Skip to content
Andrew Tobias
Andrew Tobias

Money and Other Subjects

  • Home
  • Books
  • Videos
  • Bio
  • Archives
  • Links
  • Me-Mail
Andrew Tobias
Andrew Tobias

Money and Other Subjects

A Twist on Instant Runoff Voting

January 31, 2019January 29, 2019

One dearly hopes Howard Schultz — a good man, for sure — sees the light and stands down from his disastrous idea to become the next Ralph Nader / Jill Stein / Ross Perot.  A super friendly Starbucks boycott until he does might help him see that light — and save us $5 a day we can put toward winning in 2020.

I’m not suggesting you go without coffee; just suggesting you make it at home and pour into one of these.

That said, I’ve long advocated Ranked-Choice or Instant-Runoff voting.  You’d vote for Howard Schultz or Nader — or your high school sweetheart — but specify a second choice just in case your first didn’t win.

It would be so healthy for democracy.


One of you recently wrote me with an interesting twist on that notion.

Richard S.: “I love the idea of Ranked-Choice Voting, but may I suggest a variation? Everyone votes for whomever they choose.  After the votes are tabulated, until someone has more than 50% of the votes, we go in reverse order of ‘winning’ and allow the candidates who didn’t make it to allocate all their votes to any candidate above them.  This preserves the very nature of a representative democracy, in which by voting you’re allowing someone else to make choices on your behalf; and would allow all kinds of third party votes to be not thrown away.  Candidates could even — optionally — let people know in advance where they’d allocate their votes, should they not win, so voters could take that into account as well.  This system would also encourage coalition building between the candidates.  Best of all, no changes are necessary at the polls.  Could that work?”

One worry: in a close race, where the leader got (say) 48% of the vote, this would give the least popular candidate — who got just (say) 2.1% — more sway over who wins than the second most popular candidate, who might have gotten 20% or 30% of the vote.

So I think I’d stick with the current proposals, where each voter specifies a second choice.

But what say my estimable readers?

 

Post navigation

← Left and Center
The Smartest Guy; The Nicest Guy; The Meanest Guy →

Quote of the Day

"I have learned that a man has the right to look down on another only when he has to help the other get to his feet."

Gabriel Garcia Marquez

Subscribe

 Advice

The Only Investment Guide You'll Ever Need

"So full of tips and angles that only a booby or a billionaire could not benefit." -- The New York Times

Help

MYM Emergency?

Too Much Junk?

Tax Questions?

Ask Less

Recent Posts

  • Unbelievably Bad -- Literally

    July 4, 2025
  • Repeal The Steal

    July 2, 2025
  • Our Record-High Stock Market

    June 30, 2025
  • Stuffing The Goose

    June 30, 2025
  • Yes! (Plus A Bonus)

    June 29, 2025
  • How Does THAT Make You Feel . . .

    June 27, 2025
  • Randi, David, Ken, and HYMC

    June 26, 2025
  • Six Links For Your Consideration

    June 25, 2025
  • Weekend Reading

    June 20, 2025
  • Oh, My

    June 18, 2025
Andrew Tobias Books
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
©2025 Andrew Tobias - All Rights Reserved | Website: Whirled Pixels | Author Photo: Tony Adams