So, why bother to vote for one or more?
There are two leaders, and I have a preference (or three of
which I prefer one or two)..
I see clones so, if I like what they are, I should vote for all
of them.
I like what I hear of a candidate, so hope to attract more like
this one, even if they are not getting many votes this time.
Therefore:
Among the leaders it matters, so you vote if you care.
Among the also-rans it does not matter, so you vote if you care.
Among those who might be on the edge of a significant vote count
it only matters if the one you consider bullet voting, and the one you
are considering as an option, are both on the edge such that you could
regret whatever you do, that it is time to worry. So vote if you
care, for voting can either help or hurt.
The studying here mostly makes headaches.
Dave Ketchum
On Jun 16, 2010, at 2:20 PM, Kevin Venzke wrote:
Hi Peter,
My quick responses to this:
--- En date de : Mer 16.6.10, Peter Zbornik <[email protected]> a
écrit :
I got a second question from one of our members (actually the same
guy
which asked for the first time):
If I just bullet vote in a Condorcet election, then I increase the
chances
of my candidate being elected.
If I have a second or third option, the chances of my prefered
candidate
to win is lowered.
None of this is guaranteed. Actually listing additional preferences
can
also help a preferred candidate.
Q: In this case why should any voter not bullet-vote?
You should not bullet vote if the possible use of voting for a second
preference outweighs the likelihood that the second preference will
hurt
your first preference.
It is not obvious that a voter should be trying to support his
favorite
candidate to the exclusion of everything else. He should be trying to
get the best result possible on average.
My argument starts:
If I vote for a candidate who has >50% of the votes, then it does not
matter if there is a second or third choice.
If my prefered candidate A gets <50% of the votes, then it makes
sense
to support a second choice candidate B.
However if the supporters of B only bullet vote, then maybe B's
supporters get an advantage over A?
Yes, that can happen. But it doesn't follow from this, that everybody
should bullet-vote. If A and B are similar candidates then all of
these
voters benefit from the A>B votes even though the B voters only voted
B and denied A chance to win. Most likely if the A voters bullet-voted
also, then some other candidate would win.
... at this point I realize, that I don't know enough about Condorcet
and/or Schulze to answer the question.
Why is it not rational to bullet vote in a Condorcet election if
you are
allowed not to rank some candidates?
It could be rational in some cases, but it is not rational in
general. In
general it makes sense to express your preferences.
Kevin Venzke
----
Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
