Forward by Jeanne Massey from Tony Solgard: Steve Cross said, �In this version of IRV, it doesn't sound much different from the present method of multiple ballots to endorse someone. The only difference is that the DFL's current procedure doesn't eliminate everyone other than the top two finishers after just one ballot. Now, it takes several ballots before the winnowing starts taking place�� [Tony Solg�rd]That�s exactly right. It�s not much different. The same process of elimination takes place, but is condensed in time.
Steve Cross said, ��I think most support one person and don't really start thinking of who else might be okay until it becomes evident that their candidate isn't drawing anymore votes. I think it's going to require a complete change in mind-set to say on the first ballot that someone else other than his or her most-favored candidate is okay too.� [Tony Solg�rd] What a concept! IRV might promote party unity, something conventions don�t always produce even if there is an endorsement. Steve Cross said, �Is "no endorsement" always an option on all ballots -- including the first one?� [Tony Solg�rd] Yes. When I said �proceed as normal,� I really meant it. As is the current practice, �no endorsement� would always be an option on every ballot. Again, as is current practice, so long as the votes for the trailing candidate and for �no endorsement� total more than 40 percent, the leading candidate is prevented from reaching the 60 percent threshold. Steve Cross said, �And in an election you've got machine-readable ballots and computers to do all the calculations. And, what's more, you have all night to get the results. In a convention, the process of counting, probably recounting (for second or third choices for ONLY selected ballots), and calculating the results is going to take forever -- and there are several hundred impatient people waiting for the results. [Tony Solg�rd] With IRV, there are no calculations beyond what is the current practice. As a survivor of the 1984 DFL US Senate endorsing convention (something like 24 ballots in 24 hours, as I recall), I have no desire to wait all night to get the results. That�s an argument *for* IRV, not an argument against it. As Steve observed in his opening, this application of IRV is not all that different from what is currently done, except that the time is shortened. Tony Solg�rd, President FairVote Minnesota http://www.fairvotemn.org Seward REMINDERS: 1. Be civil! Please read the NEW RULES at http://www.e-democracy.org/rules. If you think a member is in violation, contact the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list. 2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait. For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract ________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A Civil City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[email protected] Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
