[EM] Plurality loser

[DEMOREP1 at aol.com]

On Wed, 6 Feb 2002, Adam Tarr wrote:

> 
> I _think_ I follow what you are saying.  What I am arguing (perhaps 
> incorrectly!) is that my method of iteratively electing and removing 
candidates 
> is exactly equivalent to trying to maximize the PAV score of an entire set 
of 
> candidates.  That is, repeat the following process k times for a k-seat 
council:
> 
> 1) Tally the ballots.
> 2) Select the Approval winner.  This candidate is elected.
> 3) For each ballot that contained the Approval winner, decay all of the 
> remaining votes on that ballot by n/(n+1) (d'Hondt) or (2n-1)/(2n+1) 
(Webster), 
> where n is the number of candidates that ballot has helped elect so far. 
(For a 
> manual count, simply mark the ballot each time it elects a candidate.)
> 4) Remove the elected candidate from the ballot.
----
D- If Head to Head math and YES/NO are not available, then how about just 
repeatedly removing the plurality loser ???

Even a divided majority will remove (sooner or later) a plurality loser.

That is the standard place votes rank order table would in effect be reversed.

The choice with the most last place votes loses. Repeat as necessary.

Who would have survived such method for President in 2000 ???   Only the 
Shadow knows (Radio mystery show in the 1930's).