Dear Rob, you wrote: > here's a fundamental philosophical question: why is it better, even in a > two-candidate race, to elect the majority winner?
I think the question is ill-posed in at least two ways: First, you say "better" but not better than what. Second, after you settled for an alternative, you should not ask "why is it better?" but "is is better?". My answer: The alternatives here are not only "elect the majority candidate" or "elect the minority candidate" but also "elect both with just probabilities reflecting their share of the vote". And the latter is obviously the only democratic of the three since otherwise one part of the electorate can easily oppress the rest. Athenians knew why they filled offices by lot in their democracy... Yours, Jobst ---- Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info