Alternative vote

• Alternative vote is a majoritarian voting system
• Alternative vote is a preferential system because the voter ranks the candidates in order of preference.
• Should a candidate gain more than half the votes as first preferences, they are elected outright. If not, the candidate who received the fewest first preference votes is eliminated, and their votes move to the candidates who are marked as second preferences on their ballot papers. This process continues until one candidate has half of the votes.
• Alternative vote is also known as Instant Run Off Voting.
• Under alternative vote, voters may rank any number of candidates they like, from selecting only one candidate to rank ordering all candidates.
• The Labour and Liberal Democrat parties in the United Kingdom use alternative vote for the election of their party leaders.
• Advantages of AV include that it allows voters to express their true feelings about candidates without fear of tactical voting or spoiling their ballots. It can be seen as fairer than FPTP since it ensures that the winner receives at least 50% support.
• With AV, voters can express their true preferences without fear of wasting their vote. This can reduce tactical voting, where voters may strategically vote for a candidate who is not their first choice to prevent a less favored candidate from winning.
• AV was used in the Scottish Parliament elections between 2007 and 2016 but was replaced by STV due to its perceived lack of proportionality.
• It is possible for a candidate with fewer first-preference votes to win under AV if they receive enough second-preference votes from other candidates' supporters.
• AV can lead to the election of candidates who have a broader appeal, as they need to secure not only first-preference votes but also second and possibly subsequent preferences.
• Alternative vote tends to produce fewer wasted votes compared to FPTP, where votes for losing candidates have no impact on the result.
• Alternative vote can be more complex for voters to understand compared to simpler systems like FPTP. This complexity may lead to confusion and potentially lower voter turnout.
• While AV aims to be more proportional than FPTP, it still may not achieve full proportionality, particularly in multi-member constituencies.
• The counting process in AV can be more complicated and time-consuming than in other systems, which may lead to delays in announcing election results.
• Depending on the distribution of second preferences, AV may not significantly reduce the number of safe seats (where one party consistently wins by a large margin)
• In some cases, votes may be "exhausted" if all the preferred candidates of a voter are eliminated before a candidate reaches the majority threshold. This means the voter's voice may not be counted in the final decision.
• In theory, candidates who are more moderate and appeal to a broader spectrum of voters may have an advantage in AV systems. This could lead to more centrist candidates being elected, promoting a more moderate political landscape.
• While AV may be more accommodating to third-party candidates than some other systems, it may still favor major parties, and smaller parties may struggle to win seats.
• While AV reduces the need for strategic voting compared to some other systems, it doesn't eliminate it entirely. Voters may still have an incentive to strategically rank candidates to maximize the impact of their vote.