[EM] Was PA a Condorcet cycle, or did Bernie get center-squeezed?

[Jameson Quinn]

Sorry. I was editing this and my computer crashed; I didn't realize
that some of my edits got lost. The CC scenario I intended was:

30: Clinton>Sanders
17: Sanders>Clinton
5: Sanders ("Bernie bros")
48: Trump

2016-11-14 0:14 GMT-05:00, C.Benham <cbenham at adam.com.au>:
>  From this distance I gather that overall in the US with those 3
> candidates Sanders would be the sincere big CW, and there would be quite
> a few  Sanders>Trump and Trump>Sanders.  With similar media access
> Sanders would likely have been also the sincere plurality winner.
>
> I think  shake-things-up versus more-of-the-same was more significant
> than the "feminist/masculinist axis".
>
>> Elects Trump: plurality; plurality with runoff (or primary/general, as
>> happened in reality); IRV
>
> On your hypothetical figures IRV and "plurality with runoff" would elect
> Clinton 49-48.
>
>> 30: Clinton>Sanders
>> 19: Sanders>Clinton
>> 3: Sanders ("Bernie bros")
>> 48: Trump
>>
>> This is an honest Condorcet cycle!
> Clinton > Trump 49-48,   Clinton > Sanders 30-24,  Sanders > Trump 52-48.
>
> Clinton looks like the CW.
>
> Chris Benham
>
>
> On 11/14/2016 8:23 AM, Jameson Quinn wrote:
>> I believe that the honest preferences in the Pennsylvania presidential
>> election, crucial to Trump's victory, may well have been something
>> like the following:
>>
>> 30: Clinton>Sanders
>> 19: Sanders>Clinton
>> 3: Sanders ("Bernie bros")
>> 48: Trump
>>
>> This is an honest Condorcet cycle! In that case, the people who are
>> arguing that "Bernie would have been a better candidate" would be
>> simultaneously correct (against Trump) and wrong (in a two-way race
>> between Sanders and Clinton).
>>
>> It's also possible that it was like the above, except that the Trump
>> voters had a net preference for Sanders. In that case, Sanders (the
>> self-styled socialist) would have lost to center squeeze! He's
>> certainly not the center one of those three candidates on a left/right
>> axis, but I guess that he is on a feminist/masculinist axis.
>>
>> So, how would different election systems do on the election above?
>>
>> Elects Trump: plurality; plurality with runoff (or primary/general, as
>> happened in reality); IRV
>> Elects Sanders: PAR, Bucklin systems, most Condorcet systems (I think)
>> Elects Clinton: SODA (assuming that Bernie agrees with the majority of
>> his supporters, and that the "bros" don't explicitly use "do not
>> delegate"); perhaps some Condorcet systems (which?)
>> Who knows what would happen: Approval, Score (depends on strategy)
>>
>>
>>
>> ----
>> Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list
>> info
>>
>
>