• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Democracy Chronicles

Towards better democracy everywhere.

  • AMERICAN DEMOCRACY
  • WORLD DEMOCRACY
  • POLITICAL ART
  • more
    • election technology
    • money politics
    • political dissidents
    • THIRD PARTY
      • third party central
      • green party
      • justice party
      • libertarian party
    • voting methods
  • DC INFO
    • author central
    • about
    • advertise with DC
    • contact
    • privacy policy
You are here: Home / DC Authors / Against Arizona’s Proposition 121, a Flawed “Top-Two” Primary

Against Arizona’s Proposition 121, a Flawed “Top-Two” Primary

October 16, 2012 by Richard Fobes 1 Comment

FacebookLinkedInPinTweet

Richard Fobes Arizona's Proposition 121 Top-Two Primary

Election Method Expert Richard Fobes Urges No Vote on Arizona Top-Two Primary

by Richard Fobes

Arizona’s ballot contains Proposition 121, which would create what its supporters claim is a top-two primary election.  The idea is to allow all the voters to vote in the primary election for all the candidates, including both Republican and Democratic candidates.  Then the two most popular candidates would move on to compete in the general election. That’s the intent, but alas, the details of what’s proposed would not work the way it’s intended.

Two candidates Top-Two election voters
Two candidates from the same party could easily win such a “Top-Two” election, even if the voters are balanced

This top-two primary election idea is emotionally appealing because it seems to convey the message “we don’t like how primary elections are done now.”  Unfortunately the top-two primary approach is like rolling loaded dice.  The top two approach favors whichever party offers fewer candidates. The Wikipedia article titled Vote Splitting explains this concept.

For a specific scenario of vote-splitting in a top-two primary, suppose that 55 percent of the voters prefer Republican candidates and the other 45 percent prefer Democratic candidates.  If the ballot lists four Republican candidates and just two Democratic candidates, both of the Democratic candidates will win both spots in the primary election. This occurs even though intuitively everyone would expect that the two winners should be one Republican candidate and one Democratic candidate, or possibly two Republican candidates.  This kind of outcome is wildly unfair, yet very likely for this scenario.

Those of us who do the math for election methods know that the candidate with the most votes is not necessarily the most popular. (As a related point, the candidate with the fewest votes is not necessarily the least popular.)

The top-two primary approach is based on the mistaken belief that the candidate with the most votes is the most popular, and that the candidate with the second-most votes is second-most popular.  Anyone who bothers doing the math can verify that this belief is wildly mistaken.  While it is possible to have a top-two primary in a way that produces fair results, Arizona’s Proposition 121—although it is called a top-two primary—is not really a top-two primary.

Arizona’s Proposition 121 and Single-Mark Ballots

The problem with existing primary elections is that they use single-mark ballots.  These ballots only allow a voter to mark a single candidate.  Unfortunately the top-two approach in Arizona’s Proposition 121 uses the same kind of flawed ballot.

Arizona's Proposition 121 Top-Two Primary
A push for a similarly flawed “Top-Two” Primary in Oregon was defeated

The only way to get fairer results is to allow voters to mark more than one choice.  In my opinion the best way to do so is to use 1-2-3 ballots and pairwise counting.  Some voting method experts prefer the simplicity of something called approval voting, which uses ballots that look like single-mark ballots, but which allow a voter to mark more than one choice.  Regardless of the choice, the point is that better ballots are needed.

As the author of a how-to book on creative problem-solving, I certainly like innovation.  Yet having a degree in physics, which includes studying mathematics, I know how to do the math behind voting.  Here in Oregon we had a proposition for top-two primary similar to Arizona’s Proposition 121, and we defeated it.  After that defeat I talked to a major supporter of the proposition, and he lacked the knowledge about the flawed math that underlies this flawed idea.

Anyone in Arizona who wants fairer election results should vote against Arizona’s Proposition 121, learn about vote-splitting, and look at the Declaration of Election-Method Reform Advocates at www.BanSingleMarkBallots.org to see which election-method reforms are supported by election-method experts who analyze the math behind different voting methods.

 

 

FacebookLinkedInPinTweet

Filed Under: DC Authors Tagged With: American State Elections, Election Methods, Independent Politicians, Third Party

Some highlighted Democracy Chronicles topics

Africa American Corruption American Local Elections American State Elections Asia Capitalism and Big Business Celebrity Politics China Democracy Charity Democracy Protests Democrats Dictatorships Education Election History Election Methods Election Security Election Transparency Europe Internet and Democracy Journalism and Free Speech Middle East Minority Voting Rights Money Politics New York City and State Elections Political Artwork Political Dissidents Political Lobbying Redistricting Republicans Russia Socialism and Labor Social Media and Democracy South America Spying and Privacy Supreme Court Third Party Voter Access Voter ID Voter Registration Voter Suppression Voter Turnout Voting Technology Women Voting Rights Worldwide Worldwide Corruption

About Richard Fobes

Richard Fobes is a longtime DC writer and helped us immensely from the start. He is the author of "Creative Problem Solver's Toolbox: A Complete Course in the Art of Creating Solutions to Problems of Any Kind" and "Ending The Hidden Unfairness In U.S. Elections".

Reader Interactions

Comments

  1. Frank Henry says

    October 19, 2012 at 1:11 am

    A YES vote for Prop 121 is supported by a move to support voter’s “Full
    Voting Rights”.

    Voting methods that recognize “the most votes” wins is one of the aspects
    of “Full Voting Rights”. 121 supports this methode.

    Also a YES vote for 121 will:

    1. Allow all voters equal access to be placed on every balolots.

    2. Allow all voters equal access to vote on every ballots.

    3. Allows all political parties to work hard in supporting the questions
    and candidates, without the use of taxpayers tax monies.

    Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Primary Sidebar

democracy chronicles newsletter

democracy around the web

  • “Jan. 6 Rioters Are the New Hot Event in Town...
    Source: Election Law Blog Published on: 2 hours ago
  • “Clarence Thomas has long tried to undercut t...
    Source: Election Law Blog Published on: 2 hours ago
  • “Leader of pro-Eric Adams super PAC banking o...
    Source: Election Law Blog Published on: 2 hours ago
  • “Musk says he wants a new political party, an...
    Source: Election Law Blog Published on: 2 hours ago
  • Lawsuit on Alleged “Irregularities” in Rockla...
    Source: Election Law Blog Published on: 2 hours ago