Quote:
|
Originally Posted by SecretMethod70
The goal of reforming voting methodology is to move to a method which works under ALL circumstances. The point is that IRV does not satisfy that. Furthermore, the point with the example that I gave is that the minute a third party gains substantial support it again has the potential to be a spoiler. Condorcet voting eliminates this.
I mean, seriously, look at my avatar. If IRV were reasonable don't you think I'd support it?
|
I think you would if you thought it worked, but you read some information that is long on speculation and ideology and short on evidence. Although, you might have discussed this in your Poli-Sci courses--information I'm not privy to. It uses extreme hypotheticals to refute an idea. If I get some time, let me concoct some extreme hypotheticals that show condorcet voting wouldn't work under "all" circumstances. First of all, I haven't seen how IRV doesn't work in all circumstances (the three party argument was a seperate issue from you explaining how 65% of the population initially wanted a republican candidate, which inadvertantly was eliminated in the first round. Realistically, the republicans have barely half of the voting population, if that, and the libs only have 1%. Where are you getting 65%?
You've read enough of my posts to know that I vote third party, too. So the same question applies to you, do you think I'd support IRV if I thought it wasn't going to address the entrenched duelopoly?
Likewise, Nader supports IRV. Does your candidate?
[edit] Evidently, Badnarik feels it's better than what we have, but he would prefer approval voting. I should also point out that we have more than 4 parties on this ballot. Finding a system that satisfies all unknowns is impossible without data--and maybe even with it. Everything is speculation. Rather, we need to use data from what we know to explain what might happen in an unknown circumstance. That means we need to look at the current election and past elections, and work from there. We can't create a hypothetical situation that illustrates how a system would fail when no real world situation matches the hypothetical and call it a fair appraisal of the system being evaluated.