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

[Peter Zbornik]

Frank, just one comment: Vote management is very common in our party. And
yes, we have voters often split up in groups, or factions.
Peter

On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 8:37 PM, Raph Frank <raphfrk at gmail.com> wrote:

> 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.
>  ----
> Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/attachments/20100519/7907d678/attachment-0004.htm>