[EM] Party-based top two with approval

Rob Lanphier robla at robla.net
Fri Mar 2 10:44:58 PST 2018

Hi Kevin,

Thanks for the detailed reply!  This is exactly the depth of analysis I was
hoping to get.  One starter reply below:
On Thu, Mar 1, 2018 at 11:34 PM, Kevin Venzke <stepjak at yahoo.fr> wrote:

> It sounds like under your system parties need to be able to control who
> can run on their list. I think this moves more of the selection process to
> prior to the voting.

I was admittedly vague on party affiliation of candidates.  The paradox
that's created by the jungle primary system is that a primary elections
have become the preferred way for parties to winnow their candidate lists
to their party's nominee, but parties don't have a way of winnowing their
candidates without having another primary/caucus/whatever.

This problem isn't one that my proposed system introduces. As it stands now
(in California), if I recall correctly, in the current jungle primary
system, it's not very hard to declare oneself as a "Republican" or
"Democrat" in the primary.  In a very cursory investigation of the subject,
I see that political party ballot-qualification has a process associated
with it in California at least:

I haven't read through that well enough to know all of the existing rules.

It seems to me that a "list" doesn't need to be formally created or
recognized, but *can* organically emerge from whatever candidates run on
the ballot.  One possible way to use my proposed system is that the voters
can declare "I'm voting as a Democrat", and then also approve a Socialist
and a Green.  If a Socialist or a Green gets the highest approval rating
among self-declared Democrats, then that candidate would be the nominee.
It seems to me that it would be really strategically difficult for a
Republican to win the Democratic "nomination" in this system (or vice
versa), since forcing the voter to identify their party and then identify
the candidates they approve of would make a false flag vote backfire very

There's a longer reply that I can/should write up to everything else you've
written, but I'll stop myself there for now. Does what I've suggested so
far make sense?

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/attachments/20180302/a7f0d498/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the Election-Methods mailing list