What the Borda Count Is
The Borda count is a ranked-ballot aggregation method named after the French mathematician Jean-Charles de Borda, who described it in 1770. Each voter ranks the candidates; positions earn points; the candidate with the highest total wins.
It is the archetypal points-based ranking method — and the standard example in voting theory of the trade-off between consensus and manipulability.
What the Borda Count Ranks
The method ranks candidates in an election or poll from ordinal ballots — rankings, not ratings:
- Political and organizational elections
- Sports awards and polls (MVP voting, college polls)
- Jury competitions where judges rank entries
- Any setting where many ordered opinions must become one order
Core Inputs Used by the Borda Count
- Ranked ballots — each voter orders some or all candidates
- Point schedule — with n candidates, typically n−1 points for first place, n−2 for second, down to 0 for last (variants differ for partial ballots)
No intensities are measured: a first-place rank counts the same whether the voter adores the candidate or mildly prefers them.
How the Borda Count Works (High-Level)
The aggregation is pure addition:
- Convert every ballot’s positions into points.
- Sum each candidate’s points across all ballots.
- Order candidates by total — highest wins.
The result favors broad acceptability: a candidate who is everyone’s second choice can beat a polarizing candidate with more first-place votes but also many last-place rankings.
Conceptual model: Don’t ask who’s loved most — ask who’s ranked highest on average across everyone.
Key Properties
- Consensus-seeking — rewards compromise candidates
- Uses full ballot information — every rank of every voter counts
- Violates majority criterion — a candidate with an absolute majority of first places can still lose
- Violates independence of irrelevant alternatives — adding or removing a no-hope candidate can flip the order of the leaders
Update Frequency
The Borda count is computed once per election or poll — it is an aggregation rule, not a continuously updated rating.
Known Limitations and Criticisms
- Strategic manipulation — voters can bury the strongest rival of their favorite at the bottom of the ballot, regardless of honest opinion (“ranking the rascal last”)
- Clone sensitivity — nominating similar candidates can split or multiply points in ways that distort outcomes
- Majority override — results can contradict the plain majority winner, which some consider disqualifying
- Partial-ballot ambiguity — handling of unranked candidates changes results and invites gaming
Where the Borda Count Is Used
Borda-style points are used in:
- Sports awards and rankings (e.g., MVP voting in several leagues, college football/basketball polls)
- Some national elections (notably parliamentary elections in Nauru, and variants elsewhere)
- Awards juries and society elections
- The Eurovision Song Contest’s voting (a truncated positional-points relative)
Summary
The Borda count is ranking by consensus arithmetic: full ballots, positional points, highest total wins. Its elegance uses every opinion every voter offered; its weakness is that voters know it — and can aim their bottom ranks like weapons. Voting theory has spent two centuries living inside that tension.
References and Sources
- de Borda, J.-C. Mémoire sur les élections au scrutin (1781).
- Wikipedia. Borda count.
- Saari, D. — analyses of positional voting paradoxes.