WTF won't Labour, Lib Dems (& potentially the Greens) endorse tactical voting?

[Pipsquiggle]

This is obviously prompted by the by election result in Uxbridge. If there was no Lib Dem candidate, Labour could have won that seat (assuming their votes went to Labour).

I'll make no bones about it. I really dislike the Tories and want them out ASAP. Their policies have embedded generational poverty in so many parts of the UK. I reside in the home counties, a Tory stronghold seat - my middle class neighbours have zero clue how hard it is to grow up in a poor part of the country and thrive.

I want Labour to win a huge majority with other left leaning parties also getting seats. I would love electoral reform - PR and mandatory voting. The first past the post system is just shit and doesn't represent how the country voted.

YABU - Political parties should not endorse tactical voting, it's fine as it is

YANBU - Tactical voting should be encouraged as the FPTP voting system is shit

They sometimes withdraw candidates.

But the whole point of an election is to try and win, and surely each candidate believes they have the best policies and would be the best person to govern and that people shouldn't be offered second best just because it stops the worst.

Electrions are a chance to make your candidate known and advertise your policies. Elections candidates get to connect with people and find out what's important in their area. They also get to build up support over time, often over many attempts to try to get elected. They don't get any of that by sitting at home and letting another other party win. You might as well give up completely and not have a third place party if they are going to selectively fold, because they will never get enough sustained support to govern.

Political alliances are fraught with dangers and often end up damaging the smaller party (see Lib Dem Tory alliance). Some of the most significant political events that have happened recently are part of the consequence of alliances.

I don't see FPTP changing anytime soon because both the Tories and Labour are against it. As far as I can tell the suggestion at the moment seems to be that Labour are neutral on the issue and want "reform" to take place by changing who is allowed to vote rather than how we vote and how the votes are interpreted. Some people might use another word rather than "reform" for that.

I want the Tories to stay in until the whole gender ideology is sorted out. If Labour get in now we’ll be living in a bizarre fantasy land that will be incredibly difficult to sort out in the future. We need the Tories in before another generation believe in the ability to change sex.

This, with bells on.

Both of your options are rubbish!

I have no intention of ever voting for a party that I do not support, regardless of "tactics". And tactical voting can lead to horrendously stupid outcomes - your tactics and mine may not be remotely the same! Tactical voting is not an answer to the faults of the electoral system.

But the system is not fine as it is. The best way to solve that problem is to campaign for electoral change, not to tactically vote, which actually doesn't achieve electoral change anyway!

And I rest my case on the issue if this is an example of "tactical voting" - let's continue to let the country slide into ruin, make the rich richer and the poor poorer, and stuff anything to do with human rights or decency, provided one issue I happen to think about goes my way. Advocating another five years of the Tries is definitely the way to go if you want no hope of anything for the future.

@Quveas

We definitely need electoral reform

The Conservatives don't want electoral reform - the boundary lines are stacked in their favour.

I live in a constituency with a Conservative majority, their closest rival is Lib Dem - Labour have no chance. If I vote Labour I waste my vote due to FPTP

The only way to get electoral reform is to get the Conservatives out.

Mandatory voting is a terrible idea. For one, it should be everyone's right to not give a shit, and two, mandatory voting would mean that people who can't be arsed to learn anything about any of the candidates would be obliged to pick someone.

The only way I'd countenance mandatory voting would be if there was a specific "All options are shit, rerun the vote but bar these parties and candidates from running again" box to check. Yes someone can spoil their ballot but if we were to force people to put something they should have the option to state that none of the choices are suitable.

As for tactical voting - the point of having parties is that they all offer something different. If Labour and the Lib Dems want to get together they should officially merge.

With any electoral reform we need a system that every MP can be voted out by their constituents to avoid the issue with’List’MSPs in Scotland, who are accountable to no one.

@Runningslow So are you a single issue voter? Literally nothing else matters unless they sort this out.

BTW, I am not having a go at you on this. I just don't think Gender Ideology is the top of any party's list. I don't think any party has got a gold standard on how to handle gender ideology. I genuinely can't see how the Conservatives are way better than anyone else - they are governing right now and don't seem to be a leading light on this subject

I thought Labour were feeling confident on next GE

But no I don’t want this. Let people vote as they wish and if a party isn’t strong enough so be it.

I also agree with @Runningslow although it’s not the only reason

I feel very strongly that when we elect the National Government, every vote should count, and everyone should be able to vote for the party they want to run the country for the next 5 years.
The current system is ridiculous.

However, I don't want to not be able to vote for the party I want to vote for, so I am not keen on any increase in the amount of co-operation between parties where they agree not to stand and 'split the opposition vote' between candidates either.

I don't know what the answer is, as the Government that is elected clearly has no will to change a voting system that gets it elected.

The beauty of a democratic country is that you can vote for who you want (or not vote at all if you choose). If I lived in one of areas with a by election now, I may have chosen to vote tactically or done a protest vote, but when it comes to the GE - I will vote for the party where I agree with the majority of their policies. That will not be labour.

@Dotjones I have listened to a few podcasts with Julia Gillard on mandatory voting - really insightful.

She says that mandatory voting makes sure that MPs are not swayed by 'in vogue' trends that don't resonate with vast swathes of the population.

Completely agree that if mandatory voting ever came in it would have to include a 'None of the above' option

Don’t forget the AV referendum in 2011 which the Lib Dem’s got the Cons to agree to

They lost so I doubt it’ll resurface as a condition again

It's more Labour that don't, I suppose because they feel they have the least need for it. The Greens for example didn't stand a candidate or at least didn't campaign in a particular Labour held seat last time and instead advocated that their supporters vote Labour. I forget which one.

Mandatory voting is a fucking appalling idea, btw.

Is low voter turn out something that might need to come into play? Goes against the grain I know but if you feel, as I do, that there is genuinely no party you want to vote for (Tories, incumbent shit show, everyone else, doesn't know what a woman is etc.) then is simply not voting a suitable protest? Will that force more options/a better system? Vote with your feet in reverse. I'm wondering this out loud in advance to the next GE.

If the Lib Dems do end up in coalition with Labour, which is a possibility, I don't think they'll do it for any less than a switch to PR.

Because most voters dislike it, it will be weaponised by Tories to say they are trying to stitch things up.

Those Lib Dem voters are probably Tory voters though rather than labour. You can’t be sure tactical voting will get you the result you want and could do the opposite!

@Runningslow I don't doubt for one second that people are affected by the lack of action on gender identity. However I believe that more women will be harmed by a continuing Tory government, especially as with a failed justice system offences towards women such as DV or rape have an almost nil chance of ending in a conviction.

Referendum to switch do you mean?

On electoral reform and tactical voting, the AV referendum denied us a step in the right direction.

I will never forgive Nick Clegg for that stupid AV referendum, he should have left it alone instead of wasting the opportunity on such a weak proposal.

No, I mean a coalition government passing legislation to change our electoral system. I don't think they'll do it for a referendum again. They very much got the worst of that deal last time.

Angela Rayner has said on tactical voting that the electorate aren't stupid.

Both Labour and the Lib Dems throw money at the seats they are most likely to win.

In my area, which is a marginal constituency, people tactically vote.