[EM] Poll Ballot, from Richard

[Chris Benham]

> However I wouldn’t call an RCV or STV ballot “spoiled” if it has 
> equal-ranking. I’d instead just rank any equal-ranked candidates, at 
> some particular rank-position, *in alphabetical-order by last-name*
>
> I figure the voter won’t mind, because he doesn’t have any preference 
> among them.
>
> Is that okay?

No, that breaks some axiom that I think is called Anonymity.  The method 
isn't allowed to discriminate among candidates based on their on their 
names.

The simplest would be to construct a random tie-breaking order and just 
transfer the whole vote to whichever of the equal-ranked candidates is 
highest in the order.

For Hare I consider ideal would be to first divide the vote into tied 
fractions summing to 1 to order the remaining candidates and then use 
that order to transfer the whole vote.

I assume in the party-PR poll we are just supposed to give our 
favourite. Is that correct?

Chris B.

On 18/07/2024 3:01 pm, Michael Ossipoff wrote:
>
> I forgot to mention: RCV & STV don’t allow equa-ranking (though 
> Condorcet does).
>
> However I wouldn’t call an RCV or STV ballot “spoiled” if it has 
> equal-ranking. I’d instead just rank any equal-ranked candidates, at 
> some particular rank-position, *in alphabetical-order by last-name*
>
> I figure the voter won’t mind, because he doesn’t have any preference 
> among them.
>
> Is that okay?
>
> Of course, for the RP(wv) count your equal-ranked candidates will be 
> counted as equal-ranked, because equal-ranking is permissible in 
> Condorcet.
>
> Additional answers inline below:
>
> On Wed, Jul 17, 2024 at 16:55 Richard, the VoteFair guy 
> <electionmethods at votefair.org> wrote:
>
>     Michael, here is my ballot.
>
>     You can translate this into your desired ballot format.
>
>     If you claim you need a full ranking, then I choose not to vote in
>     this
>     poll.  That's because I don't have time to research unfamiliar
>     candidates and unfamiliar parties.
>
>     In the candidate poll my ballot is that I rank Biden as the only
>     "approved" candidate
>
>
> Okay.
>
>
>     -- even though I wish he would drop out and
>     transfer his delegate votes to nearly anyone.
>
>     I rank Trump at the bottom of the candidate list, below all the other
>     candidates
>
>
> Okay.
>
>     because he wants to destroy democracy, destroy the U.S.
>     economy as a favor to Putin, and destroy the U.S. military as another
>     favor to Putin.
>
>
> Yes, The Republican in general, & Trump in particular, always finishes 
> last, in every Condorcet or STAR poll that includes the Republocratic 
> candidates & the Progressive candidates.
>
> (In this election-year, Biden is winning the CIVS poll “2024 
> presidential election”. Likewise in a few STAR polls. …because this 
> year, some people feel a desperate need to portray Biden winnable, to 
> try to make people vote for him in November. But ordinarily the 
> top-finisher & CW is Jill or Bernie…well alright, sometimes a 
> Libertarian. Never, ever, is the Republican anywhere but bottom.)
>
> …& yet, people actually believe that Jill Stein couldn’t beat him. 
> Usually she or Bernie is CW, too-finisher in those polls.
>
> So, the usual top-finisher can’t beat the always bottom-finisher?
>
> Wow! What are people smoking?
>
> Hello? The always-bottom-finisher isn’t a threat if we all vote for 
> the (same) candidate whom we actually all like.
>
> Forget “The-Lesser-Evil” & “The-Two-Choices”.
>
> In Burlington Alaska, it was clearly shown that the median-voters 
> prefer the more progressive candidates. …in confirmation of those 
> poll-results.
>
> Lesser-evils voters worry too much!!!
>
>
>
>
>     In between I rank all the other candidates at the same preference
>     level,
>     and not worth researching to rank them because they lack high-level
>     executive experience and expertise.
>
>
> Okay. As I mentioned, in RCV & STV, it will be necessary to for the 
> count to rank those equal-ranked candidates in alphabetical-order. Is 
> that okay?
>
>
>
>     In the party poll, I rank the Democratic party as the only "approved"
>     party because it's the only party offering a viable candidate.
>
>
> Okay. The Democrat Party is your party vote, for the Party-PR count.
>
>
> Though it would be improper for me to comment on your ballot, there’s 
> no rule that says I can’t comment on political-statements:
>
> See above about the results of Condorcet & STAR polls, & what 
> Burlington & Alaska showed about the preference of median-voters.
>
> Most people say (in answer to other polls) that they’re tired of 
> “The-Two-Choices”, & say they want different parties.
>
> So yes the parties other than the Republocratic Party aren’t “viable”, 
> because only the people want them. :-)
>
> Don’t let the TV tell you what or who is or isn’t “viable”.
>
> Vote honestly in November, for what we all want.  …& certainly not for 
> someone none of us want, for whom we’d have to hold our nose.
>
> If you’re holding your nose, reconsider your vote.
>
>
>
>
>     Under current circumstances I rank the Republican party at the
>     bottom of
>     the list, below all other parties.  That's because they are not
>     offering
>     a candidate who wants to preserve fair elections, protect the U.S.
>     against its enemies, and improve the economy.  As another flaw,
>     the new
>     Republican party platform claims the presidential election will
>     not be
>     fair if the Republican candidate doesn't win the presidential
>     election.
>
>
> Agreed. Few people want the Republicans. They’d never win an election 
> with honest voting & honest count.
>
>
>
>     In case you didn't notice the above words "only approved party," I'll
>     clarify that all the parties other than the Democratic party are
>     "unapproved" because they do not offer viable candidates.
>
>
> Look what the Democrats offer :-)
>
> That’s viable?
>
> ..even though most people say they don’t want them?
>
> Are the Democrats more viable than the candidates who usually win the 
> Condorcet & STAR polls that include the Republocrats & the Progressives?
>
>
>
>     Apparently, in this poll, you want me to point to one party as the
>     one I
>     like.  It's "none of the above."  That's because I dislike all
>     current
>     U.S. political parties.  Yes, I'm willing to "throw away" this
>     vote to
>     express this preference
>
>
> Okay. Done. Your ballot doesn’t cast a vote in the Party-PR balloting.
>
> You dislike all current parties? Have you read all of their platforms? 
> If not, how do you know you dislike them? What do you dislike about 
> the *policies* offered by some of the “3rd-parties” that you’ve heard of?
>
> I’m not trying to get you to change your vote. That would be improper. 
> Of course your ballot will be counted exactly as you said.
>
> I’m merely participating in the political-discussion.
>
>
>
>     Clarification:  I register with either the Republican or Democratic
>     party so I can vote in the primary elections of one or the other
>     of the
>     two parties that supply viable nominees. 
>
>
> The two parties that none of us want are the only viable ones?
>
>
>
>
>
>     I switch between those two
>     parties periodically.  I dislike them both. 
>
>
> Yes! We all do!
>
> Switch between them?
>
> Switch out of them!
>
>     I also dislike all third
>     parties.
>
>
> All of them? Regarding the main ones you’ve heard of, which of their 
> platform-policies do you dislike?
>
>
>
>     My dislike of existing political parties is why I promote
>     election-method reform! 
>
>
> Yes, that’s why we’re all here! Dislike of The Two Choices.  …which 
> obviously are NOT the two choices.
>
> But which platform-policy of the main other parties that you’ve heard 
> of do you dislike?
>
>
>     If U.S. election reforms are well-designed,
>     then in the future at least one U.S. party will be motivated to offer
>     wise problem-solving leaders instead of whatever you want to call
>     their
>     current nominees.
>
>
> Regarding the platform-policies & leaders of the parties you’ve heard 
> of, other than the Democrats & Republicans—what about them isn’t wise, 
> problem-solving?
>
> Michael Ossipoff
>
>
>
>     Richard Fobes
>
>
>
>     On 7/16/2024 9:24 PM, Michael Ossipoff wrote:
>     > One reason for my voting 1st is to demonstrate what I mean by the
>     > voting-instructions:
>
>     ...
>     ----
>     Election-Methods mailing list - see https://electorama.com/em for
>     list info
>
>
> ----
> Election-Methods mailing list - seehttps://electorama.com/em  for list info
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/attachments/20240718/5b7e4550/attachment.htm>