The classic Gibbard-Satterthwaite theorem says that every strategy-proof
voting rule with at least three possible candidates must be dictatorial.
Similar impossibility results hold even if we consider a weaker notion of
strategy-proofness where voters believe that the other voters' preferences are
i.i.d.~(independent and identically distributed). In this paper, we take a
bounded-rationality approach to this problem and consider a setting where
voters have "coarse" beliefs (a notion that has gained popularity in the
behavioral economics literature). In particular, we construct good voting rules
that satisfy a notion of strategy-proofness with respect to coarse
i.i.d.~beliefs, thus circumventing the above impossibility results
