First Debate on DEMOREP1's 2-1-2 Example

[donald at mich.com]

Greetings to Methods list,

Rob Lanphier wrote:>Two questions:
>
>1.  Are the voters aware of semi-accurate polling data (or in a genuine 5
>person election, do they have a pretty good idea of who the others would
>rank on top)?

Donald writes: With only five voters and with three of them most likely
being the three candidates - I would say that these people have a pretty
good idea of who the others would rank on top.

Rob Lanphier wrote:
>2.  What is the tie-breaker assumed to be in all cases (especially
>Condorcet)?  If we are to assume experienced voters here, then they would
>undoubtedly factor in the tie-breaker in an election so likely to produce
>a tie.
>
>Rob

Donald writes: I have no knowledge about Condorcet tie breakers. That
answer could come from you or maybe DEMOREP - it is his example. The
Instant Run-off tie breaker would be to use the next selections of only the
two candidates that are tied - keep the candidate that is high and drop the
candidate that is low.

Speaking of tie breaking:

    T I E   B R E A K E R  - A M E R I C A N    S T Y L E

This is a true story - no names are used in order to hide the guilty.

On the radio this morning I heard the following story about an election for
mayor that ended in a tie. The city council decided to break the tie on the
toss of a coin. One of the tied candidates called "HEADS" when the coin was
in the air. When the coin hit the table it was a TAIL. This same candidate
yelled
 "TAILS - I WIN" This caused some concern about what he said when the coin
was in the air -  but the council refused to listen to a tape of the coin
toss - but instead the council declared this same candidate the winner -
end of story.

            So much for that tie breaker method.

Donald,