[EM] IRV's "majority winner". What if we let the people choose?

[James Gilmour]

> <jgilmour at globalnet.co.uk> wrote:
> >Now consider:
> >49  A<C<B
> >48  B<C<A
> >  3  C<B<A
> >IRV winner = B;  CW winner = C.
> >I doubt very much whether most electors would accept C as 
> the "winner" 
> >if this were an election for Sate Governor, much less for a directly 
> >elected President of the USA.  If anyone has evidence to the
> >contrary I'd like very much to see it.
> >James Gilmour

James Green-Armytage replied: > 
> 	Well, if the votes were sincere to begin with, then it 
> is axiomatic that C will win a runoff election against B. 

But if you did decide this by a separate run-off election, I should not be surprised to find large
numbers of voters changing their preferences in that run-off election, and in so doing, reject the
CW.  Imagine a "real-life" scenario: Bush, Gore, Nader.  Would we really have had four years of
President Nader?  This is about more than voting arithmetic and measures for identifying "the most
representative candidate".  It brings in systems of values which are expressed in different
dimensions from those used to measure representivity.
James Gilmour