How to Conduct An Election

I have long supported Instant Runoff Voting, where a person ranks candidates from most favorite to least favorite. Perhaps a third party candidate, whom people assume has no chance is actually the voter's preference. Third parties, primarily Dean Barkley, Independence Party, got 17% of the vote for Minnesota Senate, with Al Franken and Norm Coleman splitting the rest of the the votes to within 0.01%. I am uncertain if Barkley took more votes from Franken or from Coleman, and it is not his fault, but he certainly mucked the counting.

Let's say run-off voting occurred. The way the election went, with Coleman demonizing Franken and Franken demonizing Coleman, one can assume that Barkley was the first or second choice of most voters with knowledge of him. Put another way, people's least favorite candidate, based purely on ideology was certainly Franken or Coleman. If Barkley got many third place votes, it was for lack of name recognition.

Would Barkley have won with IRV?

He certainly would have received more than 17% of the first place vote, since many Independents probably thought they were throwing away their vote by voting for the candidate third in the opinion polls, and with IRV, your actual preference counts, so you are no longer throwing away your vote. Let's say Barkley gets 34% to Franken at 33% and Coleman at 33%. Barkley likely receives enough second place votes to win, though it is hard to guess whether Franken would be in third place and his votes would be thrown out and replaced with Franken voter's second preference or Coleman would be declared at third place and his votes apportioned between Franken and Barkley per the preferences of Coleman voters. Still, it is very likely that Barkley would have won 50+% in the second round of the instant runoff process.

Let's say Barkely does not win with IRV in place and that people vote just as they did in 2008. Then, 17% of the actual votes cast in this election would be reapportioned to either Franken or Coleman. More votes would count.

Revoting now is not fair, as many fewer voters would participate. So, we will accept that Minnesota's election laws are currently flawed since they allow third party "spoilers" to participate without counting the second place choice of third party voters.

It may seem an odd time to suggest this, as a tie between second and third is as likely as a tie between first and second, but instant runoff voting is the only way to make elections with three or more candidates fair. If I voted for Barkley with a preference for Coleman over Franken, how should I feel?

I understand if Coleman voters are unhappy with the outcome of the 2008 election, but if I am a Barkley voter, I think my reasons for being unhappy are more valid. Despite Ventura's win a while back, election laws are rigged against third parties.

But, one thing I am happy about. In Minnesota, they follow their voting laws, count their votes, and if there is bias against your favorite major party candidate, it is more likely in your imagination (perhaps you read yellow journalism) than in Minnesota's process.