Bullet voting

[2][7][10] During the Jim Crow era, municipalities often banned or disparaged bullet voting in an attempt to prevent black voters from being able to achieve representation on city councils, creating a stigma that in some cases lasts to the present day.

[4] Graham-Squire and McCune note that instant-runoff can suffer from an especially severe kind of strategic truncation, stronger than bullet voting, where voters cannot safely rank any candidates at all; such a situation is called a no-show paradox.

However, because approval satisfies no favorite betrayal, such voting is not deceptive (in other words, it accurately reflects a voter's honest ordering of candidates).

The term was used in The Journal of Politics (2007) by Jack H. Nagel, who named it after Aaron Burr, who initially tied with Thomas Jefferson for Electoral College votes in the United States presidential election of 1800.

[16][17] According to Nagel, the electoral tie resulted from "a strategic tension built into approval voting, which forces two leaders appealing to the same voters to play a game of Chicken.

"[16] The Burr dilemma takes its name from the 1800 United States presidential election, which was conducted using a voting-rule similar to approval voting, though not quite identical.