[EM] Questions about Majority-Beat vs Plurality-Beat Condorcet
Kristofer Munsterhjelm
km-elmet at munsterhjelm.no
Mon Apr 6 08:57:37 PDT 2026
On 2026-04-06 03:24, Joshua Boehme via Election-Methods wrote:
> Once you go down that rabbit hole, it gets harder to stand by
> Condorcet / Smith as a strict requirement. Indeed, it's easy to
> construct examples of elections -- not necessarily in these particular
> cases -- where *every voter* prefers, say, a random ballot lottery to a
> Condorcet winner
I think that's a problem inherent to ranked voting in general.
To take a simple example, with a center squeeze scenario like
40: L>C>R
30: R>C>L
20: C>R>L
the centrist candidate (C) could be be near-max utility for everybody;
or near-min utility for everybody except the centrist-first voters. But
a ranked method can't tell which is the case because either scenario
produces the same set of ranked ballots.
Cardinal methods can theoretically tell them apart, but most that I know
of are quite vulnerable to strategy in return, and (since they aren't
based around vNM utilities) need to assume interpersonal comparability
of some sort.
-km
More information about the Election-Methods
mailing list