Comparing Voting Methods: 2016 US Presidential Election

Herrade Igersheim, François Durand, Aaron Hamlin () and Jean-François Laslier
Additional contact information
François Durand: Nokia Bell Labs
Aaron Hamlin: The Center for Election Science, Redding

Post-Print from HAL

Abstract: This paper presents data from a survey leading up to the 2016 US presidential elections. Participants were asked their opinions about the candidates and were also asked to vote according to three alternative voting rules, in addition to plurality: approval voting, range voting, and instant runoff voting. The participants were split into two groups, one facing a set of four candidates (Clinton, Trump, Johnson, and Stein) and the other a set of nine candidates (the previous four plus Sanders, Cruz, McMullin, Bloomberg, and Castle). The paper studies three issues: (1) How do US voters use these alternative rules? (2) What kinds of candidates, in terms of individual preferences, are favored by which rule? (3) Which rules empirically satisfy the independence of eliminated alternatives? Our results provide evidence that, according to all standard criterion computed on individual preferences, be there utilitarian or of the Condorcet type, the same candidate (Sanders) wins, and that evaluative voting rules such as approval voting and range voting might lead to this outcome, contrary to direct plurality and instant runoff voting (that elects Clinton) and to the official voting rule (that elected Trump).

Keywords: US Presidential election.; Approval voting; Range voting; Instant runoff; Strategic voting (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2022-01
New Economics Papers: this item is included in nep-cdm and nep-pol
Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://shs.hal.science/halshs-03926997v2
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (2)

Published in European Journal of Political Economy, 2022, 71, ⟨10.1016/j.ejpoleco.2021.102057⟩

Downloads: (external link)
https://shs.hal.science/halshs-03926997v2/document (application/pdf)

Related works:
Journal Article: Comparing voting methods: 2016 US presidential election (2022)
Working Paper: Comparing Voting Methods: 2016 US Presidential Election (2022)
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:hal:journl:halshs-03926997

DOI: 10.1016/j.ejpoleco.2021.102057

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in Post-Print from HAL
Bibliographic data for series maintained by CCSD ().