On 12/21/2012 12:17 AM, Greg Freemyer wrote:
On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 5:50 PM, Jim Henderson <hendersj@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, 20 Dec 2012 14:53:11 -0500, Greg Freemyer wrote:
Also, am I the only one bothered by winners having less than 50%? If so, we can leave it as it is.
I'm not, because statistically when you have a larger number of candidates than 2, it's likely the winner will have < 50% of the vote. It'd be possible in a three candidate race for a single position to win with 34% of the vote.
That's the way the math works out. There's no need to complicate things further with a more elaborate voting system.
Jim Jim,
You're totally correct about the math, but at least in the USA, we tend to have election rules that reduce the number of candidates until one of them gets 50%.
Well, for what is arguably the most important vote in the USA, the presidential election, your statement can be misleading/confusing. The extremely stupid system in the USA, allots electoral votes to a candidate. Having sufficient electoral votes to win the presidency does not imply that the person elected president actually won the majority of votes. Yes the person elected has >50% of the electorate vote but may have <50% of the votes. Go figure. Robert -- Robert Schweikert MAY THE SOURCE BE WITH YOU SUSE-IBM Software Integration Center LINUX Tech Lead rjschwei@suse.com rschweik@ca.ibm.com 781-464-8147 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner@opensuse.org