[EM] IRV vs Condorcet

[Eric Gorr]

Markus Wrote:
>Dave wrote:
>  > DIFFERENCE: While Condorcet compares EACH pair of candidates and develops
>  > a matrix of pair counts to identify best liked, IRV puts emphasis on
>  > patterns, giving preference to those that are ranked first. See example
>  > below where B is much more popular than A, but IRV never sees this for C
>  > is more popular than B among B backers - even though all these C backers
>  > like B better than A.
>  > Some call this an argument for IRV, claiming that those C votes
>  > were against B. Could be, sometimes, but more likely is a simple minor
>  > disagreement within B's party that does not create a smidgen of desire to
>  > have A win.
>
>I wouldn't say that this is an argument for IRV against Condorcet or
>an argument for Condorcet against IRV. In my opinion, this is simply
>a description of the count. An argument is something like "Method X
>violates independence from clones while method Y meets independence
>from clones." but not something like "Method X counts the votes in
>this manner while method Y counts the votes in that manner."

Perhaps it isn't an argument for or against any particular method, 
but I would consider it an important point to make about any 
particular method.

It is because IRV fails to count votes in a better way that 
contributes to (if not causes) its failing of more fundamental 
criteria important to every voting method.