It seems to me that Instant Run-Off voting is a win-win situation. Do you agree? Think about it: You vote for a candidate and mark down your second and third choice candidates if the first (and second) one doesn’t get elected. If no one wins the first round with fifty per cent of the vote, then all the second (or third) choices are added and the winner is then decided. This way, we get to vote for our first choice candidate and ensure that we get a politician who has been trying to appeal to most of the voters, not just some of them. And it all happens with just a few simple modifications to the current plurality system! Talk about a good investment, eh?
ANSWER PERSON RESPONDS: Oh, what a headache these voting questions are giving Answer Person! Haven’t we learned anything from Florida in 2000 and California this year? Yes, there is something to be said for a more efficient process that doesn’t stretch out the balloting more than necessary. But do you really want to add more confusion to those already confused, and more decision-making responsibility for those who are already reluctant to make the effort to vote in the first place? Now if you can propose a more effective and HONEST campaign process, AP will be very grateful.