Hi folks, As I alluded to before, I'm still a little shakey when it comes to the optimal Approval strategy. So, first, let me paraphrase what I believe is the right strategy, and then ask about a case that's been bugging me.
My understanding is that current strategy involves classic two-party politics. The idea is that you pick your favorite front-runner, and every candidate you like better than the front-runner. However, what happens in a tight three-way race? This is often the case that gets thrown in the face of IRV advocates as a weakness in IRV, so it's only fair to ask what happens in Approval. Let's take a look at the landscape of the U.S. Presidential race. There was a time (June, 1992) where it was virtually a three-way tie. According to Gallup, Ross Perot lead the race for president, favored by 34% of Americans, compared to 32% for Bush and 24% for Clinton. These numbers shifted around significantly during that time, such that it was really hard to tell which of the three was a "front-runner". Had the election been held right then and there, picking out just two front-runners would have been difficult. So, what's the right strategy in Approval? Rob ---- Election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
