MythBuster: Ranked Ballot Voting is the same as First-Past-the-Post

Proportional Representation true-believers are fond of saying there’s no difference between First-Past-the-Post and Ranked Ballot Voting. Both, they say, are "winner-take-all" systems.

Of course, if we had RBV in 2011, the NDP and Liberals would’ve formed the government on 50% of the vote and 53% of the seats. How an NDP minority is supposed to be the same as a Harper dictatorship on 40% of the vote is beyond me.

RBV stops winner-take-all

Fact is RBV stops the winner-take-all phenomenon. Take for example, the 2011 election. Three-way center-left vote splitting allowed the Cons to win dozens of center-left ridings.

This winner-take-all effect at a riding level spread out federally allowing the Cons to win 54% of the seats on 40% of the vote — and 100% of the power.

RBV stops Con MPs from winning center-left ridings. That prevents the Conservative party from winning a majority of seats on a minority of votes. That’s obviously a lot better that corrupt FPP.

Literal democracy

Of course, RBV doesn’t discriminate against Conservatives. It prevents any minority party from weaseling absolute power. It ensures an actual majority of voters is represented in government — literal democracy as opposed to our ironic form.