[EM] Re: Median Voter Theorem and the 50-50 Nation

Rob Brown rob at karmatics.com
Tue Aug 3 11:51:24 PDT 2004

Dr. Ernie Prabhakar <drernie <at> radicalcentrism.org> writes:
>    However, the root of the split is, at the end of the day, the 
> polarized ideologies of conservatism and liberalism that anchor the 
> "hard-core" base of each party, and drives politics at the local level. 
>   As long as both parties carry those boat anchors, I don't think either 
> will be able to overtake the other/reach out to the disenfranchised 
> middle.

Hi, I saw this and it inspired me to jump out of lurk mode.

I very much disagree with this.  I'm convinced that 99% of the reason for the 
polarizing into the two parties is because of plurality voting, which clusters 
people (typically into two parties, but sometimes more) because of the 
strategic advantage of eliminating vote splitting.  With that effect gone, 
centrists would have more chance of being elected than people who were more 
one side or the other, and you wouldn't have the current battling of two sides 
to get their candidate elected as opposed to the other -- you would just have 
a subtle shifting of the middle.  There would still be people on both 
extremes, but they would have far less power.

If you were to fix this problem (by having a condorcet type election for all 
elections including for votes within congress), people's views and opinions 
and preferences are far more likely to fall along a bell curve, rather than 
the current curve which has two humps.

I don't think you would need "philosophical reform" as you suggest, and 
frankly I don't see how that would ever happen anyway.  That is almost like 
suggesting that human nature be changed.


More information about the Election-Methods mailing list