> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >Now consider: > >49 A<C<B > >48 B<C<A > > 3 C<B<A > >IRV winner = B; CW winner = C. > >I doubt very much whether most electors would accept C as > the "winner" > >if this were an election for Sate Governor, much less for a directly > >elected President of the USA. If anyone has evidence to the > >contrary I'd like very much to see it. > >James Gilmour
James Green-Armytage replied: > > Well, if the votes were sincere to begin with, then it > is axiomatic that C will win a runoff election against B. But if you did decide this by a separate run-off election, I should not be surprised to find large numbers of voters changing their preferences in that run-off election, and in so doing, reject the CW. Imagine a "real-life" scenario: Bush, Gore, Nader. Would we really have had four years of President Nader? This is about more than voting arithmetic and measures for identifying "the most representative candidate". It brings in systems of values which are expressed in different dimensions from those used to measure representivity. James Gilmour ---- Election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
