If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

•       •       •

1081 clicks; posted to Politics » on 03 Nov 2021 at 7:57 PM (34 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:

 Paginated (50/page) Single page, reversed
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

I would ask the probability of a tie in ranked choice happening, but it's apparently somewhat high.

In what is believed to be a first in US politics, a ranked-choice vote in Maine ended in a tie. Winner to be determined tomorrow at the state Thunderdome

by Stephen King.

Obviously, the solution is best 2 out of 3 to 10, N-64 Goldeneye using the Stack map

BizarreMan: I would ask the probability of a tie in ranked choice happening, but it's apparently somewhat high.

Depends how you formulate the question I suppose. The most direct setup I can think of is just a binomial distribution.  As the trailing candidates are eliminated, each ballot comes down to a question of candidate A or candidate B.  Arbitrarily consider one the 'success' and one the 'failure' event for # of votes trials and that's your probability of a tie.  That's obviously assuming an equal probability for each candidate and ignoring the probability of having an evenly divisible number of people cast votes that rank either final candidate at all (and counts people that vote but don't rank either of them as part of the non-turnout).

iheartscotch: Obviously, the solution is best 2 out of 3 to 10, N-64 Goldeneye using the Stack map

No Oddjob!

That's really, really unlikely under ranked choice, unless there are only 2 people on the ballot.

So?

No pistols at dawn?  Weak sauce.

"See! It was cause chaos if we did that in our state!" -Republicans

The less cool Portland.

Ties happen in FPTP and every other system too. It has nothing to do with Ranked Choice.

andrewagill: That's really, really unlikely under ranked choice, unless there are only 2 people on the ballot.

That's what I thought

Can't they use strength of schedule or goal differential to decide this?

BizarreMan: I would ask the probability of a tie in ranked choice happening, but it's apparently somewhat high.

It all depends on how many ballots were cast.

The ranked choice part doesn't actually have anything to do with it, only the total number of ballots matters in determining odds.

BizarreMan: I would ask the probability of a tie in ranked choice happening, but it's apparently somewhat high.

there is as yet insufficient data for a meaningful answer

And if that doesn't work, they can just toss a coin.

We are still using those after all this time? It's such an outdated concept. Can't we get beyond thunderdome?

MattytheMouse: iheartscotch: Obviously, the solution is best 2 out of 3 to 10, N-64 Goldeneye using the Stack map

No Oddjob!

Slappers only

Heavy Metal Nixon: We are still using those after all this time? It's such an outdated concept. Can't we get beyond thunderdome?

No.
"TWO POLS ENTER! ONE POL LEAVES!TWO POLS ENTER! ONE POL LEAVES!"

With ranked choice, they should see which of the two tied people had more first choice votes and declare them the winner.

Since it's unlikely that they were both tied after the first count AND after losers had been eliminated.

DemonEater: With ranked choice, they should see which of the two tied people had more first choice votes and declare them the winner.

Since it's unlikely that they were both tied after the first count AND after losers had been eliminated.

I don't like that idea as undermining one of the main benefits of ranked choice (voting first for a candidate with little support affects the final outcome), but it is massively better than a coin toss and would be pretty damned rare.

Personally I am at a toss up between most first choice ballots and the most prior to the final reallocation. But, either way, having that options is an advantage over FPTP.

Lobsterdome

Sigh.  As if ranked choice doesn't already have an uphill battle to be taken seriously...

I'm starting to think open-pit knife fights may be a better system of choosing representatives.

No, wait. Bat'leths

dywed88: I don't like that idea as undermining one of the main benefits of ranked choice (voting first for a candidate with little support affects the final outcome), but it is massively better than a coin toss and would be pretty damned rare.

Personally I am at a toss up between most first choice ballots and the most prior to the final reallocation. But, either way, having that options is an advantage over FPTP.

Oh, yeah, most prior to final reallocation is also a good option.  Hmm.

Either still beats coin toss though

DemonEater: With ranked choice, they should see which of the two tied people had more first choice votes and declare them the winner.

Since it's unlikely that they were both tied after the first count AND after losers had been eliminated.

Yeah, that seems like it might be ... you know ... undermining the entire point of the ranked choice thing.

If they're really , really tied, the right thing to do is to follow state law, which in many places is to draw lots.

rubi_con_man: DemonEater: With ranked choice, they should see which of the two tied people had more first choice votes and declare them the winner.

Since it's unlikely that they were both tied after the first count AND after losers had been eliminated.

Yeah, that seems like it might be ... you know ... undermining the entire point of the ranked choice thing.

If they're really , really tied, the right thing to do is to follow state law, which in many places is to draw lots.

How is it undermining the point of ranked choice?

"out of the whole population, these two candidates are exactly equally tolerable. Out of deference, we will defer to the one with the most enthusiastic (read, initial) support." is a perfectly fine tie break mechanism.

Thats not the same as if there's a tie you give it to the candidate with most initial votes if it's some third candidate outside the tie.

Hey, wouldn't it be keen if every state had a Thunderdome for settling disputes? No more talk talk talk, let's get down to business!

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest