You forget that the same abuse would occur for Condorcet, except it would
maybe be more pernicious, because it would involve the larger parties
preferencing amongst each other.
On Wed, 6 Dec 2000, Rob Lanphier wrote:
> Another article on the preference for cash hoopla, this one from the
> Sydney Morning Herald:
> http://www.smh.com.au/news/0012/06/national/national9.html
>
> Here's the quote from a Liberal Party member that was dispatched to a
> polling station by party leaders:
>
> "When I got there, they gave me a T-shirt and how-to-vote cards for
> one of the independent candidates and sent me to a booth for the
> day," the member said.
>
> "I felt bad about it. I don't believe it's fair. I don't believe in
> preferential voting, not after that experience."
>
> The thing I don't like about this is that Condorcet is just as vulnerable
> to this sort of attack. I suppose this is a good argument against
> treating IRV as an acceptable "stepping stone" to IRV; the major parties
> still have the power to exploit the system, without truly empowering the
> minor parties. This in turn creates a situation where people sour on the
> whole concept of preference voting.
>
> Rob Lanphier
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://www.eskimo.com/~robla
>
>
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Guy at hot dog stand: Yo, Dalai Lama, what'll you have?
The Big DL: Make me one with everything.
-Thanks to www.newgrounds.com
