Explaining Runoff Reversal to Voters — and a Fix for the BetterVoting Popover¶
When a real BetterVoting election produces a Runoff Reversal (the Scoring-Round leader losing the Automatic Runoff), voters see a little "Why is the top scoring candidate different from the winner?" popover. Its current wording is almost right but muddled — and worse, it trips over the word equal, which has a specific, opposite meaning in STAR. This page is the clean version to use instead.
→ The full lesson with worked examples: When the top-scoring candidate isn't the winner. Glossary: Runoff Reversal. The exact election behind this popover is reproduced in 05_c3_b5_low-scores-bv1265.yaml (a low-score reversal: C leads the Scoring Round with just 7 stars, but A wins the runoff 3–2).
What the popover says (verbatim)¶
The top-scoring candidate often matches the runoff winner, but not always. In the runoff, only the most preferred votes count, which can shift the outcome. For example, a 5 vs. 4-star vote has less impact in scoring but counts fully in the runoff, while a 5 vs. 0-star vote makes a big difference in scoring but is equal in the runoff. The runoff winner comes out on top because more voters prefer them over the runner-up.
What's off about it¶
- "only the most preferred votes count" — sounds like ballots are discarded. They aren't. Every ballot counts in the runoff; each becomes one full vote for whichever finalist it scored higher.
- "a 5 vs. 0-star vote … is equal in the runoff" — a 5-vs-0 is a clear preference (a full vote for the 5). It is not "equal." The intended point is that it counts as the same single vote as a 5-vs-4 — but the word equal collides with Equal Support, STAR's term for a genuine no-preference tie (what that actually means). Telling a voter "5 vs 0 is equal" states the opposite of the truth.
- The good sentence is buried. "More voters prefer them over the runner-up" is the whole answer — it should lead, not trail.
- No shared vocabulary. "Second round," "top scoring candidate," "runner-up" — it never says Scoring Round, Automatic Runoff, or Finalists, and it gives the phenomenon no name.
The fix — a clean, correct version¶
Why isn't the top-scoring candidate always the winner?
STAR counts in two rounds that ask two different questions. The Scoring Round adds up the stars and sends the two highest — the Finalists — to the Automatic Runoff. The runoff asks a simpler question: between those two finalists, which one do more voters prefer? Every ballot still counts — in full — for whichever finalist it scored higher.
The difference is that margins matter in scoring but not in the runoff. Scoring a finalist 5 vs. 4 adds just one star to their lead — but in the runoff it's a full vote. Scoring 5 vs. 0 adds five stars in the scoring round — but in the runoff it's still that same one vote. So a candidate can pile up stars from a few enthusiastic voters and lead the Scoring Round, yet lose the runoff to the finalist more voters actually prefer. That's a Runoff Reversal, and it's the runoff doing its job: making sure the winner has majority support, not just intensity.
The one idea to land¶
The Scoring Round measures how much support (margins count). The Automatic Runoff measures how many voters (each ballot = one vote between the two finalists). When those two disagree, STAR sides with how many — on purpose. Say that, and you've explained Runoff Reversal correctly in two sentences.
Presenter cheat-sheet¶
| Don't say | Say instead |
|---|---|
| "second round" | Automatic Runoff |
| "scoring" / "first round" | Scoring Round |
| "the top two" | the Finalists |
| "5 vs 0 is equal in the runoff" | "5 vs 0 counts as the same one vote as 5 vs 4" |
| "only the preferred votes count" | "every ballot counts, as one vote for its higher-scored finalist" |
| (no name) | Runoff Reversal |
Reserve Equal Support for its real meaning: scoring the two finalists the same, which counts as no preference between them in the runoff. Never use "equal" to describe a 5-vs-0 ballot.