[EM] Re: CR style ballots for Ranked Preferences

[Richard Moore]

DEMOREP1 at aol.com wrote:

> D- This is getting stranger and stranger.
> 
> An election is based on the valid ballots cast and legally counted (by the 
> election method being used) --- nothing more and nothing less.  
> 
> Nothing new since the first election -- in what year (500 B.C. ???)  ???
> 
> A disqualified ballot is not a ballot (or anything else).  B's initial 
> apparent win was illegal.
> 
And they will get stranger still when party C reveals

it has "discovered" that 100 or so of its voters were

illegally registered, and says those ballots should be

removed, making C the "legitimate" winner. Party C will

of course disavow any prior knowledge of the illegal

ballots. But what other illegal ballots still remain

hidden?


It seems to me that, in the worst-case scenario, this

could lead to Fla.-style nightmares, only with the

parties paradoxically seeking to get some of their own

supporters' ballots thrown out.


Granted, the occassional consistency failure isn't the end 
of the world, but these sorts of problems should not be 
dismissed off-handedly. If a method fails consistency on a 
frequent basis then probably we should think twice before 
using that method.

Richard