Talk:Two-round system

Merger discussion
So what exactly is the difference between a Louisiana primary and a two-round system? To me it seems it should be a section under this article Rankedchoicevoter (talk) 05:43, 12 June 2022 (UTC)


 * Oppose, the difference is that in a two-round system, if a candidate receives a majority in the first round, no second round is done. It would be too confusing to merge those two when those processes are different. However, I do support in merging the Louisiana jungle primary with the two-round system.  Bbraxtonlee (talk) 05:58, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
 * That seems like a really trivial difference. It's just a shortcut to avoid the second election if it is obvious who would win it. If A gets more than 50% of the vote when running against B,C,D, and E, then it seems pretty certain A will get more than 50% of the vote when the only opponent is B.Spitzak (talk) 17:56, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
 * That is true. At this time I think there is enough consensus to merge Lousiana primary and two-round system (the discussion has been out for almost 5 months) but I don't know about the nonpartisan blanket primary. Your call.
 * Bbraxtonlee (talk) 04:31, 6 December 2022 (UTC)
 * I'm probably not the person to make a final decision on this... Spitzak (talk) 21:56, 6 December 2022 (UTC)
 * I'm probably not the person to make a final decision on this... Spitzak (talk) 21:56, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

I agree on merging louisiana primary but also nonpartisan blanket primary should be merged as well. This article seems much better written than either of those and there is lots of redundancy. The differences between them are trivial (what dates the two elections are on, whether a majority in first election negates need for second one, and some weird rules about saying what party you belong to for the first election to avoid some nitpick legal challenge).Spitzak (talk) 18:46, 4 November 2022 (UTC)


 * Oppose a complete merger. There are differences between these.
 * One key difference:
 * A two round system often means that a second round is only held contingent upon there being no candidate obtaining a majority in the first round. For example, :Chicago and Atlanta mayoral elections, or French and Russian presidential elections.
 * In a jungle primary system, there is a second round REGARDLESS of whether someone obtains an outright majority.
 * Jungle primaries are also distinct in that party labels are included on the ballot. Not all two-round systems allow for this.
 * Louisiana and jungle should merge together, but be left separate from this article.
 * SecretName101 (talk) 00:19, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
 * I feel like that difference is minor as said above. You need to find an actual example where somebody getting 51% in the first round loses the second round, otherwise these schemes are identical in all real situations. Even if there is an example it still seems like the difference is trivial.Spitzak (talk) 00:43, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
 * This does happen. See . Elli (talk &#124; contribs) 06:33, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Support merge as initially proposed; the differences are subtle (whether or not the second round is held) and can be explained on one page. Wikipedia isn't a dictionary, so we don't need separate pages for synonymous terms; formal merge reasons are overlap and context. Klbrain (talk) 09:20, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Oppose; looking at this again, a merge would unbalance Two-round system, and the current structure seems to work for readers, having a WP:SUMMARY at Two-round system linking to the Nonpartisan blanket primary for more details. The topic is large enough and important enough to have discussion the Nonpartisan blanket primary that is focussed on the experience of some US states. Klbrain (talk) 10:36, 5 July 2023 (UTC)