?

Log in

No account? Create an account
Voting ABC is as easy as 1-2-3 - New energy \\ A Positive Choice [entries|archive|friends|userinfo]
New Democratic Party of Canada

[ website | NDP ]
[ userinfo | livejournal userinfo ]
[ archive | journal archive ]

Voting ABC is as easy as 1-2-3 [Oct. 7th, 2008|08:05 am]
New Democratic Party of Canada

ndp

[the_thorn]
Here are some basic ABC guidelines that will work wonders if we're all on the same page:

1. If you live in a riding that went Liberal, NDP or Bloc in the last election, vote for that party.
2. If you live in a riding that elected a Conservative, vote for the party that came second.
3. Vote for Elizabeth May if you live in her riding.

Now get your family and 10 friends to do the same. Let's vote out the Regressive Conservatives!
linkReply

Comments:
[User Picture]From: nitroglycol
2008-10-07 12:38 pm (UTC)
Actually it's much dodgier than that. I'm a little sceptical about whether tactical voting (the term "strategic voting" is less accurate, and probably originated in the mind of a Liberal hack who thought it would sound better to the public) is called for this time round. The Tories are sinking anyway.

But if you do want to do this, it's a bit more complex than you make it out. The folks at DemocraticSPACE have come up with some guidelines for this:

In order for a riding to qualify for strategic voting, we feel 3 conditions must be met:
1. It must be a close 2-way race (i.e. the two other parties must be within 5%)
2. The chances of third/fourth/fifth party winning riding are remote (i.e. support < ~20%)
3. Small number of votes of third/fourth/fifth party can make a difference (i.e. < 1 in 3 voters).


The list of ridings that they believe these three criteria apply to are here:

http://www.democraticspace.com/canada2008/strategic-voting-guide/

Amusingly, they also include ridings where Tory supporters can vote tactically to block a Liberal. In any case, if your riding isn't on that list, there's no point. And with a majority likely slipping out of the Tories' reach, it might be better to just vote as you always would; at least that way the NDP gets your $1.75 rather than the Liberals.
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: sweet_daddy
2008-10-07 02:58 pm (UTC)
These rules are not good rules. If you want to vote ABC, why not simply read your newspaper online? They'll be telling you the lay of the land.

Better yet, decide yourself who you want to support, and vote for them. It's not rocket science folks!

This is an NDP community, not an ABC community. So probably most people here are voting NDP, not ABC.
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: darkdragondm
2008-10-07 05:25 pm (UTC)
Took the words right out of my mouth.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: smallvictories
2008-10-07 06:48 pm (UTC)
agreed. i vote for the ndp, because that is who i support. please do not tell me that i should vote for a party because that is the party that the majority of the people in my neighbourhood have decided should win. you know?

strategic voting irritates me to know end because it presumes that democracy is a consensus exercise. i believe that we each get to have our say.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: felis_ultharus
2008-10-07 04:02 pm (UTC)
  1. Past performance in a riding is absolutely no indicator in many races -- especially those with retiring MPs. Also, this tends to assume that the Conservatives are always second. In my riding, they're a very distant fourth, and I'm not going Bloc when I have a reasonable chance of voting for a party I actually like.

  2. See #1

  3. I don't, but I don't like her economic policies, nor even her watered-down green policies.
Strategic voting leads to cynical governments that create situations that demand more strategic voting. The result of long-term strategic voting leads to two-party systems where both parties are nearly identical -- see the US and Britain.

The solution is to send a message to both of the two most powerful parties, showing them that they can't scare us into giving them our vote.
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: smallvictories
2008-10-07 06:16 pm (UTC)
that's not really what democracy looks like.
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: pensivegargoyle
2008-10-07 08:39 pm (UTC)
Nuh-uh. Especially #3 - that's the best way to ensure the re-election of Peter MacKay, as it contradicts #2.

#1 doesn't necessarily make sense in all situations. If you are in a riding such as mine, Toronto Centre, where the Conservatives don't particularly have a chance of winning, you can vote for whoever you want.
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: nitroglycol
2008-10-08 02:01 am (UTC)
And if any party doesn't have any real chance of losing, you can also vote for whoever you want. But the main point is that it's probably best to vote for the party you most believe in which for most of us is the NDP.

I kind of wish the_thorn would come back to address these points, but s/he clearly has a lot of other groups to post in. So far I've found this same post in the following:

canadadebate
canliberals
harper4pm
harpersucks

It's probably in several others as well, though I haven't checked them all. Most of them don't seem to get much traffic, in any case.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: darkdragondm
2008-10-08 03:10 am (UTC)
The_thorn seems to be trolling other groups with the same copy paste.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)