[EM] Bad Condorcet winners?

[Tom Ruen]

Tom said:

> >If they're really worried about B: AC=49, CA=48, BA=3.
> >This more powerfully resists the centrist.

Mike said:

> That's very commendable, the principled refusal to vote for a sleazy
> candidate calling himself a centrist. I always refuse to vote for him.
>
> But so what? Voters are known to vote for him anyway. Look at Clinton's
> & Gore's nonpositional disutility (and positional disutility for
> progressives). It's a question of whether they're going to vote
> for MiddleSleaze in 1st place, or for their favorite. That's the
> real question in actual elections. Let's not make them make that
> choice. That's why I advocate Condorcet & Approval.

We're in agreement here - voters shouldn't just vote a centrist because he
"seems" more like one's favorite. The more powerful a polar opposite seems,
the greater the pull to support the compromise as the better chance, but
this needs resisting if the compromise choice sucks.

These dilemmas show where Condorcet is more demanding on voters than IRV.
IRV will never look at second choices for voters of A and C.

I believe in Condorcet process only given voter think well about lower
choices, or bullet vote if they're unsure what they really want. I'd rather
voters be conservative than vote haphazardly on lower ranks. Ranking many
choices sincerely is a great responsibility!

Tom

----- Original Message -----
From: "MIKE OSSIPOFF" <nkklrp at hotmail.com>
To: <election-methods-list at eskimo.com>
Sent: Friday, March 16, 2001 7:15 PM
Subject: Re: [EM] Bad Condorcet winners?


>
>
> > > Votes             Candidate (rating)
> > > -----     ---------------------------------
> > >  49%       A(10)                 B(1)  C(0)
> > >   3%       B(10)  A(9)                 C(0)
> > >  48%       C(10)                 B(1)  A(0)
> >
> >This shows an example where Condorcet demands more care from voters in
> >lower
> >rankings.
> >Voters for A and C should simply bullet vote if they hate the centrist.
> >They can also consider between the centrist and the opposite party which
> >they prefer if their candidate can't win.
> >Many voters might choose the opposite party if they were being
thoughtful.
> >
> >In Condorcet, this should be: A=49, C=48, BA=3.
> >Then A is Condorcet candidate.
> >
> >If they're really worried about B: AC=49, CA=48, BA=3.
> >This more powerfully resists the centrist.
>
> That's very commendable, the principled refusable to vote for a sleazy
> candidate calling himself a centrist. I always refuse to vote for him.
>
> But so what? Voters are known to vote for him anyway. Look at Clinton's
> & Gore's nonpositional disutility (and positional disutility for
> progressives). It's a question of whether they're going to vote
> for MiddleSleaze in 1st place, or for their favorite. That's the
> real question in actual elections. Let's not make them make that
> choice. That's why I advocate Condorcet & Approval.
>
> Mike Ossipoff
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com