Marcus Ganley wrote: > Although it seldom occurs multiple nominations (known as > 'pre-selections') have occurred. The Queensland Liberals Party > 'pre-selected' two candidates in Pine Rivers at, I think (Tom can > probably correct) the 1989 State Election. However such is the > reluctance to do so that the Liberal and National parties try to > avoid competing in the one seat -snip- That's the "spoiler" dilemma, the flip side of the "lesser of evils voting" dilemma, in action. Marcus' info appears to confirm that CV&D and Rob Ritchie are wrong when they declare Instant Runoff eliminates the lesser evil dilemma. Is Australia happy with this "two-party system" method? Is the tallying by hand the decisive factor in continuing with Instant Runoff rather than switching to Condorcet? In the U.S., we don't let the parties "pre-select" their nominees anymore--we have open primary elections to winnow the field of contenders to one candidate per party. With Instant Runoff used in the general election, parties will still want to use primaries to winnow the field. Instant Runoff in the primaries, particularly in the Presidential primaries where a lot of people want to contend, will be amusing ;-( to watch. What voting method is used within the Australian parliament? Do they tally the legislators' preference orders, or use an amendment agenda to compare choices two at a time? If there was any validity to Instant Runoff, one would expect it to be useful in parliament, where picking one of a large set of conflicting alternatives must happen all the time. ---Steve (Steve Eppley [EMAIL PROTECTED])
