San Francisco Bay Guardian Story on Attempts to Repeal Instant Runoff Voting in San Francisco

This San Francisco Bay Guardian article describes the political maneuvering in San Francisco concerning Instant Runoff Voting and a proposed repeal of that system, which was first approved in San Francisco in 2002. Earlier this year, an attempt to repeal IRV was defeated in the San Francisco Board of Supervisors. Now a new attempt, to repeal it only for the executive offices, is under way.


  1. IRV is a single-winner district system that attracts egomaniacs, power-grabbers and dictators.

    BAN and has been a strong supporter of this system for more than 17 years.

    The correct way to elect representatives fairly would be pure proportional representation, where the eleven seats would be elected at-large using ranked choice voting (RCV). The first eleven names garnering 1/12th (8.33%) of the votes cast plus one vote could be elected in consecutive order, which is a much lower threshold than what IRV requires (50% plus one vote).

    IRV perpetuates the tyranny of the majority and BAN, and Californians for Electoral Reform should be help accountable for IRV which pretty much destroys fairness in elections.

  2. They should be held accountable.

  3. Demo Rep · · Reply

    IRV = THE method to elect Stalin/Hitler clones to single person offices — when the mystified Middle is divided.

    34 S–M–H
    33 H–M–S
    16 M–S–H
    16 M–H–S

    Gee – who has a mere 99 of 99 votes in 1st and 2nd place votes ???

    Gee – who beat both S and H using head to head Condorcet math ???

    Gee – how EVIL stupid are the EVIL IRV fanatics from Hell about IRV for single offices ???

  4. Critics of IRV have a lot more credibility when they acknowledge what is unappealing about plurality voting. Why do you suppose so many universities and organizations use IRV for their elections? (See list at

    Besides, are Hitler and Stalin really so different as your hypothetical poll implies?

    For a more realistic example, consider the election of Pres. Mary Robinson in Ireland.

  5. Demo Rep · · Reply

    NO reasoning is possible with IRV FANATICS – who do NOT care a bit about the DIVIDED MAJORITY problem with 3 or more choices.

    Like trying to reason with a 1917 Marxist-Leninist FANATIC regarding capital replacement costs in commie regimes having no economic cost stats. See the ROT of the 1917-1991 U.S.S.R. regime — took many decades — but it did ROT.

    Fanatics have an EVIL way of brainwashing folks — Lenin, Hitler, Mussolini, Hirohito, IRV folks, NPV folks, etc.

    Can an IRV FANATIC guarantee for certain for ever that there NEVER will be 2 Stalin/Hitler clones in the final top 2 positions WHEN IRV is used ???

    Gee – only takes ONE messed up election for really bad things to happen — 1860 U.S.A. Prez – about 750,000 DEAD in 1861-1865.

    1932 Germany Prez >>> appointed Prime Minister Hitler in Jan. 1933 >>> about 70 MILLION DEAD in 1939-1945.

    Gee – How come IRV has been repealed in how many local regimes in the U.S.A. thus far ???

    Some EVIL fanatics got elected via IRV and claimed a 100 percent mandate from Hell to do whatever ???
    P.R. and nonpartisan App.V – pending Condorcet head to head math.

  6. I don’t know what your criteria is for labeling someone a fanatic (from Hell, no less!), but it seems as apt to describe some defenders of the current system of as those calling for IRV.

    I know IRV’s not perfect; no voting method is. But some methods are more imperfect than others. You make it sound like no one evil ever gets elected by simple plurality.

    By the way, do you think conventional runoffs also make it more likely that someone like Hitler or Stalin wins? Or is that only true for instant runoffs?

  7. And yes, it’s true a number of places have adopted IRV and repealed it soon after. Just like some constituencies have put Democrats in office, only to send them packing in subsequent terms. Oh, the vagaries of politics . . .

  8. Demo Rep · · Reply

    IRV is one of THE worst so-called election reforms possible.

    Plurality is EVIL rotted from day 1 – by definition — plurality = minority in many cases.

    LOTS of Stalin and Hitler clones (in closets) in the gerrymander Congress and all 50 gerrymander State legislatures — due to plurality nominations and elections in de facto one party safe seat gerrymander districts.

    P.R. and nonpartisan App.V. — NO rotted caucuses, primaries and conventions.

  9. I know no voting system’s perfect but I’ve created my own system.

    Voters rank their choices in order of preference. Now, instead of declaring a candidate with he majority of the 1st choices the winner, you must make sure this candidate isn’t also the candidate with the most last place choices. The top choices are good, the bottom choices are bad.

    In a 3-way race, your 1st and 2nd choices are good, your 3rd choice is bad.

    Let’s use the classical S-H-W example:


    34 S-M-H
    33 H-M-S
    16 M-S-H
    16 M-H-S

    S got the most 1st choices but not enough to win a majority. The 3rd choices are counted and H is eliminated since he got the most votes there. Now the 2nd choices are counted and M gets the most 2nd choices and is the winner!

    So, when it comes to counting the top choices, should nobody have the majority here, the candidate with the least votes is eliminated. The bottom choices eliminate the candidate with the most votes, since a top choice is always better than a bottom choice.

  10. BAN, and Californians for Electoral Reform should be exposed for continuing to support IRV to this day.

    In politics we must be decisive and we must be decisive. It’s like we’re losing 100 units every 1/6th of a second.

    As you can see, they’ve written off 2012 for the own selfish reasons they have done year after year after year for 17 years.

    Ready for REAL democracy? Less than 37 days to elect your name and pretty much all the names you write in on the 8th USA Parliament Election of 2012 to a four-year term:

    Est. August 6th, 1995

  11. Demo Rep, do you think conventional runoffs also make it more likely that someone like Hitler or Stalin wins? Or is that only true for instant runoffs?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: