Minority winner — 34% wins Choose-One, but STAR & Ranked Robin elect the majority's real choice (BV2215, 2p33qq)¶
Generated from bv2215_2p33qq_minority_winner.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 2p33qq · test BV2215).
Scenario¶
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
Ballots¶
Row 1 = candidate names; each later row is one voter's 0–5 scores (a N × prefix = N identical ballots).
Count:Ada,Ben,Cleo
34:5,0,4
33:0,5,4
33:2,1,5
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) = Ada (differs from STAR)
--- STAR Voting Method (single winner) ---
[STAR Voting]
Tabulating 100 ballots.
Count × Ada,Ben,Cleo
34 × 5, 0, 4
33 × 0, 5, 4
33 × 2, 1, 5
[STAR Voting: Scoring Round]
The two highest-scoring candidates advance to the next round.
Cleo -- 433 -- First place
Ada -- 236 -- Second place
Ben -- 198
Cleo and Ada advance.
[STAR Voting: Automatic Runoff Round]
The candidate preferred in the most head-to-head matchups wins.
Cleo -- 66 -- First place
Ada -- 34
Equal Support -- 0
Cleo wins.
Runoff math:
100 ballots cast
− 0 Equal Support (no preference between the two finalists)
───
100 voters with a preference (majority = 51)
Cleo 66 (66%) · Ada 34 (34%)
[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
| * Ada | Ben | * Cleo |
-------------------------------------------------------------
* Ada > | --- |67 - 0 - 33 |34 - 0 - 66 |
Ben > | 33 - 0 - 67 | --- |33 - 0 - 67 |
* Cleo > | 66 - 0 - 34 |67 - 0 - 33 | --- |
[Condorcet Winner]
Condorcet Winner: Cleo — matches the STAR winner
[Condorcet Loser]
Condorcet Loser: Ben — 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
Ada 34 0 0 33 0 33 | 236 2.4
Ben 33 0 0 0 33 34 | 198 2.0
Cleo 33 67 0 0 0 0 | 433 4.3
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 method_comparisons/minority_winner/cases/bv2215_2p33qq_minority_winner.yaml