At 06:17 AM 2/23/2007, Jan Kok wrote: >2. Under IRV, if a "third party" candidate makes it to the last round, >it draws little attention from the media. But under TTR, when there is >a runoff, both candidates get equal attention for several weeks. This >lets the finalists compete on an equal basis, so the third party has a >realistic chance to win, and even if hse does not win, the party and >candidate will be remembered in the next election.
Whether or not this is *the* explanation, it is thoroughly plausible that this has an effect. Quite simply, a real runoff election is a different animal than what happens in IRV, because of the campaigning and public attention which is now focused on two candidates. It is *far* easier, I'd expect, for a third party to make it to the top two, where it *is* going to get major attention and just might win, than to win under plurality, for sure, and with IRV, it won't get the opportunity. Even if ballot analysis shows that the third party was close, it is just not the same as a public contest. I've never been thrilled about "instant* runoff; readers may have noticed that I prefer whatever takes elections into something closer to deliberative process, and succeeding votes with debate between them is definitly moving toward deliberation. The ultimate of this would be pairwise, where each question presented to the public is a Yes/No question, and which will pick *at worst* the Condorcet winner (if the Condorcet winner is presented at some point in the process). But, of course, this process is impractical for public elections. Or is it? It actually becomes possible with Asset Voting or with Delegable Proxy, for these techniques can boil down the electorate into a representative body that can function fully deliberatively. And those who are familiar with the FA/DP proposals will know that such a body can allow direct voting on questions before it. That is, any voter could participate in the voting at any point, or may entrust this right to a proxy, who may further pass it on, all of which transmission is rendered moot whenever the voter votes directly. The traditional understanding that direct democracy is impractical is based on an assumption that links voting with other forms of participation. It is impossible to *deliberate* in large groups, not in the traditional way, because demands for floor time become impossible to fulfill. There are ways around this, but the DP method solves the most basic problem: even if we find a way to deliberate in large groups (such as creating a hierarchy of subgroups), most people don't have the time. FA/DP preserves the right of direct vote, but does not guarantee the right to deliberate, i.e., to address the general assembly and to enter motions. That right may be reserved for privileged proxies (DP) or elected representatives (Asset). The right to vote does not add deliberative burden, so there is no reason to restrict it to representatives only. (The argument that the public is insufficiently informed is an old antidemocratic argument that is specious. Some of the public is informed, some is not. Ultimately, who has the right to decide that a particular individual is sufficiently informed or not? Remember, elected representatives, currently, are sometimes very badly informed..... My answer is that in a democracy, the one who has this right is the voter himself or herself. *I* decide if I know enough about a subject to vote on a matter that requires this knowledge. And, the fact is, I don't know enough about *most* subjects to make me want to vote on it if I have the option of leaving the matter to someone I trust to know better than I (or at least as well as I). If ignorant people want to vote on things they don't understand, well, it's a democracy. They have the right. Democracy allows people to make foolish decisions. If a *majority* makes a foolish decision, society is going to suffer. The alternative is to repress that foolish majority, and a society which does this is in trouble in any case. ---- election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info