A SAD weakness about what is being said.

On Aug 24, 2011, at 12:55 PM, Fred Gohlke wrote:

Michael Allan wrote:
 "But not for voting.  The voting system guarantees that my vote
  will have no effect and I would look rather foolish to suppose
  otherwise.  This presents a serious problem.  Do you agree?"

TRULY, this demonstrates lack of understanding of cause and effect.

IF the flask capacity is 32 oz then pouring in 1 oz  will:
.     Do nothing above filling if the flask starts with less than 31 oz.
.     Cause overflow if flask already full.

In voting there is often a limit at which time one more would have an effect. If the act were pouring sodas into the Atlantic the limit would be far away.

To which Warren Smith responded:
 "--no.  A single ballot can change the outcome of an election.
  This is true in any election method which is capable of having
  at least two outcomes."

  Proof: simply change ballots one by one until the outcome
         changes.  At the moment it changes, that single ballot
         changed an election outcome. QED.

BUT there could be many previous ballots of which none made any change.


Since, as stated, "A single ballot can change the outcome of an election." and "This is true in any election method which is capable of having at least two outcomes.", why would a voter prefer a new electoral method over the existing plurality method?

From the voter's perspective, (s)he is already familiar with plurality, so , if the new method produces the same result, why change?

Truly no reason PROVIDED the new method provides the same result, given the same input.

Cui bono?  Obviously, not the voter.

When considering the 'meaning' of a vote, it is more important to examine the question of what the voter is voting for or against. Voting, of the type used in plurality contests, is profoundly undemocratic, not because of the vote-counting method, but because the people can only vote for or against candidates and issues chosen by those who control the political parties - the people Robert Michels' described as oligarchs.

If the object of changing the electoral method is to build a more just and democratic government, the proposed methods must give the people a way to influence the choice of candidates and the issues on which they vote.

Fred Gohlke




----
Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info

Reply via email to