Shouldn't Talk To Santa Clara?

[David Marsay]

Dear Mike O.

I think you might draw the attention of the Santa Clara folk 
to this list for views that represent a variety of opinions.

> Before the Leftist enters, both methods elect either the
> Centrist or else the Centrist loses, but his voters have the
> power to choose who does win.
> 
> After the Leftist enters, IRO is does the same as before, but
> Runoff gives it to the Centrist for sure.

There are also examples that go the other way. You believe that the 
'correct' candidate will tend to make it to the Runoff. I wonder if 
this is so in Santa Clara?

It was suggested earlier that the motivation for IRO was to expose 
the rankings. Maybe this should be a criterion for our list:

Proposed criterion: ballots express rankings.

I believe that in some circumstances (e.g., UK) such rankings would 
lead to pressure for further reform. Worthwhile, or what?

> ... This is an example, then, of where IRO violates the
> 1st Choice Criterion, which says that there should never be
> a need for someone to not vote his favorite in 1st place.

You seem to think that the 'correct' candidate always makes it to the 
runoff. Not in the UK they wouldn't: Runoff would not in practice 
meet this criteria: IRO often would! (But what about Santa Clara?)

> In these examples, Runoff does a better
> job of electing the CW than IRO does.

And in the examples that you think are typical, but not world-wide!

Cheers.
--------------------------------------------------
Sorry, but apparently I have to do this. :-(
The views expressed above are entirely those of the writer
and do not represent the views, policy or understanding of
any other person or official body.