<html><head></head><body><div style="color:#000; background-color:#fff; font-family:Helvetica Neue, Helvetica, Arial, Lucida Grande, sans-serif;font-size:16px"><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1520202025365_32070"><span id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1520202025365_33096">Hi Rob,</span></div><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1520202025365_31366"><span><br></span></div><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1520202025365_31365" dir="ltr"><span id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1520202025365_31364">I maybe misunderstood part. I would expect in a jungle primary that there wouldn't be a need to restrict what party a candidate claims to be from, since party affiliation isn't a consideration within the method. But under your proposal, parties can decline to advance their winning candidate. So some "party" is making a decision.</span></div><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1520202025365_31365"><span><br></span></div><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1520202025365_31365" dir="ltr"><span id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1520202025365_32315">I was also thinking (maybe incorrectly on rereading) that the approval winner on each list was always counted from all voters. If that's true then it's important for parties to be able to exclude candidates from their list. If it's not true then there is less need to control who runs as what party. But it seems a little odd if it's not controlled... Taking it to an extreme I can imagine a system where every candidate just has to claim to be left-wing or right-wing and we somehow do something with that.</span></div><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1520202025365_31365" dir="ltr"><span><br></span></div><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1520202025365_31365" dir="ltr"><span id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1520202025365_32927">It sounds like you're saying it's a problem (or else think I view it as a problem) that the parties can't winnow candidates prior to the jungle primary. I don't necessarily view that as a problem... At least, if the jungle primary is supposed to serve as a primary then there shouldn't be a lot of control beforehand. (I'm fine with candidates dropping out on their own when polls say they won't be competitive.) My fear is that if parties have the ability and inclination to winnow candidates prior to the primary, then will they really see a need to offer some choices in the primary?</span></div><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1520202025365_31365" dir="ltr"><span><br></span></div><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1520202025365_31365" dir="ltr"><span id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1520202025365_32591">I guess if under your method, all the party lists just have one candidate, this is hardly broken. An overall Approval winner can run on whatever list they want and advance to the final round.</span></div><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1520202025365_31365" dir="ltr"><span><br></span></div><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1520202025365_31365" dir="ltr"><span id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1520202025365_32739">I would like to deduce party lists organically but it's tricky to come up with something simple. It sounds like maybe you're saying the candidates declare a name for the party they represent and these become options on the ballot for the voters to self-identify. I think that might be abusable... I can imagine a candidate trying to attach themselves (while encouraging the same of their supporters) to a "list" they think they can win, to get an extra boost from the other votes for that list.</span></div><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1520202025365_31365" dir="ltr"><span><br></span></div><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1520202025365_31365" dir="ltr"><span id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1520202025365_33098">Kevin</span></div><div class="qtdSeparateBR" id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1520202025365_31143"><br><br></div><div class="yahoo_quoted" id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1520202025365_31147" style="display: block;"> <div style="font-family: Helvetica Neue, Helvetica, Arial, Lucida Grande, sans-serif; font-size: 16px;" id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1520202025365_31146"> <div style="font-family: HelveticaNeue, Helvetica Neue, Helvetica, Arial, Lucida Grande, sans-serif; font-size: 16px;" id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1520202025365_31145"> <div dir="ltr" id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1520202025365_31144"> <font size="2" face="Arial" id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1520202025365_31363"> <hr size="1" id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1520202025365_32738"> <b><span style="font-weight:bold;">De :</span></b> Rob Lanphier <robla@robla.net><br> <b><span style="font-weight: bold;">À :</span></b> Kevin Venzke <stepjak@yahoo.fr> <br><b><span style="font-weight: bold;">Cc :</span></b> Election Methods <election-methods@lists.electorama.com><br> <b><span style="font-weight: bold;">Envoyé le :</span></b> Vendredi 2 mars 2018 12h46<br> <b><span style="font-weight: bold;">Objet :</span></b> Re: [EM] Party-based top two with approval<br> </font> </div> <div class="y_msg_container" id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1520202025365_31172"><br><div id="yiv8630500092"><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1520202025365_31345"><div dir="ltr" id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1520202025365_31344"><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1520202025365_31343">Hi Kevin,<br clear="none"><br clear="none"></div>Thanks for the detailed reply! This is exactly the depth of analysis I was hoping to get. One starter reply below:<br clear="none"><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1520202025365_31353"><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1520202025365_31352"><div class="yiv8630500092gmail_extra" id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1520202025365_31351"><div class="yiv8630500092gmail_quote" id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1520202025365_31350">On Thu, Mar 1, 2018 at 11:34 PM, Kevin Venzke <span dir="ltr"><<a rel="nofollow" shape="rect" ymailto="mailto:stepjak@yahoo.fr" target="_blank" href="mailto:stepjak@yahoo.fr">stepjak@yahoo.fr</a>></span> wrote:<br clear="none"><blockquote class="yiv8630500092gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex;" id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1520202025365_31349"><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1520202025365_31348"><div style="color:rgb(0, 0, 0);background-color:rgb(255, 255, 255);font-family:Neue, Helvetica, Arial, Grande, sans-serif;font-size:16px;" id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1520202025365_31347"><span id="yiv8630500092gmail-m_-2721728167852329817m_4737133418694781624yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1519970222161_5154">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. </span></div></div></blockquote><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1520202025365_31355"><br clear="none"><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1520202025365_31354">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.<br clear="none"><br clear="none"></div><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1520202025365_31356">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:<br clear="none"><<a rel="nofollow" shape="rect" target="_blank" href="http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/political-parties/political-party-qualification/">http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/political-parties/political-party-qualification/</a>><br clear="none"><br clear="none"></div><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1520202025365_31358">I haven't read through that well enough to know all of the existing rules.<br clear="none"></div><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1520202025365_31359"><br clear="none"></div></div><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1520202025365_31360">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 easily.<br clear="none"><br clear="none"></div><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1520202025365_32736">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?<div class="yiv8630500092yqt8406477977" id="yiv8630500092yqtfd42473"><br clear="none"><br clear="none"></div></div><div class="yiv8630500092yqt8406477977" id="yiv8630500092yqtfd47976"><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1520202025365_32735">Rob<br clear="none"></div><div><br clear="none"></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div><div class="yqt8406477977" id="yqtfd21417">----<br clear="none">Election-Methods mailing list - see <a shape="rect" href="http://electorama.com/em" target="_blank">http://electorama.com/em </a>for list info<br clear="none"></div><br><br></div> </div> </div> </div></div></body></html>