- May 19, 2011
- 20,038
- 14,409
- 136
Historically I've never been a fan of tactical voting. In my opinion, one's choice at the voting booth should reflect what one really wants, rather than a compromise. How can democracy be about the will of the people if the people are never indicating what they truly want.
In the last UK election I tactically voted for Labour because the tories are GQP-lite and following the GQP script with an offset of about 15 years generally speaking and are also playing the more recent culture wars BS that the GQP likes. Traditional Labour reflects a lot of my values quite well but modern Labour is tory-lite, however they stood the best chance of getting the tories out.
Ideally IMO, what would come about from tactical voting is that a clear win for a more progressive party shifts politics in the country to a more progressive balance/start point from which the parties seek to court the vote of a more progressive electorate. However, there's a few problems:
1 - Churchill quote: The best argument against democracy can be found by spending five minutes talking to the average voter (ie. the average voter has a very poor grasp of the political situation)
2 - The average voter seems to have the memory of a goldfish (example: Trump getting back in despite being impeached twice, non-stop lying, etc.).
3 - Just like "protest voting", e.g. my parents once voted for UKIP (further-right conservatives who say things like "no more immigrants until we've fixed the homeless problem" followed by no proposals for fixing the homeless problem), a tactical vote isn't saying what you really mean. I explained to my parents that the tories will interpret losses to UKIP as a signal that they need to be more like UKIP. Me tactically voting for Labour does not tell Labour to stop being tory-lite, it encourages them to be that.
4 - I hoped that the GQP would be destroyed in a landslide election in 2024 and so therefore result in the ideal outcome I previously mentioned, but the tories aren't going away at any point soon, nor are the GQP unless something revolutionary occurs, so logically once one starts tactically voting, one will likely always feel compelled to tactically vote. Even worse, maybe the Dems aren't over-keen in sending Trump to prison because they like him as part of a false-choice fallacy: Vote for us or he'll get back in.
In the last UK election I tactically voted for Labour because the tories are GQP-lite and following the GQP script with an offset of about 15 years generally speaking and are also playing the more recent culture wars BS that the GQP likes. Traditional Labour reflects a lot of my values quite well but modern Labour is tory-lite, however they stood the best chance of getting the tories out.
Ideally IMO, what would come about from tactical voting is that a clear win for a more progressive party shifts politics in the country to a more progressive balance/start point from which the parties seek to court the vote of a more progressive electorate. However, there's a few problems:
1 - Churchill quote: The best argument against democracy can be found by spending five minutes talking to the average voter (ie. the average voter has a very poor grasp of the political situation)
2 - The average voter seems to have the memory of a goldfish (example: Trump getting back in despite being impeached twice, non-stop lying, etc.).
3 - Just like "protest voting", e.g. my parents once voted for UKIP (further-right conservatives who say things like "no more immigrants until we've fixed the homeless problem" followed by no proposals for fixing the homeless problem), a tactical vote isn't saying what you really mean. I explained to my parents that the tories will interpret losses to UKIP as a signal that they need to be more like UKIP. Me tactically voting for Labour does not tell Labour to stop being tory-lite, it encourages them to be that.
4 - I hoped that the GQP would be destroyed in a landslide election in 2024 and so therefore result in the ideal outcome I previously mentioned, but the tories aren't going away at any point soon, nor are the GQP unless something revolutionary occurs, so logically once one starts tactically voting, one will likely always feel compelled to tactically vote. Even worse, maybe the Dems aren't over-keen in sending Trump to prison because they like him as part of a false-choice fallacy: Vote for us or he'll get back in.
Facebook
Twitter