Free State Project Forum

Archive => Which State? => Topic started by: Blain on September 08, 2003, 01:12:46 pm

Title: Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: Blain on September 08, 2003, 01:12:46 pm
New Hampshire

Since many votes have been cast and many ballots have been mailed in, it is safe to speculate that most of us have voted, or know what we will vote for.

So everyone, let's figure out which State is in the lead so far.

Everyone list your first pick (#1) state that you voted for at the top of your message in bolt, before you type anything else.  Just list your first pick, and first pick only.  No runner ups.  Just so that someone scrolling down can get a quick view of what's what.  Don't bother listing #2, 3, 4, etc as that will just take up space and confuse people, besides, I doubt there will be a tie for first place, though it may be close.    

New Hampshire
Title: Re:Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: Justin on September 08, 2003, 02:02:12 pm
Everyone list your first pick (#1) state that you voted for ... Just list your first pick, and first pick only.  No runner ups.  ...  Don't bother listing #2, 3, 4, etc as that will just take up space and confuse people, besides, I doubt there will be a tie for first place, though it may be close.    
(emphasis mine)

Perhaps you should re-read how the Condorcet method works (http://www.freestateproject.org/votingmethods.htm).
Title: Re:Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: Rearden on September 08, 2003, 02:16:15 pm
New Hampshire

While I doubt that Blain's informal poll will be effective in predicting the winner, a tie is still possible when using the Condorcet method, although extremely unlikely.  Still, I think the Board accounted for this possibility, through some sort of tie-breaking mechanism.  

In any case, although this is really for little more than fun, I'll play along Blain.  Do I really need to tell you that I voted for

New Hampshire
Title: Re:Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: Michelle on September 08, 2003, 02:18:30 pm
Two more for New Hampshire - both myself and my husband, though we canceled each other out with some of our other votes!
Title: Re:Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: varrin on September 08, 2003, 05:22:15 pm
Ours aren't in yet, but it'll be:

Two for Idaho

V-

Title: Re:Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: telomerase on September 08, 2003, 05:29:15 pm
New Hampshire
Title: Re:Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: Mike Lorrey on September 08, 2003, 06:44:51 pm
New Hampshire
Title: Re:Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: DadELK68 on September 08, 2003, 06:50:56 pm
New Hampshire - no secrets here...
Title: Re:Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: lloydbob1 on September 08, 2003, 07:06:48 pm
NEW HAMPSHIRE
Title: Re:Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: jgmaynard on September 08, 2003, 07:23:26 pm
NEW HAMPSHIRE


Well.....GUH! ;)

JM
Title: Re:Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: Karl on September 08, 2003, 08:32:03 pm
I voted for.... New Hampshire.  My GF also voted for New Hampshire.  :D
Title: Re:Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: CJMcMahon on September 08, 2003, 08:40:26 pm
One vote for Maine here!
Title: Re:Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: Stumpy on September 08, 2003, 08:42:14 pm
I voted NEW HAMPSHIRE

My wife voted NEW HAMPSHIRE
Title: Re:Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: Blain on September 08, 2003, 09:08:51 pm
Well it looks as if this poll is just about over.   ;)
Title: Re:Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: Dave Mincin on September 08, 2003, 09:24:38 pm
Not yet! :D  Hey never got a ballot in the mail, but Jason was kind enough to e-mail me one! ;D

SURPRISE!   New Hampshire! ;D
Title: Re:Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: synthbaron on September 08, 2003, 09:34:19 pm
Wyo... , oh why does it even matter anymore...
Title: Re:Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: phylinidaho on September 08, 2003, 10:27:33 pm
Montana=Wyoming=Idaho
Title: Montana
Post by: Ceol Mhor on September 08, 2003, 11:29:11 pm
1. Montana
2. Wyoming
3. New Hampshire
Title: Re:Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: Aaron on September 09, 2003, 06:16:38 am
NEW HAMPSHIRE

And then Wyoming second.  Boy, aren't we a self selected bunch.  Jason's latest snapshot poll shows 97% of the ballots sent to users of this forum have been returned.  Anyone surprised that the more than half that have not been returned belong to forum nonparticipants?
Title: Re:Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: LeRuineur6 on September 09, 2003, 08:31:12 am
NEW HAMPSHIRE

And then Wyoming second.  Boy, aren't we a self selected bunch.  Jason's latest snapshot poll shows 97% of the ballots sent to users of this forum have been returned.  Anyone surprised that the more than half that have not been returned belong to forum nonparticipants?

We were all afraid that the vote would be radically different than what we had all expected due to those who fail to participate in the online forums.

However, if few others even return their ballots, I guess our fear is misguided.

We'll see.
Title: Re:Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: LeRuineur6 on September 09, 2003, 08:38:54 am
Oh yeah, I voted for:

ANTARCTICA!

Low population... only 5 jobs per year so no worries about statist immigration... Tons of land... No tillable land, but who cares about that...  Distant from the mainland US so it's ripe for secession... Tons of... uhhh... wind, for uhhh wind power generation which will make us all rich... :) :) :)

We all know which state I'm voting for!  :)
Title: Re:Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: Friday Jones on September 09, 2003, 08:47:53 am
WYOMING

And I signed my name with a flourish... so that [President] George could read it without his spectacles!   :)
Title: Re:Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: yinyangdc on September 09, 2003, 09:08:52 am
Maine
Title: Re:Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: jhfenton on September 09, 2003, 10:31:52 am
Wyoming > SD > AK > ND > MT > NH > VT > DE > ID > ME
Title: Re:Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: jgilyeat on September 09, 2003, 11:47:13 am
New Hampshire

Of course, I'm still trying to get the wife onboard, but she's much more amenable to something in the Northeast than anything out west (while I have no problems moving anywhere, I had to eliminate those states that I know I had no chance of getting her to move to: -all- of her family is in PA while mine is scattered through a dozen states from coast to coast.)

New Hampshire
Title: Re:Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: ophthalmist on September 09, 2003, 12:06:33 pm
Alaska two times.
Title: Re:Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: Stan on September 09, 2003, 12:15:49 pm
NH, ID, AK, MT, WY
Title: Re:Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: freedomroad on September 09, 2003, 11:02:44 pm
I never got a ballot in the mail.  My email ballot (sent by Jason) says: I'll send it on Wed.
WY, SD, AK, MT, NH, ND, VT, DE, ID, ME
Title: Re:Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: semperliberi on September 10, 2003, 01:36:41 am
4 votes from my household:

Wyoming
Wyoming
Alaska
Alaska


Title: Re:Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: Robert H. on September 10, 2003, 01:56:49 am
Two votes from our house for:

Wyoming
Alaska
Montana
South Dakota
Idaho
New Hampshire
Vermont
Maine
Delaware
North Dakota
Title: Re:Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: MoonChaser on September 10, 2003, 02:36:40 am
I voted for... MARS!! 8)  (Population 0)  

Just Kidding!!!! ;D ;D ;D ;D

I mailed my ballot back on Friday, with The Granite State as my first pick.

I'll see you all in the Free State! :)
 
Title: Re:Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: sjolley on September 10, 2003, 10:10:49 am
2 votes for ID, WY, AK, MT, ....
Title: Re:Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: bIlluminati on September 10, 2003, 10:31:14 am
South Dakota
Idaho
North Dakota (cheap land)
Wyoming (few jobs)
New Hampshire (high population)
Alaska
Montana
Delaware
Vermont
Main

If population wre not an issue, it'd be: NH ID WY
Title: Re:Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: Summerlin on September 10, 2003, 10:37:08 am
Wyoming = Montana = Idaho

 ;D
Title: Re:Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: LeRuineur6 on September 10, 2003, 10:44:41 am
What's with all of these "two votes" and "four votes" people?

You have TWO or FOUR ACTIVISTS in your household?   ???

I could have easily signed up my wife and had her vote, but she's not an activist, so that would be dishonest manipulation of the vote.

Hopefully everyone is being honest here by only signing up those who are activists.  Otherwise you're only hurting our cause.   :-\
Title: Re:Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: SethA on September 10, 2003, 10:47:21 am
Reporting for our family and friends:
First place votes:

3 votes NEW HAMPSHIRE

2 votes ALASKA

1 vote DELAWARE

There are all activist voters!
Title: Re:Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: Ben F. Irvin on September 10, 2003, 04:02:20 pm
 :)

1.  Montana  ;D
2.  Idaho   ;D
3.  Wyoming   ;D
4.  South Dakota   ;D
5.  Alaska   :)
6.  North Dakota   :)
7.  Maine   ???
8.  Vermont   >:(
9.  Delaware   >:(
10. New Hamster   >:(
Title: Re:Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: M249SAW on September 10, 2003, 06:28:50 pm
One for Idaho
Title: Re:Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: varrin on September 10, 2003, 06:53:46 pm
As of right now, this thread represents the following order for first place votes (assuming I counted correctly - I counted ties as one vote for each):

NH 22
WY 10
ID 7
AK 6
MT 4
ME 2
DE 1
ND 1
SD 1
VT 0

Total = 54

Based on the total number of votes, it is impoosible to tell who the winner is.  NH obviously took the most first place votes, however because it didn't get an absolute majority, it's theoretically possible that another state won.  32 votes are available and only 23 above NH would be needed.  WY already has 10 (would need as few as 13 votes above NH), and ID already has 7 (would need as few as 16 votes above NH).  I didn't look at the total votes for those who reported more than one (since the thread is only about first place votes) but there were some that ranked WY, ID, AK, and MT above NH but below first place.  Hence, I wouldn't say it's 'in the bag' for NH, though it appears to be heavily weighted that way.

Also, regarding number of activists, I don't know about everyone else, but my two votes represents two activsts.  In fact, I could have listed my kids.  They were, indeed, a part of my Congressional campaign (one of my press releases centered around them and generated good local and even one piece of *national* news coverage).  However, they're not *really* activists so I stuck to my wife (published LTE generator, campaign manager, scheduler, office manager, etc. etc.) and myself.  But someday I expect these kids to be activists too ;)

Y'all behave now... ;)

V-

Title: Re:Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: RClark on September 10, 2003, 07:24:26 pm
WY>AK>MT>VT>SD>ND>DE>ID>NH>ME
Title: Re:Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: Bruce_Morgan on September 10, 2003, 07:44:05 pm
3 activists voting from this household.

New Hampshire
New Hampshire
New Hampshire


My count matched yours, varrin, but that could just mean we're both wrong!

Bruce
Title: Re:Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: varrin on September 11, 2003, 12:44:17 am
Thanks for the confirmation Bruce.  I was hoping I counted correctly.  Based on the below, NH moves closer to an absolute majority.  I wonder how the non-participants will vote (compared with those of us who frequent these forums).  If it's anywhere close, it looks like NH will win by a healthy margin.  

NH 25
WY 11
ID 7
AK 6
MT 4
ME 2
DE 1
ND 1
SD 1
VT 0

Total = 58

Assuming they're ranked in that order, it's (all on one line):

NH > WY > ID > AK > MT > ME > DE = ND = SD > VT

On Feb 27th I predicted:

NH > WY > ID > AK > VT > SD = DE > MT = ME > ND

On June 20th I predicted:

NH > WY > ID > MT > SD > VT > AK > DE > ND > ME

As you can see (in all this unscientific stuff), my ranking of VT was off.  Did *anyone* put VT first?  I can't believe someone fessed up to putting ND first and not VT.  Regardless, I got the first three in the right order and I'm willing to bet that the actual outcome will be either NH > WY > ID or NH > ID > WY.  I'll be a little surprised if AK comes in 4th, but on this thread it is.  I'll also be a little surprised if ND beats VT and if SD doesn't beat ME.  

That's all for now...

V-

p.s. yes, I do know that's not how Condorcet works ;)

Title: Re:Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: jgmaynard on September 11, 2003, 07:21:46 am
I'll be suprised if VT doesn't do better than #10..... It should, for sure, do better than ND and ME. At least Hardy's gonna be putting it 1st... ;)
IMNSHO, VT is actually quite ripe for a lib infusion, but they don't have the infrastructure, people or experience that NH does. Plus, it's a longer road to travel as far as economic issues are concerned.
But, we'll see.. :)

And I know of three other activists in town who put NH first... :)

JM
Title: Re:Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: rdeacon on September 11, 2003, 09:35:43 am
I voted for The Granite State

Title: Re:Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: jgmaynard on September 11, 2003, 02:39:26 pm
So, current tally (FWIW) of 1st place votes....

NH 30
WY 11
ID 7
AK 6
MT 4
ME 2
DE 1
SD 1
VT 0
ND 0

Hmmm... It's beginning to look like the FSP membership numbers... ;)

JM
Title: Re:Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: varrin on September 11, 2003, 11:48:01 pm
Hmmm... It's beginning to look like the FSP membership numbers... ;)

Good thing California isn't in the running ;)

V-

Title: Re:Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: Bonner County on September 11, 2003, 11:53:07 pm
Hmmm... It's beginning to look like the FSP membership numbers...  
 
Sadly,this may be true.We haven't had much of a turnout of voters
Title: Re:Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: DadELK68 on September 12, 2003, 08:10:56 am
I brought this up a few months back on one of the Yahoo! groups, and got too busy to follow up on any responses. My question was this - when we hit 5k and start the vote, is the result based on however many of the 5k respond, or is it ongoing until 5k votes are collected? Apparently it's the former, but it will be disappointing if the decision is made based on 2-3k responses.
Title: Re:Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: Sebastian on September 12, 2003, 09:25:07 am
New Hampshire (me)

New Hampshire (wife)

Quote
So, current tally (FWIW) of 1st place votes....

NH 30
WY 11
ID 7
AK 6
MT 4
ME 2
DE 1
SD 1
If the 7 ID, 6 AK, 4 MT, 2 ME, 1 DE and 1 SD votes all rank NH lower than WY, WY wins by 2 :)
Title: Re:Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: jgmaynard on September 12, 2003, 12:18:35 pm
My gf and I just spent ALL day researching the states (she has been in 8 out of 10), and filled out our ballots to mail out tomorrow.
We came to the following final, actually been pened in, vote....

NH>ID>AK>VT>ME>MT>DE>WY>SD>ND

I know. I can hear a few people screaming now "WHAT?!?!?!? DE over WY? Are you trying to hurt WY?"

Answer: No. I know enough about Condorcet to know that wouldn't work. The main thing is I feel more secure in a high income/high cost situation than a low/low place. There's more control over costs in life than income. Also, there is great coastal access in DE, a maritime climate, and lots o'water. Not a whole lot of difference, but enough to nudge it. WY's gun laws and low cost of elections edged it out over SD, though.

Fin. :D

JM
Title: Re:Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: Tony Stelik on September 12, 2003, 12:50:38 pm
NH>ID>AK>WY>DE>MT>VT>SD>ND>ME
NH>VT>ME>DE>ID>WY>MT>SD>ND>AK
I do not understand the way of my wife's thinking ???
Title: Re:Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: varrin on September 12, 2003, 06:00:47 pm
I don't know if I got Condorcet right or not, but I just came up with New Hampshire as the big *loser* in contests between NH, ID and WY that could be determined on this forum.

Here's how it shook down:

NH v.s. WY: 7 wins, 10 losses
NH v.s. ID:  9 wins, 8 losses

WY v.s. NH: 10 wins, 7 losses
WY v.s. ID:  6 wins, 9 losses

ID v.s. NH:  9 wins, 8 losses
ID v.s. WY:  9 wins, 6 losses

WY has the most wins in a single competition with 10 wins against NH.
ID has the most total wins (18 v.s. 16 each for WY and NH).

Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't that make ID the winner???

BTW, I did *not* count wins for states in ties (i.e. WY=ID>NH equals wins for WY and ID above NH but no wins for WY above ID or vice versa ).  Is that right?

I also did not run any data for any other states.  Incomplete data is available (obviously) but a ID=MT=WY first place vote obviously means both ID and WY beat NH.  Also, it's interesting to compare Condorcet winners to the first place winners.  Not all votes listed one of those three as a first place vote.  Here are the numbers of first place votes among the 'ballots' I counted for the three states listed:

NH:  11111
WY:  111111
ID:  111

The above counts a first place vote for every state tied for first (if it was in the above list).  Since ID had *two* first place ties, it would have had only *one* vote for first had I not done that (making it look even worse).  I didn't include my entire vote since it wasn't posted, but my vote was:

ID>DE>WY>NH>etc.

That vote would have improved ID's position significantly (as well as added two first-place votes for ID).  Interesting how ID got, by far, the fewest first place votes (between ID, WY, and NH) but *won* the competition overall.  I wonder if that will be how it turns out with the 'big' vote? ;)

V-

Title: Re:Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: Blain on September 12, 2003, 07:08:13 pm
I don't think you understand how the voting system works.  What happens is that all the votes for first place are tallyied up, if there is a state with most votes than it wins.  If there is a tie than all the states voted on for #2 are tallied up, if there is a tie it goes to #3 and so on.
Title: Re:Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: LeRuineur6 on September 12, 2003, 08:59:42 pm
I don't think you understand how the voting system works.  What happens is that all the votes for first place are tallyied up, if there is a state with most votes than it wins.  If there is a tie than all the states voted on for #2 are tallied up, if there is a tie it goes to #3 and so on.

Actually Condorcet's method uses "pairwise contests" between every possible pair of states to determine a winner.

But varrin's only taking the available Condorcet's votes into consideration while the majority of people here are only posting their first place choice.   :-\
Title: Re:Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: varrin on September 12, 2003, 09:32:26 pm
I don't think you understand how the voting system works.  What happens is that all the votes for first place are tallyied up, if there is a state with most votes than it wins.  If there is a tie than all the states voted on for #2 are tallied up, if there is a tie it goes to #3 and so on.

Blain, what you're describing sounds to me like a combination of Instant Runoff Voting and Plurality Voting (the latter of which plagues our current election scheme).  In essence, your method provides a way for one of our states to win with just 10% (+1) of the total votes (there are 10 candidates).  That's not how Condorcet works.

Actually Condorcet's method uses "pairwise contests" between every possible pair of states to determine a winner.

That's correct.  Though I don't recall off the top of my head which state is the winner.  I could look it up but I have to go shoot all my friends across the LAN in just a few minutes.  Is it the state with the most total wins?  I think that's the case in which case my example demonstrates ID as the winner.  WY, though, had the win with the largest margin (i.e. 10 wins pairwise with NH).

Quote
But varrin's only taking the available Condorcet's votes into consideration while the majority of people here are only posting their first place choice.   :-\

First off, I think I made a calculation error.  There was an ID first ranking that was two votes that I *believe* I only counted once (ID>WY>NH).  Hence, ID gets an additional win against both.

But your observation about the lack of available data is also correct.  As you can see, the stats for first place winners (on a percentage basis) are different for the total number of 'votes' here v.s. the votes I could determine pairwise rankings with ID, WY and NH.  There were significantly more WY first places in my sample than in the overall first place tally.

Here's another interesting stat.  Excluding first place ties (they were *all* WY=ID>NH), there were significantly more ID seconds than WY or NH seconds.  That jives as ID came out the winner.  But here's the kicker:  WY firsts were split between ID second and NH second (two and two).  NH firsts had 5 ID seconds and only 1 WY second.  Furthermore, ID firsts *all* ranked WY over NH.

So what does this tell us?  First off, NH has a lot of first place support.  Second, WY-first supporters preference for NH over ID (or vice versa) is not clearly defined.  Third, NH-first supporters seem to be heavily favoring ID over WY.  Fourth, ID supporters seem to heavily favor WY over NH (I didn't count my two votes, but they both add to that trend).

If this thread is reflective of the overal FSP votes, I predict it will be close between NH and ID for first place and WY will actually be a solid but solidly-trailing third.  NH will win if it has the overwhelming first-place support seen on this thread (almost an absolute majority which is enough to win regardless of the 2nd through last place votes).  However, if NH doesn't have quite the first-place support seen here, I suspect ID is the next leading contender based on this: overwhelming support from NH-first people (likely the largest -first group), half-way support from the WY-first people, and, of course, the (I suspect larger-than-we-see-here) ID-first people.

This race isn't over yet ;)

V-

P.S.  In all of my postings about ranking first, second, and third, I have limited discussion to ID, NH, and WY.  I don't think any other state is close enough to warrant consideration and I don't have time to run the matrix for the entire list of 10 (plus, there's not adequate data available).  When I illustrate NH>ID>WY (for example) with respect to an individual vote, the actual vote may have included other states (i.e. MT>NH>DE>ID>ND>WY for example) which were excluded to come up with the sequential ranking of the top three.  Maybe next time I'll add my vote which is now in the mail and was two votes for:

ID > DE > WY > NH > AK > SD > MT > VT > ME > ND  

Title: Re:Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: Blain on September 12, 2003, 11:34:44 pm
I don't think I understand this, the state with the most support should be the winner, should it not?  Are you telling me that if NH gets 30% more votes over the runner up that it can still loose?  That doens't seem right to me.  

Title: Re:Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: varrin on September 13, 2003, 07:48:02 am
I don't think I understand this, the state with the most support should be the winner, should it not?  Are you telling me that if NH gets 30% more votes over the runner up that it can still loose?  That doens't seem right to me.  

In a 10-way race, NH could get 30% more *first place* votes than the runner up but still lose.  Condorcet's method does not just take into account first place votes.  Based on your model, if NH got 39% of the vote, the runner up would have 30% of the vote (69% for 1st and 2nd places).  That is not an absolute majority, but under plurality voting (the method I think you have in mind) it would win.  Using Condorcet's method, NH could very well lose with 39% of the vote to the second or even third best 1st-place-vote-getter.  In fact, in theory, NH could lose to the state that gets the fewest 1st-place-votes if that state got all the second place votes.  All those second place votes constitute significant support.

Let's assume for a moment that there are 100 votes and only 4 candidate states.  NH gets first place 39 times, WY gets first place 30 times, ID gets first place 20 times, and MT gets first place 11 times (the remaining state, DE, gets zero first-place votes).  Now let's assume for a moment that all the NH, WY, ID and MT voters placed DE in second place.  To keep it simple, we'll make all the votes of the same first place ranking the same:

NH > DE > MT > ID > WY x 39 votes
WY > DE > ID > MT > NH x 30 votes
ID > DE > MT > NH > WY x 20 votes
MT > DE > NH > WY > ID x 11 votes

You would think NH would be the winner because it got 39 first-place votes - 30% more than the runner up.  However, you'll notice the people who didn't put NH first, actually ranked it fairly low, whereas *everyone* (including the NH voters) liked DE enough to put it in second place.  Here's how the pairwise contests stack up:

   DE   NH   WY   ID   MT   Wins
DE   X   61   70   80   89   300
NH   39   X   70   50   39   198
WY   30   30   X   41   30   131
ID   20   50   59   X   59   188
MT   11   61   70   50   X   192

Hence, first place rankings look like this:

NH > WY > ID > MT > DE

But Condorcet rankings look like this:

DE > NH > MT > ID > WY

The *last* place first-place-vote-getter came in first.  The *second* place first-place-vote-getter came in *last*.  Though NH's support was strong (strong enough to put it in second place in this example), DE exceeded it's pairwise competition score by more than 50%.  So while you wouldn't have even considered DE, it's clearly a better candidate because *everyone* liked it very well, though nobody liked it well enough to put it in first place.  Of course, I could have switched it up to make NH do even worse.  I just pulled those rankings (for places 3-5) out of my head.  Regardless, DE shows up the big winner in this example.

So the idea of only posting first-place votes was a bad idea.  Here's another example illustrating how NH could lose with an absolute majority of first place votes:

NH > DE > MT > ID > WY x 51 votes
WY > DE > ID > MT > NH x 20 votes
ID > DE > MT > WY > NH x 15 votes
MT > DE > ID > WY > NH x 14 votes

   DE   NH   WY   ID   MT   Wins
DE   X   49   80   85   86   300
NH   51   X   51   51   51   204
WY   20   49   X   20   20   109
ID   15   49   80   X   35   179
MT   14   49   80   51   X   194

Hence, NH wins first place votes with an absolute majority.  However, the condorcet rankings are:

DE > NH > MT > ID > WY

NH still does well, but with 49 last-place votes it's unable to unseat DE with 100 second-place votes.

So basically, we can't tell squat from this whole thread ;)  Anyone wanna start over and post entire rankings for ballots mailed in?

V-

Title: Re:Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: rdeacon on September 13, 2003, 08:47:47 am
Tony, I could tell you your wife's logic behind her votes if you like (they're the second line, right?)

NH>ID>AK>WY>DE>MT>VT>SD>ND>ME
NH>VT>ME>DE>ID>WY>MT>SD>ND>AK
I do not understand the way of my wife's thinking ???
Title: Re:Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: rdeacon on September 13, 2003, 08:49:21 am
This is why I support Instant Runoff over Concorcet...
Title: Re:Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: JasonPSorens on September 13, 2003, 10:07:49 am
NH > DE > MT > ID > WY x 39 votes
WY > DE > ID > MT > NH x 30 votes
ID > DE > MT > NH > WY x 20 votes
MT > DE > NH > WY > ID x 11 votes

   DE   NH   WY   ID   MT   Wins
DE   X   61   70   80   89   300
NH   39 X   70   50   39   198
WY   30   30  X   41   30   131
ID  20   50   59   X   59   188
MT  11   61   70   50   X   192

The correct pairwise matrix is actually:

    DE   NH   WY   ID   MT   Losses
DE  X   61   70   80   89   0
NH  39   X   70   50   39   2
WY  30   30   X   41   30   4
ID  20   50   59   X   50   1
MT  11   61   70   50   X   1


(There was a typo in MT's votes versus ID in yours.)

Quote
But Condorcet rankings look like this:

DE > NH > MT > ID > WY

Well, Condorcet works by selecting the candidate with no losses, not by summing the wins.  So DE does come in first, but after you eliminate DE, MT and ID tie for 2nd (both have no losses, but ID does have an additional tie, so that may be grounds for dropping ID to 3rd), NH comes 4th, and WY is last.  So that demonstrates your point a fortiori.  But the below is wrong:

Quote
So the idea of only posting first-place votes was a bad idea.  Here's another example illustrating how NH could lose with an absolute majority of first place votes:

NH > DE > MT > ID > WY x 51 votes
WY > DE > ID > MT > NH x 20 votes
ID > DE > MT > WY > NH x 15 votes
MT > DE > ID > WY > NH x 14 votes

   DE   NH   WY   ID   MT   Wins
DE   X   49   80   85   86   300
NH   51   X   51   51   51   204
WY   20   49   X   20   20   109
ID   15   49   80   X   35   179
MT   14   49   80   51   X   194

Hence, NH wins first place votes with an absolute majority.  However, the condorcet rankings are:

DE > NH > MT > ID > WY

Nope.  NH does not lose; therefore, NH is the winner.
Title: Re:Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: Blain on September 13, 2003, 10:13:49 am
Is it me, or does this method of voting seem foolish?  Why play games with it?  If there is a favored state, it should win, right?  
Title: Re:Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: RidleyReport on September 13, 2003, 01:25:37 pm
I just sent my ballot (which Jason thoughtfully  e-mailed to me when nothing showed up in my mailbox).

I voted:

NH>WY>ID>MT>SD>DE>AK>ND>ME>VT
Title: Re:Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: varrin on September 13, 2003, 01:45:21 pm
Nope.  NH does not lose; therefore, NH is the winner.

Ahhh.... I get it.  I'm glad you're here ;)  Maybe I should rerun it with the real data...  Or maybe I'll just wait until we have just a bit more data...

V-

Title: Re:Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: LeRuineur6 on September 13, 2003, 02:54:01 pm
Is it me, or does this method of voting seem foolish?  Why play games with it?  If there is a favored state, it should win, right?  

Condorcet's is the best method I've ever seen of finding the true desires of voters.  It is difficult to grasp at first, but simple to understand how it works once you realize the basics.

For example, if more voters rank A over B than rank B over A, then A should win, right?  Under Condorcet's, A will win!

Under some other methods, people can manipulate the vote by placing C, D, and E between them.  Under Condorcet's this method of manipulation does not work.

Condorcet's takes the true desires of all voters into consideration.  A Condorcet's vote cannot be manipulated.  It is simply unfeasible to do so.
Title: Re:Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: Blain on September 13, 2003, 04:20:04 pm
Once I understand how it works, I am sure I can find some flaw in the system.  
Title: Re:Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: Zack Bass on September 13, 2003, 04:31:08 pm


Once I understand how it works, I am sure I can find some flaw in the system.
 

If you could see others' votes before you cast yours, you might be able to manipulate it.  But not the way we're doing it.
The only thing you can do to try to manipulate it is to put one preference before another... and how could saying you prefer one over another, when you don't, possibly help you?

Title: Re:Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: Blain on September 13, 2003, 06:26:28 pm
because 10th places represent undesirables (or they should) and thus they should hold less weight than 1st, 2nd, and 3rd choice picks.  If they do not it is just messed up and WRONG!!!!!!!!!  If they do than that is one way you can manipulate it, rank the states you do not like the lowest.  Otherwise, it don't matter what order you rank states in.  
Title: Re:Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: Zack Bass on September 13, 2003, 06:33:04 pm


because 10th places represent undesirables (or they should) and thus they should hold less weight than 1st, 2nd, and 3rd choice picks....  If they do than that is one way you can manipulate it, rank the states you do not like the lowest.  Otherwise, it don't matter what order you rank states in.


Then you are indicating your preferences.  That's not Manipulation, that's Voting.

Title: Re:Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: Elizabeth on September 13, 2003, 06:52:44 pm
The sentence I use when explaining Condorcet to a reporter is, "It's a system that allows for the state that's ranked the highest by the most number of people to win."  This is overly simplistic, but gets the point across.  It's the best system for a compromise candidate, and to prevent spiteful and strategic voting.  

There are already a lot of threads on how Condorcet works.  I just merged them all, you can read it here:
http://forum.freestateproject.org/index.php?board=3;action=display;threadid=2225 (http://forum.freestateproject.org/index.php?board=3;action=display;threadid=2225)

I should note too, that we consulted with election experts and game theorists around the world, and Condorcet was the clear answer we were given.
Title: Re:Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: Justin on September 14, 2003, 02:51:51 am
Quote
because 10th places represent undesirables (or they should) and thus they should hold less weight than 1st, 2nd, and 3rd choice picks.  

Nope. Condorcet uses pair-wise comparisons.  Using a ">" list is just a convenient notation.  For example, the more accurate notation of B > D > A > C would be:

OptionsPreference
A or BB
A or CA
A or DD
B or CB
B or DB
C or DD

As you can see, the number of choices more preferable than C but less preferable than B have no impact on the magnitude of how C compares to B, (B or C)... B.
Title: Re:Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: Summerlin on September 14, 2003, 01:57:20 pm
Under 50 people have voted on this thread and a few of you are gloating that "it looks like NH wins!"

 ::)
Title: Re:Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: rdeacon on September 14, 2003, 04:20:46 pm
You're right.  We should save our gloating until after the press conference.

 ;D
Title: Re:Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: varrin on September 14, 2003, 04:30:44 pm
Under 50 people have voted on this thread and a few of you are gloating that "it looks like NH wins!"

I don't think it's a foregone conclusion that NH has won.  Of the votes posted here, there were 21 that contained enough data to rank NH, ID and WY (I'm now including my vote since I posted all of it a couple posts back).  I believe these are the three front runners, though MT may well stand a chance also.  But due to lack of data, I could only get 21 good votes.  Here's the raw data for those 21 votes:

2 WY=ID>NH
3 WY>ID>NH
3 WY>NH>ID
5 NH>ID>WY
2 NH>WY>ID
6 ID>WY>NH

Here are the total first place votes, first without the ties, then with the ties:

WY: 6 (no ties)  8 (with ties)
ID:  6 (no ties)  8 (with ties)
NH: 7  (no ties)  7 (with ties)

Either way, they're relatively even in first place rankings.  However when you run Condorcet's method, there is a clear winner.  The winner is *not* NH.  Here's the table:

   WY      ID      NH   Losses
WY   X      8      14   1
ID   11      X      11   0
NH   7      10      X   2

ID comes out undefeated.  WY loses to ID.  NH (believe it or not) loses to ID *and* WY.  How can NH lose to ID *and* WY?  Look at the raw votes.  5 of 8 (including ties) WY voters put NH below ID and *all* of the ID votes put NH below WY.  ID does well because WY voters are exactly split on the ID/NH ranking but NH voters heavily preferred ID to WY (5 to 2).  Hence, ID beats WY (decided by the NH voters) and ID beats NH (decided by the WY voters).  WY winds up beating NH primarily because *all* of the ID voters preferred WY to NH.

I suppose it's difficult to predict how people will vote, but outside of this forum (and this has been discussed before) there is one clue as to how people may vote: where they're from.  There are 5,000 potential voters.  They may not all vote and there's probably no way to predict which of them will simply not vote.  But assuming the ratios are correct, I'll go out on a limb here and speculate as to how a few of them will vote.  Remember, we don't need to know exactly how they will vote.  If (and this is a big 'if') we assume WY, ID, and NH are the front runners, predicting a winner between those three will only require us to predict how people will rank them in relation to each other, not their entire vote or where any specific state falls in their vote.

Also, it's obvious that these are just pure speculations and that using these numbers is applying a single vote to all the members from a specific state (which will certainly not be the case).  I'm going to assume that half of WY-first voters will vote WY>NH>ID and half will vote WY>ID>NH.  I'll also assume that all of the ID-first voters will vote ID>WY>NH and that 5 of 7 NH-first voters will vote NH>ID>WY and the other 2 (of 7) will vote NH>WY>ID.

Here's what I think (give or take) will be the majority of first place votes out of these states with more than 100 members:

AZ   112   WY
CA   527   ID
CO   117   WY
FL   307   ID
GA   176   WY
IL   140   NH
MA   113   NH
MI   113   WY
NC   145   NH
NH   154   NH
NJ   121   NH
NY   193   NH
OH   112   NH
OR   102   ID
PA   206   NH
TX   274   WY
VA   123   NH
WA   170    ID

WY = 792
ID = 1106
NH = 1307

WY>NH>ID = 396
WY>ID>NH = 396
NH>ID>WY = 934
NH>WY>ID = 373
ID>WY>NH = 1106

The table looks like:

   WY      ID      NH      Losses
WY   X      1165      1898      1
ID   2040      X      1502      1
NH   1307      1703      X      1

There is a tie with one loss each. The three losses were: WY<ID=1165<2040, ID<NH=1502<1703, and NH<WY=1307<1898.  The smallest magnitude loss is ID<NH hence ID wins the tie and the competition.

I'm lousy at predicting things, but I got a buck says it's going to be closer than this thread illustrates.  As you can see from the above (obviously highly realistic ;)) table, a few votes one way or another could push any one of the states over the edge.  Also keep in mind that with the highest number of first-place votes, NH did *not* win the election.  

Okay, I've wasted enough time on this one.. ;)

If more people want to post their entire rankings, I'll check back and update the score...

V-

P.S.  Did I do it all correctly?  Any Condorcet expert, feel free to critique my work here (the tables and outcomes, not the guesses as to how people might vote ;)))))



Title: Re:Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: Bonner County on September 14, 2003, 07:17:11 pm
IIRC
        ID>AK>WY>MT>SD>ND>ME>DE>VT>NH
Title: Re:Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: Blain on September 14, 2003, 09:32:53 pm
You did it INCORRECTLY, because most people only listed their first/top choice, like I asked them too!  I ranked Idaho like 8th.  
Title: Re:Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: varrin on September 14, 2003, 11:01:52 pm
You did it INCORRECTLY, because most people only listed their first/top choice, like I asked them too!  I ranked Idaho like 8th.  

No, *if* I did it incorrectly, that wasn't why.  In a previous post, I listed the rankings of first-choice wins.  The actual vote will *not* be decided in that fashion (and I was not the first person in this thread to point that out).  In my most recent message (before this one) I only used votes that had enough available data to use for the purposes of ranking NH, WY, and ID using Condorcet's method as it will be used for the vote.  My question of whether or not I did it correctly specifically referred to whether or not I implimented Condorcet's method correctly.  

For what it's worth, I *still* don't have enough data about your vote to include it.  At the very minimum, I'd need to know in what order you ranked ID, NH, and WY.  But in a few short weeks, none of this will matter because we'll have access to the actual results ;)

V-

Title: Re:Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: jgmaynard on September 15, 2003, 09:56:48 am
But keep in mind that these results are dubious at best... There's another similar thread which has WY in the lead, and in both polls, New Hampshire is right on their heels.
But, the sample is not in the least bit random, there aren't enough people being sampled, some results only list first choice, yada, yada...

But you knew that.. ;)

JM

P.S. If everyone who's member number is evenly divisible by 30 would contact me off list with your ranking as voted.... ;)
Title: Re:Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: Blain on September 15, 2003, 05:29:49 pm
Doesn't JP Sorens favor NH?  
Title: Re:Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: Hank on September 15, 2003, 05:36:27 pm
JP Sorens once stated that if the FSP fell severely short of the 20,000 that a fall back state should be considered. He mentioned several scenarios. The shortest scenario ending up with Wyoming.
Title: Re:Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: Blain on September 15, 2003, 05:53:44 pm
But there is huge volcano under Yellowstone ready to blow!!!!!
Title: Re:Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: Hank on September 15, 2003, 08:54:06 pm
But there is huge volcano under Yellowstone ready to blow!!!!!

And there is a huge hurricane coming up the coast to NH now!!!!!
Quote
This was originally a Hurricane that heavily impacted North Carolina and dumped heavy rains on New England resulting in a Presidential Declaration of Disaster in NH; FEMA DR-1305-NH with the counties of Belknap, Grafton and Cheshire Designated
From this link to New Hampshire Office of Emergency Management:
New Hampshire Hurricanes (http://www.nhoem.state.nh.us/mitigation/NH%20Hurricanes%20&%20Tropical%20Storms.htm)
Title: Re:Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: PongGod on September 15, 2003, 11:28:28 pm
The wife and I both listed New Hampshire first.
Title: Re:Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: Rearden on September 16, 2003, 10:55:25 am
FWIW, the votes listed on the Condorcet poll (http://forum.freestateproject.org/index.php?board=5;action=display;threadid=3457) reveal the following trends of dubious applicability to the larger membership:

15 of 98 voters (15.3%) demonstrated regional polarization in their vote by ranking all states from one region over all states from another.  Of the 15, 12 favored the western states and 3 favored the eastern states.

73 of 98 voters (74.5%) ranked either NH or WY first.  At least on this forum, it is clearly a horse race between those two states, but again it must be noted that the silent majority of members may have a very different idea of the leading state(s).  Of the 73, 40 ranked NH first while 33 gave WY the top spot.  
If we used a simple majority vote system, the results would be NH, WY, ID, MT, DE, AK, ME, SD, and ND.  The current Condorcet results are actually pretty similar.  

The results thus far indicate that if the western partisans had rallied around a single state they likely would have won, but enough have thus far ranked NH higher than at least one of the western states to prevent that from happening.  ID's 8 votes plus MT's 5 votes and SD's 1 vote would have given WY 47 first place votes, obliterating NH.  

Interesting...
Title: Re:Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: Karl on September 16, 2003, 11:24:20 am
7 out of 98 voters, or 7.1% ranked either NH or WY last.  This may indicate attempts to either vote strategically (member has a misunderstanding of Condorcet) or to vote spitefully, or it may indicate a failure of the voter to adequately research the states.

This group may represent the least thoughtful and/or most difficult members of the FSP.

Title: Re:Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: DadELK68 on September 16, 2003, 06:48:24 pm
7 out of 98 voters, or 7.1% ranked either NH or WY last.  This may indicate attempts to either vote strategically (member has a misunderstanding of Condorcet) or to vote spitefully, or it may indicate a failure of the voter to adequately research the states.

This group may represent the least thoughtful and/or most difficult members of the FSP.


I think many of us noticed this in the rankings which have been posted - regardless of other biases and based on all of the information available in these fora, it seems to make little sense to rank either NH or WY last unless it is exactly as you suggest. Other states are equally or less inviting than WY (culturally, economically, politically, etc.) for the large-state and/or Eastern/Metropolitan advocates, and likewise in the case of NH for small-state and/or Western/Rural advocates. For various reasons, both states would seem to be logically in most people's top five or so rankings.

Hopefully among those not active in the polarizing flame-wars between NH and WY, this will be less prominent. I've actively promoted both NH and ID over WY, but in my final ranking WY was close behind (third, until I decided to bump AK just a little higher).
Title: Re:Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: utahorganics on September 17, 2003, 02:55:10 am
Wyo
MT
ID
NH
AK
ND
SD
VT
ME
DE
Title: Re:Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: Blain on September 18, 2003, 10:00:40 pm
I'll show you a RANKING!

NH
ME
VT
AK
MT
ID
DE
ND
SD
WY
Title: Re:Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: bIlluminati on September 23, 2003, 11:19:20 am
varrin:

You did it correctly as far as you went. It would be correct to add WY>ID=NH for thos who had WY first, but did not list ID or NH, and the same for the other states. This moves ID down some, but I don't know how much.

Someone else compiled 100 votes with complete ballots and got NH WY and ID as the top three, with only 4 votes separating WY and NH. But that thread has been quiet lately, and late voters are a different demographic, and may pay less attention to their 2-4 picks, which are crucial.

In this larger sample, lots of folk have NH>WY or WY>NH as their 1/2 votes. My intuitive opinion is that NH will win, because of lack of research by later voters, but if the late voters are more West coast, either WY or ID could win.
Title: Re:Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: Rearden on September 23, 2003, 11:46:54 am
My intuitive opinion is that NH will win, because of lack of research by later voters...

Or, it will win because many voters did much research -- and concluded that NH is the best state.  I place myself in that category.   ;D

A first-place vote for NH doesn't indicate an uninformed voter, anymore than a first-place vote for WY.  It justs indicates disagreement over the best state.  
Title: Re:Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: Karl on September 23, 2003, 11:55:03 am
My intuitive opinion is that NH will win, because of lack of research by later voters...

Or, it will win because many voters did much research -- and concluded that NH is the best state.  I place myself in that category.   ;D

A first-place vote for NH doesn't indicate an uninformed voter, anymore than a first-place vote for WY.  It justs indicates disagreement over the best state.  

I think the two biggest beneficiaries of the "minimal research" vote are going to be MT and ME.  Both places share the distinction of being large and thinly populated and full of natural beauty.  They both have the "I'd love to live there!" reputation.
Title: Re:Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: bIlluminati on September 23, 2003, 09:57:55 pm
Of course I forgot to add (in my not so humble opinion).

If population is irrelevant, I can make a case for NH. If population is relevant to the extent my calcs indicate, WY and SD should be ahead. Now ID/NH is a horserace, because population is close to a wash, so preferences are important.

I could rank ND anywhere from 3rd to 8th - and many ranked it 10th. I wanted to rank MT in my top 5, but the numbers put it 7th. DE, VT and ME bring up the rear for me, but an optimist could rank VT as high as 4th if Burlington is hated enough by the locals. I have to scratch my head on those who put DE in top 3 - but I've never been to Delaware, which makes a difference.

I have friends in Alaska, but the numbers put it in the middle - okay if we ever get to 4th state, but maybe 6th is appropriate.

Again, just my (slight prejudice towards Western) opinion. That's why we have the vote.  It looks like Maine is rated near last, which is where I put it. Maine is lovely and large, and a little warmer than ND.  So we shall see. Seven(+) days!

Title: Re:Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: rdeacon on September 24, 2003, 09:46:13 am
I think that we're underestimating the power of Delaware here.  A lot of the underinformed voters are more likely than not looking for a place where the weather is good, and the location is close to friends and family.  Delaware accomplishes that AND has a reputation as best for businesses.  Now, I'm not pro-Delaware by any means, but considering population distribution, I feel that Delaware is definitely going to be ranked higher than it should be in the final breakdown.
Title: Re:Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: 61au79 on September 25, 2003, 01:11:49 am
I don't see how placing NH first can be interpreted as indicating lack of research. I did hours and hours of analysis and I came up with NH first. (And I know this cannot influence anyone, as the votes have closed.) Personally I would have preferred the whole voting thing to have been done electronically. (Digitally signed votes of course.)
Title: Re:Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: jgmaynard on September 25, 2003, 11:08:24 am
You're right. The only vote which would indicate lack of research would be a straight "voting in the order of the state's distance from me".
No state is perfect, and people have different criteria by which they are weighting states. For me, low taxes, low crime, and political accessibility were highest. Hence, I voted NH first. If I thought population were the end all and be all of the vote, I would have gone with WY or VT first.
On to the free state! :D

JM
Title: Re:Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: LeRuineur6 on September 25, 2003, 03:06:55 pm
Time's up!!!

Today is the LAST DAY of voting!   :D
Title: Re:Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: bIlluminati on September 25, 2003, 09:17:19 pm
*Any* winner of the Free State vote *will* be better than where I am now.

In Ohio, THe Supreme Rulers (aka Supreme Court) by a 5-2 vote again ignored both the Ohio and US Constitutions and ruled that Ohioans have no Constitutional right to keep and bear arms.

Governor Taft said that he would oppose any bill that Police State chiefs did not approve.
Title: Re:Where do we Stand as of Right Now?
Post by: Blain on September 26, 2003, 05:54:00 pm
And why is this thread being closed today when we won't know which state is chosen until Tues?