[EM] Strategy and Winner-Take-All

[Forest Simmons]

Are you sure you mean "winner-take-all?"

Single winner elections, whether based on Approval, Condorcet, IRV, Borda,
First-Past-The-Post, etc. tend to be winner-take-all, unless some
agreements are made like, "Youse guys vote for me instead of your
favorite, and I make concessions to your party."

As Bart once pointed out, methods that have the spoiler problem are more
likely to produce such concessions than those that do not.

I suppose a presidential election could be done by Proportional
Representation if you gave the first candidate to reach quota the
presidency, and the second candidate to reach quota the vice presidency.

Forest

On Mon, 11 Mar 2002, Narins, Josh wrote:

>
> Has anyone gone out and proved that a winner-take-all system will always
> result in a two party system, based on the inclusion of all reasonable
> strategies where there is no major information sharing between voters?
>
> Outside of any state repression of the second candidate's voters, of course
> :)
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> This message is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the designated recipient(s) named above.  If you are not the intended recipient of this message you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution or copying of this message is strictly prohibited.  This communication is for information purposes only and should not be regarded as an offer to sell or as a solicitation of an offer to buy any financial product, an official confirmation of any transaction, or as an official statement of Lehman Brothers.  Email transmission cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error-free.  Therefore, we do not represent that this information is complete or accurate and it should not be relied upon as such.  All information is subject to change without notice.
>
>
>