[EM] percentage support

James Green-Armytage jarmyta at antioch-college.edu
Mon May 2 18:49:02 PDT 2005

James replying to Curt...

>Plurality actually serves two 
>purposes.  It is a bad way to select a winner, but it is also a way to 
>track percentage support over a period of time, and by determining 
>proportional support when it's relevant.

	You don't seem to have defined "support". What does it mean to support a
>Democratic primaries are an example.  The proportion of votes a 
>candidate receives determines how many delegates they receive.  But 
>even if that particular decision structure is done away with, there are 
>plenty of other reasons to track proportional support - polling, for 

	"Polling", as a reason, seems rather broad. Can you be more specific?
>And this is something that Condorcet methods cannot do.  You cannot 
>derive, from a Condorcet ballot collection, how much percentage support 
>each candidate got.  You can't give each candidate a share of 100% in a 
>way that all candidates would agree on.  If you can, I'd love to know 

	Well, the most obvious way to me is to find the share of first choice
votes for each candidate. I'm still not quite sure what we would use this
for, though.
>Is this an already identified criteria?  The ability to determine 
>percentage support?  The Siffert Criteria?  :-)  If so, Condorcet fails 
>it; at least, I haven't seen a technique that would allow it to pass 

	I don't think that you have defined the criterion very precisely.

>What voting methods can convincingly a) identify the total 
>available support (in terms of that vote method) for all candidates, 
>and b) determine what percentage of that support each candidate 
>received ?

	I don't understand what you mean by (a). 

my best,

More information about the Election-Methods mailing list