[EM] The worst about each system; Approval Preferential

[Kathy Dopp]

Yes. I agree with your scenario of not needing a runoff Abd ul.

On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 9:47 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax
<abd at lomaxdesign.com> wrote:
> At 09:33 PM 5/26/2010, Kathy Dopp wrote:
>>
>> Abd ul,
>>
>> I agree with virtually everything you say here.
>
> Thanks.
>
>>  However, I would also
>> consider that an excellent system for electing one winner would be
>> "approval, every voter votes for up to two candidates, followed by a
>> runoff of the top two vote getters".  It solves some of the problems
>> of a simple runoff election, avoids the spoiler effect I think, and is
>> very fair.  Although it does seem to always require a runoff election.
>
>
> Would you agree that if only one candidate gets a majority in this approval
> election, and it is a form of approval, a runoff is unnecessary? A runoff
> might only be needed if (1) there is no majority, or (2) there are two
> majorities, which is more iffy.
>
> There is already an excellent system that is not terribly different from
> this, and the only difference between how it was used is that it wasn't
> coupled with a runoff for majority failure. And I'm suggesting a couple of
> tweaks. I'd be thrilled just to see original Bucklin restored, it worked,
> and it's a much better system than the propaganda has claimed.
>
> Perfect, almost, for a primary election in a runoff system, because it's
> much better at finding *real* majorities than IRV.
>
>



-- 

Kathy Dopp
http://electionmathematics.org
Town of Colonie, NY 12304
"One of the best ways to keep any conversation civil is to support the
discussion with true facts."

Realities Mar Instant Runoff Voting
http://electionmathematics.org/ucvAnalysis/US/RCV-IRV/InstantRunoffVotingFlaws.pdf

Voters Have Reason to Worry
http://utahcountvotes.org/UT/UtahCountVotes-ThadHall-Response.pdf

View my research on my SSRN Author page:
http://ssrn.com/author=1451051