User:Araucaria: Difference between revisions
Content added Content deleted
imported>Araucaria (More primarly election suggestions) |
imported>Araucaria No edit summary |
||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
I would prefer to avoid primary elections. However, they may continue to be required during a transition period. If that is the case, I would recommend using |
I would prefer to avoid primary elections. However, they may continue to be required during a transition period. If that is the case, I would recommend using |
||
* Favorite plus Approval. As above. Narrow field to at least 2 candidates, comprising the most-favored, most-approved, and second-highest approved. The main advantage of this is simplicity, plus it would be a marked improvement of the Top-Two Louisiana-style primary using Single Vote. |
* Favorite plus Approval. As above. Narrow field to at least 2 candidates, comprising the most-favored, most-approved, and second-highest approved. The main advantage of this is simplicity, plus it would be a marked improvement of the Top-Two Louisiana-style primary using Single Vote. |
||
* Favorite plus [[Range voting]]. As above. Narrow field to at least 2 candidates, who would include the most-favored, most-approved, second-highest approved, plus any other candidate with a pairwise beatpath to the most-approved. The improvement here over Favorite plus Approval would be that the entire Smith |
* Favorite plus [[Range voting]]. As above. Narrow field to at least 2 candidates, who would include the most-favored, most-approved, second-highest approved, plus any other candidate with a pairwise beatpath to the most-approved. The improvement here over Favorite plus Approval would be that the entire [[Smith set]] (plus approval winner) would be included in the slate of candidates going to the general election. |
||
You can contact me at ''araucaria dot araucana at gmail dot com''. |
You can contact me at ''araucaria dot araucana at gmail dot com''. |
||