On 4/16/2012 12:50 PM, robert bristow-johnson wrote:
hey Richard, how did you get "[email protected]" for the
Reply-to header?". i had to change it to get this to post.
That's the email account I sent the message from.
On 4/16/12 12:42 PM, Richard Fobes wrote:
As I recall the issue is that I stated in a previous message that
Approval voting was very unlikely to be adopted for use in U.S.
Presidential _general_ elections. Here are some reasons:
1: Making that change requires adopting a Constitutional Amendment.
not precisely. there is a going state compact movement that will
essentially make the Electoral College a figurehead. it will exist, but
it will be powerless. and it doesn't need a Constitutional amendment,
because the Constitution says that the state legislatures have the
exclusive authority in defining how the presidential electors are
chosen. ...
> ...
Notice that the "state compact movement" specifies that the state's
electoral votes goes to the candidate with the "most votes."
That will lead to ambiguity if there is a strong three-way race.
For example, if the group that has gotten approval in many states to add
a third Presidential candidate in the upcoming Presidential general
election (I forget their name) were to choose a well-liked liberal
candidate, vote splitting between the Democratic candidate (Obama) and
the added candidate could cause the Republican candidate (Romney,
presumably) to get the most votes, even though a majority of voters vote
"against" the Republican candidate.
That would "break" the "most votes" workaround.
Yes, I agree that it is possible that the reform could happen without a
Constitutional Amendment.
However, at this rate of progress, the Constitutional Amendment seems as
likely as a well-written workaround.
(Jameson made the same point, so this reply also applies to his comment.)
Richard Fobes
----
Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
