[EM] new simple legal strategy to get IRV

[Kristofer Munsterhjelm]

On 10/09/2015 10:08 AM, Clinton Mead wrote:
> How did the 2009 Burlington Vermont Mayoral "fail"? It was one of the
> rare cases where it didn't elect the Condorcet winner, but
> unlike plurality, at least it didn't elect the Condorcet loser out of
> the three strongest candidates. IRV in this case gave a more
> representative result than would have been the case with plurality. And
> in almost all cases IRV does this.

I'd say it didn't go far enough. IRV works like a patch on Plurality
that lets it discard fringe parties that can't win anyway. But when you
get multiple large parties, the patch isn't sufficient and weird
behavior like center squeeze happens.

But that's me :-)

Perhaps there's a more strategic explanation for the repeal itself. IRV
clearly wouldn't have pleased the Plurality supporters; they'd have
preferred seeing Wright win. And IRV wouldn't have pleased those who
found its outcome counterintuitive in the other direction; they'd have
preferred seeing Montroll win. IRV might have held against either side,
but it couldn't hold against both at the same time.

I'd like to emphasize that I'm speculating, though. I don't live in
Burlington; someone who does would probably know the situation better
than I do.