Editing Spoiler effect (section)

==== 2022 Alaska's at-large congressional district special election ====
In [[2022 Alaska's at-large congressional district special election|Alaska's first-ever IRV election]], [[Nick Begich III|Nick Begich]] was eliminated in the first round to advance [[Mary Peltola]] and [[Sarah Palin]]. However, the pairwise comparison shows that Begich was the [[Condorcet winner criterion|Condorcet winner]] while Palin was both the [[Condorcet loser criterion|Condorcet loser]] and a spoiler:<ref name="Analysis Alaska2" />
<!--- Tables inside a table in order to get both to sit next to each other --->
{| 
|+
|-
|
{| class="wikitable" 
|+Pairwise comparison matrix by vote totals<ref name="Clelland">{{Cite arXiv |last=Clelland |first=Jeanne N. |date=2023-02-28 |title=Ranked Choice Voting And the Center Squeeze in the Alaska 2022 Special Election: How Might Other Voting Methods Compare? |page=6 |class=cs.CY |eprint=2303.00108v1 |language=en}}</ref><ref name="Analysis Alaska2">{{Cite arXiv |last1=Graham-Squire |first1=Adam |last2=McCune |first2=David |date=2022-09-11 |title=A Mathematical Analysis of the 2022 Alaska Special Election for US House |page=2 |class=econ.GN |eprint=2209.04764v3 |language=en |quote=Since Begich wins both … he is the Condorcet winner of the election … AK election also contains a Condorcet loser: Sarah Palin. … she is also a spoiler candidate}}</ref>
!
!Begich
!Peltola
!Palin
|-
!Begich
| -
|'''88,126'''
|'''101,438'''
|-
!Peltola
|79,486
| -
|'''91,375'''
|-
!Palin
|63,666
|86,197
| -
|}

|
{| class="wikitable" style="float:right; margin-left:1em;
|+ Pairwise as a percentage
!Winner
!
!Loser
!Winner
!Loser
|-
|'''Begich'''
|vs.
|'''Peltola'''
|52.6%
|vs. 47.4%
|-
|'''Begich'''
|vs.
|'''Palin'''
|61.4%
|vs. 38.6%
|-
|'''Peltola'''
|vs.
|'''Palin'''
|51.5%
|vs. 48.5%
|}
|}

In the wake of the election, a poll found 54% of Alaskans, including a third of Peltola voters, supported a repeal of RCV.<ref name=":2">{{cite web |last=Baruth |first=Philip |date=March 12, 2009 |title=Voting Paradoxes and Perverse Outcomes: Political Scientist Tony Gierzynski Lays Out A Case Against Instant Runoff Voting |url=http://vermontdailybriefing.com/?p=1213 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110726125814/http://vermontdailybriefing.com/?p=1213 |archive-date=July 26, 2011 |publisher=Vermont Daily Briefing}}</ref><ref name="repeal2">{{cite web |last=Slota |first=Bianca |date=March 2, 2010 |title=Burlington voters repeal IRV |url=http://www.wcax.com/story/12074080/burlington-voters-repeal-irv |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160409132306/http://www.wcax.com/story/12074080/burlington-voters-repeal-irv |archive-date=April 9, 2016 |access-date=March 28, 2016 |publisher=[[WCAX-TV|Wcax.com]]}}</ref><ref name="rutland_herald">{{cite web |last=Barlow |first=Daniel |date=April 27, 2010 |title=Instant run-off voting experiment ends in Burlington : Rutland Herald Online |url=http://www.rutlandherald.com/article/20100427/NEWS03/4270339/1004/NEWS03 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160304055602/http://www.rutlandherald.com/article/20100427/NEWS03/4270339/1004/NEWS03 |archive-date=March 4, 2016 |access-date=April 1, 2016 |website=Rutlandherald.com}}</ref> Observers noted such pathologies would have occurred under Alaska's previous primary system as well, leading several to suggest Alaska adopt any one of [[Comparison of electoral systems|several alternatives]] without this behavior.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Felsenthal |first1=Dan S. |last2=Tideman |first2=Nicolaus |date=2014-01-01 |title=Interacting double monotonicity failure with direction of impact under five voting methods |url=https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0165489613000723 |journal=Mathematical Social Sciences |volume=67 |pages=57–66 |doi=10.1016/j.mathsocsci.2013.08.001 |issn=0165-4896|url-access=subscription }}</ref>