[EM] Voting by selecting a published ordering
davek at clarityconnect.com
Fri Apr 14 01:08:51 PDT 2006
Actually, this debate is becoming complex beyond any hope of value.
The lists had value in approaching the capability of ranked choice on
voting machines that can handle ONLY simple preference voting.
They had problems in that there would need to be many lists - often
several for each candidate - those ready to give A first preference may
want B or C or D or E for second preference.
BUT - as soon as you want complications such as described below:
You need a more capable machine.
Which could have ranked choice built in.
And has little need for anything more, for ranked choice can do any
vote the lists dream of - with actually simpler rules for voters and
On Mon, 10 Apr 2006 11:54:49 -0700 Simmons, Forest wrote:
> Dave (in response to Jobst) wrote ...
> Assuming "also approved" is synonymous with "approved", the counting is
> simple but, as soon as my vote can affect the result and I WANT to say:
> FOR A
> AGAINST B
> Vote against C interfering with A, BUT for C being preferred over B
> I cannot say this with approval.
> I reply:
> Actually, "also approved" is not synonymous with "approval." Rather, it means "approved in addition to the candidate marked favorite," as will be clear from the examples below.
> I think that your main point is that you want to rank A>B>C, but you don't think Jobst's suggestion allows for this.
> Actually it does:
> If A's published order is A>B>C, then you can just mark A as favorite, and forget about the "also approved" part.
> If A's published order is A>C>B, then you can mark A as favorite, and then mark B as also approved. This will result in the ballot being interpreted as A>B>C , with an approval cutoff between B and C available for use if desired.
> The approval cutoff would be used in DMC, for example, but not in MAM.
> In other words, if you don't like methods that use approval cutoffs, just think of the "also approved" option as a tool for correcting the most egregious mistake in the order of the best available list choice.
> Suppose, for example, that your preference order is
> A>B>C>D>E>F>G, and that candidate A's published order is
> A>B>D>C>F>G>E, and that you consider the CD to DC switch a relatively minor nuissance, but you feel very strongly that E should be ranked ahead of F and G. Then by marking candidate A as your first choice, and marking B, C, D, and E as "also approved" you can move E back into its rightful position, and your final order will be interpreted as
> A>B>D>C>E>F>G, with only the minor C/D switch between this and your dream ballot.
> Now, a comment on Dan Bishop's message: it is an excellent illustration of one variation that Eppley suggested near the end of his original post on this topic.
> Dan wrote ...
> For that matter, why limit list sponsorship to candidates? The ballot
> could look something like this:
> ************ STATE OF TEXAS ************
> ************ OFFICIAL BALLOT ************
> U.S. House of Representatives
> Either choose an ordering of candidates from the LISTS section
> OR rank the candidates in the CANDIDATES section.
> -------------- LISTS --------------
> To choose a list, mark the box next to it. You may vote for
> only ONE list.
> [ ] REPUBLICAN PARTY
> John Carter, Randy Neugebauer, Tom Delay, Joe Barton
> [ ] DEMOCRATIC PARTY
> Sheila Jackson Lee, Al Green, Charlie Gonzales,
> Eddie Johnson, ...
> [ ] AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION
> Sheila Jackson Lee, Eddie Johnson, Charlie Gonzales,
> Rub?n Hinojosa, ...
> [ ] FAMILY RESEARCH COUNCIL
> Tom Delay, John Culberson, Sam Johnson, Louie Gohmert, ...
> [ ] LEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS
> Lloyd Doggett, Eddie Johnson, Sheila Jackson Lee, ...
> Charlie Gonzales
> [ ] NATIONAL RIFLE ASSOCIATION
> Tom Delay, Henry Bonilla, Pete Sessions, Kay Granger
> -------------- CANDIDATES --------------
> Write an "A" in the box next to your favorite candidate, a
> "B" next to your second-favorite candidate, a "C" next to
> your third-favorite candidate, etc. You may rank as many
> candidates as you wish.
> [ ] Louie Gohmert
> [ ] Ted Poe
> [ ] Sam Johnson
> [ ] Ralph Hall
> election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
davek at clarityconnect.com people.clarityconnect.com/webpages3/davek
Dave Ketchum 108 Halstead Ave, Owego, NY 13827-1708 607-687-5026
Do to no one what you would not want done to you.
If you want peace, work for justice.
More information about the Election-Methods