A lot of it boils down to how RCV is just a series of First Past the Post elections on the same ballot. This means that it can never really rise above FPtP.
Fun fact that the site I provided gets wrong, RCV isn’t actually 150 years old, it’s actually a bit older. The Marquis de Condorcet actually came up with the idea in the 1790s, but abandoned it because of its flaws.
Here’s a direct quote from one of his more influential works, “On the Admission of Women to the Rights of Citizenship”
The rights of men stem exclusively from the fact that they are sentient beings, capable of acquiring moral ideas and of reasoning upon them. Since women have the same qualities, they necessarily also have the same rights. Either no member of the human race has any true rights, or else they all have the same ones; and anyone who votes against the rights of another, whatever his religion, colour or sex, automatically forfeits his own.
That was 1790.
Sadly, the political party that was backing him fell out of power and the replacements had him arrested, and possibly killed.
These folks have a good breakdown of RCV’s flaws. https://www.equal.vote/rcv_v_star
A lot of it boils down to how RCV is just a series of First Past the Post elections on the same ballot. This means that it can never really rise above FPtP.
Fun fact that the site I provided gets wrong, RCV isn’t actually 150 years old, it’s actually a bit older. The Marquis de Condorcet actually came up with the idea in the 1790s, but abandoned it because of its flaws.
If you want some unrelated reading, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marquis_de_Condorcet The guy was based as fuck.
Here’s a direct quote from one of his more influential works, “On the Admission of Women to the Rights of Citizenship”
That was 1790.
Sadly, the political party that was backing him fell out of power and the replacements had him arrested, and possibly killed.
This was his final work http://files.libertyfund.org/files/1669/Condorcet_0878_EBk_v6.0.pdf