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

[Jan Kok]

James Gilmour wrote:
>49  A<C<B
>48  B<C<A
>  3  C<B<A
[and expressed doubts about whether the public would accept a voting system
that chose C as the winner]

What I see here is a highly polarized electorate.  The A-first voters place
B last, and vice versa.  Both A-first and B-first voters consider C to be
better than the other alternative.  That's exactly what they said on their
ballots!

Personally, if I was an A or a B voter, I would not have a problem with C
being chosen as the winner.  I would address those who objected as follows:
Would you rather we chose between A and B with a coin toss?  There are some
who might take that gamble, but I suspect most would grudgingly settle for
the compromise candidate.

James G. was groping for a way to describe C using some other "dimension."
In this case, I would suggest that "political experience" or "visibility" or
"viability" might be ways to describe the dimension or issue.  That
dimension could explain why there are so few centrist voters voting for C.

McCain was suggested as an example of a C-type candidate.  I think Ross
Perot in 1992 and 1996 would be another example.  Perot created the Reform
Party and, it seemed to me, tried to occupy a centrist position between the
D's and R's.

Cheers,
- Jan