Strategic voting pitfalls

[logicalview]

Ignore today's reality . . . that could well be the NDP campaign slogan.

Ignore ALL reality...that's the only way you can support the NDP. There truly is no other way.

[mr.bandaid]

That's a little over the top. He is very controlling and autocratic when it comes to running his party but I would be very hard pressed to compare him to the Nazi party.

[Merry]

That's a little over the top. He is very controlling and autocratic when it comes to running his party but I would be very hard pressed to compare him to the Nazi party.

There was a time when I might have agreed with that statement. But not since Harper began stirring up ethnic tensions against a certain identifiable religious group.

[marooned]

Ignore ALL reality...that's the only way you can support the NDP. There truly is no other way.

Is that REALLY a photo of Ted Cruz, above the name logicalview? I sincerely hope that one or both are a spoof; if not, your Castanet account has been hacked!

[Glacier]

The Kelowna - West Kelowna riding is the perfect example of bad strategic voting. Earlier in the campaign strategic voters would be inclined to vote NDP, but now the polls show the Liberals ahead of the NDP in that riding, which means that many NDP supporters will be voting Liberal, offsetting the Liberal voters going the other way.

[George+]

And why strategic voting should not be based on polling.

[Glacier]

And why strategic voting should not be based on polling.

Yup, everyone should just vote NDP. Liberal, Green, Marxist-Lennonist, etc. If they all did this, there would be no vote splitting, and the NDP would win hands down. It's the fault of the stupid liberals.

[Merry]

The real reason that strategic voting seems so tempting to many, is the fact that our current system usually results in a Party that most of the electorate didn't vote for winning the seat.

What we really need is a new method of electing people, and both the NDP and the Liberals have promised to introduce such a method if they win.

It'll be interesting to see if either of them actually deliver on that promise, if elected. Because it will be hard for them to find the will to change a system that worked in their favour.

But I'm hopeful that they'll actually do it; because we really do need a change in this regard.

[Glacier]

The real reason that strategic voting seems so tempting to many, is the fact that our current system usually results in a Party that most of the electorate didn't vote for winning the seat.

That's not true. 100% of all ridings in the BC interior were won by more than 50% of the vote in 2011.

[Merry]

With respect Glacier, the BC Interior is only a very tiny percentage of the whole of Canada.

[Glacier]

With respect Glacier, the BC Interior is only a very tiny percentage of the whole of Canada.

This was the case for most of Canada. The Conservatives won 69% of their ridings with more votes than the Libs, NDP, and Greens combined. They won 95% of their ridings with more than 40% of the vote, and by any stretch of the imagination, 40% of the vote is enough to win in a runoff if we had such a method.

[logicalview]

The real reason that strategic voting seems so tempting to many, is the fact that our current system usually results in a Party that most of the electorate didn't vote for winning the seat.

This certainly is the case in every riding that has an NDP MP.

[Jx3]

The real reason that strategic voting seems so tempting to many, is the fact that our current system usually results in a Party that most of the electorate didn't vote for winning the seat.

When there are more than two options available it should not be unexpected that the option that receives the most votes is not a simple majority. If you want to guarantee that there always be a simple majority in each election then do away with all the fringe parties and just go with the Libs and Cons.

What we really need is a new method of electing people, and both the NDP and the Liberals have promised to introduce such a method if they win.

Actually I believe they both said they would create all-party committees to study different methods. I don't believe either of them have made any commitments to introduce something that hasn't even been studied yet.

[George+]

Now here is a current interesting poll:

http://www.ekospolitics.com/index.php/2 ... ervatives/

Note the Orange curve in the graph.

[Glacier]

Your link goes here: http://www.ekospolitics.com/index.php/2 ... n-results/

Please fix.