1st August 2018, 7:19 PM
I think this video explains better than I could that problem with ranked choice voting, no matter the way the end result is tallied.
I should note that cardinal voting (score voting being my preferred version) not only doesn't seem to suffer from this problem, it's also far easier to tally up the results, in that you just add it all up, and thus far easier for the public to understand why the results are the way they are.
But, it does suffer from another problem, or benefit from a feature, depending on the way you look at it.
If a candidate is incredibly divisive, but another candidate is generally liked by the populace (just not the the first choice for many), that second candidate will win. Frankly, I consider that a bonus. Keep in mind that this situation only arises if a candidate is MASSIVELY divisive, to the point a minority is basically entirely disenfranchised if the majority wins. Getting massively divisive does not appear to be a good thing (see: this exact thread), so frankly, this seems like an ideal situation.
"On two occasions, I have been asked [by members of Parliament], 'Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?' I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question." ~ Charles Babbage (1791-1871)