Placet
🔁

Two-round runoff

Absolute majority or second round.

If nobody reach 50 % for first round, di top two go clash for second one. Di winner must get absolute majority — but only against di finalist wey dem put am with.

If nobody reach 50%, di top two go face off for second round. Di final winner sure to get absolute majority.

Make sure say person get absolute majority, with second round if e necessary.

Start vote with dis method →

How e dey work, well well

First round: everybody vote one option. If one pass di threshold (50 % by default for Placet, you fit change am), e don finish.

If not, second round between di top two — na di normal rule. French parliament elections use anoda one: any candidate wey reach 12.5 % of registered voters go qualify, na so three-way runoff dey happen.

For second round, absolute majority sure by arithmetic: with two options, plurality NA majority. Na arithmetic guarantee, no be consensus guarantee.

Example wey get figures

Di same hundred people, dis time for two rounds.

OptionRound 1Round 2
Lyon4045
Bordeaux3555
Lille25dem comot am
  1. Nobody reach 50 %: Lyon and Bordeaux enter second round.
  2. Lille 25 votes move: 20 go Bordeaux, 5 go Lyon.
  3. Bordeaux win 55 against 45.

Di runoff correct di first round true true. But see wetin e no do: if Lille be everybody compromise second choice, dem for don comot am for first round, without ever testing am for duel.

Where e come from

Two-round voting na French invention of di 19th century, wey spread under di Third Republic. Di Fifth Republic take am for 1958 for parliament elections, then for 1962 for presidential election by direct vote — dem first use am for 1965.

Di idea na political compromise: keep di clearness of majority voting while dem fix im worst problem, di minority winner. Di runoff force clear choice between two options only.

E spread far pass France: Austria, Portugal, Brazil, Poland, most Latin American presidential elections, and plenty French-speaking association votes.

Where dem dey use am

  • French presidential election and plenty other republics.
  • French parliament and departmental elections.
  • Association and union votes, where absolute majority dey often for di rules.
  • Heavy group decisions, when clear mandate matter pass speed.

Limits and wahala

✓ GOOD SIDE
  • Di winner pass 50%
  • You fit vote your heart for round one
  • System wey people sabi
✕ BAD SIDE
  • Two ballots to run
  • Di third person fit be betta agreement
  • Vote transfer no dey predictable
Di compromise die for first round
Moderate option, wey be everybody second choice but nobody first, no dey pass first round. Condorcet winner fit comot before e even play.
Non-monotonicity
To gain votes fit make you lose. As e dey change who qualify, extra support for first round fit put you against more dangerous opponent. Di result no dey always move di same way as di votes.
Cost and tiredness
Two votes, two organisations, and turnout wey almost always drop for second round.
Tactical voting shift, e no comot
E no be about winning again but about qualifying: di calculation just move go first round.

Questions wey people dey ask

Di runoff dey guarantee real consensus?

No: e dey guarantee absolute majority against ONE particular opponent. If di duel wey dem give no be di correct one — because dem comot di compromise for first round — di majority na arithmetic, no be political.

How candidate fit lose as e dey gain votes?

By changing im runoff opponent. Say you beat A small small but you dey lose to B: small extra votes for first round fit comot A and put B, and cost you di election. Na di monotonicity failure, and dem fit show am plain.

Two rounds or Condorcet?

Condorcet dey test EVERY duel for one single vote, while di runoff dey test only one, wey di first round pick. If your group fit rank di options, Condorcet dey answer di same question more complete.

Check dis too

First-past-the-postSimple CondorcetMajority judgment

Voting methods