Voting Systems in the United States

Voting Systems

Tactical Voting

It is a voting that does not express the voter’s true preferences.

According to Earl A. Killian:
“Many voting schemes are flawed in that voters who express their true preferences are punished by having a low preference outcome. For example, if you prefer candidate A to B, and candidate B to C, voting for A may cause C to be elected. The most common voting scheme in the U.S., first past the post, has this property, as voters may only select one of the choices on their ballot. In the example above, if B and C are the candidates most likely to be selected by other voters, voting for A instead of B, may cause C’s votes to exceed B’s, thereby electing C and punishing the voter for choosing her first preference. To vote tactically, the voter first estimates the actions of all other voters, and then votes in such the way that is most likely to give a better result than other choices, given her estimate of other voters. In the above example, she would vote for the lesser evil of the two candidates most likely to be voted for by others.

Such voting schemes are terribly flawed, and yet almost every U.S. election uses them, because they reinforce the two-party system. The need for tactical voting can be minimized by using more sophisticated voting methods, such as ranked ballots with Condorcet’s Method for election resolution. While such systems are more complicated for the election organizers, they are simpler for the voters, who need only express their true preferences without regard to what other voters will likely do.”