05/02/02 - The So Called Compromise Candidate:

[DEMOREP1 at aol.com]

Donald in his standard junk style of postings wrote in part-

There seems to be a mind set among a few on this list that if there is no
majority on the first count then the winner should be the third or lower
candidate, the so called `compromise candidate'.

---
D- The ever clueless Donald does not want to disturb his brain cells mind set 
in political concrete with even the actual (or possible) existance of a 
*complete* place votes table.

Example -- 5 Choices

       1    2     3     4     5

A     A1   A2    A3    A4    A5
B     B1   B2    B3    B4    B5
C     C1   C2    C3    C4    C5
D     D1   D2    D3    D4    D5
E     E1   E2    E3    E4    E5

For example purposes - NO candidate has a first choice majority.

There will obviously be 4 losers (assuming only the place votes table math 
will determine the winner) --- NOT just one.

Thus, the second or later choices of 3 (not just 1) first choice losers would 
determine the winner between the remaining 2.

The question is which 3 of the 5 are losers AT THE SAME TIME in order to get 
a so-called instant runoff between the 2 remaining --- very complex since a 
divided majority and a divided minority may EACH have 2 or more subparts.

Donald and his favorite mind set IRV would ignore most of the data in the 
table.

Another IRV idiot example-

26 AE
25 BE
24 CE
23 DE
1 E

99

With IRV ---  E loses.  A wins with a mighty 26 of 99 votes

E beats each other choice head to head

If the votes are deemed to be YES votes, then 

   YES

A 26
B 25
C 24
D 23
E 99 (a mere 100 percent of the votes)

----
For more information about this list (subscribe, unsubscribe, FAQ, etc), 
please see http://www.eskimo.com/~robla/em