<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 2:25 PM, Jameson Quinn <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:jameson.quinn@gmail.com">jameson.quinn@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
JQ:You keep saying "I'm middlebrow, I think IRV would work OK, because the parties would shift to wherever they had to be." You could use exactly the same argument to support plurality. </blockquote><div><br>
</div><div>dlw:As a matter of fact, I believe that the US was capable of doing a lot of good things in its past, despite the fact that it primarily used plurality because of that exact fact. This is why I get most passionate about the use of a mix of multi-winner and single-winner elections than the specific sorts of options given voters. </div>
<div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">Yet we know that under plurality, the two-party domination is such that the parties get stuck and/or bought, and significant ideological segments are unrepresented.</blockquote>
<div><br></div><div>dlw: It's more so like that when only plurality is used. All parties in power tend to get bought some and it's hard not to have some ideological segments unrepresented. </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
<div>
<br></div><div>JQ:And if it doesn't work the way you expect? A lot of effort, down the drain; and the well is poisoned for the next reform.</div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>dlw: It's going to work. Burlington was a temporary setback, facilitated by a lot of anti-electoral reform money and args from the detractors of IRV that got used improperly to reinstate FPTP. </div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;"><div><br></div><div>JQ:Personally, I have and woud again vote for IRV, if that's the only choice. But if your goal is to convince all of us - or even one of us - to start pitching IRV to our friends as the way forward... well, it just won't happen.</div>
</blockquote><div><br></div><div>dlw: I'm glad to hear it. In my country, because of how the system is set up currently and people's ignorance on the matter, there isn't scope for there to be a lot of choices for electoral reform. </div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
<div><br></div><div>JQ:Where we can mostly agree is on something like the statement, which excoriates plurality, and endorses 4 good systems, but also leaves the door open to IRV. And getting even that much consensus, honestly, is a struggle.</div>
</blockquote><div><br></div><div>dlw: I guess that's why electoral reform cannot proceed by consensus which is why I support FairVote, even though I believe that they are rhetorically over-committed to the importance of Rank-Choice-Voting (or Later No Harm).</div>
<div><br></div><div>dlw </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;"><div><span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><br>
<div><br></div></font></span><div><span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888">JQ<br><br></font></span><div class="gmail_quote"><div class="im">2011/11/3 David L Wetzell <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:wetzelld@gmail.com" target="_blank">wetzelld@gmail.com</a>></span><br>
</div><div><div class="h5"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div class="gmail_quote"><div><div><div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><br>
</blockquote><div><br></div><div>dlw: Well, 1. IRV3 doesn't let folks rank all of the options and so it hopefully has more quality control on which options are ranked. </div><div>2. by not always giving us the "center", it does permit learning about the different viewpoints. Remember, since I'm middle-brow, I don't put as much significance on optimizing within the distribution of political opinion space. </div>
</div></blockquote><div><br></div></div></div></div><div>JQ:Balinski and Laraki studied a number of rules, and found that IRV and Plurality elected an extremist almost 100% of the time; Condorcet and Range elected a centrist almost 100%; and only Majority Judgment elected both centrists and extremists with about equal balance. So "learning about the different viewpoints does not favor IRV, but rather MJ.</div>
</div></blockquote><div>dlw: But since I'm middle-brow, then I'm rather agnostic about "centrism". The political center is at best a useful fiction or something tautologically always present and always shifting. It isn't something that you can construct a political party around and keep from going stale. </div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div class="gmail_quote"><div><div>
<div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div class="gmail_quote">
<div>3. It introduces some uncertainty in the circulation of the elites, which can give alternative viewpoints a chance to get a better hearing. When a new third party gains ground, it'll get a serious hearing and hopefully the de facto center will be moved. </div>
</div></blockquote><div><br></div></div></div><div>JQ:Again, this actually argues for MJ more than IRV.</div></div></blockquote><div>dlw: What the potential for spoilers doesn't create uncertainty or give third parties some sway with the major parties? The main losers are the centrists, but with two dynamic shifting major parties, as I envision in my ideal-type democracy, why would we really need a centrist party? </div>
<div>dlw</div><div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div class="gmail_quote"><div><br></div><div>JQ </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div class="gmail_quote">
</div><br><font color="#888888"><div>dlw</div>
</font><br>----<br>
Election-Methods mailing list - see <a href="http://electorama.com/em" target="_blank">http://electorama.com/em</a> for list info<br>
<br></blockquote></div><br>
</blockquote></div></div><br>
</blockquote></div></div></div><br></div></div>
</blockquote></div><br>