1340:
921:
56:
896:
908:
1582:
in March 2015, with the aim of testing and developing the new platform for municipal decisions. The objective of choosing this method was to motivate people to take interest in what was happening in their municipality. It was suggested that the system made it easier for them to get involved in making
1288:
In some cases, voters can also use a minus vote, provided they cast at least two plus votes. Minus votes carry the same absolute value as plus votes. It is not recommended to use minus votes in political elections in societies with major internal divisions among ethnic, religious or linguistic lines.
1545:
In 2016, Janeček founded
Institute H21, initially named Institute for Democracy 21, with the objective to promote the D21 method and research it comparatively with other voting methods. The insights gained from research projects conducted by Institute H21 led to further refinements in the D21 voting
1619:
used currently in Czech general elections, suggesting it might be difficult for voters to understand and use the new system effectively. However, an experimental presidential election in 2023 showed that voters cast fewer invalid votes in the D21 voting method than in plurality voting. On the other
1611:
parties is essential for a well functioning democracy for several reasons. It is theorized that the limitation of extremism on the political level can cause the mushrooming of the ideology in other forms. Those ways of extremism could go underground and become more difficult to monitor, making them
1350:
is having an election on the location of its capital. The population of
Tennessee is concentrated around its four major cities, which are spread throughout the state. For this example, suppose that the entire electorate lives in these four cities, and that everyone wants to live as near the capital
1326:
The system aims to reduce the chance of populist and extremist candidates getting elected, as they would struggle to garner votes from other candidates' supporters. The fact that voters are allowed to vote for candidates of different political affiliations is expected to lead to a broader consensus
1049:
The basic prerequisite of the D21 method is that the voter always has more votes available than the number of existing winning opportunities. All votes have the same value. The voter can, but does not have to, use all of them. Multiple votes cannot be accumulated; a candidate can receive only one
1029:
in the country was widespread. In March 2011, Janeček founded the
Endowment Fund Against Corruption (NFPK), aiming to expose prominent cases of corruption. Suggestions were made that the country's voting system needed an overhaul. The D21 method, originally formulated in 2012, was beta tested the
1317:
There exists a variant of the D21 method that includes a minus vote. Minus votes carry the same absolute value as plus votes (-1 vs +1). In such cases, voters can use a minus vote so long as they cast at least two plus votes.
1620:
hand, they did make more mistakes with the conditional minus vote without invalidation the plus votes. In addition, it was argued that it would be more complicated for the administration to determine the election results.
1606:
One of Janeček's main objectives with this method is to diminish extremist electoral strength. This point has been questioned by some specialists in political sciences. They claim that the existence and competitiveness of
1068:
The number of votes is determined by the number of seats available and the number of ballot options. The total number of votes is decided based on a mathematical algorithm which takes both of these factors into account.
1061:
where voters cast as many votes as there are seats. All votes are of the same absolute value and each candidate can only receive one vote from each voter, which distinguishes the D21 method from
1566:
The D21 method has been employed in election polls to study the method empirically and to identify voter overlaps between candidates and parties in the Czech
Republic consistently since 2015.
2207:
879:
1583:
public decisions to raise general welfare and transparency of public procurements. The town allows for voting via the internet, and it has been used on several occasions since 2015.
1314:
For example, in an election to fill two seats, with six candidates competing, voters may cast up to three votes. With one seat open and six candidates, voters may cast two votes.
1925:
563:
582:
1841:
1563:, as well as vote for them with D21 voting method using three plus votes and one minus vote. More than 300,000 people in the Czech Republic have participated.
1053:
The system is based on the effect of more votes, which means that voters are allowed to grant a 'plus vote' to more candidates than there are seats, unlike
2058:
1723:
1546:
method. The primary adaptation was maintaining the method as a predominantly plus vote system, with the inclusion of minus votes only in specific cases.
949:
786:
1502:
With the D21 method, voters are able to vote for their two top preferences - their own city and the next closest. The results would be as follows:
2298:
2347:
1331:, as voters are less motivated to vote strategically when they do not have to choose between their sincere choice and the "lesser evil."
640:
2158:
1872:
672:
534:
529:
2009:
942:
635:
17:
1663:
317:
841:
92:
1537:
but was rejected. As of 2023, D21 has not been used to decide any major general elections in the country or elsewhere.
935:
2088:
1703:
836:
1896:
2387:
1560:
1038:
1014:
826:
576:
547:
487:
1792:
1762:
558:
83:
2270:
621:
1734:
1683:
685:
2232:
2159:"Občané Říčan si vyzkouší unikátní hlasování díky projektu Demokracie 2.1 - ŘÍČANY (oficiální stránky města)"
1615:
The system was also criticized by the political academic Michel
Perottino for its complexity compared to the
1512:
Chattanooga: 58 total votes (0 votes from
Memphis, 26 from Nashville, 15 from Chattanooga, 17 from Knoxville)
263:
248:
233:
2382:
499:
422:
343:
1515:
Knoxville: 32 total votes (0 votes from
Memphis, 0 from Nashville, 15 from Chattanooga, 17 from Knoxville)
1509:
Nashville: 68 total votes (42 votes from
Memphis, 26 from Nashville, 0 from Chattanooga, 0 from Knoxville)
1668:
1616:
1022:
864:
311:
293:
134:
1307:
Each vote has the same absolute weight; the candidate(s) receiving the greatest net sum of all votes win
2377:
1648:
1506:
Memphis: 42 total votes (42 votes from
Memphis, 0 from Nashville, 0 from Chattanooga, 0 from Knoxville)
1018:
755:
738:
705:
469:
457:
427:
228:
186:
119:
1817:
611:
604:
88:
1574:
The D21 method has been used in various Czech and Slovak municipalities to allocate public funds in
1638:
987:
665:
593:
445:
432:
415:
392:
370:
333:
323:
874:
1818:"Czech Republic 2013 - World's largest opinion survey on corruption - Transparency International"
1575:
1002:
982:, which allows voters to cast more votes than there are open seats. It is a cardinal method like
791:
645:
328:
2246:
760:
1058:
975:
820:
700:
630:
437:
2322:
1591:
Negative voting has been described as "ill-advised" in cases where it could be used against a
1658:
728:
568:
452:
258:
237:
169:
147:
1600:
1026:
859:
846:
814:
78:
8:
1361:, the state's largest city, with 42% of the voters, but located far from the other cities
1301:
Each voter may vote for more candidates than the number of election winners to be decided
1072:
The following table shows the recommended vote allowances for each number of candidates:
765:
599:
252:
2226:
1926:"Lidi, pojďte si hrát! Karel Janeček nabízí hru Prezident 21, snesitelnou lehkost bytí"
1592:
1530:
979:
925:
796:
407:
191:
1688:
1678:
1653:
1062:
920:
831:
801:
723:
660:
494:
221:
196:
179:
47:
1673:
1643:
1339:
1328:
998:
971:
912:
869:
748:
462:
338:
164:
158:
140:
129:
124:
112:
73:
35:
991:
1793:"Alumnus Gives Voters A Better Way to Decide - News - Carnegie Mellon University"
1596:
1289:
With its effect, the minus vote is designed to enhance the effect of more votes.
983:
900:
733:
588:
553:
474:
385:
288:
211:
153:
31:
2133:
1698:
1054:
770:
710:
695:
506:
375:
350:
201:
1579:
2371:
2010:"Czech philanthropist exports own-developed election system | Prague Monitor"
1982:
1633:
1553:. In 2015, the D21 system was introduced to the public through a voting game
779:
479:
267:
105:
68:
43:
2348:"Volit více hlasy nedělá voličům problém. V australském systému ovšem tápou"
2208:"Democracy 2.1: The idea of empowering voters through a new election system"
1693:
1555:
1034:
519:
283:
276:
206:
55:
1904:
1376:
397:
355:
298:
243:
895:
1534:
2059:"Online hra Prezident 21 spustila prezidentskou volbu v reálném čase"
1957:
1608:
1599:. Concerns have also been raised that the minus vote could encourage
1549:
The system was considered for participatory budgeting experiments in
1370:
1364:
1347:
365:
360:
2033:
1842:"Anti-corruption campaigner 'targeted' by Prague underworld | Téma"
616:
1550:
1358:
402:
1724:"Digital tools and Scotland's Participatory Budgeting programme"
907:
2112:
2182:
1763:"Lex Paulson: "Nova Iorque tem muito a aprender com Cascais""
1310:
The voter can, but does not have to, use all available votes
1057:
where voters can cast fewer votes than there are seats, and
1304:
Each voter can cast no more than one vote for any candidate
1383:
The preferences of the voters would be divided like this:
2299:"Democracy's New Normal: The Impact of Extremist Parties"
1037:, an initiative focused on helping voters understand the
1897:"ParticipateDB: The Digital Engagement Tool Directory"
1367:, with 26% of the voters, near the center of Tennessee
1025:
in 2013, a majority of Czech citizens believed that
1731:The Democratic Society for the Scottish Government
1013:The D21 method was created in 2013 in response to
990:. The method was developed by Czech mathematician
2212:Friedrich Naumann Foundation for Freedom Brussels
2369:
2271:"Should extremist parties be banned in the EU?"
1529:A proposal to implement the method in two-seat
997:This voting method has yet to be used in any
943:
1559:, where people could suggest candidates for
1015:corruption within the Czech political system
2323:"Jaký volební systém pro Českou republiku?"
1033:The method was notably used in the project
2214:. Archived from the original on 2014-10-31
1870:
1076:Number of votes allowed by the D21 method
950:
936:
2089:"Janečkova Demokracie 21: Volby jako hra"
2327:Centrum pro studium demokracie a kultury
1569:
2247:"The use of Janeček method in politics"
14:
2370:
2293:
2291:
2083:
2081:
2079:
1664:Party-list proportional representation
1297:An election uses the D21 method when:
1005:programs conducted by various cities.
2205:
2004:
2002:
1958:"Guidelines for using the D21 method"
1327:by the author. It is meant to reduce
1952:
1950:
1948:
1946:
1866:
1864:
1862:
1787:
1785:
1783:
1756:
1754:
1524:
1354:The candidates for the capital are:
2288:
2076:
1975:
1871:Cunningham, Benjamin (2015-08-13).
1044:
24:
2199:
1999:
1760:
1338:
962:The D21 method, also known as the
54:
25:
2399:
1943:
1889:
1859:
1780:
1751:
1716:
1704:List of mathematics-based methods
1578:elections. It was first used in
1561:2018 Czech presidential election
1039:2018 Czech presidential election
919:
906:
894:
842:McKelvey–Schofield chaos theorem
488:Semi-proportional representation
120:First preference plurality (FPP)
2340:
2315:
2263:
2239:
2175:
2151:
2126:
2105:
2051:
2026:
1733:. February 2016. Archived from
2206:Haury, Caroline (2014-10-31).
1918:
1834:
1810:
1540:
1292:
1001:. It has been used in several
880:Harsanyi's utilitarian theorem
837:Moulin's impossibility theorem
802:Conflicting majorities paradox
13:
1:
1710:
1008:
706:Frustrated majorities paradox
1612:potentially more dangerous.
1586:
875:Condorcet dominance theorems
815:Social and collective choice
7:
2303:www.worldpoliticsreview.com
1684:Webster/Sainte-Laguë method
1669:Proportional representation
1626:
1533:was submitted to the Czech
1023:Global Corruption Barometer
541:By mechanism of combination
312:Proportional representation
10:
2404:
1822:Transparency International
1797:Carnegie Mellon University
1649:First-past-the-post voting
1617:proportional voting system
1334:
1321:
1019:Transparency International
739:Multiple districts paradox
470:Fractional approval voting
458:Interactive representation
2231:: CS1 maint: unfit URL (
1873:"Recalculating democracy"
1243:
1200:
1157:
1124:
1091:
686:Paradoxes and pathologies
535:Mixed-member proportional
530:Mixed-member majoritarian
525:By results of combination
416:Approval-based committees
1769:(in European Portuguese)
1639:Single transferable vote
1379:, with 15% of the voters
1373:, with 17% of the voters
988:combined approval voting
865:Condorcet's jury theorem
666:Double simultaneous vote
641:Rural–urban proportional
636:Dual-member proportional
598:
587:
554:Parallel (superposition)
446:Fractional social choice
433:Expanding approvals rule
262:
247:
232:
163:
152:
128:
2388:Participatory democracy
1576:participatory budgeting
1003:participatory budgeting
792:Tyranny of the majority
569:Fusion (majority bonus)
386:Quota-remainder methods
2329:(in Czech). 2015-12-10
2134:"Surveys and analyses"
2065:(in Czech). 2017-11-24
1932:(in Czech). 2016-12-22
1406:(close to Chattanooga)
1343:
1050:vote from each voter.
926:Mathematics portal
832:Majority impossibility
821:Impossibility theorems
617:Negative vote transfer
438:Method of equal shares
59:
1901:www.participatedb.com
1659:Instant-runoff voting
1570:Use in municipalities
1342:
729:Best-is-worst paradox
718:Pathological response
453:Direct representation
106:Single-winner methods
58:
1761:Pincha, João Pedro.
1601:negative campaigning
1413:(close to Knoxville)
1399:(close to Nashville)
1084:Number of candidates
1027:political corruption
974:applicable for both
964:D21 – Janeček method
913:Economics portal
860:Median voter theorem
79:Comparative politics
18:D21 - Janeček method
2383:Election technology
1077:
980:multi-winner voting
901:Politics portal
612:Vote linkage system
583:Seat linkage system
170:Ranked-choice (RCV)
2187:www.ridimricany.cz
1392:(close to Memphis)
1344:
1075:
1059:plurality-at-large
797:Discursive dilemma
756:Lesser evil voting
631:Supermixed systems
334:Largest remainders
192:Round-robin voting
60:
2378:Electoral systems
2014:praguemonitor.com
1679:Cumulative voting
1654:Positional voting
1551:Cascais, Portugal
1525:Official proposal
1500:
1499:
1414:
1407:
1400:
1393:
1286:
1285:
1081:Number of winners
1063:cumulative voting
999:general elections
960:
959:
847:Gibbard's theorem
787:Dominance paradox
724:Perverse response
428:Phragmen's method
294:Majority judgment
222:Positional voting
180:Condorcet methods
48:electoral systems
16:(Redirected from
2395:
2363:
2362:
2360:
2359:
2344:
2338:
2337:
2335:
2334:
2319:
2313:
2312:
2310:
2309:
2295:
2286:
2285:
2283:
2282:
2267:
2261:
2260:
2258:
2257:
2243:
2237:
2236:
2230:
2222:
2220:
2219:
2203:
2197:
2196:
2194:
2193:
2179:
2173:
2172:
2170:
2169:
2155:
2149:
2148:
2146:
2145:
2130:
2124:
2123:
2121:
2120:
2109:
2103:
2102:
2100:
2099:
2085:
2074:
2073:
2071:
2070:
2055:
2049:
2048:
2046:
2045:
2030:
2024:
2023:
2021:
2020:
2006:
1997:
1996:
1994:
1993:
1983:"The D21 method"
1979:
1973:
1972:
1970:
1969:
1954:
1941:
1940:
1938:
1937:
1922:
1916:
1915:
1913:
1912:
1903:. Archived from
1893:
1887:
1886:
1884:
1883:
1868:
1857:
1856:
1854:
1853:
1838:
1832:
1831:
1829:
1828:
1814:
1808:
1807:
1805:
1804:
1789:
1778:
1777:
1775:
1774:
1758:
1749:
1748:
1746:
1745:
1739:
1728:
1720:
1674:Two-round system
1644:Condorcet method
1531:voting districts
1412:
1405:
1398:
1391:
1386:
1385:
1329:strategic voting
1087:Number of votes
1078:
1074:
1045:Electoral system
1030:following year.
972:electoral system
952:
945:
938:
924:
923:
911:
910:
899:
898:
854:Positive results
749:Strategic voting
646:Majority jackpot
603:
592:
463:Liquid democracy
339:National remnant
329:Highest averages
266:
251:
236:
168:
159:Alternative vote
157:
141:Partisan primary
133:
74:Mechanism design
27:
26:
21:
2403:
2402:
2398:
2397:
2396:
2394:
2393:
2392:
2368:
2367:
2366:
2357:
2355:
2346:
2345:
2341:
2332:
2330:
2321:
2320:
2316:
2307:
2305:
2297:
2296:
2289:
2280:
2278:
2275:Debating Europe
2269:
2268:
2264:
2255:
2253:
2245:
2244:
2240:
2224:
2223:
2217:
2215:
2204:
2200:
2191:
2189:
2181:
2180:
2176:
2167:
2165:
2157:
2156:
2152:
2143:
2141:
2132:
2131:
2127:
2118:
2116:
2111:
2110:
2106:
2097:
2095:
2087:
2086:
2077:
2068:
2066:
2057:
2056:
2052:
2043:
2041:
2032:
2031:
2027:
2018:
2016:
2008:
2007:
2000:
1991:
1989:
1981:
1980:
1976:
1967:
1965:
1956:
1955:
1944:
1935:
1933:
1924:
1923:
1919:
1910:
1908:
1895:
1894:
1890:
1881:
1879:
1869:
1860:
1851:
1849:
1840:
1839:
1835:
1826:
1824:
1816:
1815:
1811:
1802:
1800:
1791:
1790:
1781:
1772:
1770:
1759:
1752:
1743:
1741:
1737:
1726:
1722:
1721:
1717:
1713:
1708:
1629:
1623:
1597:ethnic minority
1589:
1572:
1543:
1527:
1520:Nashville wins.
1411:
1404:
1397:
1390:
1337:
1324:
1295:
1047:
1017:. According to
1011:
984:approval voting
956:
918:
917:
905:
893:
885:
884:
851:
827:Arrow's theorem
817:
807:
806:
775:
745:
734:No-show paradox
715:
701:Cloning paradox
691:Spoiler effects
688:
678:
677:
652:
539:
522:
512:
511:
484:
475:Maximal lottery
442:
423:Thiele's method
412:
382:
314:
304:
303:
289:Approval voting
277:Cardinal voting
273:
218:
212:Maximal lottery
176:
108:
98:
23:
22:
15:
12:
11:
5:
2401:
2391:
2390:
2385:
2380:
2365:
2364:
2339:
2314:
2287:
2262:
2238:
2198:
2174:
2163:info.ricany.cz
2150:
2125:
2113:"Prezident 21"
2104:
2075:
2063:Tyinternety.cz
2050:
2025:
1998:
1974:
1942:
1917:
1888:
1858:
1833:
1809:
1779:
1750:
1714:
1712:
1709:
1707:
1706:
1701:
1699:Schulze method
1696:
1691:
1689:Coombs' method
1686:
1681:
1676:
1671:
1666:
1661:
1656:
1651:
1646:
1641:
1636:
1630:
1628:
1625:
1588:
1585:
1571:
1568:
1542:
1539:
1526:
1523:
1517:
1516:
1513:
1510:
1507:
1498:
1497:
1496:
1495:
1492:
1489:
1484:
1477:
1476:
1475:
1472:
1469:
1464:
1457:
1456:
1455:
1452:
1449:
1444:
1437:
1436:
1435:
1432:
1429:
1424:
1416:
1415:
1408:
1401:
1394:
1381:
1380:
1374:
1368:
1362:
1336:
1333:
1323:
1320:
1312:
1311:
1308:
1305:
1302:
1294:
1291:
1284:
1283:
1278:
1274:
1273:
1268:
1264:
1263:
1258:
1254:
1253:
1248:
1245:
1241:
1240:
1235:
1231:
1230:
1225:
1221:
1220:
1215:
1211:
1210:
1205:
1202:
1198:
1197:
1192:
1188:
1187:
1182:
1178:
1177:
1172:
1168:
1167:
1162:
1159:
1155:
1154:
1149:
1145:
1144:
1139:
1135:
1134:
1129:
1126:
1122:
1121:
1116:
1112:
1111:
1106:
1102:
1101:
1096:
1093:
1089:
1088:
1085:
1082:
1055:limited voting
1046:
1043:
1010:
1007:
958:
957:
955:
954:
947:
940:
932:
929:
928:
916:
915:
903:
890:
887:
886:
883:
882:
877:
872:
867:
862:
850:
849:
844:
839:
834:
829:
818:
813:
812:
809:
808:
805:
804:
799:
794:
789:
774:
773:
771:Turkey-raising
768:
763:
758:
744:
743:
742:
741:
731:
726:
714:
713:
711:Center squeeze
708:
703:
698:
696:Spoiler effect
689:
684:
683:
680:
679:
676:
675:
670:
669:
668:
655:By ballot type
651:
650:
649:
648:
643:
638:
628:
627:
626:
625:
624:
619:
609:
608:
607:
596:
573:
572:
571:
566:
561:
556:
538:
537:
532:
523:
518:
517:
514:
513:
510:
509:
507:Limited voting
504:
503:
502:
483:
482:
477:
472:
467:
466:
465:
460:
441:
440:
435:
430:
425:
411:
410:
405:
400:
395:
381:
380:
379:
378:
376:Localized list
373:
368:
363:
358:
348:
347:
346:
344:Biproportional
341:
336:
331:
315:
310:
309:
306:
305:
302:
301:
296:
291:
286:
272:
271:
256:
241:
217:
216:
215:
214:
209:
204:
199:
189:
175:
174:
173:
172:
161:
148:Instant-runoff
145:
144:
143:
135:Jungle primary
122:
111:Single vote -
109:
104:
103:
100:
99:
97:
96:
86:
81:
76:
71:
65:
62:
61:
51:
50:
40:
39:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
2400:
2389:
2386:
2384:
2381:
2379:
2376:
2375:
2373:
2353:
2352:Institute H21
2349:
2343:
2328:
2324:
2318:
2304:
2300:
2294:
2292:
2276:
2272:
2266:
2252:
2248:
2242:
2234:
2228:
2213:
2209:
2202:
2188:
2184:
2178:
2164:
2160:
2154:
2139:
2138:Institute H21
2135:
2129:
2114:
2108:
2094:
2090:
2084:
2082:
2080:
2064:
2060:
2054:
2039:
2038:Institute H21
2035:
2029:
2015:
2011:
2005:
2003:
1988:
1984:
1978:
1963:
1962:Institute H21
1959:
1953:
1951:
1949:
1947:
1931:
1927:
1921:
1907:on 2018-04-12
1906:
1902:
1898:
1892:
1878:
1874:
1867:
1865:
1863:
1847:
1843:
1837:
1823:
1819:
1813:
1798:
1794:
1788:
1786:
1784:
1768:
1764:
1757:
1755:
1740:on 2017-03-08
1736:
1732:
1725:
1719:
1715:
1705:
1702:
1700:
1697:
1695:
1692:
1690:
1687:
1685:
1682:
1680:
1677:
1675:
1672:
1670:
1667:
1665:
1662:
1660:
1657:
1655:
1652:
1650:
1647:
1645:
1642:
1640:
1637:
1635:
1634:Ranked voting
1632:
1631:
1624:
1621:
1618:
1613:
1610:
1604:
1602:
1598:
1594:
1584:
1581:
1577:
1567:
1564:
1562:
1558:
1557:
1552:
1547:
1538:
1536:
1532:
1522:
1521:
1514:
1511:
1508:
1505:
1504:
1503:
1493:
1490:
1488:
1485:
1483:
1480:
1479:
1478:
1473:
1470:
1468:
1465:
1463:
1460:
1459:
1458:
1453:
1450:
1448:
1445:
1443:
1440:
1439:
1438:
1433:
1430:
1428:
1425:
1423:
1420:
1419:
1418:
1417:
1410:17% of voters
1409:
1403:15% of voters
1402:
1396:26% of voters
1395:
1389:42% of voters
1388:
1387:
1384:
1378:
1375:
1372:
1369:
1366:
1363:
1360:
1357:
1356:
1355:
1352:
1351:as possible.
1349:
1346:Imagine that
1341:
1332:
1330:
1319:
1315:
1309:
1306:
1303:
1300:
1299:
1298:
1290:
1282:
1279:
1276:
1275:
1272:
1269:
1266:
1265:
1262:
1259:
1256:
1255:
1252:
1249:
1246:
1242:
1239:
1236:
1233:
1232:
1229:
1226:
1223:
1222:
1219:
1216:
1213:
1212:
1209:
1206:
1203:
1199:
1196:
1193:
1190:
1189:
1186:
1183:
1180:
1179:
1176:
1173:
1170:
1169:
1166:
1163:
1160:
1156:
1153:
1150:
1147:
1146:
1143:
1140:
1137:
1136:
1133:
1130:
1127:
1123:
1120:
1117:
1114:
1113:
1110:
1107:
1104:
1103:
1100:
1097:
1094:
1090:
1086:
1083:
1080:
1079:
1073:
1070:
1066:
1064:
1060:
1056:
1051:
1042:
1040:
1036:
1031:
1028:
1024:
1020:
1016:
1006:
1004:
1000:
995:
993:
992:Karel Janeček
989:
985:
981:
977:
976:single-winner
973:
969:
968:Democracy 2.1
965:
953:
948:
946:
941:
939:
934:
933:
931:
930:
927:
922:
914:
909:
904:
902:
897:
892:
891:
889:
888:
881:
878:
876:
873:
871:
870:May's theorem
868:
866:
863:
861:
858:
857:
856:
855:
848:
845:
843:
840:
838:
835:
833:
830:
828:
825:
824:
823:
822:
816:
811:
810:
803:
800:
798:
795:
793:
790:
788:
785:
784:
783:
782:
781:
780:majority rule
778:Paradoxes of
772:
769:
767:
764:
762:
759:
757:
754:
753:
752:
751:
750:
740:
737:
736:
735:
732:
730:
727:
725:
722:
721:
720:
719:
712:
709:
707:
704:
702:
699:
697:
694:
693:
692:
687:
682:
681:
674:
671:
667:
664:
663:
662:
659:
658:
657:
656:
647:
644:
642:
639:
637:
634:
633:
632:
629:
623:
620:
618:
615:
614:
613:
610:
606:
601:
597:
595:
590:
586:
585:
584:
581:
580:
579:
578:
574:
570:
567:
565:
562:
560:
557:
555:
552:
551:
550:
549:
544:
543:
542:
536:
533:
531:
528:
527:
526:
521:
520:Mixed systems
516:
515:
508:
505:
501:
498:
497:
496:
493:
492:
491:
490:
489:
481:
480:Random ballot
478:
476:
473:
471:
468:
464:
461:
459:
456:
455:
454:
451:
450:
449:
448:
447:
439:
436:
434:
431:
429:
426:
424:
421:
420:
419:
418:
417:
409:
406:
404:
401:
399:
396:
394:
391:
390:
389:
388:
387:
377:
374:
372:
369:
367:
364:
362:
359:
357:
354:
353:
352:
349:
345:
342:
340:
337:
335:
332:
330:
327:
326:
325:
324:Apportionment
322:
321:
320:
319:
313:
308:
307:
300:
297:
295:
292:
290:
287:
285:
282:
281:
280:
279:
278:
269:
265:
260:
259:Antiplurality
257:
254:
250:
245:
242:
239:
235:
230:
227:
226:
225:
224:
223:
213:
210:
208:
205:
203:
200:
198:
195:
194:
193:
190:
188:
187:Condorcet-IRV
185:
184:
183:
182:
181:
171:
166:
162:
160:
155:
151:
150:
149:
146:
142:
139:
138:
136:
131:
126:
123:
121:
118:
117:
116:
114:
107:
102:
101:
94:
90:
87:
85:
82:
80:
77:
75:
72:
70:
69:Social choice
67:
66:
64:
63:
57:
53:
52:
49:
45:
44:Social choice
42:
41:
37:
33:
29:
28:
19:
2356:. Retrieved
2351:
2342:
2331:. Retrieved
2326:
2317:
2306:. Retrieved
2302:
2279:. Retrieved
2277:. 2012-11-14
2274:
2265:
2254:. Retrieved
2251:www.ih21.org
2250:
2241:
2216:. Retrieved
2211:
2201:
2190:. Retrieved
2186:
2177:
2166:. Retrieved
2162:
2153:
2142:. Retrieved
2137:
2128:
2117:. Retrieved
2107:
2096:. Retrieved
2092:
2067:. Retrieved
2062:
2053:
2042:. Retrieved
2037:
2028:
2017:. Retrieved
2013:
1990:. Retrieved
1987:www.ih21.org
1986:
1977:
1966:. Retrieved
1961:
1934:. Retrieved
1929:
1920:
1909:. Retrieved
1905:the original
1900:
1891:
1880:. Retrieved
1876:
1850:. Retrieved
1848:. 2012-01-31
1845:
1836:
1825:. Retrieved
1821:
1812:
1801:. Retrieved
1799:. 2016-03-07
1796:
1771:. Retrieved
1766:
1742:. Retrieved
1735:the original
1730:
1718:
1694:Borda voting
1622:
1614:
1605:
1590:
1573:
1565:
1556:Prezident 21
1554:
1548:
1544:
1528:
1519:
1518:
1501:
1486:
1481:
1466:
1461:
1446:
1441:
1426:
1421:
1382:
1353:
1345:
1325:
1316:
1313:
1296:
1287:
1280:
1270:
1260:
1250:
1237:
1227:
1217:
1207:
1194:
1184:
1174:
1164:
1151:
1141:
1131:
1118:
1108:
1098:
1071:
1067:
1052:
1048:
1035:Prezident 21
1032:
1012:
996:
967:
963:
961:
853:
852:
819:
777:
776:
761:Exaggeration
747:
746:
717:
716:
690:
654:
653:
622:Mixed ballot
577:Compensatory
575:
548:compensatory
545:
540:
524:
486:
485:
444:
443:
414:
413:
384:
383:
371:List-free PR
316:
284:Score voting
275:
274:
220:
219:
207:Ranked pairs
178:
177:
110:
1930:Aktuálně.cz
1541:Development
1487:Chattanooga
1462:Chattanooga
1447:Chattanooga
1431:Chattanooga
1377:Chattanooga
1293:Application
661:Single vote
564:Conditional
559:Coexistence
408:Quota Borda
398:Schulze STV
356:Closed list
299:STAR voting
244:Borda count
2372:Categories
2358:2023-08-04
2354:(in Czech)
2333:2019-04-19
2308:2019-04-19
2281:2019-04-19
2256:2019-04-19
2218:2018-03-16
2192:2019-04-19
2168:2019-04-19
2144:2023-08-07
2140:(in Czech)
2119:2023-08-07
2115:(in Czech)
2098:2019-04-14
2069:2018-05-03
2044:2024-08-13
2034:"About us"
2019:2018-03-12
1992:2019-03-25
1968:2024-04-29
1936:2018-05-03
1911:2018-03-16
1882:2018-03-16
1852:2018-03-15
1846:Lidovky.cz
1827:2018-04-20
1803:2018-03-12
1773:2018-03-16
1767:Observador
1744:2018-04-12
1711:References
1535:government
1277:14 or more
1234:13 or more
1191:12 or more
1009:Background
766:Truncation
495:Cumulative
318:Party-list
93:By country
84:Comparison
2227:cite news
1609:extremist
1593:religious
1587:Criticism
1491:Nashville
1482:Knoxville
1471:Nashville
1467:Knoxville
1451:Knoxville
1442:Nashville
1434:Knoxville
1427:Nashville
1371:Knoxville
1365:Nashville
1348:Tennessee
1148:7 or more
1115:7 or more
673:Dual-vote
366:Panachage
361:Open list
351:List type
229:Plurality
125:Two-round
113:plurality
36:Economics
2183:"Říčany"
1877:POLITICO
1627:See also
970:, is an
393:Hare STV
32:Politics
30:A joint
1494:Memphis
1474:Memphis
1454:Memphis
1422:Memphis
1359:Memphis
1335:Example
1322:Effects
403:CPO-STV
253:Baldwin
202:Schulze
197:Minimax
115:methods
2093:E15.cz
2040:. 2024
1964:. 2024
1580:Říčany
268:Coombs
38:series
1738:(PDF)
1727:(PDF)
605:'MMP'
594:'AMS'
2233:link
1267:9-13
1224:8-12
1181:7-11
986:and
978:and
546:Non-
500:SNTV
89:List
46:and
34:and
1595:or
1257:7-8
1214:6-7
1171:5-6
1138:4-6
1105:3-6
1065:.
1021:'s
966:or
264:el.
249:el.
238:IRV
234:el.
2374::
2350:.
2325:.
2301:.
2290:^
2273:.
2249:.
2229:}}
2225:{{
2210:.
2185:.
2161:.
2136:.
2091:.
2078:^
2061:.
2036:.
2012:.
2001:^
1985:.
1960:.
1945:^
1928:.
1899:.
1875:.
1861:^
1844:.
1820:.
1795:.
1782:^
1765:.
1753:^
1729:.
1603:.
1041:.
994:.
600:NZ
589:UK
165:US
154:UK
137:)
130:US
2361:.
2336:.
2311:.
2284:.
2259:.
2235:)
2221:.
2195:.
2171:.
2147:.
2122:.
2101:.
2072:.
2047:.
2022:.
1995:.
1971:.
1939:.
1914:.
1885:.
1855:.
1830:.
1806:.
1776:.
1747:.
1281:8
1271:7
1261:6
1251:5
1247:6
1244:5
1238:7
1228:6
1218:5
1208:4
1204:5
1201:4
1195:6
1185:5
1175:4
1165:3
1161:4
1158:3
1152:4
1142:3
1132:2
1128:3
1125:2
1119:3
1109:2
1099:1
1095:2
1092:1
951:e
944:t
937:v
602::
591::
270:)
261:(
255:)
246:(
240:)
231:(
167::
156::
132::
127:(
95:)
91:(
20:)
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
