[EM] Eric Gorr and David Gamble's Running Debate:

[Adam Tarr]

Don Davison wrote:

>It is unrealistic for you to assume that none of the A voters will
>make a lower choice in light of the fact that the election is very close.
>Both the high and low candidates are within five percent of the center
>candidate.  This election is too close for any voter not to make a second
>choice if he wants to be sure he has a choice in the final decision between
>the last two candidates.

Oh, that's the problem.  Great.  Now that that's cleared up, let's make a 
realistic example:

10% FarRight>Right>Centrist>Left>FarLeft
10% Right>FarRight>Centrist>Left>FarLeft
15% Right>Centrist>FarRight>Left>FarLeft
16% Centrist>Right>Left>FarRight>FarLeft
15% Centrist>Left>Right>FarLeft>FarRight
13% Left>Centrist>FarLeft>Right>FarRight
11% Left>FarLeft>Centrist>Right>FarRight
10% FarLeft>Left>Centrist>Right>FarRight

Now explain why this is unrealistic.  Here, I'll help you out: you're going 
to ignore the first preferences of the most extreme fashions, and magically 
turn this into a three way race, at chich point your standard 
anti-weak-center logic will apply.  Or, you're just going to ignore 
me.  That's worked in the past...

It takes a good dose of cognitive dissonance to argue that the above 
example should result in someone other than Centrist being elected.

-Adam