People are mystified by the outcomes of our elections in the U.S. Many people think that either many voters are totally stupid or that the elections are either bought or rigged. Some even have suggested that the election machine manufactures are somehow fixing the elections so the candidates those companies want to win are favored.
It's even worse. The very system we trust to elect our politicians is defective. So instead of having fair elections, we have an election system that acts like The Three Stooges are in charge of the process. In fact, there are three "stooges" that are turning our elections into a huge tangled mess of unexpected results.
OUR THREE-STOOGE ELECTIONS
USELESS OPINION POLLS
BIAS IN THE PRESS
The worst part of the election system in the U.S. is the Plurality Voting System (PVS). It malfunctions whenever more than two candidates run, or when people like many or no candidates. The failures are:
A culpable accomplice in the faulty U.S. elections is the defective and biased system of public opinion polls. They have the following biases. Most of them are caused by the polling agency's desire to save money:
The most culpable part of the faulty U.S. elections is the deliberately biased press. Most reporters are strongly biased to the liberal side because they want the benefits they think they will get if liberals are in office:
2012 election - a typical scenario:
The 2012 elections were affected by our Three-Stooge Elections in the following ways:
So the worst Republican won the Plurality Voting primaries to get the party nomination, and then Plurality Voting and the liberal press elected Obama by biasing the election.
Other cases where Three-Stooge Elections biased the vote:
Why various methods to predict elections don't work:
Various news gathering agencies have come up with attempts to predict elections. The "Elect-O-Wheel spinner at right might produce a better prediction than any of the methods listed below. All of them fail, because the Plurality Voting System outcome is not based on the logic these systems use to produce predictions:
WHY RANKING DOESN'T WORK
As the following models of elections will show, four different methods of ranking can elect four different choices (candidates):
The choices (candidates) are A, B, C, and D.
Imagine the following 10 voting blocs:
Plurality Voting System (PVS)
PVS looks at only the first place vote of each voter. All other preferences of the voters are ignored.
PVS is biased, as seen at left.
People like PVS because it is easy, because it is less work, or because it's the only way they know.
None of these justify using PVS. The results are still wrong.
Borda Count System (BCS)
Voter ranks n choices from 1 to n; each vote is n-r+1 for rank r.
Total Score = 4 X 1st + 3 X 2nd + 2 X 3rd + 1 X 4th
Can't take equal rankings. Can't tell which choices voter dislikes.
Condorcet Pairwise Winners System
Voter ranks n choices from 1 to n. Pairs of rankings are tested for who wins. Choice score is number of pairs won.
Can't take equal rankings. Can't tell which choices voter dislikes. Treats small and large differences same. Can produce no winner.
Plurality With Elimination (PWE = Instant Runoff)
Voter ranks n choices from 1 to n.
Do while no majority: Remove choice with fewest #1 ranks. Fill voids by moving ranks up.
Larger vote can make choice lose. Can't take equal rankings. Can't tell which choices voter dislikes. Treats small and large differences same.
PWE favored because it gives immediate result.
PWE should never be used.
Four different ranking voting systems shown above produce four different winners!
This means that ranking is not a valid method of election. It must be abolished.
The following systems are not ranking systems:
Range 9 Rating
Each voter rates choices on scale from 0 to 9.
Sum the ratings. Highest score wins.
In this model, voters in the bloc table (above) use the following ratings:
The Range 9 Vote
Races may be awfully close. Ties are likely. The margins of 1.63 % and 0.77 % might trigger demands for recounts.
Approval Voting (AVS)
Each voter votes for all choices he likes.
Here, voter votes for all first and second ranks in bloc table:
Here, voter votes for all Weighted Yes votes in bloc table:
Here, a vote an at-large set of 3 ranked choices.
Some voters cast more votes than others. Some voters have more power than others. Favors centrist choices. Gives wrong results with at-large elections. Ties are common.
Each voter votes independently on each choice.
Each choice score is YES votes minus NO votes.
Two possible results are shown:
Here is weighted voting (some 2nd and 3rd ranks are Abstain):
Here is block voting (2nd place = Yes, 3rd place = No):
Actual voter behavior is somewhere between above two cases.
3 ranked at-large choices. 3rd place are half Abstain, half Yes:
Voter intent is preserved with IVS.
Comparing System Voter Satisfaction
The following table compares how pleased the voters are with the results of each of the voting systems.
At-large voting is discouraged because it is a means to multiply power.
Note: Here, Max Worst occurs here with choice A or choice D win.
Error Type Meanings:
Independent Voting is the clear winner, producing a better result than other systems. It always chooses the choice that pleases the most people. It works because it does NOT use ranking.
About Vote Balance
One of the indicators of a faulty voting system is the lack of balance between the YES votes and the NO votes. Voting systems with balance work the best.
If the voter can set his own balance and numbers of YES and NO votes, the system is optimum.
Win margin - number of vote changes needed to change outcome.
Again, the Independent Voting System (IVS) is much better than the others.
How reporters twist the truth to get election results they want:
The sad truth is that the American news media are heavily biased. Their bias favors the liberal candidates because the reporters believe the promises of the liberals and want the things the liberals promise for themselves:
HOW TO FIX THIS PROBLEM
The following measures will fix these defects in the way we elect our officials.
EXAMPLES OF PLURALITY AND INDEPENDENT VOTING
Imagine an election where the following are true:
EXAMPLE OF PLURALITY VOTING RUINING AN ELECTION
No winner of either primary favors Proposition X.
Operated this way, the primary election selects the oddball candidate - the candidate most different from the rest.
An effort to defeat candidate C or candidate F will fail because the votes against them will be split.
Candidate G enters the race after the primary.
No candidate still in the race favors Proposition X.
THE GENERAL ELECTION
General Election Results:
Though more primary votes were cast for Republicans, a Democrat wins the race.
A candidate entering the race changed the outcome.
EXAMPLE OF INDEPENDENT VOTING WORKING IN AN ELECTION
There is no primary election with Independent Voting.
THE GENERAL ELECTION
People use this decision matrix to decide how to vote in this independent voting election.
In this case, Independents consider the Republican party compatible and the Democrat party incompatible.
In this case, half of the Republicans consider the Independent party compatible and half consider it incompatible.
In this case, Democrats do not consider the Independent party compatible.
In this case, Democrats do not consider the Republican party compatible.
In this case, Republicans do not consider the Democrat party compatible.
General Election Results:
A candidate entering the race cannot change the outcome unless he wins.
The result always pleases the largest number of voters.
In the table above, the number pleased for a candidate is his YES votes plus half of his ABSTAIN votes.
Other pages on the subject: