Regretted Turnout. Insincere = ranking.

[DEMOREP1 at aol.com]

[Demorep1] wrote (13 Jun 1998):

> If initial conditions change (i.e. by adding more
> voters with different rankings), then the results
> can be expected to change.

Markus Schulze wrote-

If it is not possible to create an election method,
that never rewards tactical voters, isn't it senseful
to ask, whether there is at least 1an election method,
that never punishes sincere voters?
---
D- Assume a sincere divided majority (whose first choices are A, B, C, D,
etc.) and one or more sincere divided minorities (whose first choices are Z,
Y, X, W, etc.). 

The sincere majority will get its "real" choice only if all (repeat all) of
the choices of the sincere minority are ignored (in a dictatorial manner).

Does the sincere minority have a right to sincerely or insincerely support a
compromise candidate ?  I say yes.   If no, then expect many more political
problems in divided societies (i.e. where are mostly everywhere). 

The majority/minority situation is why I suggest that there be a YES/NO vote
on each executive/ judicial candidate and a ranking vote (1, 2, etc.)

Extremist candidates would probably not get YES majorities.  The rankings of
the voters who voted for such candidates would move up.

Example--
100 voters vote   Z > W > Y > C > B > etc.
Assume that Z, W and Y all fail to get YES majorities.
The votes then become
C > B > etc. for doing the head to head math.

I note the general historical problem is that very dangerous monarchial-
oligarchial minorities have controlled many countries in many years against
the political will of majorities in such countries.

Are Mr. Arrow's observations about dictatorial election methods still relevant
?    I assume most folks do not want to have to take lie detector tests when
they vote.