[EM] favorite betrayal and 2-party domination

[Juho Laatu]

Hello Kevin,

On Sep 9, 2005, at 00:29, Kevin Venzke wrote:

>> But I'm also not very worried since the real (stronger, meaningful)
>> reasons for 2-party domination are elsewhere, not in Condorcet or 
>> other
>> slightly big party favouring rules (e.g. d'Hondt method).
>
> I'm confused.

I'm sorry for giving the wrong impression. I think I agree with your 
view 100%. My response was originally to Warren Smith's strong opinions 
that Condorcet methods lead to 2-party domination, and I just wanted to 
show that even if this kind of features can be found in Condorcet 
methods, they can be identified in others to, like in range voting. I 
thus agree that such tendencies may exist, but I certainly feel that 
they are not significant. The reasons that make or maintain 2-party 
dominance are elsewhere (one member districts etc.). (In my response to 
Abd ul-Rahman Lomax I had also some other observations about 2-party 
dominance.)

> You say that even approval-style voting could move us
> towards two-party domination, but that this doesn't worry you because
> we have real, stronger, meaningful reasons elsewhere...?
>
> If I were you, I wouldn't be very worried, either. I would feel forced
> to give up on this issue.

I don't have any strong reasons hidden anywhere (on Approval style 
range voting or Condorcet). I just meant that two party countries have 
other stronger reasons that keep them two party systems. No need to 
change opinions since I believe we share them :-). Sorry about sending 
confusing messages.

BR, Juho