
	Where results make sense

Topic: Condorcet winner

Related Topics

Condorcet criterion

Condorcet method

Maximum Majority Voting

Ranked Pairs

Cloneproof Schwartz Sequential Dropping

Voting system

Voting paradox

Borda count

Smith set

First past the post electoral system

Clinton administration

Center for public integrity

Chocolate

Oxford English Dictionary

Cyrillic alphabet

In the News (Wed 2 Dec 09)

Northern Trust

Marvin Harrison

Peter Chernin

Gary Locke

Match Play

Penelope Cruz

Mickey Rourke

AR Rahman

Danny Boyle

Hugh Jackman

	Condorcet method - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-10-22)
		Condorcet is sometimes used to indicate the family of Condorcet methods as a whole.
		However, a Condorcet winner may not exist, due to a fundamental paradox: It is possible for the electorate to prefer A over B, B over C, and C over A simultaneously.
		Condorcet methods tend to encourage the selection of centrist candidates who appeal to the median voter.
	en.wikipedia.org /wiki/Condorcet%27s_method (2414 words)

	Encyclopedia: Condorcet winner (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-10-22)
		The Condorcet candidate or Condorcet winner of an election is the candidate who, when compared in turn with each of the other candidates, is preferred over the other candidate.
		The Condorcet criterion for a voting system is that it chooses the Condorcet winner when one exists.
		Any method conforming to the Condorcet criterion is known as a Condorcet method.
	www.nationmaster.com /encyclopedia/Condorcet-winner (322 words)

	Condorcet method
		The Condorcet Winner of an election is the candidate who, when compared in turn with each of the other candidates, is preferred over the other candidate.
		Any voting system which chooses the Condorcet Winner when it exists is known as a Condorcet method, after its deviser, the 18th century mathematician and philosopher Marquis de Condorcet, although the method was previously devised by Ramon Llull in the 13th century.
		If there is a Condorcet Winner (a candidate who, when compared in turn with each of the other candidates, is preferred over the other candidate), many argue that that candidate should be selected by the voting system as the (sole) winner.
	www.brainyencyclopedia.com /encyclopedia/c/co/condorcet_method.html (1712 words)

	Condorcet - dKosopedia
		Condorcet is a voting system named after the Marquis de Condorcet, an 18th-century French mathematician.
		IRV enthusiasts usually criticize Condorcet as too complicated, but it's actually simple.
		Since Condorcet can be seen as a race where everbody is in a run off election against everybody else with the winner of the most elections being the overall winner, the acronym IRV-P makes sense.
	www.dkosopedia.com /index.php/Condorcet (435 words)

	Condorcet criterion -- Facts, Info, and Encyclopedia article (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-10-22)
		The Condorcet candidate or Condorcet winner of an (A vote to select the winner of a position or political office) election is the candidate who, when compared in turn with each of the other candidates, is preferred over the other candidate.
		Mainly because of Condorcet's (additional info and facts about voting paradox) voting paradox, a Condorcet winner will not always exist in a given set of votes.
		The Condorcet criterion for a (A legal system for making democratic choices) voting system is that it chooses the Condorcet winner when one exists.
	www.absoluteastronomy.com /encyclopedia/c/co/condorcet_criterion.htm (289 words)

	Vote Aggregation Methods
		This procedure is not neutral because it favors the status quo in the absence of a Condorcet winner.
		Generally, the winner of an approval voting election is the alternative that receives a plurality of votes [17].
		However, approval voting has a higher Condorcet efficiency than plurality voting, selecting the Condorcet winner in all cases where it is selected by plurality voting as well as in other cases where it it may not be selected by plurality voting [17].
	lorrie.cranor.org /pubs/diss/node4.html (8348 words)

	Single-Winner Electoral Methods FAQ
		If their is a Condorcet winner for the voter's sincere preferences, and this candidate does not win, then by definition, a majority of the voters prefer this candidate to the winner.
		We can therefore conclude that when the Condorcet winner loses in any of these methods, even those that do not meet the Condorcet criterion, it is because voters did not have enough information or were unwilling to use strategy.
		For example, if for a particular elected method candidate X is the winner for one group, and candidate X is the winner for another group, then one might expect that candidate X would be the winner in a larger group combining all these voters.
	condorcet.org /emr/singfaq.shtml (4064 words)

	Schulze method - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
		Note that this is different from some other preference voting systems such as Borda and Instant-runoff voting, which do not satisfy the Condorcet criterion; in these systems the Condorcet winner may lose.
		The Schulze method uses Condorcet pairwise matchups between the candidates and a winner is chosen in each of the matchups.
		The Schulze method doesn't guarantee that the winner is always chosen from the uncovered set.
	en.wikipedia.org /wiki/Cloneproof_Schwartz_Sequential_Dropping (1598 words)

	Condorcet's Method
		Condorcet's method is a pairwise election system where ranked ballots are used to simulate many head-to-head elections.
		Condorcet's method is one of several pairwise methods, which are great methods for electing people in single-seat elections (president, governor, mayor, etc.).
		Condorcet's method lets voters mark their sincere wishes for who they would like to win the election, without having to consider strategy ("I'd vote for Candidate B, but I'm afraid of wasting my vote.").
	robla.net /1996/politics/condorcet.html (907 words)

	Definitions and Criteria
		A Condorcet winner, also called a ‘dominant candidate,’ is a candidate that wins all of its pairwise comparisons.
		Candidate B is the Condorcet winner, because it wins all of its pairwise comparisons.
		However, in many Condorcet completion methods, it is possible for the B supporters to change the result to their advantage.
	fc.antioch.edu /~james_green-armytage/vm/define.htm (2163 words)

	Variations on IRV
		On the other hand, another system, called Condorcet, only measures breadth of support and ignores how strong the support is. A Condorcet winner may not be the favorite candidate of any voter, but the person would have to compare favorably in head-to-head matchups with each of the other candidates.
		The Condorcet rules suffers from the Condorcet Paradox: there may not be any candidate who defeats all the others: A might beat B, B might beat C, and yet C could beat A. In this case, some other system must be used to resolve the paradox.
		In addition, the Condorcet candidate might be one with so little core support that he or she would never have been able to win under any of the single-winner voting systems currently used for all governmental elections in the United States and other nations.
	www.fairvote.org /irv/various1.htm (785 words)

	[No title]
		The Condorcet Winner criterion says nothing about what happens in elections where there is not Condorcet Example: In a a b b c c c c c a b b a a b c beats b 3-2 and c beats b 3-2.
		Proof: In the first example election, c is the Condorcet winner, but c is eliminated after the first round and a is the ultimate winner under the Hare System.
		Proof: In the first example election, c is the Condorcet winner, but if the dictator is any voter but the last, he will not choose c as the winner.
	www.academic.marist.edu /~jzg8/courses/m111/Spring04/Handouts/Condor3_3.doc (365 words)

	A Survey of Basic Voting Methods
		This assures that the resulting winner is preferred by a majority to at least the one other candidate who makes it to the second election.
		Condorcet does not make the same mistake, since it doesn’t eliminate any candidates before it looks at the later preferences on the ballots.
		In this case, the minimax winner is A, whose worst loss is least bad.
	fc.antioch.edu /~james_green-armytage/vm/survey.htm (6352 words)

	New electoral system: (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-10-22)
		Condorcet simulates many head-to-head battles between all possible combinations of candidates, to find the candidate that is universally preferred by a majority of the electorate.
		While a Condorcet method will always pick the Condorcet candidate if there is one, (the candidate a majority prefers over all others) and all other systems will not, there may sometimes be no single Condorcet winner because of an ambiguity in the preferences of the electorate.
		Some people regard the possibility of this situation occurring as a deficiency of Condorcet voting, but in the words of Russ Paielli who runs the election methods website http://www.electionmethods.org/ it is not a disadvantage of the system.
	johnquiggin.com /wp-content/Condorcet.htm (1532 words)

	Condorcet Notes (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-10-22)
		The winner is usually the candidate who is popular with the core voters of the largest moderate party.
		Mathematician Charles Ludwidge Dodgson (better known as author Lewis Carroll) proposed in 1876 to elect the Condorcet winner or, in the event of a cycle, the candidate who needs to change the fewest ballots to become the Condorcet winner.
		Utility voting systems such as Clark's incentive revealing device or Hylland and Zeckhauser's influence point voting are not Condorcet completions rules, are easy to manipulable by "conspiracies", and are rather complicated so their ballots may confuse and burden voters.
	www.accuratedemocracy.com /c_other.htm (1100 words)

	Ranked Pairs: Instant Run-Off Voting
		In fact, in cases where there is a Condorcet Winner, and where IRV does not choose it, a majority would by definition prefer the Condorcet Winner to the IRV winner.
		This means that the majority would be better off having voted for the Condorcet Winner in first place instead of backing their candidates until they fell out of contention.
		In general, under IRV, you can either play it safe by voting for whom you think is the Condorcet Winner in first place, or you can adopt the more risky strategy of voting for your first choice, with the danger that this may cause one of your least favorite to be elected.
	www.condorcet.org /rp/IRV.shtml (1787 words)

	Accurate Democracy 1
		Four of the 7 ballots rank STV winner B over plurality winner D. But a different 4 of 7 rank Condorcet winner C over B. So Condorcet's pairwise rule is usually better than the STV elimination rule for electing a single central winner.
		If these rules are not used, the central Condorcet candidate, surrounded by moderates and centrists, might get few first-rank votes and be eliminated during an STV tally -- in spite of the fact that she is the overall favorite.
		The 4 tallies: Condorcet's rule, STV, the chair's tiebreaker, and the runoff are all tallied from the preference ballots.
	accuratedemocracy.com /elect.htm (6575 words)

	[No title]
		This method obeys the extended Condorcet criterion, is resistant to manipulation (it removes the "noise" from individual fault ballots), and is neutral and consistent.
		For a single winner election using the CAB method (it would differ slightly if there were two or more seats to fill), we would first check to see if there was a Condorcet winner (the C in CAB).
		If there were no Condorcet winner, then we would take Smith set (the smallest set of candidates where every member of the set beats every member outside the set, beats at least one other member of the set, and loses only to other members of the set).
	www.mrouse.com /cabelect.htm (3830 words)

	[No title]
		If the number of voters is odd, and we are interested only in voting systems that never result in a tie, then majority rule is the only voting system for two alternatives that satisfies the three conditions just listed.
		A voting system satisfies independence of irrelevant alternatives if it is impossible for an alternative B to move from nonwinner status to winner status unless at least one voter reverses the order in which he or she had B and the winning alternative ranked.
		Monotonicity- if an alternative is a winner, and a new election is held in which the only ballot change made is for some voter to move the former winning alternative higher on his or her preference list, then the original winner should remain a winner.
	www.svsu.edu /~agm/m125.Ch12.NOTES.F03.htm (607 words)

	[No title]
		Clearly a majority winner is also a plurality winner; equally clearly, the reverse is not always true.
		While Condorcet voting is obviously Condorcet consistent, previous examples showed that Liberal may fail to win given Profile 1 under each of the other voting rules discussed, so none of them is Condorcet consistent.
		But since Condorcet voting does not always select a winner, it cannot be deemed a full-fledged voting rule comparable to the others discussed here.
	userpages.umbc.edu /~nmiller/POLI325/WINNERS.htm (4122 words)

	Evaluating Voting Methods
		If alternative a is declared the winner under a voting method, and one or more voters change their preferences in a way favour to a (making no other changes), then a should still win.
		Alternative a is the Condorcet winner, and by Coombs’ method, it is eliminated first.
		It clearly meets the Condorcet criteria, but in the absence of a Condorcet winner, the election outcome is highly dependent on the agenda of the vote.
	theorem.ca /~mvcorks/code/voting_methods.html (2289 words)

	CIVS completion algorithms
		Condorcet election methods are methods that are guaranteed to elect the Condorcet winner if one exists.
		Second, when there is a Condorcet winner (the usual case), the voters have no incentive to rank the choices in any way other than their true preferences; so-called strategic voting usually does not help them.
		Although there is usually a Condorcet winner, especially when there are many voters, it is possible that there isn't one.
	www5.cs.cornell.edu /~andru/civs/rp.html (949 words)

	Borda count - Electowiki
		Nashville also happens to be the Condorcet winner in this case.
		It does not satisfy the Condorcet criterion, the Independence of irrelevant alternatives criterion, or the Independence of Clones criterion.
		A procedure for finding the Condorcet winner of a Borda count tally is called Nanson's method or Instant Borda runoff.
	wiki.electorama.com /wiki/Borda_count (2005 words)

	John Quiggin » Blog Archive » A guest post on Condorcet voting (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-10-22)
		In Condorcet all of the people all of the time have their full preferences recorded, everyone has a maximal impact on the outcome.
		Condorcet stumbles at a hurdle that STV clears, in that people COULD understand STV if it were clearly explained to them and they had a minute or two to think about it.
		I grant you that it lacks Condorcet’s conceptual elegance because it involves a compromise between two principles, but I think both principles are important and that both Condorcet and full STV give one of them too little weight.
	johnquiggin.com /index.php/archives/2005/06/10/a-guest-post-on-condorcet-voting (6433 words)

	Evaluation Criteria
		Brams and Fishburn have analyzed the ability of plurality and approval voting to select a Condorcet winner when voters use poll data to vote strategically [17].
		While it is certainly a deficiency of plurality DSV that the Condorcet candidate cannot win unless it is one of the top two in the polls, it is a deficiency shared with plurality voting in many real election situations.
		This data may be useful, for example, to distinguish between a winner generally preferred only slightly to the runner-up, and a winner greatly preferred to the runner-up.
	lorrie.cranor.org /pubs/diss/node20.html (1544 words)

	Election procedures (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-10-22)
		In this case, Ursala with only two votes would be eliminated first; shifting her votes to Tamburlaine would not create a majority, but Sheherezade with only four votes would be the bottom candidate at that point and be eliminated.
		A Condorcet winner is a candidate who would win a two candidate election against every other candidate (a majority over each other candidate in a sense other thanthat used above).
		In the case of the runoff procedure, if those who voted for Tamurlaine voted for Ursula, she would be the ultimate winner, and the prefer Ursula to Sheherezade.
	www.math.uni.edu /~campbell/mdm/elec.html (766 words)

	MP in Action - If you can't win an election ... change the voting rules! (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-10-22)
		How the winner of an election is determined can have a very large effect on who the winner is, and not just because of tactical voting.
		Otherwise the winner is the candidate who would become the Condorcet winner with the smallest number of interchanges of preferences.
		If there is a Condorcet winner, he will win irrespective of the agenda.
	www.eudoxus.com /mpac9507.html (1258 words)

	Joseph Malkevitch's Fairness and Equity Glossary (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-10-22)
		An election decision method where the winner is the candidate who gets the largest number of votes based on a ballot where each voter votes for as many of the candidates running as he/she is willing to have serve in the office (i.e.
		The Borda Count is an election decision method where the winner is decided on the basis of points which are assigned to the candidates based on how far up on the ballots of the voters the candidates appear.
		Some election decision methods do not guarantee the election of a Condorcet winner even when there is one.
	www.york.cuny.edu /~malk/fairness-glossary.html (1587 words)

Try your search on: Qwika (all wikis)