I wrote: >>Bush 49% >>Gore>Nader 24% >>Nader>Gore 27% > >Fair enough: I guess my point is that Nader is also not an irrelevant >alternative, neither in the strict sense nor even in the local sense.
Er... well, Nader is an irrelevant alternative in the strict sense. In margins, his addition causes a change in the winner. In winning votes, Nader's addition or subtraction from the race doesn't change the result, so the method is independent of this particular "irrelevant alternative". I refer here to my original example: Bush 49% Gore 24% Nader>Gore 27% OK, enough blathering about clone spoilers and irrelevant alternative spoilers; it's totally outside the point of my original post. -Adam ---- Election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
