Disapproval of disapproval (was Re: Majority Support?)

[Steve Eppley]

Mike O wrote:
-snip-
>I hope you've caught on to the fact that no one is opposing
>the idea of a y/n vote, with disqualification of anyone getting
>"n" from a majority.
-snip-

I oppose including an option which could disqualify all the
candidates.  If we did a poll in EM and everyone responded, 
I don't think I'd be the only Nay.

Keep the sw reform proposal simple and as uncontroversial as
possible.  Including this provision in a single-winner reform
proposal may cause the campaign to go down in flames.  You can bet
the two-party system supporters, opponents of reform, will seize on
this.  Replacing the stifling two-party system is much more important
than requiring a re-election in the theoretical case where no
candidate is approved. 

Some two-party supporters might deviously pretend to advocate the
disapprove-all option long enough to get this sw combination on the 
ballot, then turn around and campaign against the whole package 
using its indecisiveness as ammo.  Much like the health insurance 
companies helped write Hillary's health reform proposal, then 
turned around and attacked it with their "Harry and Louise" ads.
(No, I'm not suspicious of Demorep's motives.  :-)

If we ever get to use focus groups to show which sw proposal is more
likely to pass, we'd better be sure to provide the group the kind of
anti-proposal info, like a vacuum of power during a crisis, that we 
can expect from opponents of reform. 

A disapproval option could be adopted at a later date, after passing
effective sw reform.

If we're talking about passing laws, not about electing candidates to
important single-winner offices, then it's obviously essential that
disapproval (or the simple equivalent "None of the Rest") be part of
the Condorcet's method proposal. 

---Steve     (Steve Eppley    seppley at alumni.caltech.edu)