# [EM] Re: Pairwise winner of the 2 least-beaten

Steve Eppley seppley at alumni.caltech.edu
Sun Mar 3 13:45:05 PST 1996

```Mike O. wrote:
>You suggested that circular ties be solved by determining which 2
>candidates are the 2 least-beaten ones, and choosing, as the winner,
>the one of those two who beats the other in a pairwise comparison. It's
>to that proposal that that letter is a reply.

No, I suggested:
If the least beat also pairwise-beat the 2nd least beat,
then the least beat wins.
Else a runoff between the two.

Mike's example:
>40%: Buchanan, Nader, Clinton  (order-reversal cheating attempt)
>25%: Clinton   (defensive truncation to thwart order-reversal)

Tie-break summary:
Buchanan -60%
Clinton  -75%

Since Nader (the winner in plain Condorcet) is least beat but
Buchanan beat him, we get a runoff between Nader and Buchanan.  This
gives the Clinton voters a chance to vote for Nader, so Nader wins
runoff.

The runoff costs time and money, but it squelches the claims of the
Buchanan crowd that they were robbed by a weird voting system.  This
was the point of my proposal.

Thanks for the example numbers.  They make it so much easier for me
to understand.  I hope we make this a universal practice.

```