet winner, beating A by 5 to 4 and B by 6 to 3.
Three different counts, three different winners, from nine ballots. C is never ranked last by anyone, and it is eliminated in the first round of both runoff rules because only two voters put it first. Nothing in the ballots has changed between the rules; what changed is which part of the ballots each rule looks at.
The lab runs these on the profile you type, with the winner under the chosen rule, the Condorcet result and the table of pairwise counts. It reports a tie as a tie. It scores Borda as 2, 1, 0 for three candidates and with the matching run of points for more, and it takes every ballot as the voter's real ranking; whether voters would rank the same way under a different rule is the question of “Strategic Voting and Manipulation”.
Interactive
six voting rules, the majority relation, judgment aggregation and the jury theorem
Method
Five moves, in this order, for any profile of three candidates. Keep the profile table in front of you throughout.
One row per ranking, best to worst, with the number of voters who hold it. Check that the counts add up to the electorate.
Add the counts of the rows that begin with each candidate. The largest total wins, however small a share of the voters it is.
The two candidates with the most first places meet. For each row, see which of the two it ranks higher, and add the counts. Instant runoff instead removes the candidate with the fewest first places and moves those rows to their next choice.
Multiply a row's points by its count for each candidate, then add down the column. The largest total wins.
Count each pair of candidates. If one candidate beats both others it is the Condorcet winner, and each rule can now be described by whether it elected that candidate.
Four voters rank A B C, three rank B C A, two rank C B A.
Plurality elects a candidate who loses a head-to-head contest with the Condorcet winner. The first column of a ballot is a small part of what the voter thinks, and a rule that reads only that part can disagree with every rule that reads more.
Given a profile with counts, compute each rule's winner by hand, find the Condorcet winner, and name a profile on which three of the rules elect three different candidates.
Something to change about this lesson? Write it down, tick it off when it is handled, and export the list when you want to act on it. Kept in this browser only: nothing is sent anywhere, and nobody is notified.
No recommendations yet for this lesson.