In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> in sci.stat.edu, Robert J.
MacG. Dawson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Stan Brown wrote:
>> Indeed, it would be silly to let him appear on the ballot.[A] (Hear me
>> out, please, before you react.) If a majority want to remove him,
>> then obviously a majority doesn't want to retain him [B].
>
> I agree with [B] but not [A]. In a typical three-way
>race, there is *no* candidate that a majority wants to elect. Or, to put
>it another way, for each candidate there usually exists a majority that
>does not want that person elected.
You're right. That's why I said "hear me out before you react"! As I
had said in my next paragraph, the problem is that simple plurality
is a really lousy way to pick a winner if there are more than two
serious candidates.
--
Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Cortland County, New York, USA
http://OakRoadSystems.com/
It's not necessary to send me a copy of anything you post
publicly, but if you do please identify it explicitly to avoid
confusion.
.
.
=================================================================
Instructions for joining and leaving this list, remarks about the
problem of INAPPROPRIATE MESSAGES, and archives are available at:
. http://jse.stat.ncsu.edu/ .
=================================================================
