[EM] NPV vs Condorcet

[Dave Ketchum]

Actually NPV has some value - it gets us toward all presidential votes 
having the same value from all states.

FPTP is a problem that should be addressed.

I am simply looking for a way to actually make some progress.

On Mon, 10 Nov 2008 20:52:00 -0800 Bob Richard wrote:
>  > It is not a truncation.  It is interpreting FPTP ballots as if used 
> by Condorcet voters.
> 
> I'm having trouble viewing the ballots from the states that continue to 
> use FPTP any other way except as ranked ballots truncated to one 
> ranking. What am I missing here?

I suggest different viewing.  While Condorcet voters CAN rank more than one 
candidate, they CAN choose to rank only one.  In the latter case they have 
offered exactly the same information as an FPTP voter would.
> 
>  > We claim Condorcet offers all voters equal power - even if we have to 
> demand
>  > some reinterpretation from the courts - and some updating of laws if 
> that gets involved.
> 
> I'm afraid that this comment completely misunderstands my post. See below.
> 
>  > If you are referring to laggard states not offering their voters the 
> full ability that is
>  > offered and that voters in compliant states get - go beat on the 
> laggard states.
> This is exactly what I'm referring to. I was specifically *not* saying 
> that Condorcet-compliant methods themselves could violate 
> one-person-one-vote. That's not the case.
> 
> --Bob
> 
> Dave Ketchum wrote:
> 
>> On Mon, 20 Oct 2008 19:51:55 -0700 Bob Richard wrote:
>>
>>>  >     Some states may not be up to Condorcet instantly.  Let them 
>>> stay with FPTP
>>>  >      until they are ready to move up.  Just as a Condorcet voter 
>>> can choose to rank
>>>  >     only a single candidate, for a state full of such the counters 
>>> can translate FPTP
>>>  >     results into an N*N array.
>>>
>>> What would enforcing the truncation of rankings (to a single ranking) 
>>> for part of the electorate -- but not the rest -- do to the formal 
>>> (social choice theoretic) properties of any given Condorcet method? 
>>> Would the effect be the same for all Condorcet-compliant voting methods?
>>
>>
>> It is not a truncation.  It is interpreting FPTP ballots as if used by 
>> Condorcet voters.  Should result in pressure on all states to conform 
>> ASAP.
>>
>> I am ONLY considering FPTP and Condorcet  The exact Condorcet method 
>> cold be stated in the amendment.  Note that this is only a single 
>> national election, though there would be extreme pressure on other 
>> government uses of Condorcet to conform.
>>
>>>
>>> In fact, would this arrangement be valid for any ranked or cardinal 
>>> voting method? Arguably, in the U.S. your opponents could take this 
>>> to court as a violation of one-person-one-vote.
>>
>>
>> We claim Condorcet offers all voters equal power - even if we have to 
>> demand some reinterpretation from the courts - and some updating of 
>> laws if that gets involved.
>>
>> If you are referring to laggard states not offering their voters the 
>> full ability that is offered and that voters in compliant states get - 
>> go beat on the laggard states.  The intent is to expedite full 
>> compliance without demanding such.
>>
>> DWK
>>
>>>
>>> --Bob
>>>
>>> Dave Ketchum wrote:
>>>
>>>> Was:  Re: [EM] Making a Bad Thing Worse
>>>>
>>>> Is the Electoral College recognized as having lived ot its useful 
>>>> life?  If so, perhaps we could do up a worthwhile constitutional 
>>>> amendment.
>>>>
>>>> Should we not desperately try to get FPTP out of this?
>>>>
>>>> I suggest three parts for the heart of this:
>>>>      Like NPV we want to count a national election.
>>>>      FPTP deserves burial - USE Condorcet.
>>>>      Some states may not be up to Condorcet instantly.  Let them 
>>>> stay with FPTP until they are ready to move up.  Just as a Condorcet 
>>>> voter can choose to rank only a single candidate, for a state full 
>>>> of such the counters can translate FPTP results into an N*N array.
-- 
  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.