Delphi Primaries

Posted by James Bowery on Tuesday, 05 February 2008 23:19.

I know it’s vanity: Tinkering around the edges of an electoral system that is in essence broken, not to mention the mendacity of any system of so-called “self-determination” that doesn’t let you vote with your feet. But here goes:

The argument supporting the “super-duper Tuesday” Presidential primary system in the United States is that early States have an unfair influence on subsequent State primaries—it is “fair” to have them all vote at once. The opposing argument is that staggered primaries allow little-known political figures to focus their limited resources on smaller campaigns where voters can make more in-depth judgments on the issues rather than mere name recognition or mass media buzz.

There is actually a third way to conduct primaries that provides the fairness offered by both approaches without the unfairness of either:

Delphi Primaries

Delphi primaries are conducted iteratively, converging on the candidates in a manner similar to the Delphi Method of conferencing developed by RAND Corporation. The Delphi Method , in brief:

1) Anonymous debate.
2) Anonymous vote on the issues.
3) Publication of vote results.
4) Go to step 1 unless the vote is little changed from the prior vote.

The goal of the Delphi Method is to allow minority opinions to emerge from suppression by the Zeitgeist if they merit more serious consideration.

In similar manner a Delphi Primary would allow little known candidates to emerge from the Zeitgeist-selected field if the issues they address merit more serious consideration:

1) Public debate for a month.
2) Anonymous vote on the candidates on the first Tuesday of the month.
3) Publication of the vote results.
4) Go to step 1 unless it is time for the party’s convention.

Now, please be kind. I did try to emphasize at the outset this is tinkering around the edges of an insane Zeitgeist.

Tags:

Comments:

Posted by Bert Rustle on Wed, 06 Feb 2008 10:38 | #

Reportedly ]http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=384167&in_page_id=1770”] Most Britons actually support BNP policies [/url]
... But the YouGov survey found that many people disown the policies once they are associated with the BNP. ...

I would hazard a guess that for this reason alone the Delphi Method will not be employed in the UK.

Posted by Englander on Wed, 06 Feb 2008 15:26 | #

From above article:

“And 52 per cent were opposed to encouraging immigrants and their families to leave Britain.”
Meaning 48 per cent were in favour of this. And that’s with the media situation being what it is; imagine if some truth was given to the public rather than sheer lies.

Posted by Lurker on Wed, 06 Feb 2008 19:37 | #

And if we assume that immigrants were amongst those polled that 52% could well be lower.

Posted by Rusty Mason on Wed, 06 Feb 2008 22:44 | #

“The goal of the Delphi Method is to allow minority opinions to emerge from suppression by the Zeitgeist if they merit more serious consideration.”

Is this different from the Delphi technique which is used to manipulate unsuspecting local populations into predetermined “alternatives”? Facilitators already know what result their masters want. They are trained how to spot informal leaders in might turn into “trouble-makers,” how to isolate them from the group, and how to keep the group in line through guilt and fear. Charlotte Iserbyt, Dennis Cuddy, Lynn Stuter, and John Loeffler, among others, have written quite a bit about it. Allegedly, it’s very popularly used to pass unpopular bond issues in recalcitrant districts.

Posted by James Bowery on Wed, 06 Feb 2008 23:17 | #

Rusty, I have to plead ignorance of the kind of “Delphi method” involving “facilitators” since my only hands-on experience was in my first paying job as a computer programmer in 1974 where we automated all aspects of the process except those involving the participants. In other words, the computer program was the “facilitator”.

It was an NSF grant that was promptly shut down by the Nixon/Ford Administration when its first application resulted in politically incorrect policies regarding the Viet Nam “war”.

Certainly, any genuinely powerful method will be co-opted or it will be made illegal.