IRV vs Plurality Vote with a Runoff

[DEMOREP1 at aol.com]

Bart wrote--

In NYC the top candidate only needs 40% of the vote to avoid a runoff. 
Makes sense to me, since 40% is no more arbitrary than 50%.  I would
gladly accept a strong plurality over a manufactured majority.
----
D- Anything less than a majority is totally arbitrary since by definition --- 
 Majority > Minority (i.e. most pluralities).

Many current alleged *strong* plurality winners have lots of *insincere* 
votes --- President (popular votes) - Mr. Clinton 1992 and 1996 and Mr. Bush 
2000.

For newer folks I note again that a choice is or is not tolerable with a 
majority of the voters.

If there happen to be two or more such majority tolerable choices, then 
number (rank) votes can be used to see if there is a Condorcet Winner.   If 
not, then the highest tolerable choice can be the tiebreaker ---- for mere 
mortal citizen- voters who are not (yet) into all sorts of conspiratorial 
strategic mathematical machinations.

Executive/ judicial officers should be nominated and elected in a nonpartisan 
manner (to lessen the *partisan* enforcement of the laws).