Some of those criterion are odd, and yeah, most don’t even apply to STAR, because it’s Cardinal and not Ordinal.

Bit it’s also important to know why and how the criterion are applied.

Like being cloneproof,

This wiki, (which is better for election specific stuff) says this;

STAR voting

STAR voting consists of an automatic runoff between the two candidates with the highest rated scores. Suppose we use the rated definition of cloning, where a candidate’s clones have scores nearly identical to the candidate who was cloned. If the winner in STAR voting differs from the Range voting winner, then cloning the latter will make him or her win. Therefore, STAR voting has a teaming incentive.

A bit later is says this;

Notes

Clone-negative methods can be argued to be better than clone-positive methods, because in a clone-negative methods, the clones may be more likely to drop out of the election, giving voters more of a say on the remaining candidates, whereas with clone-positive methods, the election result can come down primarily to which candidates run more clones of themselves. Such behavior has been observed with the Borda count.[6]

It’s a weakness, and it’s important to know about, but it’s not election breaking, it just renders the automatic runoff meaningless. Except it doesn’t because people still care about the who, even if the platforms are identical.

An election breaking criterion to fail would be Monotonicity. STAR satisfies it.

There’s this;

https://democrats.org/news/dnc-and-asdc-announces-organize-everywhere-win-anywhere-strategy-largest-ever-monthly-dnc-investment-into-democratic-state-and-territory-parties/

Both of those people will be out come November. They might be reelected to office, but they’re done as congressional leaders.

The chair of the DNC has shifted to someone who likes Mamdani, and is backing similar candidates.

Well, the DNC chair has passed to someone who is willing to actually back the left.

Sadly RCV is just a bad system.

It’s better than Plurality, but when you dig into the mathematic details of RCV, it’s just as broken as Plurality, just in new an horrible ways.

Arrow’s Impossibility Theorium says that all Ordinal voting systems are shit. They all have a spoiler effect. It’s just a question of when does it kick in.

All that said, there is a much better system. A Cardinal system called STAR.

A breakdown can be found at www.starvoting.org

The short of it is that instead of a meaningless ranking, you rate.each candidate on a scale of 0-5, and candidates may share ratings.

Those ratings are then counted independently of each other. The two highest rated candidates then go onto an automatic second step that incentivises the use.if the lower end of the scale for candidates you don’t like. You see which of the final two candidates are rated higher on each ballot.

If your bottom two candidates make it to the final step, and you rated one as a 2, and the other a 0, the 2 gets your final vote.

No thrown out ballots because of ballot exhaustion. They all get counted and even the losing side has a slight say in who is elected. Which would prevent another Trump completely.

The old joke, one side wants peace, understanding, and a better world for their children. The other main side wants to kill all of the first side. The center says, let’s compromise and only kill half.