[ad_1]
At first On class day, Daniel Ullman – a mathematician at George Washington University – encouraged his students to exercise. Ullman offers a three-point selection, selected to be A, B, and C fighting for victory. He then gives his students 99 voting reports. They prefer A more than B and B than C. The next wants A more than C and C more than B And et cetera, 99 times.
The class then has three options – “multiple,” in which each voter wins; “Condorcet,” with a series of matches; and “special selections,” in which voters are able to express their preferences and the winner is calculated through successive talents.
You can imagine what happens in Ullman’s actions. Each voting process brings another winner. There are no methods that are wrong. No one stole. However: Same votes, different counts, different winners. This looks bad, doesn’t it? But as a mathematician, Ullman knows better than just that statistics don’t always add up. “I make notifications around,” he says, describing how he created 99 voting files to show diversity, reliable math can change the future. “The decision is easier when they break the ground. If all voters agree, we should not worry about this. But as elections approach, these things are important. And elections are fast approaching in the US. ”
The fact is, democracy only promises to a More perfect contract – not really perfect. For decades, a segment of the so-called culture theory has tried to find new ways to support the vote that was severely shaken. Finicky’s freedom fighters have said so meditation is a method large groups of people can say what they like (valid votes! Quadratic votes! judicial votes!) fairly, fairly, in a way that is possible – ensuring that the winner is successful. Voting in elections is a more common process, perhaps even better than the most popular American election — a choice that most Americans are familiar with (in some cases the “better”). This is how New York City is electing a candidate for mayor right now, and if the election goes well, a vote that could be a way to cast your next vote.
As your goal since democracy is necessary to participate in voting – and to make it a more representative part of politics – then elections are the means to determine their true aspirations. But decisions are also worth the price. Voting is the time it takes for them to determine who can vote and who is actually voting – by letter or in person. (In some places the cost is higher than in others, in long queues or with limited options, say, a preliminary vote or by e-mail, and above all other races of mankind, Usually the poor and the indigenous people.) The benefit is to establish a point, or a key person in a representative position. A good system can reduce costs, make voting easier, and increase profits, making voters more likely to express the wishes of the voters and, in turn, turn those wishes into laws or actions.
That is why while Americans are more aware of the majority of votes, these types of votes may not accurately reflect their interests. This is especially true if elections have a group of people on the ballot, not — or yet a number of elections. Of the well-run ballots used in New York – sometimes called a temporary run – if no one gets more than 50% of the vote, those who want to vote are less likely to be eliminated and their first vote is for anyone who voted second. Then there is another calculation. As the election of the mayor of San Francisco in 2018 showed, it may take a while.
[ad_2]
Source link
