[EM] Arguments against disapproval. Demorep1 reply

[DEMOREP1 at aol.com]

Replying to
Subj:  [EM] Arguments against disapproval. Demorep reply re: notation.
Date:  Wed, Mar 6, 1996 7:49 AM EDT

The Demorep posting began with
<It is possible to rank disapproved candidates in reverse order

There is a differance between "is possible to" and "should be done".
I have already mentioned what should be done with disapproved candidates-
give them a zero (0) vote or leave a blank by the candidate's name so that a
majority 0/blank candidate is not elected. 
Getting enough minus votes would inform some candidates never to run again.

Adding a "D" for disapproval or a dividing line between approved and
disapproved candidates or NOTB would add another minor feature to the
Condorcet procedure (and add confusion to the minds of lesser educated
voters). 

Is single winner reform going to be only by the numbers or with more add-on
features ?

The U.S. media should be screaming daily about actual minority rule winners
for President (Lincoln in 1860, Clinton in 1992, etc.) and for other
executive and judicial offices.

Why is there continous fascination with possible/probable Condorcet plurality
single office winners being possibly elected with absolute disapproval votes
(i.e. 0 to minus 100 percentage votes) ? 

Example again-- every second choice vote in the Hitler -Stalin- Middle
42-41-16 examples could be a total opposition minus 100 percentage value vote
being voted (as a "2" vote) only for strategic offensive/defensive fun and
games. 

I have already mentioned that the legislative body can appoint an
executive/judicial officer if there is no majority winner by the voters
(which is the safety valve law in all States if the winner dies before taking
office and no other replacement officer is specified by law).

The use of "or State Senator" is mystifying since P.R. and not single winner
reform will be electing state legislators.

Other general comments will be in the posting Single Winner Basics, Part 3