On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 10:08 AM, Raph Frank <[email protected]> wrote: > On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 1:46 PM, Terry Bouricius > <[email protected]> wrote: >> Why would one want to have voters be restricted by the list order of one's >> favorite candidate, instead of allowing the voters themselves to reorder >> the party list (as happens with OPEN list systems - unlike closed party >> list PR)? > > Open list doesn't really allow re-ordering of the party lists. The > method uses multi-seat plurality to decide which party candidates are > elected. It is better than having the party list decided centrally. > > There is a possible system where all voters can vote for a few > candidates and then a party list as their last choice. > > However, that still leads to a large number of choices. For example, > if there were 50 candidates and 5 parties, then the number of possible > ballots would be 50*49*5 = 12250.
More than that in the US where partially filled rank choice votes are legal votes too. I like the idea of choice, but also of simplicity, equality and monotonicity. I don't have time to devote to studying this enough now. Kathy > >> Is the idea to allow candidates to list candidates outside their >> own party? Would parties put up with that from candidates they nominate, >> or wouldn't they insist on that level of party loyalty to receive the >> party's nomination? > > Quite possibly. However, even if the party insisted on party members > being put first, it would allow party members to decide how to order > other party members. > > Also, it reduces the power of the party over candidates. If a party > tries to throw its weight around, the candidate has the option of > running as an independent and just listing some of the other party > members as high ranks. > > It is a trade-off. Ideally, there would be one district and everyone > would be elected at once using some form of PR-STV. However, this > would be logistically difficult to achieve. It would place a large > load on the voters, as they would have to rank a larger number of > candidates, and also on the counting process due to the large number > of rounds required. The candidate list method gives some of the > flexibility of PR-STV and the national level proportionality of party > list systems. > -- Kathy Dopp http://electionmathematics.org Town of Colonie, NY 12304 "One of the best ways to keep any conversation civil is to support the discussion with true facts." Realities Mar Instant Runoff Voting http://electionmathematics.org/ucvAnalysis/US/RCV-IRV/InstantRunoffVotingFlaws.pdf Voters Have Reason to Worry http://utahcountvotes.org/UT/UtahCountVotes-ThadHall-Response.pdf Checking election outcome accuracy http://electionmathematics.org/em-audits/US/PEAuditSamplingMethods.pdf ---- Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
