On Jun 16, 2010, at 11:11 PM, Kevin Venzke wrote:
Hi Dave,
--- En date de : Mer 16.6.10, Dave Ketchum
<[email protected]> a écrit :
That is possible. Would primaries encourage that
effect? If
so, would we expect parties in two-party states
without
voter primaries to be closer to each other?
I'm not sure. I tend to view primaries as one form of
a phenomenon that
will inevitably happen under FPP one way or another.
If there's something
important about them I guess it has something to do
with timing...
Plurality NEEDS primaries because its voters can vote for
only one. If X1 and X2 run for party X, without
primaries, they can expect to each get only half the votes
intended for party X. If Y1 is the only candidate for
party Y, Y1 has a big advantage over X1 and X2.
What I'm saying is that if we didn't have primaries, candidates would
either drop out or voters would decide not to support them, so that
there would still only be two viable candidates on election day.
What I'm
unclear on is what effect primaries have (or we should expect that
they
have) on candidate positions in comparison to just having candidates
drop
off as they start to lose in the polls.
True that candidates can drop out, and some might respond to
unexpected competition with such. Voters deciding not to support X1/
X2 is possible. My point was that plurality can be helped via
primaries when your alternatives fail.
Kevin Venzke
----
Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
