>>>You may not like this system but it is clearly different from a direct vote where the winner of the plurality (however small) is the next president.
>
>>And this scenario would be GOOD because?????
>>
>>I thought the idea was to get rid of the ambiguity - the grid lock...< s >...
>
>It's good because it includes minority viewpoints.
>
>Peter
Peter,
Who gives a rip about minority viewpoints? We want a winner, not a consensus. We're not electing a committee. <g>
Best,
DD
A man is no fool who gives up that which he cannot keep for that which he cannot lose.
Everything I don't understand must be easy!
The difficulty of any task is measured by the capacity of the agent performing the work.
