Voting styles — low-score ballots¶
Generated from 03b_c3_b3_1_style-protest-vote.yaml — do not edit by hand. Regenerate: python STARVote_LH_tabulation_engine/tools_adam/scripts/build_yaml_pages.py.
Method: STAR (single winner) · 1 seat · Expected winner: Almond
Scenario¶
What if you dislike all the candidates? You can still vote: even low scores register a relative preference, and STAR will count them. Here every voter scores only 0s and 1s, yet a winner still emerges (Almond) from the 1s.
Ballots¶
The ballots as marked — the filled bubble is the score given, and the score is the number in its column:
| # | Ballot as marked | Choco | Almond | Vanilla |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | ![]() |
0 | 1 | 0 |
| 2 | ![]() |
0 | 0 | 1 |
| 3 | ![]() |
0 | 1 | 0 |
The same ballots as the file records them:
Row 1 = candidate names; each later row is one voter's 0–5 scores (a N × prefix = N identical ballots).
Choco,Almond,Vanilla
0, 1, 0 # least-bad = Almond
0, 0, 1 # least-bad = Vanilla
0, 1, 0 # least-bad = Almond
What the engine says¶
The count, step by step — the rounds and how the winner is reached:
[Divergence from STAR]
STAR = Almond
Approval = Choco (differs from STAR)
--- STAR Voting Method (single winner) ---
[STAR Voting]
Tabulating 3 ballots.
Count × Choco,Almond,Vanilla
2 × 0, 1, 0
1 × 0, 0, 1
[STAR Voting: Scoring Round]
The two highest-scoring candidates advance to the next round.
Almond -- 2 -- First place
Vanilla -- 1 -- Second place
Choco -- 0
Almond and Vanilla advance.
[STAR Voting: Automatic Runoff Round]
The candidate preferred in the most head-to-head matchups wins.
Almond -- 2 -- First place
Vanilla -- 1
Equal Support -- 0
Almond wins.
Runoff math:
3 ballots cast
− 0 Equal Support (no preference between the two finalists)
─
3 voters with a preference (majority = 2)
Almond 2 (67%) · Vanilla 1 (33%)
[STAR Voting: Winner — STAR Voting Method (single winner)]
Almond
Full audit — preference matrix, Condorcet, and score distribution¶
--- Runoff (Preference) Matrix ---
Head-to-head / pairwise comparison
Legend: For - Equal Support - Against
* indicates Top 2 Finalist
| Choco | * Almond | * Vanilla |
---------------------------------------------------------
Choco > | --- | 0 - 1 - 2 | 0 - 2 - 1 |
* Almond > | 2 - 1 - 0 | --- | 2 - 0 - 1 |
* Vanilla > | 1 - 2 - 0 | 1 - 0 - 2 | --- |
[Condorcet Winner]
Condorcet Winner: Almond — matches the STAR winner
[Condorcet Loser]
Condorcet Loser: Choco — loses every head-to-head matchup — elected by Approval!
[Score Distribution] (how many ballots gave each star rating)
Score
Candidate 5 4 3 2 1 0 | Total Avg
Choco 0 0 0 0 0 3 | 0 0.0
Almond 0 0 0 0 2 1 | 2 0.7
Vanilla 0 0 0 0 1 2 | 1 0.3
Everything in one file: the _tabulated mirror (regenerated on every run; every analysis forced on).
Run it yourself:
python STARVote_LH_tabulation_engine/starvote_larry_hastings.py 01_STAR/02_Examples/cases/03b_c3_b3_1_style-protest-vote.yaml
See also¶
- Methods disagree on this election — its entry in the divergence review ledger
- Glossary · all cases by method
More cases in this set: 02a_c3_b1_three-candidates · 02b_c3_b2_three-candidates · 03a_c3_b3_style-bullet-vote · 03b_c3_b3_2_expand_style-protest-vote · 03c_c6_b8_style-gallery · 03d_c5_b5_style-gallery-five-more · 04b_c4_b3_display-options-all · 05a_c5_b3_unanimous-ballots · 06a_c9_b3_large-field-equal-support · 06b_c9_runoff-overturns-leader · 09_c4_b100_tennessee-capital · abstentions · bv2182_tg4779_faq_runoff_reversal · bv2184_fyy886_lunch_vote · bv2187_qrw6wb_ann-bob-cal · bv2256_c8h3tb_traditional_style · bv2263_xw23m9_over_50_percent · csv_ambiguity_ex1_c4_b8 · display_options_demo · equal_support_runoff_demo · quorum_demo_c3_b6 · quorum_fail_demo_c3_b6 · same_mean_different_spread_c2_b5 · star_ala_approval · three_winners_cw_score_runoff · vote_splitting · vote_splitting2 · vote_splitting3 · vote_splitting_scenario1_spoiler · vote_splitting_scenario2_bloc_leads · vote_splitting_scenario3_outsider_wins


