DR says:
Mr. Ossipoff wrote-
So let's have a good reason for which defeat we drop. Let's
minimize the number of people whom we overrule, if we have to
disregard an expressed opinion of the voters.
---
D- Such is the reasoning of the pro-IRV folks (even when there is a
Condorcet
Winner with the lowest number of first choice votes--- my earlier
Hitler-Stalin-Washington examples).
Mike says:
Wouldn't that be nice if that were the reasoning of the IRVies.
Then they'd be Condorcetists.
Or are you saying that dropping the weakest defeat is the same
as dropping the candidate with fewest 1st choice votes? If so,
would you post a proof of that, or an argument for it?
DR says:
Is IRV tolerable when there is no Condorcet Winner (as in the below) ?
Mike says:
No. IRV fails majority rule & lesser-of-2-evils standards & criteria
even if it's only used as a circular tie solution.
Mike Ossipoff
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
