Draft talk:List of pathological elections

What exactly is a pathology?

Just to get ahead of some discussions I think might crop up:

Rigged or corrupt elections are not mathematical pathologies.
Condorcet cycles, Condorcet failures, nonmonotonic elections, and spoiler effects are also pathologies.

It's fine to include elections where we can't mathematically prove the result was pathological, so long as polling and expert commentary confirm it's somewhat likely the election was pathological.

That said, please don't cite old pundits' tales. In the 1992 United States presidential election(s), the spoiler was George H. W. Bush, not Ross Perot (the Condorcet winner). –Maximum Limelihood Estimator 18:39, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

But I don't think we should at all speculate that Ross Perot was the Condorcet winner. We sure as fuck don't know that at all. Clinton coulda creamed Ross Perot if the latter was the Republican nominee an HW bowed out.

I think we should illustrate, as a hypothetical, that what if, in various states that Clinton won where it was close, that Perot drew more votes from HW than Clinton and may have changed the outcome in those states. 69.5.112.154 (talk) 02:24, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sure; I was under the impression that Perot was Condorcet winner in some reputable polls (in which case the race could be included), but I might be wrong. It shouldn't be speculation on our part, but if there's a paper or poll showing it, it would be valid to include it. –Maximum Limelihood Estimator 03:57, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]