bv_test_id: BV2215
bv_election_id: 2p33qq
bv_results_url: https://bettervoting.com/2p33qq/results
election_title: "Minority winner — 34% wins Choose-One, but STAR & Ranked Robin elect the majority's real choice (BV2215, 2p33qq)"
paradoxes: [condorcet-winner]
scenario_description: |-
  The canonical minority-winner example. 100 voters, three candidates for a seat.
  Ada has a passionate third of the room: 34 people rank her first — so under
  Choose-One (Plurality), where only your top pick counts, Ada WINS with 34%. But
  she's a minority winner: 66 of the 100 voters score her 0 or 1. Cleo is the
  opposite — nobody's fiery favorite (only 33 first choices), but everyone's warm
  second (most rate her 4 or 5). Reading the whole ballot finds her: Cleo leads
  STAR's scoring round (433), wins the automatic runoff over Ada 66-34, and beats
  both rivals head-to-head (the Condorcet winner). So STAR and Ranked Robin both
  elect Cleo, the candidate a majority is genuinely glad about; only first-choice
  counting crowns Ada on a third of the vote. Same opinions, no strategy — the whole
  difference is how much of the ballot the method reads. (It can be worse: with a
  bigger field, Choose-One winners can take office on 10-20%. A third is just the
  most common, most believable version.)
  Live results (BV2215): https://bettervoting.com/2p33qq/results
  Lesson: 07_Concepts/topics/plurality.md · README.md
voting_method: STAR
num_winners: 1
ballots: |-
  Count:Ada,Ben,Cleo
  34:5,0,4
  33:0,5,4
  33:2,1,5
expected_winners:
  - Cleo

# file: bv2215_2p33qq_minority_winner.yaml