[EM] Pseudo-election reform in California

[bql at bolson.org]

On Tue, 1 Jun 2004, Dr. Ernie Prabhakar wrote:

> I agree that Plurality in the first round suffers from all the same
> problems as Plurality in the final election.   So, my question is -- if
> people *want* a two-round system, what is the most efficient election
> method to use?  I think Ranked Ballots are probably optimal, but
> Condorcet is designed for single-winner elections. Is Condorcet still
> the best way to determine the optimal dual-winners, if the goal is to
> reflect the diversity of the electorate (vs. just the two most
> acceptable to everyone)?  Or would some form of IRV or STV accomplish
> that goal?
>
> Put another way -- I'm trying to figure out the optimal way to help
> these reformers achieve *their* goals, rather than trying to get them
> to -change- their goals.   Any suggestions?

The Primary is equivalent to a multi-seat election (2 seats). It should be
a proportional representation system. A second round with a clone
candidate in it would be terrible. The largest minority would be angrily
disenfranchised, I expect.

Brian Olson
http://bolson.org/