[EM] James--Your example shows that my claim wasn't correct

[MIKE OSSIPOFF]

James--

You asked why I'd say that the supporters of some candidate A can't steal 
the election for A by offensive order-reversal unless A is the sincere 
Plurality winner. Good question. I said it because I was only considering 
examples in which the CW, B, is between A and C, in the following sense:

Everyone who prefers A to C prevers B to C. Everyone who prefers C to A 
prefers B to A.

If a CW is between the other 2 c andidates in a 3-candidate example, I call 
that CW a "middle CW".

So tha;t's why I made the claim that I made: I was only considering examples 
in which the CW is a middle CW.

My guarantee about A needeing to be sincere Plurality winner, in order for 
the offensive order-reversal to succeed holds then. I don't know if it holds 
in every spatial example. If so, that would be a good thing to find out. 
Does anyone know?

In your example, A is the CW, and B is the candidate of the offensive 
order-reversers. In my examples, and most of those on EM, it's the opposite. 
Typically B is the CW, and A is the candidate of the offensive strategists.

Mike Ossipoff

_________________________________________________________________
Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! 
http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/