CVD wants Alt.V to be fairer but it isn't: misleading website

[MIKE OSSIPOFF]

Demorep said:

Mr. Ossipoff wrote-

I quite agree that relative rank positions aren't Y/N votes.
The advantage of rank balloting is that the election isn't a Y/N
choice: It's a relative choice. Someone has to win, so which
should it be? Relative balloting, because the election is a relative
choice.
---
D- Not quite relative.  As I have mentioned now about 5 times on this list- 
A
legislative body could always choose a person for an elective executive or
judicial office if there is a vacancy (when the voters do not find any (or
enough) majority YES choices).

I reply:

But it still comes down to which one wins. Passing the choice off to
someone else doesn't change that.

Demorep wrote:

The 2000 election for U.S. President might just be such a case.  NONE of the
candidates might be deemed worthy enough to get a YES majority.

I reply:

Then we still pick one, hopefully by a more democratic method.

Demorep continues:

If ALL of the candidates in a given year of really hard times (like perhaps
1932) happen to be extremists (such as perhaps Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Saddam,
etc. etc.) would Mr. Ossipoff demand that one of such folks be elected in a
*relative choice* election ???

I reply:

What I don't understand is why you didn't run a better candidate,
to run against Hitler, Stalin, Mao & Sadaam?

If those are the candidates, then of course one of them should win.
Hopefully the best one. But it's important that people not be cowed
into dumping the one they consider best in order to beat the one they
consider worst.


Demorep continues:

I note that with current primary election plurality nominations, many e
xtremists of both the D and R parties are now being nominated so the voters
really have the LO2E *relative choice* problem in general elections that Mr.
Ossipoff (and myself) are unhappy about.

I reply:

No not just in the primaries. What about the general, with Nader,
Gore, & Bush? LO2E with a vengeance. Everyone seems to know that
Nader is better than Gore, but says Nader can't win. Come again??
Everyone likes Nader better than Gore, but Nader can't win and Gore
can? Now the voters are proving their hopeless sucker-ness more than
they ever have before. If you asked a Bush voter to compare the honesty
of Nader & Gore, he'd probably agree that Nader is the honest one of
those 2. Maybe it's a UUCC badexample afterall.

Mike Ossipoff

_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at 
http://profiles.msn.com.