Hello,
Warren Smith wrote:
For example, consider a 2-way election Gandhi vs Hitler in which
everybody votes
for the (unanimously agreed to be) worst choice: Hitler.
Well, that is a "Nash equilibrium" because no single voter can change
the election result!
Indeed, essentially every possible vote pattern in every possible
large election, is a Nash equilibrium.
Disagreed.
True that Nash applies to the last voter if not at a tie. However, if
at a tie, this voter has full control of the result. As we step
backward thru election activity we decrease the probability of Nash
applying as a reason for voting for Hitler - in fact it becomes more
reason for voting for Gandhi.
Dave Ketchum
----
Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
