RCV doesn’t achieve better results than our current system because they elected Eric Adams who didn’t even live in NYC at the time and is now under criminal investigation. I’m more than willing to wait to see more results from RCV elections before completely damning it, but I have low expectations. Corruption almost always win. That’s the main problem.
Other places, not just a few in the US, use RCV, so there’s plenty of real data to go by, plus the math itself. There are other systems out there that add to RCV, but even by itself it is absolutely better than FPTP which is mathematically shown to favor only two major parties even when started off with lots of evenly preferred parties.
You’re correct on if there aren’t any good selections there can’t be a good pick, but don’t condemn an election system because of that. Make it so parties have to work to stay relevant. Or as Washington warned, just don’t have parties to become this way, but I don’t know if that’s possible in a larger and more complex society.
RCV doesn’t achieve better results than our current system because they elected Eric Adams who didn’t even live in NYC at the time and is now under criminal investigation. I’m more than willing to wait to see more results from RCV elections before completely damning it, but I have low expectations. Corruption almost always win. That’s the main problem.
Other places, not just a few in the US, use RCV, so there’s plenty of real data to go by, plus the math itself. There are other systems out there that add to RCV, but even by itself it is absolutely better than FPTP which is mathematically shown to favor only two major parties even when started off with lots of evenly preferred parties.
You’re correct on if there aren’t any good selections there can’t be a good pick, but don’t condemn an election system because of that. Make it so parties have to work to stay relevant. Or as Washington warned, just don’t have parties to become this way, but I don’t know if that’s possible in a larger and more complex society.