Anthony Weiner’s concession in advance of the Democratic primary run-off is the best possible result of Tuesday’s election, and not least of which because I have no intention of voting for Whitey (whatever name he may go by).

Freddy Ferrer, whose campaign has been rather timid until now, deserves the chance to finally take on Mayor Mike directly, without diminished strength and campaign funds. His “two New Yorks” theme from four years ago was exactly the message that voters deserved, and I will always appreciate that Freddy didn’t back down on September 12, insisting that nothing had changed. We still had then, and still have now after four years of Bloomberg, a city of inconceivable riches that is pushing its poor and desperate farther out into the margins. If Freddy campaigns like a populist from now until November, our CEO Mayor may yet get fired.

Better yet, the possibility of wasting $12 million in taxpayer money on an unnecessary run-off election opens the possibility for significant election reform. It’s time to put proportional representation back on the agenda. Taxpayer outrage was a significant, if not primary, factor in San Francisco’s recent switch to instant run-off voting (elections by ranked ballot, where the votes for the lowest vote-getting candidate are redistributed to the next choice listed on each ballot until a candidate finally achieves a majority vote). It could be here, too. The gradual demographic shifts in the city virtually ensure lots more run-off elections, with a splintered, Balkanized electorate unable to elect majority candidates.

Those run-off elections are bad for democracy, too, for how divisive they can be. Four years ago, when Ferrer had to face Mark Green in a run-off, Green’s campaign played the race card, using fears of Al Sharpton to galvanize the white suburban vote. Green won the primary, but lost support and lost the election. But Whitey won anyway.

That wouldn’t happen in an instant runoff vote. A candidate must appeal to his rivals’ supporters for their second and third place votes in order to prevail in multiple rounds of counting. Divisiveness doesn’t work if you’re simply a plurality, nor does painting certain candidates (the wild ones, with the kooky lefty ideas) as “spoilers.” Voters could finally vote their conscience and their true preference, and candidates would have to emphasize common ground and areas of agreement.