Peter Bleackley wrote: > Staving Paul Bennet: > >> Well, for my money, in an election with multiple candidates, Condorcet >> voting is the way to go. Each voter ranks each candidate in order from >> best to worst, and there is a simple algorithm to determine the winner. >> >> http://www.electionmethods.org/ >> >> There's even a site that will run a Condorcet election for you, without >> anyone here having to understand or implement the underlying >> algorithm. I >> forget the URL, but IIRC it's linked from the above site. > > > Ugh. I think that if a real election were ever held on that basis, the > results would be widespread dissent. It's far too likely to elect a > candidate who was nobody's first choice. The theory is that if say 45% of > the electorate vote for A, 40% vote for B and 15% vote for C, but A's > supporters prefer C to B, and B's prefer C to A, then you should elect > C as > a compromise candidate. But only 15% of the electorate wanted C, so > 85% are > dissatisfied. > > Not dissatisfied, neccesarily. Just not entirely satisfied. In other words, it annoys the least number of people.