[EM] Party lists and candidate multiwinner elections

rbj at audioimagination.com rbj at audioimagination.com
Sun Oct 19 20:24:15 PDT 2014

 "Kristofer Munsterhjelm" <km_elmet at t-online.de> write:

> Say we have two settings: one is an ordinary multiwinner election with,

> say, 10 seats.
BTW, another remarkable real-life fact about local elections in my part of Vermont (besides we had IRV and an election that is a classic example of what happens when IRV does not election the Condorcet Winner) is that in the Vermont State Senate, we have the
*largest* legislative district in the entire U.S. in terms of the number of winners.  the Chittenden Senate District elects 6 state senators at large throughout the whole district.  there is no other legislative district in the U.S. with that many seats.
and we're having an election
coming up in 2 weeks.  it's a real cluster-fuck.  it's nearly the same as Approval Voting: vote for at most 6 candidates and the top 6 vote-getters win seats in the Vermont State Senate.  i dunno whether to vote for my second or third preference since, even though they may be running
"alongside" my favorite candidate in the same party, they are really running against their colleagues in the same party.  in fact, in this liberal district (containing Burlington and suburbs), one of the 6 Democrat candidates will be bumped off (like musical chairs) because a single
Republican candidate is expected to win re-election securely.  really weird voting dynamics, especially for a governmental election.
this is when Proportional Voting (using, dare i say?, the Single Transferable Vote) would be possibly useful.
> The other is a party
list PR election to a very large
> assembly (say 500 seats), but where the number of distinct parties has

> been limited to 10. That is, no more than 10 parties may be represented

> in that large council.


> Furthermore, assume that the voters' ballots are completely identical in

> the two settings. So if a voter in setting two ranks party A > party B >

> party C, then in setting one he would rank candidate A > candidate B >

> candidate C.

just a curiosity: does this mean that Candidate C of Party A is preferred over Candidate A of Party B?  what if the voter doesn't like that, is it impossible to rank differently?
r b-j
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/attachments/20141019/0c49d78c/attachment-0001.htm>

More information about the Election-Methods mailing list