Should we get rid of first past the post voting?

BOX SCORE: Last, First Past the Post Voting

Puzzle Summary:

POLI the AI, asks, “Where can we agree?” First-past-the-post (FPTP) all but assures that the two-party system stays in power because, well, it almost assures no serious third-party candidates can get elected. It also keeps all that campaign money flowing through reliable well-greased channels and away from third-party candidates.

ONE PARROT posts that whoever gets the most votes should win even if no candidate gets a majority of the votes. THE OTHER PARROT approves of either approval-voting (AV) or ranked-choice-voting (RCV) to assure that the winner is the one that the largest majority approves of or ranks highest. Many people dislike voting against who they hate the most rather wanting to vote for who they like the most.

Both Parrots make their good points over and over and over again. What did our nonpartisan scoring system say?                       

BOX SCORE for switching to Approval, Score, Ranked Choice, or STAR Voting
:Weighted-Average: Forecast

:67%: ± 5% Nonpartisan Score
Sides of the Table 4/4
Wall of Information 6/8
Cultural Windows 10/16
Columns of Bias 6/8


Top Four Key Reasons in Favor of Switching to Approval, Score, Ranked Choice, or STAR Voting

The most approved of candidate wins
No more run-off elections
Platform over personality or party
FPTP is a third-party blocking tool

Top Four Key Reasons Against Switching to Approval, Score, Ranked Choice, or STAR Voting

FPTP is the classic way to vote
Any computer can be hacked
FPTP is a barrier against unneeded change
Voters are confused by other methods

Where Can We Agree?®: Four Odd Couples IN-FAVOR

Activists & Gun Owners
Ethicist Democrats & Digital Republicans
Judiciary & Exporters
USA Made & International NGOs

Where Can We Agree?®: Four Odd Couples AGAINST

Moralist Republicans & Rank and File Democrats
Social Media & Landlords
Biz Groups & Corporate Lobby
Rural PT & Billionaires

Four A-hah Moments

(Yes) Strategic voting is eliminated
(Yes) Government policy will be easier to forecast

(No) Less chance of a reformer being elected
(No) Voters are confused by too many candidates

Politics 4.0 DNA (ACGT) Conclusion

We predict an 67% vast super-majority of roles in this country to support switching to Approval, Score, Ranked Choice, or STAR Voting with an average error margin of  ± 5%. Thrift (T) types will see better ideas rather than just throwing money around. Abundance (A) types will like a greater choice of candidates. Commerce (C) types will see more businesspeople running for office. Governance (G) types will see less disruption from useful idiots.

:: :: :: :: 

You can play this week’s game at

Congress’s approval rating is 21%, the Supreme Court’s is 40%, the media 27%, the average score of the policies on the PolicyKeys™ National Idea Leaderboard is 73%—Politics 4.0 is already a 2x to 3x better model of US political sentiment and direction than Politics (as usual) 3.0.

A new PolicyKeys™ Where Can We Agree? Puzzle every Monday at 6am Eastern at You can read more about PolicyKeys™ Where Can We Agree? in Politics 4.0 How Gamification, AI, and National Idea Leaderboards Can Help You Depolarize the World. The Observatory of Public Sector Innovation (OPSI) at the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) has recognized PolicyKeys™ for its innovative approach to consensus building.

Finding out Where We Can Agree? takes Guts ::



, ,