|
|
Re: The Powerless Voter
Posted:
Nov 28, 2000 2:24 PM
|
|
I would have to say that what you contend only happens in elections
which are not perfect. In a perfect world, The voting method would
somehow be statistically impervious to any type of scrutiny, whether it
be from the media, the candidates or their followers. Although I cannot
answer the original question, I do believe that it depends on the
circumstances of the election as to whether a single vote could win it.
Danny Purvis wrote:
>
> Key to the cited discussion is the following passage:
>
> >These insights came quickly, but it was many years before Natapoff
> >devised his formal mathematical proof. His starting point was the
> >concept of voting power. In a fair election, he saw, each voterÃÂÃÂs
> >power boils down to this: What is the probability that one personÃÂÃÂs
> >vote will be able to turn a national election? The higher the
> >probability, the more power each voter commands.
>
> I would argue that, by the definition above, each voter has no power.
> A difference of one vote in millions is not measureable, and thus the
> probability is zero that one vote can swing a national election. As
> the present national election demonstrates, a national election which
> ends in a statistical tie is settled not by votes but by a chaotic
> legal and propaganda war, the type of struggle in which the
> unprincipled rascal has a definite advantage. A single vote is
> statistically insignificant and thus cannot break a statistical tie.
|
|
