A Solution to The Difficulties of Multi-Voting…

**The beauty of ConCensus™ is simply that it reduces all variables and what-ifs and rankings of importance into simple 2-way races. Consciously and sub-consciously we can and do make decisions between two items relatively quickly and with a feeling of finality, automatically taking into account all of the known and unknown influences to each pair-decision.**

An article released by the University of California in San Diego (1998), "Chaos at the Polls: Mathematicians Prove that Group Decisions Can Be Impossible To Predict", indicates:

**"Meyer and Brown proved through a mathematical model that if the group's options are presented in different orders — even when their preferences are fixed — the result will become unpredictable, even 'chaotic'." **

**But with ConCensus™, the order is irrelevant since all factors are compared only two at a time.**

**Any doubts as to the mathematical veracity of our system as compared to others were dispelled upon reading "A Mathematician Reads the Newspaper"** by John Allen Paulos, Professor of Mathematics at Temple University. The book is dedicated to debunking the intimidating nature of the mathematical spin-doctoring that we are subjected to every day. In it, there is a wonderful chapter that describes the balloting (listing 5 candidates in order of preference) by 55 voting members in a state caucus as follows:

- 18 preferred Tsongas to Kerrey to Harkin to Brown to Clinton
- 12 preferred Clinton to Harkin to Kerrey to Brown to Tsongas
- 10 preferred Brown to Clinton to Harkin to Kerrey to Tsongas
- 9 preferred Kerrey to Brown to Harkin to Clinton to Tsongas
- 4 preferred Harkin to Clinton to Kerrey to Brown to Tsongas
- 2 preferred Harkin to Brown to Kerrey to Clinton to Tsongas

This resulted in the following matrix:

**Number of Delegates**

18 | 12 | 10 | 9 | 4 | 2 | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|

1^{st} Choice | T | C | B | K | H | H |

2^{nd} Choice | K | H | C | B | C | B |

3^{rd} Choice | H | K | H | H | K | K |

4^{th} Choice | B | B | K | C | B | C |

5^{th} Choice | C | T | T | T | T | T |

**T**=Tsongas; **C**=Clinton; **B**=Brown; **K**=Kerrey; **H**=Harkin.

**He goes on to show how every single candidate was able to mathematically justify his case for being a winner!**

"**Tsongas** supporters stolidly argued that the plurality method, whereby the candidate with the most first-place votes wins, should be used. With this method and eighteen first-place votes, Tsongas wins easily.

"At the end of a very short time, a solution we can live with is clearly apparent."

"Ever alert for a comeback, **Clinton** supporters argued that there should be a runoff between the two candidates receiving the most first-place votes. Clinton handily beats Tsongas in such a runoff (18 prefer Tsongas to Clinton, but 37 prefer Clinton to Tsongas).

"**Brown's** people suggested that the candidate with the fewest first-place votes (Harkin) should be eliminated first; then the first-place votes for the others should be adjusted. This process continues by removing at each stage the one with the fewest first-place votes. Brown ends up the winner.

"**Kerrey's** campaign manager remonstrated that more attention should be paid to overall rankings... First-place = 5 points, Second-place = 4 points, etc. Kerrey's count of 191 is higher than anybody else so he wins.

"Finally, **Harkin**, being a more macho sort, responded that only man-to-man contests should count and that, pit against any of the other four candidates in a two-person race, he comes out the winner (he beats Kerrey 28-27 and Clinton 33-22)."

When we converted the figures in the table as if our own **ConCensus™ System** were being used, always selecting between only two candidates at a time, it resulted in the following order of prioritization:

Harkin **4**

Kerrey **3**

Brown **2**

Clinton **1**

Tsongas **0**

Lo and behold, at the end of a very short time period during which all such pairs are compared, **a solution we can live with (individually and as a group) is clearly apparent.**