At 1:57 AM -0400 6/8/06, Dave Ketchum wrote: >If I understand complaints about troublemaking, Tom and his friends, >SOMEHOW knowing how all others will vote, vote a pattern that will change >the winner, without directly voting their desire. > How do they manage this without Dick ad HIS friends finding out and >doing a counter plot. > ANYWAY, how did these troublemakers get a valid picture as to what >all other voters were doing? "what they think other voters are going to >do" is not sufficient for successful troublemaking.
To take a real-world recent example, on Tuesday we had a gubernatorial primary election in California to choose party candidates for the November general election. In the Democratic primary, there were half a dozen candidates, but only two with a chance of winning, and extensive polling leading up to the primary had them in a statistical tie. That's not an uncommon situation, and the Condorcet strategy of burying would have been trivial to implement. With IRV, I'd be interested in knowing what the strategy would be in the above election. -- /Jonathan Lundell. ---- election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
