[EM] 04/05/02 - I Know the Drill, Adam, I'll be on the same page:

[Donald Davison]

04/05/02 - I Know the Drill, Adam, I'm on the same page:

Hi Adam, you wrote: "OK, imagine the polls before election night show the
following first-place preferences:

Favorite 30%
Compromise 26%
Worst 44%

Almost every Favorite voter likes Compromise more than Worst, and almost
every Worst voter likes Compromise more than Favorite.  The supporters of
Compromise are split 50-50 between Favorite and Worst.  This is, I hope you
realize, a quite realistic scenario."

Donald here: Realistic scenario maybe, except that forty-four percent of
the voters do not consider their candidate as being the worst.  Did the
polls actually report this candidate as the worst.

Why is it that some examples on this list use names like Hilter, Stalin,
and, of course, names like Favorite, Compromise, and Worst?  It tells me
that the example's creator has a weak argument and he needs to pre-program
us readers so that we will know who should win and who should lose.   (I'm
partial to the name Saint Howitzer.)

Alan: "Now say that I'm a supporter of Favorite."

Donald: Of course you are a supporter of Favorite, who else would you
support, I know the drill, I too support Favorite, I'll be on the same
page.

Adam: "What would you, Donald Davison, advise me and those like me to do?"

Donald: `Listen up troops, our first objective in this coming election is
for our party to rise up and take over the Number Two Party position in
this area, we can do it.  For the first time, the polls are in favor of us
doing this.  This new election method called IRVing has allowed our party
to float up in strength election after election until victory is on our
doorstep.  Becoming Number Two for the first time is a very big event in
the history of any party.  `Now is the Hour' (to quote some famous author).
Don't blow it you guys, less we start falling back in future elections.  I
want everyone to get out there and drum up as many votes as possible for
our candidate and for our party, the Favorite Party, we must become Number
Two.'

Adam: "If we vote Favorite in first place, Worst will beat Favorite 57-43
or some such in the runoff."

Donald:  Winning this election is only our second objective.  Worst may win
this election, but that is only a short term gain for them.  We are going
for the long term gain.  We are going for Number One, but first we need to
be Number Two.
(Note: What Adam does not tell us is that candidate Worst will still win if
the method being used were Approval Voting.)

Adam: "But if [I] and others like me, bury our favorite and vote for the
"lesser of two evils" in Compromise, we can get Compromise to win the
election 56-44 over Worst."

Party member One:  Who is that guy?

Party member Two:  Of more importance, who let him in here?

Donald:  Almost every Favorite voter will chose Compromise as their second
choice, that is how we are helping Compromise in the event our candidate
does not win, in spite of the fact that only half of the Compromise voters
will be doing the same for our candidate.  Our help to Compromise should be
limited to the second choices.  Besides, helping Compromise to win is only
our third objective.
  If you cause our party to fail to gain Number Two,  you will be trading
our first objective for our third and I'll trade my bowling ball for your
head.
  The Compromise party will not only win the election, it will also take
back the title of Number Two Party from us before we even win it, that
sucks.
  You will have deserted your party in time of need.  You will have
betrayed our candidate.  You will have shown everyone that this party
cannot be trusted.
  This party may never gain the Number Two position, let alone Number One.
We should expect to see our party fade away, all because of you ADAM
TARR!!!

Adam: "This is how IRV keeps the two-party duopoly going.  Even after a
third party (favorite, in this example) is more popular than the party
nearest it, the voters will still abandon that party for the more moderate
party.  So the new party will seem weaker than it really is.  IRV keeps
third parties down."

Donald:  No Adam, it was you and others like you who are the voters that
abandoned our party for the more moderate party, now our party is facing
long term losses, it was you that goofed.  Every man and woman should have
supported our candidate and our party to the hilt.
  What did we gain in this election?  Answer, we gained our third objective
in place of our first objective, while we had our first objective in our
pocket.
  We could have shown the public that the Favorite Party has arrived to
take over as Number Two Party on its way to the top spot.  But now, we are
still number three and fading.

It was not IRVing that stopped our party from becoming Number Two, it was
your stupid gyrations that stopped us cold.
  It was IRVing that allowed our party to rise up to the point of becoming
number two, but it was you that tossed away a very big long term gain for a
small third grade short term gain. (Penny Wise Pound Foolish).

Too bad you froze.