Adam Tarr wrote:
I think the issue with multi-winner primaries is not whether they are
proportional, or even whether the elect clones, but whether they advance
at least one winnable candidate to the general election. But I suppose
a proportional system would be more likely to do so due to
I don't think we really disagree about anything meaningful, Dave.
I imagine this is common, but they are really doing the primary on behalf
of the party. The party could decide to not have a primary, just as the
state could decide to not do the party the favor of administering it.
About 100
On Wed, 31 Mar 2004 12:14:45 -0500 Adam Tarr wrote:
I don't think we really disagree about anything meaningful, Dave.
I imagine this is common, but they are really doing the primary on
behalf of the party. The party could decide to not have a primary,
just as the state could decide to not do
We have about worn out this thread:
A primary before a ranked ballot general election has its own needs,
UNLIKE those preceding a Plurality general election.
Perhaps multiple primary winners would make sense. If so, needs are
unlike those of a PR election.
I like the method to be
I think the issue with multi-winner primaries is not whether they are
proportional, or even whether the elect clones, but whether they advance
at least one winnable candidate to the general election. But I suppose
a proportional system would be more likely to do so due to the shotgun
effect of
Dave Ketchum wrote:
Original Message
From: Bart Ingles [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: EM List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [EM] Argument for Approval Primaries
Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2004 09:49:40 -0800
It occurs to me that one place where ranked ballot methods are entirely
On Mon, 29 Mar 2004 21:49:15 -0500 Adam Tarr wrote:
Dave Ketchum wrote:
If a method is good enough to select a single winner in the general
election, then it must be good enough, and most logical choice, for
use in related primaries.
It does not follow. An general election is a method the
On Mon, 29 Mar 2004 14:03:18 -0800 (PST) Forest Simmons wrote:
On Sat, 27 Mar 2004, Dave Ketchum wrote:
Original Message
From: Bart Ingles [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: EM List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [EM] Argument for Approval Primaries
Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2004 09:49:40 -0800
It
On Sat, 27 Mar 2004, Dave Ketchum wrote:
Original Message
From: Bart Ingles [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: EM List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [EM] Argument for Approval Primaries
Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2004 09:49:40 -0800
It occurs to me that one place where ranked ballot methods are
Dave Ketchum wrote:
If a method is good enough to select a single winner in the general
election, then it must be good enough, and most logical choice, for use
in related primaries.
It does not follow. An general election is a method the government uses to
try to find a candidate who best
Original Message
From: Bart Ingles [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: EM List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [EM] Argument for Approval Primaries
Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2004 09:49:40 -0800
It occurs to me that one place where ranked ballot methods are entirely
unsuitable is in party primary elections.
11 matches
Mail list logo
