Curt Siffert wrote > > And this is something that Condorcet methods cannot do. You cannot > derive, from a Condorcet ballot collection, how much > percentage support > each candidate got. You can't give each candidate a share of > 100% in a > way that all candidates would agree on. If you can, I'd love to know > how.
Actually, nothing else can do this either. Example: by a poll in 2000, we find that 75 percent of the electorate supports Bush or McCain, and 75 percent support Gore or McCain. You get 150 percent, and there's no way to divide it up because there's not enough information in the results. If by "percentages" you mean mutually-exclusive yes/no like plurality, you most certainly can get the same information by just toting up the 1st place votes for each candidate. So all the information you get from polls is still available in ranked ballots. And so is a lot more that you can't get from the pure "vote for 1 and only 1" candidate - built into the ballot is information that you can ONLY get in a plurality election by additional polling extraneous to the election process. ---- Election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
