<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<title></title>
</head>
<body>
<br>
<br>
-------- Original Message --------
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" border="0">
<tbody>
<tr>
<th valign="baseline" align="right" nowrap="nowrap">Subject: </th>
<td>Re: [EM] Re: Use a "turkey" filter</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th valign="baseline" align="right" nowrap="nowrap">Date: </th>
<td>Thu, 03 Jul 2003 18:33:36 +0930</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th valign="baseline" align="right" nowrap="nowrap">From: </th>
<td>Chris Benham <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:chrisbenham@bigpond.com"><chrisbenham@bigpond.com></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th valign="baseline" align="right" nowrap="nowrap">To: </th>
<td>Anthony Duff <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:anthony_duff@yahoo.com.au"><anthony_duff@yahoo.com.au></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th valign="baseline" align="right" nowrap="nowrap">References: </th>
<td><a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:20030703021047.31920.qmail@web40708.mail.yahoo.com"><20030703021047.31920.qmail@web40708.mail.yahoo.com></a></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<br>
<br>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1">
<title></title>
<br>
<br>
Anthony Duff wrote:<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid20030703021047.31920.qmail@web40708.mail.yahoo.com">
<pre wrap=""> --- Chris Benham <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:chrisbenham@bigpond.com"><chrisbenham@bigpond.com></a> wrote: >
In Australia in Federal and most State elections
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">there is a ridiculous
and indefensible requirement for voters to put a
number in every box.
Most voters (certainly nearly all those with no
clear, sincere second
and lower preferences) just fill out their ballots
as their favourite
party advises them.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
True.
I don’t know the reasoning for the ballot to be
compulsory fully ranked.</pre>
</blockquote>
C.B: IRV was first introduced in Australia to rescue a large number
of conservative candidates from the threat of a Labor win. Presumably then,
the original "reasoning" was the hope that many votes for Labor could be
declared invalid. Since then it has been maintained partly by demonising
FPP, and also because since the demise of the DLP Labor has also benefited
from preferences and so neither major party likes the idea of voters being
able to abstain from a choice between them. <br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid20030703021047.31920.qmail@web40708.mail.yahoo.com">
<pre wrap="">For an optional ranked ballot, look at NSW. (or Queensland).
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">so you can be sure that if the
method used was
Condorcet (especially with truncation allowed) they
would not be
advising voters to elect so-called "turkeys"
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
How can you be so sure? Is the following hypothetical
so unrealistic?:
In a highly polarised campaign, a strong candidate
emphasizes the negatives of the incumbent and repeats
the catchy message "Put [the incumbent] last". The
incumbent replies with similar negativity, "[the
challenger] is dangerous, put him last"
If two large minorities put each other’s favourite
last then it becomes very likely that a minor
candidate will be a CW. And seeing as the campaign
was so polarised, that minor candidate may have been
subjected to very little scrutiny.
C.B: Your hypothetical scenario is unlikely because the media, and both leading candidates would be well aware of the "danger". Presumably the media would inform the public that a centrist candidate could win with very few first preferences. It is even possible that there could be more than one would-be compromise candidate campaigning for second preferences.
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">I can see no reason in principle why a CW with no
first preference
votes is necessarily in any way illegitimate (or a
"turkey").
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
Me neither. But does it hurt to be a little
pragmatic? Apparently, IRVists can exploit the turkey
issue to criticize condorcet/approval. Substantial
nomination requirements defeat the turkey argument.</pre>
</blockquote>
C.B: I don't see how. Actually the the "Condorcet turkey problem" thread
at E-M was started and largely maintained by an Approval supporter. <br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid20030703021047.31920.qmail@web40708.mail.yahoo.com">
<pre wrap="">
Would substantial nomination requirements do actual
electoral harm?</pre>
</blockquote>
C.B: Probably yes. <br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid20030703021047.31920.qmail@web40708.mail.yahoo.com">
<pre wrap="">
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Maybe with
Condorcet, candidates should have to achieve some
minimum Borda score
to get their cash deposit back.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
A financial barrier to running is inequitable as it is
less of a burden on the rich. To run for public
office, shouldn’t popular support be more important
than money?</pre>
</blockquote>
C.B: In principle, yes. I did say a "deposit" (not necessarily large),
and the minimum Borda score need not be very high. In practice any "substantial"
momination requirement would be to the advantage of the rich. I believe in
places in the US where signatures are required it is easy for the rich to
just buy them. But here is a more detailed proposal : to nominate candidates
must put up a modest cash deposit OR a miminimum of x% of the electors'
signatures. To get the cash deposit back the candidate must achieve a modest
Borda score OR a modest proportion of first preferences. There need
not be a sharp cutoff, but there could be a sliding scale so that sometimes
a candidate could get back some but not all of his/her deposit back.<br>
<br>
Chris Benham (Adelaide)<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid20030703021047.31920.qmail@web40708.mail.yahoo.com">
<pre wrap="">
Anthony
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://mobile.yahoo.com.au">http://mobile.yahoo.com.au</a> - Yahoo! Mobile
- Check & compose your email via SMS on your Telstra or Vodafone mobile.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>