**Next message:**Damien Broderick: "Re: ELECTION: problems/solutions"**Previous message:**Damien Broderick: "Re: ELECTION: problems/solutions"**Next in thread:**CurtAdams@aol.com: "Re: Buchanan Palm Beach Statistics"**Messages sorted by:**[ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Robin forwards,

*>From: Alex Tabarrok <ATabarrok@independent.org>
*

*>Of the studies on the web page I noted this is by far the best and most
*

*>comprehensive
*

*>http://elections.fas.harvard.edu/
*

This did seem to be a good analysis from what I could tell. It found

that you could pretty well predict the Buchanan vote in a county based

on the Bush and Nader vote percentages, and West Palm Beach was an

extreme anomaly.

I was trying to think of a way to apply fair-division theory to these

kinds of disputes. You know, the old "I cut and you choose" method

of dividing a birthday cake. You have this sort of strategic space

in which the two sides can make moves, and each wants to maximize his

chances of winning, just like with the cake each wants to maximize the

size of his piece.

Unfortunately it doesn't work because at some point you need to say

something like, Bush, would you be satisfied with the outcome if we

assigned all the Gore votes to you, and all of your votes to Gore?

That way you could get each guy to agree to a policy which gave each

side a fair shot.

But this is obviously ludicrous in the context of an election where

people are expressing their preferences. Fairness is not the same as

equal division, it's just that in this case, with the vote so close,

it looks somewhat similar.

Hal

**Next message:**Damien Broderick: "Re: ELECTION: problems/solutions"**Previous message:**Damien Broderick: "Re: ELECTION: problems/solutions"**Next in thread:**CurtAdams@aol.com: "Re: Buchanan Palm Beach Statistics"**Messages sorted by:**[ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

*
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30
: Mon May 28 2001 - 09:50:21 MDT
*