Politics - 26 November 2007

Suppose 9 people run for election, and no one of them gets 50% of the vote. If you give office to the one with the most votes, you are giving it to someone whom the majority did not want. Perhaps the majority would prefer a different, compromise candidate instead of the one who won.
I thought about a run-off system: if no one candidate receives 50% or more of the vote, the bottom candidate is eliminated. Then those who voted for #9 vote again for one of the remaining 8, and so on, until a single candidate has the majority vote. But this is also not perfectly fair: perhaps, when candidate #3 is eliminated, a majority of voters would prefer candidate #9 to candidates #1 and #2, but they no longer have the ability to vote for him.

So for the question: suppose you have a list wherein all the voters have ranked the candidates in order of preference.
1) How would you determine the winner of the vote?
2)Why is this the ideal method?

Thanks in advance

2007-11-26 13:40:57 · 12 answers · asked by crazyhorseavi 4

2007-11-26 13:35:28 · 1 answers · asked by Anonymous

I know this African American man that was real disabled and cannot drive and during the Clintons great "I feel your pain" years he could not help him and Sen. Lott did get him help after they jerked him around, he was from Laurel, so why has lott got to resign, i mean Mississippi hasn't got much, just ranked over Louisiana, New Hampshire and New Mexico, Mississippi needs him.

2007-11-26 13:32:49 · 17 answers · asked by R J 7

2007-11-26 13:31:24 · 1 answers · asked by shiningStar 2

2007-11-26 13:27:27 · 17 answers · asked by Tank 2

Aussie PM John Howard was the last 1.

2007-11-26 13:21:39 · 23 answers · asked by Anonymous

with their new walth they will afford missiles, etc

2007-11-26 13:17:21 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous

The way I see it is, one is one religion, one is another, one is another, one is...well they all are..crazy. I would like to know your opinion on this coming presidential election.

2007-11-26 13:17:20 · 4 answers · asked by Americanman7 1

2007-11-26 13:16:33 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous

be a Republican?

2007-11-26 13:05:44 · 18 answers · asked by PeachJello 6

Heck I think I'd buy! He seems like he'd be a heck of a time!

2007-11-26 13:05:02 · 17 answers · asked by Anonymous

2007-11-26 13:02:34 · 16 answers · asked by Anonymous

With things like the, "Patriot Act," the, "Military Commissions Act of 2006," the, "John Warner National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) of 2007," and the, "H.R. 1955 and S. 1959: Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007." The laws are set up to totally control the masses WITHOUT any court supervision, which means that there is no longer the "Checks and Balances" which the forefathers set the US government up with.

So, knowing these "Acts" is it too late to save the USA from the fascist state which we have become?

Just because they have not used these powers yet, doesn't mean that they wont. Now that they have taken away the First amendment the next one they will be after is the 2nd.

2007-11-26 12:58:51 · 14 answers · asked by Fedup Veteran 6

2007-11-26 12:57:12 · 19 answers · asked by Anonymous

Especially one with tracking devises implanted in them???

I find it hard to believe that Americans would EVER let ANY government get away with this... but I would like to hear what type of appeasement arguments I'm going to have to act on next year.

Your thoughts... and beliefs on this?!?!

2007-11-26 12:55:40 · 11 answers · asked by AckDuScheisse!! 4

like abiotic factors

2007-11-26 12:53:23 · 4 answers · asked by Anonymous

2007-11-26 12:46:31 · 10 answers · asked by Brandon 1

Nothing!

Why? H. "whore of corruption " Clinton

2007-11-26 12:45:10 · 11 answers · asked by The One 2

Why did Anti - Federalists believe that the design of the Constitution was insufficient to protect...?
why did Anti - Federalists believe that the design of the Constitution was insufficient to protect individual right and, in fact, would lead to violations of rights by the new national government?

2007-11-26 12:38:39 · 3 answers · asked by buBbles03 1

http://news.yahoo.com/photo/071126/480/ca6b4b29d7e84839b62ed061aac2583c;_ylt=AjWoqxph_S6gOgIKBuZzZoUGw_IE

What is Bush thinking?
What is Gore thinking?

Add some captions to their thoughts...

2007-11-26 12:36:36 · 23 answers · asked by Anonymous

i know a little about impeachment. but can someone give me a good description that a 13 year old would understand.??
thanks!

2007-11-26 12:32:49 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous

Protest were held outside and inside Oxford University Student Union debate?

2007-11-26 12:29:27 · 13 answers · asked by Sunny Day 6

I agree with the death penalty in cases for the worst murderers however in other cases I support life without parole as an option for most cases of first degree murder. However it seems like texas executes over 30 people a year isnt it too much considering states like north carolina, florida, and georgia that have high death penalty rates only executes 3-5 inmates a year.

2007-11-26 12:18:31 · 22 answers · asked by Brandon 1

It seems to be part of the money problem the Pentagon is complaining about.

If We had more actual Combat troops would we be able to Win?

Oh the Source was Gen Tommy Franks he said we have 503,000 Men working at a 17 to 1 ratio.

This was because the Iraq war started in the middle of Rumsfeld's Transformation Policy.

2007-11-26 12:05:49 · 13 answers · asked by Guerilla Liberal fighter 3

2007-11-26 12:05:21 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous

then oppose this war?

Which is worse.....raising taxes to pay for war or making our children and grandchildren pay for it down the road?

2007-11-26 11:59:49 · 30 answers · asked by Kelly B 4

2007-11-26 11:52:45 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous

2007-11-26 11:49:04 · 16 answers · asked by Lindsay 1

2007-11-26 11:46:47 · 14 answers · asked by Chi Guy 5

yes this question has been asked before... im not going to choose best answer based on my personal belifes but by the argument you make. im talking about moraly, ethicaly, and economicly. NOT religiously...

2007-11-26 11:43:55 · 69 answers · asked by kevin t 2