[EM] Juho reply, 21 Feb., 1053 GMT

[Juho]

On Feb 24, 2007, at 2:22 , James Gilmour wrote:

> Juho> Sent: 22 February 2007 06:29
>> On Feb 22, 2007, at 5:50 , Dave Ketchum wrote:
>>> STAY AWAY from US Presidential elections.  The Electoral College
>>> offers too many complications to live with for this effort.
>>
>> Ok, let it be UK then, electing a MP (excluding at least the
>> Scottish Parliament to stay in the two-party domain). :-)
>
> Someone's a little out of date with the state of UK politics!  At the
> 2005 UK general election (Westminster, House of Commons), Labour  
> got 35%
> of the votes, Conservatives 32% and Liberal Democrats 22%, with 11%
> spread across a wide range of other parties.  MPs from 12 different
> parties were elected.  Changed days from 1951 and 1955 when the two
> largest parties together took 97% and 96% of all the votes!!  The  
> UK is
> the exception that proves Duverger's "law".
> James Gilmour

Ok, it would maybe be safest not to refer to any country with an  
existing voting system and political history :-). The examples should  
work as described for any large scale public Condorcet elections (of  
one district) that use winning votes to measure the strength of the  
pairwise comparisons.

Juho



		
___________________________________________________________ 
Try the all-new Yahoo! Mail. "The New Version is radically easier to use" – The Wall Street Journal 
http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html