In particular, the median voter theorem states: "The median voter theorem states that 'a majority rule voting system will select the outcome most preferred by the median voter'" - IF (big if) "voters can place all election alternatives along a one-dimensional political spectrum."
"Two doctors give you an independent diagnosis: One doctor says there's a 99% chance it's disease A, but there's a 1% chance it's disease B. The other doctor says there's 99% chance it's disease C, but there's a 1% chance it's disease B. Question: What's the most likely outcome? Answer: It's most likely disease B, the point where both doctors/experts agree (even though they both only give it a 1% chance of being true)."
Does anyone recall where that example comes from? I wanted to cite it the other day.
We know that there are only P(C | X) = 0, meaning that you cannot have disease C because the first doctor is positive (and therefore has incontrovertible evidence) that it is not C. Similarly, P(A | Y) = 0, meaning that you cannot have disease A. As a result, the only possibility with a non-zero probability is that you have disease B.
Anything good and free? I understand that commercial solvers are much better, but the price is too high for me.
Say, there are 3 candidates and only 1 agenda point: 1 supports the idea and 2 are against it. The later 2 get 33% of the votes each and the first gets 34%. The unpopular idea wins while 66% was against it.
It sure seems like one can get a high degree of control over the results by simply adding candidates until the unpopular idea is sufficiently under represented.
It's like, if you have 100 Bernie Sanders sharing the votes you may never get socialism.
