[EM] Condorcet cycles in Romanian 2009 election?

[Warren Smith]

>juho laatu:
It is also interesting to separate different types of cycles.
I'll assume that the number of voters is high.

>1) Weak cycle (random cycle, noise level cycle, or noise generated cycle)
- the looped candidates are almost tied
- can be a result of some almost random variation in the votes
- one could say that this kind of a loop is one special version of a tie
- any of the looped candidates could be the winner (no big violation
against any of the majority opinions)
- the expected winner may change from day to day (in the polls)

>2) Strong cycle (stable cycle, rational cycle, cycle with a stable identifiable reason)
- there is some specific reason that has led to the formation of this
loop (not random variation in the votes)
- the reason behind the cycle can be described (maybe multiple theories)
- the cycle / opinions are strong enough to carry over daily/weekly
fluctuation in the opinions

>3) Strategic cycle
- a special case
- artificially generated (result of strategies that some voters have applied)
- not based on sincere opinions

>Weak cycles may well exist when we have candidates that are close to tied. Strong cycles are more interesting since then we must have some specific reason behind them and the opinion is stable and clear. There are such situations but I believe they are not too common in real life.

--It seems to me the Romanian O>B>G>O cycle was not "weak" in the
sense it was strong enough to be stable day to day, and there was some
nonrandom "rational"
reason behind it.   However, it wasn't very strong in the sense the
margins were about
3.5%, 0.66%, and 7.7% respectively.

I don't think it was "strategic" since its pairwise claims are based
on 2-choice polls and elections, in which it is difficult or
impossible to see any strategic reason for the pollees/voters to be
dishonest.

>One example of a strong cycle is a situation where candidate A promotes strongly topic T1 and slightly T2, candidate B promotes strongly T2 and slightly T3, and candidate C promotes strongly T3 and slightly T1. Many of the voters are mainly interested in one topic only (T1, T2 or T3). Each topic has about as many supporters. As a result a stable rational cycle is may well emerge. (This example is based on having a special set of candidates with "looped" opinions or campaigns. Do you have also some other kind of potential (real-life, rational, large election) strong cycles in mind?)

--yes, I think this sort of thing was happening, although what precisely the
Tj were is not so clear to me -- and even if I did somehow know that,
proving those Tj really were the underlying reason, seems almost
impossible.

-- 
Warren D. Smith
http://RangeVoting.org  <-- add your endorsement (by clicking
"endorse" as 1st step)
and
math.temple.edu/~wds/homepage/works.html