[EM] Partial points in CR

[MIKE OSSIPOFF]

Between the time when I read your posting, and the time when I replied, I 
forgot that you said you were talking about genuine compromise candidates, 
not necessarily Republocrats. So my reply was to something that you weren't 
saying.

Sure, with CR I'd probably often give partial points to some people I 
wouldn't give anything to in Approval.

Partly because I might refuse to vote for someone in Approval even a 
strategy says I should, because of principle, or because I just want to. 
But, then, Von Neuman  & Morgenstern estimate utilities from choices that 
someone makes, and so it could be said that because I don't feel like voting 
for someone, maybe that means that not voting for hir improves for my 
outcome-expectation.

For instance Kucinich and Chomsky (if Chomsky were running) seem better than 
my expectation for the 2004 election, so the better-than-expectation 
strategy says to vote for them, but I still wouldn't vote for them in 
Approval. Maybe I should trust my judgement, and the assumption that however 
I want to vote maximizes my expection, based on the implied vNM utiliities.

And partly because, for better expressivity, I might give a few points to a 
candidate who definitely shouldn't get a vote, strategically.

Though I wouldn't vote for Kucinich or Chomsky in Approval, I might give 
them something in CR, barely more than the other undesirabales, especially 
if someone much more undesirable is in the race.
To vote more than 2 merit-levels even though that isn't optimum strategy.

CR is so familiar to people that it's llikely to be more winnable than 
Approval is. CR won't elicit the mistaken 1-person-1-vote objection, because 
CR is clearly a point system.

When Approval is proposed, it's important that, from the start, Approval be 
introduced as a point system, like 0-10, etc., but a 0,1 point system.

I'd just as soon have CR as Approval. In fact I'd like the greater 
expressivity of CR, even though partial points wouldn't be optimum strategy. 
Sometimes I'd give partial points.

I've objected to CR because some people would vote suboptimal strategy, but 
most progressives who'd give partial points to the Democrat in CR would 
probably vote for the Democrat in Approval, and so the results of CR would 
be fine. As in Approval, if Nader outpolls the Republican, progressives will 
hopefully stop giving even partial points to the Democrat.

As I was saying earlier, too, if I don't know whether I should vote for 
someone in Approval, giving them partial points in CR is consistent with 
good Approval strategy. If it's a toss up in Approval, I could give that 
candidate a point assignment halfway between maximum & minimum.

And, as you suggested, a few CR points could be improvement-bait for 
candidates who are at least honest. And maybe even Kucinich and Chomsky 
could merit the reward-gesture of a point more than the usual Republocrats.

Mike Ossipoff

_________________________________________________________________
Plan your next US getaway to one of the super destinations here. 
http://special.msn.com/local/hotdestinations.armx