Eric Scharin wrote:
>
> The discussions I've heard during the media coverage of this all have a
> disconcertingly political tinge to them. There seems to be a lack of debate
> based on principle. The principle I'm referring to the right of every
> eligible citizen to have their opinion heard and choice recorded. If the
> voting system in place in Palm Beach hampered this fair process, then it
> needs to be investigated in an even-handed way, considering all of the data
> available.
Correct; however, it must be remembered that the results of this
particular election were highly unusual. In the absence of perfect
systems the correct criterion for a good imperfect system is that it
works with high probability; I do not see that the events of the last
few days constitute evidence that the existing American system doesn't
do so.
Neither candidate got a significant majority either of the US or
Florida vote; with a vote so close any election *will* be determined by
technicalities that even partisans would have said were irrelevant until
they knew whose ox was going to get, er, gored.
It's an interesting data set, an object lesson in design of
questionnaires, and the whole episode has been genuinely educational.
(Speaking of "educational": I certainly did not know until recently
that members of the Electoral College can and do cast maverick votes,
and that (so I have heard) state laws requiring the electoral college
members to vote the popular ticket are untested in court and possibly
unconstitutional. From this, it would seem that what we just observed
was not a presidential election, but a non-binding plebiscite. My mind
is still reeling!
(Up here, our Members of Parliament can and do "cross the floor" to a
different party occasionally, and could in principle bring down a
government by doing so; and the Governor-General can in principle invite
a person other than the leader of the largest party to form a
government, and this has happened. However, this is quite consistent, as
neither the concept of "party" nor of "Prime Minister" have much
constitutional existence. The official purpose of the election *is* to
elect a group of MP's, and that is what happens.)
Yours from the Great White North,
Robert Dawson
=================================================================
Instructions for joining and leaving this list and remarks about
the problem of INAPPROPRIATE MESSAGES are available at
http://jse.stat.ncsu.edu/
=================================================================
