Re: IRV

From: mayhem <meurtre_at_earthlink.net_at_hypermail.org>
Date: Sat, 11 Oct 2003 11:41:01 -0700

> Instant Runoff Voting adds another level
> to the voting scheme, solving a common
> "vote-for-one" flaw. But it doesn't address
> the underlying problem, which is that one
> party is looking to be the "winner" and
> therefore the other must be the "loser".
> This inevitably leads to the Hatfields-McCoys
> situation that we find ourselves in today.
>
> The best solution that I've seen are the
> vote-for-many schemes. Either "vote for
> as many of the candidates as you'd find
> acceptable" [credit to AEM] or the 5-level
> "How do you find this candidate -- Excellent,
> good, fair, poor, unacceptable?" The latter
> is a very popular system used to measure
> all sorts of things.

It's a good idea. But each party would still
want its own people to win.

> What I like about the last system is that
> not only does it change these flaws in the
> voting, but it would change the way that
> the candidates campaign. No longer would
> it be of any value to smear your opponent.

Ah, but it might. You'd still want the other guys
to look as bad as possible, so as to attain a higher
ranking by comparison. You might be subtler about
it, but negative campaigning would still have a
place.

> Qualities such as ability to forge a
> consensus, diplomacy and cooperation would
> now be revealed and key to a candidate's
> success. No longer would our votes hinge
> on hot-button topics or old wounds. Rather,
> actual leadership skills would be demanded.

I do like the fact that in my town the mayor is
always part of the city council, so any citizen
will actually have had a chance to see this person
in action before voting for him/her.

>>> Three years of Governor Gangbang.
>> ... i honestly wasn't sure which candidate
>> he was talking about (Mary Carey or Ahnold).

He's such a prude. Governor Gangbang, indeed.

> MC would have been "Governess".

What I don't like is that Master and Governor are
powerful-sounding terms. Yet the exact feminine
equivalents--"Mistress" and "Governess"--do not
(except in *very* specialized situations) connote
power at all. One is often taken to mean "kept
woman," and the other often means "nanny." Forget
voting reform: we need language reform.

> [By the way, there was an interesting LA Times
> article about gender issues and sex scandals,
> specifically Clinton and Schwarzenegger.
> Unfortunately, Miss Carey was not included.]

URL?

> Bark!

Meow.

--Q.M.




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Received on 2003-10-11 11:55:20

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : 2020-02-04 07:16:18 UTC