Ways to vote

There are lots of ways to vote. This page lists a few so you can learn about them, and gives you a simple tool to run votes of different kinds.

Start a vote Learn about the systems View the taxonomy

Voting system taxonomyHow the systems are related to each other. Select a system to see a short description.

Ways for a group to decide

Talk it through: no votingThe group discusses a proposal and changes it until nobody objects.
- Consentadopted when nobody objects
  There is no count. A proposal is adopted when nobody in the group has a reasoned objection to it.
  One winnerDiscussion2–20 people
  Suited to a team, a household or a small board deciding how it works.
  Read the full description →
Barely voteEach person says which options they are OK with.
- ApprovalWho's OK with X?
  Ask “Who's OK with each option?” Most approvals wins.
  One or severalTick any2–500 people
  Suited to choosing a date, a restaurant or a team name, where finding something acceptable to most people is enough.
  Read the full description →Start one
Vote and countEveryone fills in a ballot. The systems are grouped by what the ballot asks voters to do.
- Pick oneEach voter chooses one option.
  - Plurality (First Past the Post)the most votes wins
    Each person votes for one option, and the option with the most votes wins.
    One winnerPick one2–500 people
    Suited to yes-or-no questions, and choices between two options.
    Read the full description →Start one
    - ↳ adds a second vote between the top two
      Two-round runoff
      Everyone votes for one option. If no option gets more than half the votes, the top two go to a second vote.
      One winnerPick one5–500 people
      Suited to electing a chair or a captain at a meeting where the group can vote twice.
      Read the full description →Start one
- Rank themEach voter puts the options in order of preference.
  - Ranked Choice: Instant Runoffthe last option is removed each round
    Voters rank the options. The option with the fewest first choices is removed, and its votes go to each voter's next choice, until one option has a majority.
    One winnerRanking3–500 people
    Suited to choosing one person, place, name or plan from three to ten options.
    Read the full description →Start one
    - ↳ the same method, for several winners
      Ranked Choice: Single Transferable Vote
      Voters rank the options, and several winners are chosen so that each part of the group is represented in proportion to its size.
      Several winnersRanking5–500 people
      Suited to electing a committee or a board, picking a shortlist of three, choosing dishes for a shared meal, or deciding which five ideas to fund.
      Read the full description →Start one
  - Ranked Choice: Condorcetevery pair of options is compared
    Voters rank the options, and the winner is the option that would beat each of the others in a one-on-one contest.
    One winnerRanking3–500 people
    Suited to a single decision where finding the option with the broadest support matters more than speed.
    Read the full description →Start one
  - Ranked Choice: Borda Counteach position is worth points
    Voters rank the options, and each position is worth a set number of points. The option with the most points wins.
    One or severalRanking2–50 people
    Suited to friendly, low-stakes rankings, such as the order of songs on a playlist or which films to watch first.
    Read the full description →Start one
- Rate each oneEach voter rates every option separately.
  - Scorea score for each option
    Voters give each option a score, and the option with the highest average wins.
    One winnerScores2–500 people
    Suited to rating proposals or judging entries in a group whose members trust each other.
    Read the full description →Start one
    - ↳ adds a runoff between the top two
      STAR
      Voters score each option from 0 to 5. The two options with the highest scores then go to an automatic runoff.
      One winnerScores3–500 people
      Suited to choosing one option when people care about how much they like each one.
      Read the full description →Start one
  - Majority judgmenta grade for each option
    Voters grade each option from Excellent to Reject, and the option with the best median grade wins.
    One winnerGrades5–500 people
    Suited to judging, hiring panels, or choosing between proposals that should be assessed on their merits.
    Read the full description →Start one
- Share out pointsEach voter divides a fixed number of points between the options.
  - Dot votingpoints spread across the options
    Each voter gets a few dots or points to spread across the options as they like.
    Several winnersPoints3–50 people
    Suited to retrospectives, brainstorming sessions, and narrowing a long list of ideas to a few.
    Read the full description →Start one

The systems

Each system has strengths and weaknesses, and suits different situations.

Run one here

Ranked Choice: Single Transferable Vote

Also called STV, ranked-choice voting (several winners), proportional ranked choice Voters rank the options, and several winners are chosen so that each part of the group is represented in proportion to its size. Several winnersRanking5–500 people How it works, strengths and weaknesses

Each voter ranks the options in order of preference.
A quota is calculated. Any option with more votes than the quota is certain to win a seat. It is the number of ballots divided by one more than the number of seats, so with 30 ballots and 3 seats it is 7.5.
An option with more votes than the quota is elected. The votes it does not need are passed on to each voter's next choice at a fraction of their value, so that no vote is counted twice.
If no option has reached the quota, the option with the fewest votes is removed and its ballots are passed on at their full value.
This repeats until every seat is filled.

Strengths

Very few votes are wasted.
A third of the voters can expect to elect about a third of the winners.
Voters gain nothing by ranking dishonestly.
With one seat, it works the same as instant runoff.

Weaknesses

It is too slow to count by hand for a large group, so a computer does the count here.
The result takes some explaining, which is why each round is shown.
Ranking a long list takes time.

Suited to electing a committee or a board, picking a shortlist of three, choosing dishes for a shared meal, or deciding which five ideas to fund.

Less suited to a single yes-or-no question, where a simple majority is enough.

The Voting System That's Actually Too Good for Politicians to AllowVideo · CGP Grey Single transferable voteRead · Electoral Reform Society Single transferable voteRead · Wikipedia Model rules for computerised STV (the rules this count follows)Rules · OpenTally

Set up an STV vote Read the full explanation

Run one here

Plurality (First Past the Post)

Each person votes for one option, and the option with the most votes wins. One winnerPick one2–500 people How it works, strengths and weaknesses

Each person votes for one option.
The option with the most votes wins, even if it has less than half.

Strengths

Everyone already understands it.
It can be counted by hand in a few minutes.
With only two options, it is the right choice.

Weaknesses

Two similar options can split their supporters, so both lose to a third.
The winner may be opposed by most of the group.
People often vote for an option they think can win rather than the one they prefer.

Suited to yes-or-no questions, and choices between two options.

Less suited to choices between three or more options, where two similar options can split the vote.

Why Your Vote Doesn't CountVideo · CGP Grey First-past-the-post votingRead · Wikipedia The spoiler effectRead · Wikipedia

Set up a vote like this

Run one here

Two-round runoff

Also called Top-two runoff Everyone votes for one option. If no option gets more than half the votes, the top two go to a second vote. One winnerPick one5–500 people How it works, strengths and weaknesses

Everyone votes for one option.
If an option gets more than half the votes, it wins.
If not, the two options with the most votes go to a second vote, and the winner of that vote wins.

Strengths

The winner has beaten its closest rival in a straight contest.
It is easy to understand.
People have time to reconsider between the two votes.

Weaknesses

It needs a second vote, and some people may not take part in it.
An option that many people like as a second choice can fail to reach the top two.
Similar options can still split the vote in the first round.

Suited to electing a chair or a captain at a meeting where the group can vote twice.

Less suited to groups that are hard to bring together twice. Instant runoff gives a similar result with a single vote.

Two-round systemRead · Wikipedia

Set up a vote like this

Run one here

Ranked Choice: Instant Runoff

Also called Ranked-choice voting (one winner), the alternative vote Voters rank the options. The option with the fewest first choices is removed, and its votes go to each voter's next choice, until one option has a majority. One winnerRanking3–500 people How it works, strengths and weaknesses

Each voter ranks the options in order of preference.
First choices are counted. If an option has more than half of them, it wins.
If not, the option with the fewest votes is removed, and each of its ballots is passed to that voter's next choice.
This repeats until one option has more than half of the ballots still being counted.

Strengths

It gives a result similar to a runoff without a second vote.
Voters can put a less popular option first without wasting their vote.
Similar options splitting the vote is much less of a problem than with plurality.

Weaknesses

A compromise option that many people rank second can be removed early.
The count takes several rounds, although a computer does it instantly.
Ranking a long list takes time.

Suited to choosing one person, place, name or plan from three to ten options.

Less suited to choosing several winners. The single transferable vote uses the same approach for several seats.

The Voting System That Should Replace Every ElectionVideo · CGP Grey Ranked choice votingRead · FairVote Instant-runoff votingRead · Wikipedia

Run an STV vote with one seat. That is instant runoff.

Set up a vote like this

Run one here

Approval

Ask “Who's OK with each option?” Most approvals wins. One or severalTick any2–500 people How it works, strengths and weaknesses

Each voter marks every option they would be happy with.
The option with the most marks wins. To choose several winners, take the options with the most marks.

Strengths

It is as simple as plurality, but similar options do not split the vote.
It tends to find the option most people can accept.
It can be counted by hand quickly.

Weaknesses

Voters have to decide where to draw the line between options they mark and options they don't, which can be tactical.
Voters cannot say how much they prefer one option to another.
When several winners are chosen, they tend to all be favoured by the same majority.

Suited to choosing a date, a restaurant or a team name, where finding something acceptable to most people is enough.

Less suited to seats that should be shared fairly between different groups. The single transferable vote is better for that.

Approval votingRead · The Center for Election Science Approval votingRead · Wikipedia

Set up a vote like this

Run one here

Score

Also called Range voting Voters give each option a score, and the option with the highest average wins. One winnerScores2–500 people How it works, strengths and weaknesses

Each voter gives every option a score, for example from 0 to 5.
The option with the highest total or average score wins.

Strengths

Voters can show how strongly they feel, not just which option they prefer.
It is simple when voters give honest scores.
It is good at finding a compromise most people like.

Weaknesses

A voter who gives only top and bottom scores has more influence than one who uses the whole scale.
People use the scale differently.
Scoring a long list takes time.

Suited to rating proposals or judging entries in a group whose members trust each other.

Less suited to contested decisions, where exaggerating your scores pays off. STAR voting reduces that problem.

Score votingRead · Wikipedia

Set up a vote like this

Run one here

STAR

Also called Score then automatic runoff Voters score each option from 0 to 5. The two options with the highest scores then go to an automatic runoff. One winnerScores3–500 people How it works, strengths and weaknesses

Each voter scores every option from 0 to 5.
The two options with the highest total scores go to a runoff.
Each ballot counts as one vote for whichever of those two options it scored higher. The option with more votes wins.

Strengths

Voters can show how strongly they feel, as with score voting.
Because of the runoff, exaggerating your scores rarely helps.
It needs only one ballot.

Weaknesses

It is newer than most systems, so fewer people are familiar with it.
The count has two stages.
In its basic form it chooses only one winner.

Suited to choosing one option when people care about how much they like each one.

Less suited to choosing several winners who should represent the whole group. Use the single transferable vote for that.

STAR VotingRead · Equal Vote Coalition STAR votingRead · Wikipedia

Set up a vote like this

Run one here

Ranked Choice: Borda Count

Voters rank the options, and each position is worth a set number of points. The option with the most points wins. One or severalRanking2–50 people How it works, strengths and weaknesses

Each voter ranks all the options.
Each position is worth points. With five options, a first choice gets 4 points, a second choice 3, and so on down to 0 for last place.
The option with the most points wins.

Strengths

It rewards options that many people like, not only those with strong supporters.
It uses every position on every ballot.
The arithmetic is simple.

Weaknesses

It is easy to manipulate by ranking a strong rival last.
Adding an option very similar to an existing one can change the winner.
Voters have to rank every option.

Suited to friendly, low-stakes rankings, such as the order of songs on a playlist or which films to watch first.

Less suited to anything people care about enough to vote tactically.

Borda countRead · Wikipedia

Set up a vote like this

Run one here

Ranked Choice: Condorcet

Also called Schulze, ranked pairs Voters rank the options, and the winner is the option that would beat each of the others in a one-on-one contest. One winnerRanking3–500 people How it works, strengths and weaknesses

Each voter ranks the options.
Every pair of options is compared by counting how many ballots rank A above B and how many rank B above A.
If one option wins every one of its comparisons, it wins.
Sometimes there is a cycle, where A beats B, B beats C and C beats A. Methods such as the Schulze method resolve this with a fixed procedure.

Strengths

The winner is preferred by a majority over each of the other options.
It favours compromise options.
It is used by the Debian project and many technical communities.

Weaknesses

The procedure for resolving cycles is hard to explain.
The count is a table of comparisons rather than a sequence of rounds, so it is harder to follow.
Ranking a long list takes time.

Suited to a single decision where finding the option with the broadest support matters more than speed.

Less suited to groups that need to follow the count step by step to trust it. Instant runoff is easier to follow.

Condorcet methodRead · Wikipedia Schulze methodRead · Wikipedia How Debian votesExample · Debian

Set up a vote like this

Run one here

Majority judgment

Voters grade each option from Excellent to Reject, and the option with the best median grade wins. One winnerGrades5–500 people How it works, strengths and weaknesses

Each voter gives every option a grade: Excellent, Very good, Good, Fair, Poor or Reject.
For each option, the median grade is found. This is the grade that at least half the voters gave or bettered.
The option with the highest median grade wins. If two options are tied, the winner is the one with more grades above that median.

Strengths

The grades have a shared meaning, unlike numerical scores.
Exaggerating rarely changes the result.
The results show how each option was rated, not only which one won.

Weaknesses

Most people are not familiar with it.
The tie-break rule is complicated.
It can choose an option that most voters ranked below another option.

Suited to judging, hiring panels, or choosing between proposals that should be assessed on their merits.

Less suited to quick decisions where nobody wants to grade every option.

Majority judgmentRead · Wikipedia Majority judgmentRead · Electowiki

Set up a vote like this

Run one here

Dot voting

Also called Cumulative voting, dotmocracy Each voter gets a few dots or points to spread across the options as they like. Several winnersPoints3–50 people How it works, strengths and weaknesses

Each voter gets the same number of dots, often about a third of the number of options.
Voters place their dots on the options they support. They can put them all on one option or spread them out.
The dots are counted, and the options with the most become the group's priorities.

Strengths

It is quick and visual, which suits workshops.
It shows how strongly people feel.
It is a good way to narrow down a long list.

Weaknesses

When dots are visible, people tend to follow where others have put theirs.
Putting all your dots on one option is a tactical choice.
It is better for setting priorities than for settling a difficult choice.

Suited to retrospectives, brainstorming sessions, and narrowing a long list of ideas to a few.

Less suited to final decisions on contested questions.

Dot-votingRead · Wikipedia

Set up a vote like this

Ways to vote

The systems

Ranked Choice: Single Transferable Vote

Strengths

Weaknesses

Plurality (First Past the Post)

Strengths

Weaknesses

Two-round runoff

Strengths

Weaknesses

Ranked Choice: Instant Runoff

Strengths

Weaknesses

Approval

Strengths

Weaknesses

Score

Strengths

Weaknesses

STAR

Strengths

Weaknesses

Ranked Choice: Borda Count

Strengths

Weaknesses

Ranked Choice: Condorcet

Strengths

Weaknesses

Majority judgment

Strengths

Weaknesses

Dot voting

Strengths

Weaknesses

Consent

Strengths

Weaknesses