Two chapters, one delegate — Both chapters together (9 members)¶
Generated from b38b7fg_districting_combined.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: Cleo
▶ Live on BetterVoting: vote · results ↗ (election 38b7fg · test BV2274).
Scenario¶
Part of the districting-cost trio. Two chapters of one club elect a single national delegate. Ana is adored in Northside and unknown in Southside; Beto is the mirror image; Cleo is everybody's solid second. Counted chapter by chapter, Cleo wins NEITHER — so a delegate chosen from the chapter winners is Ana or Beto. Counted as one electorate, Cleo wins outright, and she is also the highest-welfare candidate (33 points to Ana's 23 and Beto's 19) and the Condorcet winner. That gap is the distortion of distributed voting, made countable. Companion concept page: 07_Concepts/topics/distributed_voting_distortion.md Live on BetterVoting (Test ID BV2274): https://bettervoting.com/38b7fg/results — ONE election carries all three counts as three races. The chapter races hold all nine papers, with the other chapter's members leaving the contest blank; a blank scores 0, so every total matches this file exactly.
Ballots¶
Row 1 = candidate names; each later row is one voter's 0–5 scores (a N × prefix = N identical ballots).
Ana,Beto,Cleo
5,0,3
5,0,3
5,0,3
4,0,5
4,0,5
0,5,3
0,5,3
0,5,3
0,4,5
What the engine says¶
The count, step by step — the rounds and how the winner is reached:
[Divergence from STAR]
STAR = Cleo
Choose-One (Plurality) = Ana (differs from STAR)
--- STAR Voting Method (single winner) ---
[STAR Voting]
Tabulating 9 ballots.
Count × Ana,Beto,Cleo
3 × 5, 0, 3
3 × 0, 5, 3
2 × 4, 0, 5
1 × 0, 4, 5
[STAR Voting: Scoring Round]
The two highest-scoring candidates advance to the next round.
Cleo -- 33 -- First place
Ana -- 23 -- Second place
Beto -- 19
Cleo and Ana advance.
[STAR Voting: Automatic Runoff Round]
The candidate preferred in the most head-to-head matchups wins.
Cleo -- 6 -- First place
Ana -- 3
Equal Support -- 0
Cleo wins.
Runoff math:
9 ballots cast
− 0 Equal Support (no preference between the two finalists)
─
9 voters with a preference (majority = 5)
Cleo 6 (67%) · Ana 3 (33%)
[STAR Voting: Winner — STAR Voting Method (single winner)]
Cleo
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
| * Ana | Beto | * Cleo |
-----------------------------------------------------
* Ana > | --- |5 - 0 - 4 |3 - 0 - 6 |
Beto > | 4 - 0 - 5 | --- |3 - 0 - 6 |
* Cleo > | 6 - 0 - 3 |6 - 0 - 3 | --- |
[Condorcet Winner]
Condorcet Winner: Cleo — matches the STAR winner
[Condorcet Loser]
Condorcet Loser: Beto — loses every head-to-head matchup
[Score Distribution] (how many ballots gave each star rating)
Score
Candidate 5 4 3 2 1 0 | Total Avg
Ana 3 2 0 0 0 4 | 23 2.6
Beto 3 1 0 0 0 5 | 19 2.1
Cleo 3 0 6 0 0 0 | 33 3.7
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 method_comparisons/districting_cost/cases/b38b7fg_districting_combined.yaml
See also¶
More cases in this set: b38b7fg_districting_north · b38b7fg_districting_south