This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Sorry for another politics based thread but im not very clear on whats going on.
My preference would be to vote for Green or Plaid cymru, however Im worried that doing so wont have any significant effect on the outcome (my general bias being to remain in EU).
Any pointers please wise folk?
1
4
18
In reply to The Potato:
Rather than start a new thread, I’ll attach a related question - which tactical voting site is the best for impartial, logically-derived advice?
I’m particularly interested in any that have attempted to model the chances of the tactical vote being successful.
3
In reply to The Potato:
This site compares all of the main tactical voting sites to show what each recommends for your constituency to help prevent Brexit: https://tactical.vote/compare
If there's a consensus among them, you have your answer.
11
In reply to Removed User:
> It's simple. Enter your postcode
It's even recommending the SNP over unionist parties in my constituency in Scotland. That wasn't happening a few weeks ago, looks like people are finally getting serious about stopping the Tories.
4
In reply to The Potato:
well that was easy! thanks all
In reply to The Potato:
Many votes will have no significant effect on the outcome.
It would be naive to change your vote in an attempt to have an effect.
3
43
In reply to timjones:
> Many votes will have no significant effect on the outcome.
> It would be naive to change your vote in an attempt to have an effect.
This is the reason for my question. These tactical voting sites are helpful if you think the only value in your vote is removing the tories.
If you have a slightly more nuanced position of ‘I would invest my vote to remove the tories if it’s likely to work, but otherwise I’d rather build support for the party I actually like’ then it’s not as clear cut.
If you had a constituency where the tories were on 75%, the greens on 20% and LD on 5% these tactical voting sites would still recommend a vote for the greens even though in reality it’s wasted.
4
In reply to The Potato:
Vote tactically - vote for whoever is most likely to unseat Bojo.
14
1
In reply to mullermn:
I think it's important to try...
3
1
In reply to mullermn:
> If you had a constituency where the tories were on 75%, the greens on 20% and LD on 5% these tactical voting sites would still recommend a vote for the greens even though in reality it’s wasted.
You are assuming that every single person who voted Tory last time would repeat that act. Not even all Tories are Brexiteers, so many will either vote AGAINST their usual party, or at the very least abstain. We must continue in hope, and not give in before the fight is over.
4
In reply to The Potato:
There is a good Facebook meme going around at the moment which says:
Want to leave the EU ASAP?
Can't decide which way to vote?
Put your X in both the Conservative AND the Brexit party boxes
Make damn sure we leave!
I'm not actually suggesting this to you, just made me laugh and I thought I would hijack your thread to share it!
27
1
In reply to mullermn:
> If you had a constituency where the tories were on 75%, the greens on 20% and LD on 5% these tactical voting sites would still recommend a vote for the greens even though in reality it’s wasted.
No they don't. The linked site clearly advocates voting for your preference in safe and very seats. It indicates which those are.
https://tactical.vote/faq#method
4. In seats the Tories are unlikely to win (ie. where there is no right wing party in first or second place), we point out that there is probably no need for tactical voting here – for example, Bermondsey and Old Southwark.
...
6. Additionally, we have switched the safest Tory seats to 'no recommendation', as tactical voting is unlikely to have any impact there, but might disadvantage smaller parties for no good reason.
jk
3
In reply to jkarran:
Oh, ok, thanks. I did read that page but evidently missed that bullet. That puts that site above some of the others.
Ps. I would edit my post to correct it but I don’t have the option now it’s been replied to.
Post edited at 11:24
1
In reply to mullermn:
No worries, easy missed. I looked into the methodology the other day before sharing the recommendation on facebook so I knew it was in there.
jk
In reply to mullermn:
> If you had a constituency where the tories were on 75%, the greens on 20% and LD on 5% these tactical voting sites would still recommend a vote for the greens even though in reality it’s wasted.
How do you work that out? Surely , the whole idea of tack tickle voting is to make sure the Tories don't get in, whether that's in a safe seat of a marginal. Surely it's all down to numbers, and you assume the people who voted Tory last time won't change their mind.
My constituency is a perfect example Tory 54%, Labour 34%, the rest adds up to not surprisingly 13%) so with tactical voting Labour gets at least 47% which means it only needs 4% of Tories to change their vote and they're out, quite a long shot, but not impossible. At least it's a lot more feasible than needing 10% of Tories to vote Labour.
Post edited at 12:02
5
1
In reply to krikoman:
Well, as per the post above my argument wasn’t valid with this specific site, but in general I think the point adds up.
In the example I laid out, if I want the LDs to be a viable option in future, that means demonstrating support for them. So, if I was in a place where there was no chance of displacing a Tory I’d rather use my vote for the LDs, as a vote for the greens would not achieve that result and would therefore be a waste. If I lived somewhere where a vote for the greens had a high chance of displacing a Tory then that would be a good use of my vote ‘for the greater good’ even though it undermines my preferred party next time round.
Consider it ‘strategic tactical voting’ versus pure ‘tactical voting’.
Post edited at 12:04
3
In reply to mullermn:
Ah! I understand now, it's still a bit of a strange one though, because I'm still pretty convinced there are a significant number of Tory remainers, I have no idea how they might vote, I think they'll find it hard to vote Labour, even if that meant a chance Brexit won't happen.
Boris' bollocks about, "people just want Brexit done and dusted" has ever taken into account those that what Brexit to f*ck right off.
1
1
In reply to krikoman:
Indeed. There must be a lot of remainer and/or left-ish tories looking for a home at the moment.
This is one of the reasons it’s a shame that the LDs seem to have been relegated to ‘a wasted vote’ in a lot of people’s minds. Also a shame that Labour didn’t accept the olive branch of the ‘remain alliance’ idea, though obviously there is a conflict between that and the neutral stance that they’ve adopted.
In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:
> It's even recommending the SNP over unionist parties in my constituency in Scotland.
Here's one to stop the SNP. Just for balance.
4
1
1
In reply to Removed User:
For me, that site says not sure/ LibDem - it's a pretty safe Tory seat.
I'd be tempted to vote LibDem, but as they've been on the decline and are now 3rd to Labour, I'm a bit in a quandary about not wanting Brexit/BoJo/the incumbent Tory -v- risking Labour getting into power.
Really need to get my postal vote in the box today...
In reply to LastBoyScout:
Labour aren't going to get into "power". The best they can manage is an alliance with others who will be a limiting influence.
If you don't want a Tory government, vote for whoever has the best chance of beating the conservatives, even if that's someone you don't want.
6
In reply to LastBoyScout:
'Risking Labour getting into power'. Grow a pair - what risk? Any concerns about Labour should be tempered by the fact that they are not going to get a free rein with the inevitably tight parliamentary numbers.
5
4
In reply to Le Sapeur:
> Here's one to stop the SNP. Just for balance.
Voting tactically to stop Boris makes sense because if he gets in with a majority he could really f*ck the country up.
The SNP are only standing in about 50 seats. They can't possibly become the government in Westminster. So what are you going to stop?
2
3
In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:
> The SNP are only standing in about 50 seats. They can't possibly become the government in Westminster. So what are you going to stop?
Errm....... A 2nd Independence referendum?
11
In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:
> So what are you going to stop?
Personally I won't be stopping anything.
In reply to Removed User:
> It's simple. Enter your postcode
Unfortunately, it isn’t so simple. For example, the site states Labour in Ynys Mon(Anglesey) when the polls show that Plaid are better placed to beat the tories.
1
In reply to timjones:
> Many votes will have no significant effect on the outcome.
Which is why tactical voting is essential under our stupid winner takes all voting system
> It would be naive to change your vote in an attempt to have an effect.
Not so naive as wasting your vote.
7
In reply to Rog Wilko: It is naive to assume that under our absurd system of party politics that there will not be a significant number of people who genuinely cannot influenece the result. We need a system where we can vote for good people rather than charlatans that are prepared to cosy up to a political aprty.
> Which is why tactical voting is essential under our stupid winner takes all voting system
Those who think it is essential tend to have a strong political bias to either the left or right. If your views sit somewhere in the centre then attempting to make a tactical vote based on quite possibly flawed polls and recommendations from websites that are run by other biased people seems like a silly idea.
> Not so naive as wasting your vote.
3
3
In reply to timjones:
Your attempts to boost Johnson's chances of pushing though a disastrous Brexit against the wishes of the people, by discouraging centrist voters from best using their votes to oppose such an outcome, really should be accompanied by a smiley face.
9
2
In reply to john arran:
Jesus christ John. I'm not trying to push anything or push anyone to do anything. I do not have the confidence in any element the system to make such judgements and then try to push them onto others.
Is it really so hard to comprehend that many of us either cannot achieve anything with our votes or quite simply do not see party politics as a nice simple black and white issue?
Post edited at 16:03
2
6
In reply to timjones:
> Is it really so hard to comprehend that many of us either cannot achieve anything with our votes or quite simply do not see party politics as a nice simple black and white issue?
Am I misremembering Tim, didn't you previously say no-deal brexit was going to cripple or even kill your business? To me that looks pretty black and white where one party is still all guns blazing for it while the strongest contender, whichever it is, offers a lifeline.
jk
6
1
In reply to jkarran:
Maybe someone could take me at my word rather than trying to act smart?
Last election went roughly along the lines of Conservative 31000, Labour 9000, Lib Dem 6000. WTH is the smartarse tactical voting option there?
The strongest contender is not only trailing miles behind, their Brexit policy is nothing more than a fudge that will satisfy no-one.
Post edited at 17:14
3
In reply to john arran:
The likes suggest that you're getting as much support for your lies as BoJo gets for his
Is it any wonder that I think that party politics stinks, when anyone can claim anything about other peoples intentions and get a pat on the back for it?
3
1
In reply to timjones:
> Maybe someone could take me at my word rather than trying to act smart?
> Last election went roughly along the lines of Conservative 31000, Labour 9000, Lib Dem 6000. WTH is the smartarse tactical voting option there?
> The strongest contender is not only trailing miles behind, their Brexit policy is nothing more than a fudge that will satisfy no-one.
That is a tough position to be in if you aren’t wanting to vote Conservative, as I wouldn’t want to, it’s also a good argument to a more proportional system of representation. However, not everyone is in this position and tactical voting can definitely have a place in the absence of a better system of representation.
Labour’s position of negotiating a deal then putting it back to the people alongside remain is by far the most coherent policy on Brexit of all the parties, given the history of the issue.
4
1
In reply to timjones:
In very safe seats your choice is not the same as elsewhere but not supporting the tory would still be a good idea!
I don't see what's up with Labour's brexit policy now, they have different priorities to the tories then we get our say.
Jk
Post edited at 18:28
2
1
In reply to timjones:
> We need a system where we can vote for good people rather than charlatans that are prepared to cosy up to a political aprty.
That's what we need. But we haven't got it.
So we have to use the only means we have of trying to prevent the election of a party we are opposed to; and that is to vote tactically.
3
In reply to The Potato:
I'm probably going to vote Labour in Stamford, and Liberal in Rutland.
2
In reply to Removed User & Ron Rees Davies:
Yes, I didn't word that very well, as was in a bit of a rush - I should have said "anywhere near power", or something along those lines.
The strange fact is that the local Labour candidate is possibly the pick of the bunch and it'll possibly be quite tight with the incumbent Tory. The Lib Dem candidate is a Tory defector from another local constituency where, by all accounts, he hasn't exactly been much use at a local or national level.
In reply to The Potato:
Hobsons Choice.
And you must remember that the only reason why you have to make it, is because the vainglorious Jeremy Corbyn has robbed the British public of a moderate credible alternative. Hopefully, this election will ring some changes throughout the political spectrum. Or it will be more paralysis.
4
7
In reply to Le Sapeur:
> Errm....... A 2nd Independence referendum?
It is a total fantasy that indyref2 will disappear as an issue if the Westminster government, especially a Tory government, says no to an s30. It won't disappear, it will escalate.
3
2
In reply to timjones:
> Jesus christ John. I'm not trying to push anything or push anyone to do anything. I do not have the confidence in any element the system to make such judgements and then try to push them onto others.
> Is it really so hard to comprehend that many of us either cannot achieve anything with our votes or quite simply do not see party politics as a nice simple black and white issue?
Doing nothing plays into the hands of the Tories though, doesn't it? nO matter how much you argue about,how shit the system is, the system works in a particular way, if enough people use the system to their advantage then a certain outcome is achieved. Doing nothing is not an option, ignoring experts and statists, isn't the same as relying on polls.
4
1
In reply to birdie num num:
> Hobsons Choice.
> And you must remember that the only reason why you have to make it, is because the vainglorious Jeremy Corbyn has robbed the British public of a moderate credible alternative.
Vainglorious!! Really the bloke that never wanted to be PM? The facts he's still there, despite the numerous attempts to oust him is a particularly good reason to vote for him.
4
In reply to wynaptomos:
I've just looked up Ynys Mon details (linked below): and it's a Labour seat at over 15,000 votes with the Conservatives and Plaid both over 10,000. It seems pretty clear that tactical voters should be voting Labour if they want to keep the tories out, so why do you say something different?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ynys_Môn_(UK_Parliament_constituency)
2
1
In reply to birdie num num:
> Hobsons Choice. And you must remember that the only reason why you have to make it, is because the vainglorious Jeremy Corbyn has robbed the British public of a moderate credible alternative. Hopefully, this election will ring some changes throughout the political spectrum. Or it will be more paralysis.
FPTP robs the electorate of a plurality of options, not the parties.
jk
1
In reply to krikoman:
> Vainglorious!! Really the bloke that never wanted to be PM? The facts he's still there, despite the numerous attempts to oust him is a particularly good reason to vote for him.
No it's not. It's been apparent for a long time that Corbyn is an electoral liability. If he really wanted a Labour Government, he would have recognised this a long time ago and stood aside in favour of someone who does not attract such consistently poor approval ratings.
4
In reply to krikoman:It makes sense now. This is a ‘do a shit job and don’t get asked to do it again’ situation.
> Really the bloke that never wanted to be PM?
1
In reply to Offwidth:
> I've just looked up Ynys Mon details (linked below): and it's a Labour seat at over 15,000 votes with the Conservatives and Plaid both over 10,000. It seems pretty clear that tactical voters should be voting Labour if they want to keep the tories out, so why do you say something different?
The sitting labour MP, Albert Owen, had a strong personal vote, but he has now retired. The opinion polls during this campaign have shown Plaid to be a very close second to the Tories. Voting labour as this site suggests will surely split the anti tory vote.
1
In reply to wynaptomos:
Any links to these local polls?... a 5000 majority in a three way marginal is normally pretty safe when a sitting MP retires but if you have evidence to the contrary it's worth posting.
In some constituencies the local polls have determined the tactical voting recommendation (notably for Luciana Berger and Sam Grimah in London). So it might be worth emailing the sites (Gina Millar's site also recommended Labour for Ynys Mon).
Post edited at 12:15
In reply to jkarran:The theory sounds good but is it right to kick a good constituency MP and support another lame duck candidate. It would be easier if the parties respected their constituents enough to field decent candidates
> In very safe seats your choice is not the same as elsewhere but not supporting the tory would still be a good idea!
> I don't see what's up with Labour's brexit policy now, they have different priorities to the tories then we get our say.
Hard though it is, I think that if Brexit is going to happen we really don't need the extra burden of complying with EU legislation to safeguard our trade whilst having no input into that legislation.
2
In reply to krikoman:
> Doing nothing plays into the hands of the Tories though, doesn't it? nO matter how much you argue about,how shit the system is, the system works in a particular way, if enough people use the system to their advantage then a certain outcome is achieved. Doing nothing is not an option, ignoring experts and statists, isn't the same as relying on polls.
I'm not proposing doing nothing, I'm saying that for me personally it makes more sense to vote for the most plausible candidate/party combination rather than a party that has stuff buried in it's manifesto that is going to cause yourself and others grief merely to spite a third party.
2
2
In reply to The New NickB:PR just doesn't stack up right in my mind, if you're not a creature of party politics your local MP is all you have and you should have the ability to vote for that MP and to hold them to account.
> That is a tough position to be in if you aren’t wanting to vote Conservative, as I wouldn’t want to, it’s also a good argument to a more proportional system of representation. However, not everyone is in this position and tactical voting can definitely have a place in the absence of a better system of representation.
> Labour’s position of negotiating a deal then putting it back to the people alongside remain is by far the most coherent policy on Brexit of all the parties, given the history of the issue.
My dictionary says that the definition of coherent is "logical and consistent". In light of the history of this matter over the last 3 years, I don't think their answer is logical and they have most certainly not been consistent on this matter. We would either wind up with a really nasty compromise or remain but find ourselves bickering over it for years to come, I cannot see any party getting away with a 2nd referendum without a straight hard Brexit option on the paper
1
1
In reply to captain paranoia:
> That's what we need. But we haven't got it.
> So we have to use the only means we have of trying to prevent the election of a party we are opposed to; and that is to vote tactically.
If we keep playing along with it we are unlucky to get anything better.
1
1
In reply to timjones:
> The theory sounds good but is it right to kick a good constituency MP and support another lame duck candidate. It would be easier if the parties respected their constituents enough to field decent candidates
Vote as you please, it's still a free country. Personally I wouldn't be supporting the party whose headline policy threatened my livelihood whether I liked their candidate or not, especially where the candidate has, in exchange for party support, pledged to rubber stamp that policy!
> Hard though it is, I think that if Brexit is going to happen we really don't need the extra burden of complying with EU legislation to safeguard our trade whilst having no input into that legislation.
What's the bridge, what's going to get us from the cliff edge break with Europe looming next year through the next 20? Hopefully I'm just blinded by ignorance, pessimism and revulsion but I don't see a credible route to anything but a severe economic shock. To what end we can only speculate.
jk
Post edited at 15:11
4
In reply to timjones:
> Hard though it is, I think that if Brexit is going to happen we really don't need the extra burden of complying with EU legislation to safeguard our trade whilst having no input into that legislation.
I disagree. Much of that legislation protects us. Much of it is about food standards and safety standards etc. I absolutely think these have to be upheld. One of the things the EU membership has given us is a whole load of better protection in so many areas of life
8
1
In reply to timjones:
> If we keep playing along with it we are unlucky to get anything better
The trouble is, unless everyone decides to change their voting habits at the same time, it won't work. And unless we adopt PR, that isn't going to happen.
In reply to timjones:
> PR just doesn't stack up right in my mind, if you're not a creature of party politics your local MP is all you have and you should have the ability to vote for that MP and to hold them to account.
I said a more proportional system, not national lists.
> My dictionary says that the definition of coherent is "logical and consistent". In light of the history of this matter over the last 3 years, I don't think their answer is logical and they have most certainly not been consistent on this matter. We would either wind up with a really nasty compromise or remain but find ourselves bickering over it for years to come, I cannot see any party getting away with a 2nd referendum without a straight hard Brexit option on the paper
The problem with this is that hard Brexit isn't really a thing, hard Brexit is a lack of things. Primarily an agreement. Voting on a lack of things is what started this shit show in the first place and allowed a bunch of sociopaths to move the agenda to an extreme that dismissed as "project fear" during the referendum.
1
In reply to timjones:
> PR just doesn't stack up right in my mind, if you're not a creature of party politics your local MP is all you have and you should have the ability to vote for that MP and to hold them to account.
However much you may feel that, surely FPTP stacks up even less well when you know years, if not elections, earlier whether there is any point in your voting or not; voting for an opposition party in a safe seat is like rubbing two sticks together underwater. The extreme end example says a lot: the Tories winning 51% of the vote in every electorate would give them 100% of seats in parliament. That's how skewed the current system is, which is only magnified as more parties enter the fray.
I also doubt the amount of holding-to-account you can have over your local MP. A PR system still delivers local MPs so localism remains mostly intact.
Just because the system has been a certain way forever, doesn't mean that is best for the future. NZ had the UK system and happily changed to MMP, held a referendum to confirm if people were still happy with it after giving it a go, and now wouldn't dream of going back. It is possible.
In reply to timjones:
> PR just doesn't stack up right in my mind, if you're not a creature of party politics your local MP is all you have and you should have the ability to vote for that MP and to hold them to account.
In Scotland we have an Additional Member System which allows for direct constituency MSPs and regional MSPs, all of whom are your representatives. We have the ability to vote for the constituency MSPs and are perfectly able to hold them to account. The system delivers a much more representative Parliament than the woeful FPTP system the English seem so wedded to.
In reply to timjones:
> Is it really so hard to comprehend that many of us either cannot achieve anything with our votes or quite simply do not see party politics as a nice simple black and white issue? <
Trouble is this sort of mindset can lead to many thinking their vote won't make any difference so they won't bother. A good excuse for not voting if its raining.....fortunately a December election guarantees good weather. In fact that attitude is absolutely true for any individual since there are few if any seats lost by one vote or drawn. But, as they say, its not over until the fat lady sings
>Hard though it is, I think that if Brexit is going to happen we really don't need the extra burden of complying with EU legislation to safeguard our trade whilst having no input into that legislation. <
Surely our products are going to have to comply with regulations and legislation if they are exported to the EU, a very important trading partner.
In reply to mullermn:
> > Really the bloke that never wanted to be PM?
> It makes sense now. This is a ‘do a shit job and don’t get asked to do it again’ situation.
Not at all, simply the best man for the job, as someone once said, wanting to be PM should automatically bar you from the job. Corbyn doesn't want the job, he wants the responsibility and the chance to make a real change, Johnson, wants the job, so he can say he's PM and prove to everyone how good he is (but we all know he isn't) he's shown himself to be a liar on numerous occasions.
In reply to The Potato:
I think unfortunately due to our voting system that you are stuck with two parties. If remain is your goal then vote labour. Check the tactical site as suggested above.
If Brexit is your only worry then it’s generally either of the big two depending which way you want it to go.
Personally, I’m a life long labour voter and don’t really care that much about Brexit above other issues like the NHS, so I will again vote labour.
2
In reply to The Potato:
how can you not vote for a party that says "Cats Renovate Privy"?
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Loading Notifications...