by Michael Ossipoff

This is a worldwide poll on general categories of political parties. Residents of all countries are invited to vote. In the past some have objected that I didn’t include a few parties or categories that are objectionable or repugnant to nearly everyone. So I included them this time, to avoid objections of insufficient inclusiveness. Including a party-category here certainly does not imply approval, endorsement or condoning of it.

Rank, in order of preference, as many or as few party-categories as you want to. If you want to (because you have no preference among them) you can rank several at the same rank position. The only thing you can’t do is rank one party-category at more than one rank position.

With MAM, the count-rule used here, as with nearly all rank-counts, it’s usually in your best interest to not rank any unacceptable alternatives. It is recommended that you only rank party-categories that are acceptable to you.

The ballot is below, after this text-space. What follows, in this text-space is a definition the Ranked-Pairs rank-count rule, preceded by an introduction to pairwise-count in general.

1. “X beats Y” means that the number of ballots ranking X over Y is greater than the number of ballots ranking Y over X.
2. If X beats Y, that is a “defeat” of Y by X. A defeat is a public pairwise decision, saying that X is better than Y.
3. Usually there’s an alternative that doesn’t have such a decision against it. It should win. It does win, in all of CIVS’s rank-count methods.
4. But sometimes, X beats Y beats Z beats X, and every alternative has a defeat, a public pairwise decision, against it.

That’s called a “cycle”.

It’s rare for a cycle to prevent a winner, but when it happens, it isn’t possible to honor all of the public pairwise decisions. Disregarding a public pairwise decision amounts to wronging the voters who voted for that decision. Therefore, to wrong the fewest voters, we should favor the decisions with more voter support.

So let’s define a defeat’s “strength” as the number of voters who voted for that defeat (public pairwise decision). Here is the Ranked-Pairs (RP) count rule:

• To “keep” a defeat means to honor it, by disqualifying from election the defeated candidate.
• Keep each defeat that isn’t in a cycle with stronger kept defeats.
• Elect the alternative that doesn’t have a kept defeat.

By the way, the use of the number of voters voting for a defeat, as the defeat’s “strength” is called “winning-votes”. Some advocate using the margin of defeat instead, wanting to count also those who voted against the defeat. But the goal is to minimize the number of wronged voters. Those who voted against the defeat aren’t wronged if the defeat is kept. They lost, fair and square.

As I said, MAM is RP, with a certain tie-breaking rules. Briefly, MAM says that, if there are equal defeats, or pairwise ties, then we randomly select one of the voters’ rankings, and we use that ranking to solve ties. There will be a 1-day nomination period. Nominations will be accepted until 0001 GMT (That’s one minute after midnight), on the early morning of 17th November, 2013.

Now, I invite you to vote among these 14 political party categories, click here and see this image:

SPOILER ALERT: Schulze/Beatpath/CSSD results for 11-24-13:

1. Democratic Socialist (Condorcet winner: wins contests with all other choices)
2. Non-Socialist Progressive (e.g. Greens) loses to Democratic Socialist by 8–2
3. Liberal  loses to Democratic Socialist by 7–3, loses to Non-Socialist Progressive (e.g. Greens) by 7–4
4. Centrist (between Liberal & Conservative) loses to Democratic Socialist by 7–5, loses to Liberal by 7–3
5. Anarcho-Syndicalist loses to Democratic Socialist by 9–2, loses to Centrist (between Liberal and Conservative) by 7–5
6. Trotskyist (communist)  loses to Democratic Socialist by 11–0, loses to Anarcho-Syndicalist by 6–2
7. Libertarian  loses to Democratic Socialist by 9–3, loses to Trotskyist (communist) by 6–4
8. Conservative  loses to Democratic Socialist by 8–4, loses to Libertarian by 5–4
9. Marxist-Leninist (communist)  loses to Democratic Socialist by 11–0, loses to Conservative by 6–4
10. Conservative Populist  loses to Democratic Socialist by 8–2, loses to Marxist-Leninist (communist) by 5–4
11. Arch-Conservative  loses to Democratic Socialist by 10–1, loses to Conservative Populist by 6–2
12. Tied: Anarchist  loses to Democratic Socialist by 10–2, loses to Arch-Conservative by 5–3
13. None of the listed categories  loses to Democratic Socialist by 9–2, loses to Arch-Conservative by 5–2
14. Non-Traditional Communist (write-in)  loses to Democratic Socialist by 8–3, loses to Anarchist by 6–3
15. Crypto-Fascist  loses to Democratic Socialist by 10–1, loses to Anarchist by 5–2
16. Fascist  loses to Democratic Socialist by 11–0, loses to Crypto-Fascist by 4–1

For simplicity, some details of the poll result are not shown.

Other polls you may like:

civs.cs.cornell.edu

politicsforum.org