IRV

IRV is a recount nightmare and with non-negligible frequency gives perverse results.

Matthew Yglesias » Pining For White Supremacy 2010

IRV is a band-aid, trying to fix fatal flaws in proportional representation.

Matthew Yglesias » Alternative Voting 2010

IRV is better on paper first-past-the-post in most situations, but it has its own host of both practical problems and theoretical pathologies.

Matthew Yglesias » David Miliband Doesn’t Know What Century It Is 2010

If IRV is all that, why does Australia still have two dominant parties?

Matthew Yglesias » Alternative Voting 2010

I also think IRV is decidedly superior to our current system; The electoral college really only made sense back when electors were, in fact, chosen by state legislatures.

Balkinization 2007

I also think IRV is decidedly superior to our current system; The electoral college really only made sense back when electors were, in fact, chosen by state legislatures.

Balkinization 2007

I also think IRV is decidedly superior to our current system; The electoral college really only made sense back when electors were, in fact, chosen by state legislatures.

Balkinization 2007

I also think IRV is decidedly superior to our current system; The electoral college really only made sense back when electors were, in fact, chosen by state legislatures.

Balkinization 2007

Clay Shentrup hurls a lot of accusations here, but IRV is "peddled" by a whole lot of serious people and is widely used by serious people in real elections.

Easter Lemming Liberal News 2007

The claim that IRV is better than plurality is questionable, since it increases the rate of spoiled ballots by a factor of 7, and incentivizes the implementation of fraud-prone (electronic) voting machines, and cannot be counted in precincts (and therefore requires central tabulation that makes counting less transparent and more prone to a central fraud conspiracy).

Easter Lemming Liberal News 2007