Placet
🔁

Two-round runoff

Absolute majority or second round.

If nobody reaches 50 % in the first round, the top two face off in a second. The winner necessarily holds an absolute majority — but only against the finalist they were paired with.

If no one reaches 50%, the top two face off in a second round. The final winner is bound to have an absolute majority.

Guarantee an absolute majority, with a second round if needed.

Start a vote with this method →

How it works, precisely

First round: everyone votes for one option. If one clears the threshold (50 % by default in Placet, adjustable), it is over.

Otherwise a second round pits the top two against each other — the usual rule. French parliamentary elections use a different criterion: every candidate reaching 12.5 % of registered voters qualifies, which is how three-way runoffs happen.

In the second round an absolute majority is mechanically guaranteed: with two options, the plurality IS the majority. That is an arithmetic guarantee, not a guarantee of consensus.

A worked example

The same hundred people, this time over two rounds.

OptionRound 1Round 2
Lyon4045
Bordeaux3555
Lille25eliminated
  1. Nobody reaches 50 %: Lyon and Bordeaux go through.
  2. Lille's 25 votes transfer: 20 to Bordeaux, 5 to Lyon.
  3. Bordeaux wins 55 to 45.

The runoff did correct the first round. But note what it did not do: had Lille been everyone's compromise second choice, it would have been eliminated in round one, never tested in a duel.

Where it comes from

The two-round system is a French nineteenth-century invention, generalised under the Third Republic. The Fifth Republic adopted it in 1958 for parliamentary elections, then in 1962 for the direct presidential election — first used in 1965.

The idea is a political compromise: keep the clarity of majority voting while fixing its most visible flaw, the minority winner. The runoff forces an explicit choice between two options only.

It spread far beyond France: Austria, Portugal, Brazil, Poland, most Latin American presidential elections, and a large share of French-speaking association ballots.

Where it is used

  • The French presidential election and many other republics.
  • French parliamentary and departmental elections.
  • Association and union ballots, where an absolute majority is often required by statute.
  • Weighty group decisions, when a clear mandate matters more than speed.

Limits and pitfalls

✓ PROS
  • The winner clears 50%
  • You can vote with your heart in round one
  • A familiar system
✕ CONS
  • Two ballots to run
  • The third-placed could be a better consensus
  • Unpredictable vote transfers
The compromise dies in round one
A moderate option, everyone's second choice but nobody's first, never makes the runoff. A Condorcet winner can be eliminated before ever playing.
Non-monotonicity
Gaining votes can make you lose. By changing which pair qualifies, extra first-round support can pair you against a more dangerous opponent. The result does not always move in the same direction as the votes.
Cost and drop-off
Two ballots, two organisations, and turnout that almost always falls in the second round.
Tactical voting moved, not removed
It is no longer about winning but about qualifying: the calculation simply shifts to the first round.

Frequently asked questions

Does the runoff guarantee real consensus?

No: it guarantees an absolute majority against ONE given opponent. If the duel on offer is the wrong one — because the compromise was eliminated in round one — the majority obtained is arithmetic, not political.

How can a candidate lose by gaining votes?

By changing their runoff opponent. Suppose you narrowly beat A but lose to B: a few extra first-round votes can eliminate A in favour of B and cost you the election. That is the monotonicity failure, and it is entirely demonstrable.

Two rounds or Condorcet?

Condorcet tests EVERY duel in a single vote, where the runoff tests just one, chosen by the first round. If your group can rank the options, Condorcet answers the same question more completely.

See also

First-past-the-postSimple CondorcetMajority judgment

Voting methods