[EM] 03/30/02 - Re: How to vote in Approval:

[Donald Davison]

03/30/02 - Re: How to vote in Approval:

Dave wrote:
"I like Condorcet because I CAN say the two things I care most about:
Approve of the candidate I MOST like.
Get in on deciding between the candidates most likely to win."

Dear Dave, Donald here,
I like IRVing because I CAN say the two things I care most about:
Approve of the candidate I MOST like.
Get in on deciding between the candidates most likely to win."

Plus, with IRVing, my lower choices will not be helping some other
candidate while my first choice is still a contender.


Mike wrote:
But 3 different Australians have told me that it's common for
preferrers of 3rd parties to insincerely rank one of the big-2 in
1st place, so as not to "waste [their] vote".

Donald: I don't believe this.  Either those three Australians are telling
you what you want to hear, if in fact they really did tell you that, or you
are only hearing what you want to hear.  You are either fooling yourself or
are being fooled.

In any IRVing election it is stupid "...for preferrers of 3rd parties to
insincerely rank one of the big-2 in 1st place..."  To do so will reduce
the election down to a Plurality election.  I would say that you are trying
to pass as much misinformation about IRVing as possible so you can promote
Approval Voting, the Trojan horse, the actual sick horse of election
methods.

Back to Dave, take everythig that Mike writes with a grain of salt.  To
understand Mike you must know what his agenda is, which is, he wants an
election method that will put his third party candidate on the fast track
to the winner's circle, by hook or by crook. IRVing will not do this for
him.  In IRVing the winner must have the votes in the end, but Approval
Voting is able to do this little trick of deception.

A conclusive majority of the public is not interested in electing the third
candidate, but if only half of them make the mistake of foolishly giving a
second vote to a third candidate in an Approval election, then it is
possible for that candidate to win.  This is the deception of Approval
Voting and this is what Mike and his cohorts are counting on.  Give the
public more votes and then maybe the third candidate will get enough to
win.  Giving the public more votes is like giving them more rope to hang
themselves.

The people on this list can vote anyway they want to in an Approval Voting
election, that is not important.  What is important is the way the public
should vote and that is as follows:

  The supporters of the two largest factions should only cast one vote each.

Doing this insures the winner will be one of the top two candidates.  As I
have said before, the voters of the top two candidates are not interested
in electing the third place Nader.  Bullet voting is the best defense
against Approval Voting.  (I keep expecting that some day the Approval
crowd will insist on a rule in which all voters must cast n-1 votes.
That's the only way Approval Voting will ever be able to con the public.)

If the third parties also bullet vote, then the election is reduced down to
Plurality - the more things change the more they remain the same.  So,
third party voters should cast more than one vote.  If so, then the
Approval Voting election is now reduced to a form of IRVing.  All roads
lead to Rome and all single seat method lead to IRVing.

Best to start with IRVing and not with Approval nor Borda nor Condorcet.



Regards,
   Donald Davison, host of New Democracy at http://www.mich.com/~donald

   +=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+
   |                        Q U O T A T I O N                          |
   |  "Democracy is a beautiful thing,                                 |
   |        except that part about letting just any old yokel vote."   |
   |                           - Age 10 -                              |
   +=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+
    APV   Approval Voting
    ATV   Alternative Vote  aka  IRV Instant Runoff Voting  aka  IRVing
    FPTP  First Past The Post  aka  Plurality
    NOTA  None of the Above  aka  RON Re-Open Nominations
    STV   Single Transferable Vote  aka  Preference Voting  aka  Choice Voting
          aka  Hare Clarke  aka  Hare Preferential Voting

Please be advised that sending email to me allows me to quote from it
and/or forward the entire email to others.