[EM] Re: SR
Abd ulRahman Lomax
abd at lomaxdesign.com
Tue Sep 20 09:50:31 PDT 2005
At 01:07 AM 9/20/2005, MIKE OSSIPOFF wrote:
>Well, for such voters, Approval is ideal (if it were only more
>publicly acceptable). But maybe people insist on a rank method.
As to the public acceptability of Approval, it may depend on how it
is presented. While Approval could have major implications, it is not
really such a radical reform. All that is necessary is to stop
trashing overvoted ballots. And it could be presented that way, so
instead of calling it Approval, it might be called Expanded Voter
Choice or something like that. Or Stop Trashing Votes.
The goal would be to put the shoe on the other foot: I think the
no-overvote rule is indefensible; the legitimate objections to
Approval are based on the theory that the Condorcet winner should
win. But the choice may not be between Condorcet and Approval, but
only between Plurality and Approval.
If we get Approval, and especially if the implementation allows the
expression of simple preference, whether or not counted for winner
purposes, it would then be simple to move toward further reforms
including full ranking. There will be more actual election data....
More information about the Election-Methods