[ExI] elections again; was [Time Magazine: Person of the Year: Putin(!),my vote instead:Anna Politkovskaja]

[Harvey Newstrom]

On Thursday 27 December 2007 20:43, spike wrote:
> Thanks J. Andrew, this I cheerfully recognize.  There is a lot of game
> theory involved in national elections.  Paradoxes abound.  For instance
> assume there are elections between mauves and taupes.  Assume a person is
> mauve to the core.  She realizes her choice in the primaries appears safe
> (or hopelessly lost, either way.)  Game theory suggests she should register
> as a taupe, then vote for the least electable candidate of the bunch.

Pretending to register for a party that one doesn't really believe in, and 
then sabotaging the other party's vote is dishonest (or misleading at best). 
I belive most voters would refuse to do this on moral grounds.  There is no 
paradox why most people don't use game theory to elect leaders.  The 
elections are not a game.  They are intended to poll the opinion of the 
populous.

Using the system to do anything other than represent one's opinion violates 
the principal of the thing, and may even be illegal.  I expect a good lawyer 
could argue that this practice constituted fraud and election tampering.  
Registering as a member of a party to sabotage it rather than support it 
might be considered fraud.  If a number of people agreed to do this plan, it 
might be considered conspiracy.  I don't know how the election ballots are 
exactly worded, but voting for someone not your own choice but to disrupt the 
system could be a violation of what one signs and submits during the process.  
Clearly, the intent is to disrupt the true polling of the party's opinions, 
so on the basis of intent alone, it would be attempted election tampering.

-- 
Harvey Newstrom <www.harveynewstrom.com>
CISSP CISA CISM CIFI GSEC IAM ISSAP ISSMP ISSPCS IBMCP