http://kedarsoman.wordpress.com/2007/05/27/mathematical-simulation-of-election-in-democracy-india-and-usa/

            This article is about game theory and how it relates to democratic systems in India and the USA.  The writer describes the electoral system in the United States with respect to game theory, then goes on to extrapolate what kinds of systems would work best in India.  In democracy, the votes are considered random if people vote with respect only to their own preferences, and do not vote as a block.  If people vote in a block, such that all the people in that block vote exactly the same way, then political candidates must concentrate on winning that block regardless of how small it is, because the remaining distribution of votes will be random.  Therefore, it is in the candidate’s best interests (a dominant strategy) to please the block, as he either gets the entire block or doesn’t, but the candidate must balance his policy decisions with respect to pleasing the group and pleasing the other constituents.  The problem is that the creation of one unified group hurts democracy in that the candidate will change his strategies to cater to the one group more than to the interests of the public in general.  A Nash equilibrium must be found where the candidate can balance the desire of the groups and the candidates not in groups.  Another beneficial alternative is the presence of several groups that make the voter distribution more random than the presence of only one group. 

            A complication of the voting system is that only a majority of a certain block needs to be won for the candidate to get that entire set of votes.  In the United States, states can be considered blocks of people; regardless of what the voting distribution is within the state, a majority within the state guarantees all the votes to that candidate.  Thus the voting distribution of the people of the United States is less important than getting majorities in every states, making the winning of states as blocks very important to the election process.  This detracts from democracy by not making the votes of all people equally important.  However, as described above, the candidate can use game theory to help assess how to balance the desires of the American majority and success in the election.  The article also describes an election simulation to assess what type of system would be best in India, based on the election system here.  The algorithm is complex and takes in account many factors such as individual voters and special interest groups.  The simulation assesses a failed election if the candidate that wins is one that is disliked by a majority of people.  It is interesting to see that game theory arguments can be used to assess whether our election system if flawed: catering to small blocks of people as opposed to the entire set of people goes against democratic principles, and could result in a president unpopular to the majority.