[EM] Blake's margins arguments

[Rob LeGrand]

Alex wrote:
> Before we sell the public on Condorcet we need to get ourselves heard
> over the cacaphony of pro-IRV voices.  Seen in that light, the new
> Approval Voting organization seems like a much better horse to back in
> any race.

Obviously, I couldn't agree more.  :-)  Thanks so much to all of you who
have joined CAV.  Those who haven't, please check us out at
http://www.approvalvoting.org/ .

> So I put that issue pretty low on the list of things to care about.  If
> other people find it stimulating to debate that, have fun, but I'm
> agnostic on it for all practical purposes.

Really I am too by this point, which explains my long silence on the boring
margins/winning-votes debate.  I just have to chime in every once in a
while for the sake of newcomers who might get the impression that there's
wide agreement on the list that winning-votes is superior.

> Keep this in mind about selling the public on winning votes or margins: 
> Nobody says "Bush won Florida with <number of votes>", they say "Bush won
> Florida by 537 votes" or whatever the final margin was.

Excellent point . . . I never thought of it that way.

=====
Rob LeGrand
rob at approvalvoting.org
http://www.approvalvoting.org/

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Shopping - Send Flowers for Valentine's Day
http://shopping.yahoo.com

----
For more information about this list (subscribe, unsubscribe, FAQ, etc), 
please see http://www.eskimo.com/~robla/em