[EM] Conceiving a Democratic Electoral Process

[Peter Zbornik]

Dear all,

86 emails in this discussion is quite a lot to read to catch up on the
discussion on this topic.
Maybe a summary could be in place, in case you have agreed upon something,
or someone has come up with some great idea.
Thx.

Best regards
Peter Zborník

2012/8/2 Michael Allan <mike at zelea.com>

> > ...  Are P-Q-R-S-T separate groups (parties?), each with members
> > making nominations? ...
>
> They are primary processes, i.e. for selecting candidates prior to the
> official election.  So the unreformed ones are party primaries, yes.
>
> > ... When you say "at least two are reformed processes, are you
> > speaking of groups with open nominations? ...
>
> One could be the process you and Juho were mooting, and another could
> feature open nominations, yes.
>
> > ...  Are the percentages the percent of the groups' membership or of
> > the entire electorate?
>
> Of the entire electorate.
>
> --
> Michael Allan
>
> Toronto, +1 416-699-9528
> http://zelea.com/
>
>
> Fred Gohlke said:
> > Good Afternoon, Michael
> >
> > In response to your July 29th post on a different thread:
> >
> > re: "I guess we can safely assume that reforms (whatever they
> >       are) will not begin with the official electoral process.
> >       It is too difficult to change and too easy to circumvent.
> >       What matters is the selection of candidates, namely the
> >       primary electoral process.  Right?"
> >
> > Yes, we are discussing a possible method of selecting candidates.  We
> > arrived at this particular idea by assuming that parties still operate
> > in more or less the same way they do today, but that everyone has the
> > right to nominate candidates for public office - party members within
> > parties and unrepresented people (in the 'party' sense) as a separate
> group.
> >
> >
> > re: "Consider a point in the future at which there are five main
> >       primary processes in operation at varying levels of turnout,
> >       with at least two being reformed processes (your choice
> >       which)."
> >
> >              Process  Turnout
> >              -------  -------
> >                 P       20 %
> >                 Q       15        (at least two are
> >                 R        5        reformed processes)
> >                 S        2
> >                 T        1
> >
> >       Is this expectation more-or-less reasonable?  Anyone?
> >
> > Please help me with this one.  Are P-Q-R-S-T separate groups (parties?),
> > each with members making nominations?  When you say "at least two are
> > reformed processes, are you speaking of groups with open nominations?
> > Are the percentages the percent of the groups' membership or of the
> > entire electorate?
> >
> >
> > re: "When you speak (Fred) of controlling the time at which
> >       'candidates are announced', do you mean only for the process
> >       that you and Juho are mooting, say one of P-T?  Or all
> >       processes P-T?  Your purpose would seem to require control
> >       of all the major primaries."
> >
> > The concept we were examining imagined a single nominating process in
> > which partisans and non-partisans nominate candidates for public office.
> >   After being nominated, the nominees for each party (and the
> > non-partisan nominees as a group) decide which of the nominees are the
> > best advocates of the party's point of view.  Then, the remaining
> > partisan/non-partisan nominees examine each other to decide which of
> > their number will be the candidates for public office.  Then the people
> > vote for their choice of the candidates.  The question of how many
> > candidates there would be for each office was not discussed, and,
> > barring further discussion, would be left to those who implement the
> > process.
> >
> > Fred
> ----
> 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/20120802/5a8683ea/attachment-0003.htm>