On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 4:54 AM, robert bristow-johnson <[email protected]> wrote: > is that why IRV > (under whatever name) was first plugged for government elections in > multiparty environments?
It seems that what Fairvote want is PR-STV. The hope is presumably, that if they can get voters used to ranked ballots and eliminations with IRV, they can then argue that moving onto PR-STV is just changing to the multiseat version of IRV. This means that by choosing IRV as step 1, it makes step 2 easier. However, they seem to be losing footing with the first step. Also, if IRV does lose ground, it might make PR-STV even harder to sell as it could be linked with IRV. A better plan could have been to go for condorcet first to get people used to ranked ballots and then try for PR-STV. At least then, the problems with IRV wouldn't have occurred. Also, condorcet (or approval) would help weaken party central authority, and so make PR more thinkable. ---- Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
