[EM] The matter of whether people strategize

[Anthony Duff]

 --- MIKE OSSIPOFF <nkklrp at hotmail.com> wrote: > 
> Bill continued:
> 
> 
> Even in countries where voting systems other than plurality are in
> general
> use, strategic voting is far from universal (and in many cases,
> when it is
> used it is done so at the urging and direction of party
> spokespeople --
> which is hardly what I'd call "rational" behavior.)
> 
> I reply:
> 
> I've been told by several Australians that it's common for voters
> there, in 
> IRV, to vote someone other than their favorite in 1st place, so as
> not to 
> "waste [their] vote".
> 
I'll tell that it is not common, despite what some individuals may
say.  Further, I can't see why anyone would ever not vote for their
favourite under IRV.

Perhaps, this could be an explanation of where this story came from.

Most people do not understand how the vote counting works, because
they simply do not know how it works.  Those who don't understand are
probably inclined to vote for their favourite realistic candidate, to
keep it simple, to be safe.  These people may find themselves being
urged, against their initial inclination, to vote for their longshot
favourite ahead of their realistic favourite.

This is indeed what the minor parties do.  They argue reasons for why
you should put them first, ahead of your favourite major party
candidate.  Perhaps the line is "You have an opportunity to lodge a
protest by voting for [this single issue candidate] first, without
hurting [your realistic favourite].  Don't waste this opportunity"

Perhaps whoever told you things about Australian voting were using
the word "favourite" loosely?

Anthony

http://personals.yahoo.com.au - Yahoo! Personals
New people, new possibilities. FREE for a limited time.