Since AMG is opposed to all things Portland, it was totally predictable that they would be opposed to Instant Runoff Voting (IRV), particularly since there was only one Republican in the race. But always open-minded, the good AMGers withheld judgment until after the election (kind of) and saved their best comments until now. Basically, they’re saying since Mike Brennan led at every turn of the counting, why bother with it? Just let him have his 25%, or whatever, and call it good. Cheaper and easier, right?
They don’t like to hear about LePage’s 38% “mandate” yet still refer to John Baldacci as “Governor 38” in reference to his nearly identical election percentage. So, I was wondering how IRV might have worked in the last two gubernatorial elections. Understanding that the dynamics of IRV make it difficult to do any truly accurate Monday morning quarterbacking, I thought I’d take a stab anyway at trying to understand what it would have taken to reverse the results of LePage’s and Baldacci’s elections.
In 2010, the results looked like this:
Cutler 208,270
LePage 218,065
Mitchell 109,387
Moody 28,756
Scott 5,664
Other 2,624
So, now comes the tricky part. Please bear with me. Knowing a little bit about who might be attracted by the various candidates, let’s try to figure out what it would take to win a race that’s been reduced to two people. Let’s assume that LePage would pick up all of the Moody, Scott and Other candidates votes. That gives him an additional 37,044 votes, for a total of 255,109. The question then becomes how many Mitchell votes would have to move to Cutler to give him the election. I estimate the answer to be 78,114, with the other 31,273 going to LePage. A total of 71% of Mitchell’s votes swing to Cutler and he wins 286,384 to 286, 382.
Does that pass the straight face test? I certainly think so. In fact, I think that 71% is low.
In 2006, the results looked like this:
Baldacci 209,927
Lamarche 52,690
Merrill 118,715
Napier 3,108
Woodcock 166,425
There’s no telling where the 3,108 lunatics who voted for Napier would go, but let’s give them to Woodcock. That leaves 171,405 votes for Lamarche and Merrill to distribute. I calculate that if 105,900 switch to Woodcock and the remaining 65,505 go to Baldacci, Woodcock wins by a total of 275,433 to 275,432. That means that 62% of those who voted for Lamarche or Merrill would have to swing to Woodcock.
What are the chances of that happening? The words snowball and hell come to mind.
Bearing in mind that this is all conjecture and it’s very uncertain what really might have happened, it seems to me that AMG’s opposition to IRV is, as usual, rooted in pure logic and common sense, with no regard for political consequences whatsoever. NOT!