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

[Alex Small]

Donald wrote:

>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.

That's strange.  Although partisan politics is not the main focus of the
list, my impression is that Mike supported Nader (correct me if I'm
wrong).  Nader is not the type of candidate I see winning most elections
held by approval voting, because I don't consider him a compromise
candidate.  If Mike does indeed have a nefarious fast-track motive then
he's pursuing it in a stupid manner.  However, Mike seems quite intelligent
to me, so I have to conclude that Mike's motives are not to fast-track his
favorites.

However, approval voting would end the "wasted vote syndrome" and make it
possible for a candidate like Nader to approach voters as a serious
contender.  Under those circumstances, it is possible that a person like
Nader might make an eloquent case and persuade the electorate that his
stances are the best.  In that case the opinion of the electorate might
shift and Nader would in fact be a compromise candidate.

In the end, that's the goal of breaking the duopoly:  Not to elect my
favorite, or Mike's favorite, or Donald's favorite, or anybody else's.
Rather, the goal is to let our favorites take the stage and make their case
to voters whose decisions aren't compromised by the "wasted vote
syndrome."  Then we just have to see what the voters decide, and hope that
the winner serves his country in a noble manner.

Alex