Voting Theory Project Group 2

Part I:

During a US Presidential election, a states’ votes are accumulated in two different ways:

either by holding a primary election, or by a gathering called a caucus. While a primary election

is typically held with polls where people can turn up to simply cast their vote, regardless of party

affiliation, a caucus is a more interactive process. Though they vary between states and among

different parties, a caucus has been described as a “gathering of neighbors”and generally

involves more counseling and discussion among party members before deciding on a candidate.

Since the 1970’s, (1972 for the Democratic Party and 1976 for the Republican Party) the

Iowa caucus marks the beginning of a Presidential primary season.This was not necessarily

intentional; Iowa does not give a very accurate representation of the country as a whole,as it is a

predominantly white state and very rural. However, the complexity of the Iowa caucuses is what

made it necessary for parties to begin their voting process early in that state. As a rural state, it

doesn’t hold very many votes in the Electoral College. For both Democrats and Republicans,

only about 1% of the party delegates come from the Hawkeye State. Despite this, the simple fact

that Iowa votes first means that it stands as a state that helps narrow down candidates. While

winning Iowa’s support isn’t necessary to winning a party’s nomination, Iowa’s results are

closely watched by the other states and if someone doesn’t catch very much attention at the

beginning, support and campaign money can dwindle quickly.

Voting Theory Project Group 2

Part II:

# Voters 19 6 36 39

1st B R C T

2nd R B R R

3rd C C B C

4th T T T B

i. ​How many people voted? ​100 people voted

​ ho wins by plurality method? ​Donald Trump (T)

ii. W

iii. I​ nstant Runoff Voting Round 1 - B: ​19+6=25​ C: ​36​ T: ​39

# Voters 19 6 36 39

1st B B C T

2nd C C B C

3rd T T T B

iv. I​ nstant Runoff Voting Round 2 - C: ​19+6+36=61 ​T: ​39

# Voters 19 6 36 39

1st C C C T

2nd T T T C

v. ​Who wins IRV? ​Ted Cruz

​ orda Count for each candidate?

vi. B

B: ​ ​205 ​ C: ​ 272 ​ ​R: ​ 306 ​ ​T: ​ ​217

Voting Theory Project Group 2

​ ho wins by Borda Count? ​Marco Rubio

vii. W

viii. ​How many points for each candidate using Copeland’s Method?

B: ​ ​1 ​ C: ​ 2 ​ ​R: ​ 3 ​ ​T: ​ ​0

ix. ​Who wins by Copeland’s Method? ​Marco Rubio

x. ​Is there a Condorcet Candidate? ​Yes

xi. ​Who is the Condorcet Candidate? ​Marco Rubio

Part III:

As delegates from Precinct W1-P2, we propose Florida Senator Marco Rubio as the

Republican candidate we have chosen to support. As we carefully deliberated on how to make

this decision, we considered the votes using five different fairness criteria. Marco Rubio proved

to be the winner of three of the five methods, including Borda Count and Copeland’s Method, as

well as being the Condorcet Candidate.

Borda Count is a great method for determining a winning candidate because it

demonstrates a method in which all the votes are considered based on specific point values. This

means that each vote is represented rather than having them reassigned if your candidate gets cut

from the running. When we calculated the votes using the Borda Method it was found that Marco

Rubio came out on top with the second place candidate a full thirty-four points behind. With

such a large gap between him and the other candidates, it goes to show that Marco Rubio is

clearly the most preferred candidate.

Utilizing Copeland’s Method also found Marco Rubio coming out on top with a full point

more than any other candidate. This further demonstrates his preference among the voting
Voting Theory Project Group 2

population. Also, this reflects Marco Rubio as the clear winner when he was put up to

one-on-one comparisons. His win of Copeland’s Method also makes him the Condorcet

Candidate. As a Condorcet Candidate, Marco Rubio is preferred when compared to every other

option. None of the other candidates can make this claim.

The other two methods used were the Plurality Method and Instant Runoff Voting (IRV),

which listed Donald Trump and Ted Cruz as the winners, respectively. If one were to only

consider the Plurality Method, only six percent of voters chose Marco Rubio as their first choice.

However, ninety-four percent of voters listed him as their second choice. This means that one

hundred percent of voters prefer him as either their first or second choice. This is also a

distinction that only he can claim among all four candidates.

We feel that Marco Rubio should win due to his victories as the Condorcet Candidate, as

well as winning the Borda Count and Copeland’s Method. He is the clear winner with the people

in Precinct W1-P2. He won utilizing methods that determine a median between the number of

voters rather than a preference schedule. Taking all of these facts into consideration, we feel that

it is Marco Rubio who will best represent the desires of the people.