[EM] Re: Use a "turkey" filter
chrisbenham at bigpond.com
Wed Jul 2 03:04:02 PDT 2003
In Australia in Federal and most State elections there is a ridiculous
and indefensible requirement for voters to put a number in every box.
Most voters (certainly nearly all those with no clear, sincere second
and lower preferences) just fill out their ballots as their favourite
party advises them. These advising parties certainly do understand the
electoral system, so you can be sure that if the method used was
Condorcet (especially with truncation allowed) they would not be
advising voters to elect so-called "turkeys"
I can see no reason in principle why a CW with no first preference
votes is necessarily in any way illegimate (or a "turkey").
With secret voting, a reqirement for some minimum number of nominators
is fairly meaningless. I think in some parts of the US a certain
minimum number of signatures will get a person (or a proposition?) on
the ballot, and there I believe they can easily be bought. Maybe with
Condorcet, candidates should have to achieve some minimum Borda score
to get their cash deposit back.
More information about the Election-Methods