[EM] Why proportional elections - Power arguments needed (Czech green party)

[Raph Frank]

On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 5:46 PM,  <VoteFair at solutionscreative.com> wrote:
> In particular, such a highly proportional method is more
> likely to be vulnerable to strategic voting.

In what way?

> Personally I regard resistance to strategic voting to be
> very important, and it should not be neglected just to
> achieve what on the surface appears to be highly
> proportional results.

"Vote management" is the main strategic issue with PR-STV and
Schulze's method is designed to be resistant.

This shouldn't be a big issue for elections within a party.  It
requires voters to be split up into groups and vote according to
instructions.  I would hope that if a candidate tried to organise
that, there would be a negative reaction within the party.

Even with basic PR-STV, I don't think this is a major issue for
internal party elections.

> Another way to express this is to say that, as a voter, I
> would rather choose to elect a competent leader whose
> political views are slightly different than mine, rather
> than elect a less-competent politician who claims to
> represent the party I most prefer.

I agree, but that is what PR-STV allows you to do.  You rank the
candidates in order of your choice.

You can decide how to balance competence and political alignment.
Other votes might decide on a different trade-off.