IR elects Hitler?

[DEMOREP1 at aol.com]

Mr. Eppley wrote:

This isn't close to the examples I requested, which would either
show IR doing better than Condorcet or Condorcet electing a
disapproved candidate when an approved candidate is also running.
IR elects H in this example, no better than Condorcet.

Demorep1- I will not be producing any examples that favor IR over Condorcet.
I am not sure where you got the idea that I favor IR over Condorcet.

>[Demorep1 wrote-] With the lesser of 2 evils [3 evils in this case] tie
breaker, 
>H is elected with a mere 65 percent of the voters against him in 
>his worst (and only) defeat. 

What makes this a plausible scenario?  Why didn't any decent 
candidates compete against this field of horrors?

Demorep1-- Once any so-called decent candidates are on the ballot after the
ballot access deadline, there just might be some research into their
backgrounds (and especially the backgrounds of their supporters to get some
guilt by association dirt) for probable negative attacks (what was the ratio
of negative/positive TV ads against/for Mssrs. Clinton, Dole or Perot-  10/1,
20/1, 100/1 ??)
----
----
It was not IR electing Hitler in the 35-33-32 example.  It was plain
Condorcet electing Hitler.