[EM] Primaries

[Kevin Venzke]

 --- Dave Ketchum <davek at clarityconnect.com> a écrit : 
>       With Condorcet, or the better other methods discussed for the 
> general election, parties could be permitted two, or even more, candidates 
> in the general election - needing a primary only for an excessively large 
> set of candidates.
>       Puzzle:  Assuming the above leads to Condorcet in the primary, to 
> select two candidates for the general election - WHY NOT?  the arguments 
> are not necessarily the same as related to electing two officers for PR.

I suspect parties would retain primaries even under Condorcet or Approval,
1) in order to concentrate resources on a single candidate, and 2) out of
distrust that their supporters would support all of the party's nominees.

I think this because even IRV can handle clones.  Yet despite that the Australians
have to rank all of the candidates, I'm under the impression that major parties 
in Australia don't nominate multiple candidates.  So I think the problem is
not with the method, but with money, and voters' unpredictable response to
multiple nominees.

Perhaps it's not such a bad thing if parties deign to retain primaries, and only
nominate lone candidates.  That should allow independent candidates to gain some 
attention for themselves, and not get drowned out by a mass of major party candidates.

But I would be happier, I think, to replace primaries with a single-winner method
based on party lists.  That should permit more voters to participate in selecting
a nominee.


Kevin Venzke
stepjak at yahoo.fr



	

	
		
Yahoo! Mail : votre e-mail personnel et gratuit qui vous suit partout ! 
Créez votre Yahoo! Mail sur http://fr.benefits.yahoo.com/

Dialoguez en direct avec vos amis grâce à Yahoo! Messenger !Téléchargez Yahoo! Messenger sur http://fr.messenger.yahoo.com