In your example, there isn't a problem. I just think there is a problem when there are 2 mutually exclusive parties that hate each other. It guarantees that the best guy Not from either party will win. From a political stand point, this might be a good thing. From a mathematical/voting-strategy standpoint, this shows a flaw in the system. I might add, also, that this system might encourage candidates that are less radical, and ignore the spotlight. The least-hated system would favor politicians not willing to go out on a limb. I'm not really leaning toward any voting system (other than getting rid of the electorial college), I just thought this was something interesting to think about. Thanks for the response.
Think about this in terms of the presidential race a few years ago. All of the republicans (who hate democrats, of cours), would have voted like so: 2. George Bush 1. Ross Perot 0. Bill clinton. They would have put clinton last because he's a democrat. Conversly, any democrat would have voted like this: 2. Bill Clinton 1. Ross Perot 0. Bill Clinton. As you can see, this would have given each candidate an equal number of votes.
Factoring in the number of people who voted for Ross Perot first, this actually would have allowed him to win the race.
Ross Perot for president. A plurality vote may be biased, but it doesn't seem to me that this way will work for political elections, where voters don't just like one candidate, but hate the other.
It becomes a least-hated rather than a most-liked election.
Slashdot Mirror
In your example, there isn't a problem. I just think there is a problem when there are 2 mutually exclusive parties that hate each other. It guarantees that the best guy Not from either party will win. From a political stand point, this might be a good thing. From a mathematical/voting-strategy standpoint, this shows a flaw in the system. I might add, also, that this system might encourage candidates that are less radical, and ignore the spotlight. The least-hated system would favor politicians not willing to go out on a limb. I'm not really leaning toward any voting system (other than getting rid of the electorial college), I just thought this was something interesting to think about. Thanks for the response.
Think about this in terms of the presidential race a few years ago. All of the republicans (who hate democrats, of cours), would have voted like so:
2. George Bush
1. Ross Perot
0. Bill clinton.
They would have put clinton last because he's a democrat. Conversly, any democrat would have voted like this:
2. Bill Clinton
1. Ross Perot
0. Bill Clinton.
As you can see, this would have given each candidate an equal number of votes.
Factoring in the number of people who voted for Ross Perot first, this actually would have allowed him to win the race.
Ross Perot for president. A plurality vote may be biased, but it doesn't seem to me that this way will work for political elections, where voters don't just like one candidate, but hate the other.
It becomes a least-hated rather than a most-liked election.