[Election-Methods] range/approval effect on 2000 election (rob brown still very confused)

CLAY SHENTRUP clay at electopia.org
Wed Jan 2 17:22:40 PST 2008

experts overwhelmingly agree that range or approval voting would have
changed the result of the 2000 election, but rob brown thinks
otherwise. i said his position was ridiculous, and he replies:

> It's not ridiculous. They talk about the effect with regard to approval
>voting here:
>The same effect applies to range.
>Your only response to it was to only discuss "Nader voters" and ignore all
>of those who preferred Nader>Gore>Bush but who actually voted for Gore.
>The point is that without Nader in the election, most of the N>G>B people
>would give Gore a 100, with Nader, many of that group would give Gore less
>than 100.
>I can't think of another group that make up for that effect, and you have
>not mentioned one.

that article explains a phenomenon whereby most of the nader voters
would have given gore a "10" under range voting, if nader hadn't run,
but (the sincere ones) would reduce that "10" by a few points when
nader entered the race. but in 2000, nader _did_ run, and all those
sincere voters did even worse. they didn't give gore a "5", they gave
him a "0"! the effect this article discusses was already far more
impactful under plurality than it would have been with range voting.

but those who strategically voted for gore were so concerned with
preventing the election of bush, that they were willing to effectively
give nader a "0" in order to give gore a "10". so if we alleviated
much of whatever guilt they had by allowing them to also give nader a
"10", why on earth would they suddenly feel the need to go the extra
mile and subtract a few points from gore, just to be even more
honest?  they are strategic voters.  if they're willing to throw nader
under the bus to give gore the best chance of defeating bush, why
would they suddenly _not_ want to give gore the best chance of defeating
bush, even if it _doesn't_ mean having to throw nader under the bus
to do so?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/attachments/20080102/fb4b2c9f/attachment-0002.htm>

More information about the Election-Methods mailing list