I don't have data at hand as I have not researched this topic in a long time, but from everything we know, people tend to not do only min or max. From everything we know, the majority of people don't vote purely strategically, specially when the voting system gives you serious disincentives to do so.
There is a clear intensive not to do that as it seriously hurts your overall preference. And Star Voting makes this even stronger compared to normal score voting because of the run-off.
Even if you assume that everybody is a 100% total party zealot it still only breaks down to approval voting and that is still a pretty good system.
> Given how polarizing politics tends to be,
Politics is polarized because of the voting system, if you look at actual data of preferences then you would see that there is far more agreement then can be expressed.
> I’d wager that most people put all 5’s for candidates of their party and all 1’s for candidates of the other party.
You would lose that wager. Most people are not party activists.
There is a clear intensive not to do that as it seriously hurts your overall preference. And Star Voting makes this even stronger compared to normal score voting because of the run-off.
Even if you assume that everybody is a 100% total party zealot it still only breaks down to approval voting and that is still a pretty good system.
> Given how polarizing politics tends to be,
Politics is polarized because of the voting system, if you look at actual data of preferences then you would see that there is far more agreement then can be expressed.
> I’d wager that most people put all 5’s for candidates of their party and all 1’s for candidates of the other party.
You would lose that wager. Most people are not party activists.