When Math Warps Elections

[Dr. Strange]

It is a little disturbing for democracy. One candidate could win with some rules and lose with others.
...
For anyone who believes in democracy, this is a little disturbing. What it means is that "election outcomes can more accurately reflect the choice of an election rule than the voters' wishes," writes mathematician Donald Saari of the University of California, Irvine. One candidate could win with some rules and lose with others. In fact, as mathematicians analyze voting systems, they are turning up other oddities that can yield a "winner" who does not reflect the will of even a plurality, much less a majority. The discoveries are especially relevant this year. "The severity of the problem escalates with the number of candidates," notes Saari, and one thing this primary season has is a lot of still-viable candidates.

http://www.newsweek.com/id/105586

Mathematics and Voting Theory.

:woohoo:

[TZ]

1. Isn't that what happened in 2000 basically?

Of course mathematics theory can't compete with hanging chads and a biased SCOTUS.....

[Dr. Strange]

2. Well, one of the issues with our way of voting is that we only get one vote.

Which is fine if there are only two candidates. With more than that, it would be nice to be able to cast several votes, so that you don't have to worry about whether your first choice is really "electable." The Newsweek article mentions approval voting, which could be interesting (just indicate which candidates you "approve" of, and whoever gets the most approval votes wins).

Another approach is to have voters rank the candidates. So if you really like Nader more than Gore, you can make Nader your first choice and Gore your second choice. If Nader doesn't have a chance to win, then at least you got to vote for him, and you didn't "waste your vote" since you have Gore ranked above Bush. Where things become interesting--mathematically speaking--is how do you decide the winner based on the rankings? There are several perfectly legitimate sounding approaches (Instant Runoff Voting gets mentioned here at DU a lot), but different approaches could give different results. (One method might result in Gore winning, another might give Bush the win.) So which method is the best?

Therein lies the fun.

But, as you say, mathematical theory really can't complete with the SCOTUS.

Next week's lecture: the mathematics of Apportionment.