[EM] Re: Issues, Condorcet, and IRV (was: IRV vs. plurality)

[Adam Tarr]

>So Condorcet gives 2 of the 3 parties an incentive to "go 2D" in this
>example, while IRV only gives 1 party an incentive to "go 2D" in this
>model.

Doesn't that constitute a strong argument for Condorcet, given your views?

Empirically, we know that politics tend to remain 1-D, with two dominant 
parties, in IRV.  Maybe Condorcet would be different.  My intuition, and 
your example. both suggest that Condorcet would lead to parties offering 
different permutations of "left" and "right" viewpoints.

>What interests me is that, based on what I hear of politics in other
>countries (which is admittedly not a lot), it seems like most countries
>have some sort of left-right division.  The factions may not have the same
>respective stances as the American left and right, but that sort of
>division still seems to stand.  Even PR doesn't seem to do much to cure
>this problem.

PR, if adopted in the USA with large districts, would surely lead to some 
Libertarian representatives.

Part of the problem is that people are so accustomed to certain views being 
packaged together, that they tend to go with the whole lot or none of 
them.  Call it political socialization, or intellectual laziness; your choice.

-Adam