[EM] Cycles in sincere individual preferences and application to vote-col...
atarr at purdue.edu
Mon Sep 6 11:46:53 PDT 2004
Paul Kislanko wrote:
>The reason I wouldn't have chosen E over B, C, or D on a ranked ballot
>with A as an alternative is that B, C, D "trumped" E on every issue that
>was not the single one that A&E agreed upon.
And yet, you already stated you would prefer E pairwise over any of the
three. So why, oh why, would you rank E below them? In what meaningful
sense do you rank any of those three over E? Agreeing with them on more
issues is irrelevant if the one issue you support E on trumps all others.
>But once A is out of the picture, there's one issue that E trumps B, C,
>and D on. And if A&E are both out of the picture than my sincere ordering
>of B, C, D could well change.
To which I once again ask, why? Why does the existence or absence of
another alternative change how you feel about B relative to C? Note that
even within a group, such reversal of preferences is not part of
> My original point was that you can;'t infer that I prefer B>C from a
> ballot that has A>B>C>D>E on it. If you ask me which I prefer of B and C
> (only) I might say C sincerely because (in this example) C is the only
> one that is both pro-gun control and anti-capital punishment.
>When both of those are covered by my first choice, I might rank C last
>among B,C,D because of something else, like fiscal policy.
At which point, I would accuse you of being illogical. Either you value
the candidates' relative stances on fiscal policies more, or you value
their relative stances on gun control/capital punishment more. The
presence of another candidate who may be great or terrible on both of these
issues should not change your relative valuations of those issues.
>There's no reason to believe you can infer pair-wise wins from a ranked
>ballot voting method.
Well, that's what folks have been doing since Condorcet's day. You're
welcome to question it, and I'm welcome to disagree with you.
More information about the Election-Methods