On 12/15/2011 12:15 PM, David L Wetzell wrote: > dlw: Within the third parties themselves, there'd need to be used > single-winner elections to determine their candidates/leaders/positions. > In these regards, there'd be great scope for experimentation with > single-winner election rules, especially since they'd have no commitment > to a particular single-winner election rule.
You said that experimentation opportunities would be "a good reason to strategically support IRV". Presumably IRV would be used for both internal voting "to determine their candidates/leaders/positions" and for choosing candidates for public elections. Why would IRV-chosen party leaders be motivated to try any other voting method (for either internal or candidate-selection use)? Richard Fobes On 12/15/2011 12:15 PM, David L Wetzell wrote:
---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Richard Fobes <electionmeth...@votefair.org> To: election-meth...@electorama.com <mailto:election-meth...@electorama.com> Cc: Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2011 23:26:59 -0800 Subject: [EM] Electoral experimentation On 12/14/2011 12:59 PM, David L Wetzell wrote: if we push hard for the use of American Proportional Representation it'll give third parties a better chance to win seats and they will prove great labs for experimentation with electoral reform. This is also a good reason to strategically support IRV, since we can trust that with changes, there'll be more scope for experimentation and consideration of multiple alternatives to FPTP. dlw I doubt that electoral experimentation would follow the adoption of any new election method. Why? Consider that elected representatives tend to defend whatever election method they got elected under. So if "American Proportional Representation" -- or any other method -- were used by a third party to elect its leaders, the elected representatives would be unlikely to support experimenting with other election methods. dlw: Within the third parties themselves, there'd need to be used single-winner elections to determine their candidates/leaders/positions. In these regards, there'd be great scope for experimentation with single-winner election rules, especially since they'd have no commitment to a particular single-winner election rule. It's analogous to a door to a treasure room that gets closed and locked after the first people pass through. People who gain access to power naturally want to preserve whatever electoral system got them elected. dlw: Third parties (in a 2 party dominated system) aren't so much about getting into power as making democracy work, turning over the center.... Richard Fobes ---- Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
---- Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
