[EM] Re: IRV vs. Plurality

[Rob LeGrand]

Forest wrote:
> What do you think of the Candidate Proxy / Approval hybrid that I
> suggested a few months ago?
>
> Voters fill out regular approval style ballots. If a voter makes only one
> mark on the ballot, then (by default) the marked candidate (as proxy for
> the voter) may approve additional candidates on behalf of the voter in
the
> Election Completion Convention.

I like it.  My only worry is that the candidates themselves might be far
less willing to compromise than the voters.  In the California
gubernatorial "race", Bill Simon pulled out to avoid drawing votes away
from Schwarzenegger, but he's an exception.  Most of the candidates are
running despite not having any chance of winning, and many of them (Arianna
Huffington, Tom McClintock, Peter Camejo, etc.) are likely to take
significant votes away from the frontrunners.  A candidate would seem to
care much more about his own, even slim, chances than about who ends up
winning.  When I ran for state rep in Texas, I wouldn't have considered
voting for one of my major-party opponents even if I had vastly preferred
one to the other.  (I didn't.)

On the other hand, maybe a candidate would be likely to compromise in an
Election Completion Convention once it's obvious that he has no chance of
winning.  It's fun to play kingmaker, even if the results might sometimes
resemble the "corrupt bargain" of 1824.  Would the public accept the winner
of an ECC if he didn't get the most proxy votes in the public election?

=====
Rob LeGrand, psephologist
rob at approvalvoting.org
Citizens for Approval Voting
http://www.approvalvoting.org/

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com