Finding the probable best candidate?

[Rob LeGrand]

Steve,

The term "clones" refers to candidates who are together on every ballot in an
election.  In other words, on no ballot does any other candidate separate them.
 (Markus has a good formal definition.)  The term doesn't imply that the
candidates are actually alike in any way, much less that they're clones in the
genetic sense.  :-)  Being independent of clones is different and much easier
than being independent of irrelevant alternatives.  In fact, no Condorcet
method is independent of irrelevant alternatives, although many are independent
of clones, which I see as an important advantage over Borda.

> Maybe, just maybe, part of the problem is that we are sort of
> prejudiced in favor of majoritarian systems, and too
> uncritically accepting of the majority rules ideal.

Just as a quick point, every reasonable ranked-ballot method I know of is
equivalent to plurality when there are only two candidates.  So all of them,
from Borda to Condorcet, can be thought of as generalizations of plurality in
that sense.  As for your sample elections . . .

> 	1,000,001:Eric>Fran>Gary
> 	1,000,000:Fran>Gary>Eric

Eric, the freedom-loving candidate, wins a squeaker using Condorcet, and no
voter would have reason to regret his vote.  If Borda were used, though, Fran
would win by a large margin, and the freedom-loving voters would have *plenty*
of reason to regret voting Fran second.  If they'd all voted Fran last, their
favorite would have won.  Doesn't it bother you that Borda encourages insincere
voting to such an extreme?

> 	1,000,000:Eric>Fran>Gary
> 	1,000,000:Fran>Gary>Eric

This one should be a tie between Eric and Fran.  Do you really think Fran
should win decisively just because the socialists ran two candidates?  Would
you honestly like to see parties or ideologies benefit by running lots of
candidates?  As much as I hate the vote-splitting that occurs using plurality
or IRV, at least it limits the confusion and complexity.  Surely the
proliferation of candidates that would occur using Borda would be much more
nightmarish.  But that's just my opinion.  If it doesn't convince you, then
stick with Borda.  Believing that Borda is the best method is perfectly logical
if certain criteria are considered more important than others, but aren't
Saari's criteria far removed from real-world concerns?

=====
Rob LeGrand
honky98 at aggies.org
http://www.aggies.org/honky98/

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Sports - Coverage of the 2002 Olympic Games
http://sports.yahoo.com