IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/h/spr/stpchp/978-0-387-98171-0_6.html
   My bibliography  Save this book chapter

Electoral Decision Making

In: The Calculus of Consent and Constitutional Design

Author

Listed:
  • Keith L. Dougherty

    (University of Georgia)

  • Julian Edward

    (Florida International University)

Abstract

Everyone remembers the 2000 U.S. presidential election between George W. Bush and Al Gore. Bush won more Electoral College votes than Gore, and with it the presidency. Nevertheless, Gore won more popular votes than Bush. Many argued that Gore should have been elected the president because he won the plurality of the popular vote. Making such an argument implies that one voting rule (plurality rule) is more desirable than another voting rule (the Electoral College) and opens up a discussion about the desirable properties of voting rules and which voting rule is best. Although one voting rule may be particularly adept at fulfilling one criterion, other voting rules may be particularly adept at fulfilling other criteria. Since no voting rule satisfies a small subset of reasonable criteria (Arrow, 1951), the natural question is which rules are most likely to satisfy common norms?

Suggested Citation

  • Keith L. Dougherty & Julian Edward, 2011. "Electoral Decision Making," Studies in Public Choice, in: The Calculus of Consent and Constitutional Design, chapter 0, pages 73-95, Springer.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:stpchp:978-0-387-98171-0_6
    DOI: 10.1007/978-0-387-98171-0_6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:stpchp:978-0-387-98171-0_6. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.