d_jango's "dirty secret"...

[Hux]

In a previous thread d_jango said this:

One of the dirty secrets is that in a number of ridings, those voting Liberal to keep out the Conservatives in previous elections have actually served to elect more Conservative MPs by shifting votes from the leading NDP candidate to the Liberal candidate -- allowing the Cons to come up the middle.

Clearly a statement against strategic voting, fair enough, but what are the facts?

I have the #'s, so let's have a little competition here (the person who guesses closest gets to have a beer on me in Ottawa sometime).

Using data from the last election, in how many ridings did:

a) A Conservative candidate win, but would have lost had the 3rd place NDP voters voted strategically for the 2nd place Liberal candidate.

A Conservative candidate win, but would have lost had the 3rd place Liberal voters voted strategically for the 2nd place NDP candidate.

(C'mon d_jango - guess without looking at any numbers...)

[d_rawk]

Clearly a statement against strategic voting, fair enough, but what are the facts?

Not a statement against strategic voting, no. A plea for caution regarding strategic voting without looking at the specifics of the riding in which it is being attempted.

Using data from the last election, in how many ridings did:

a) A Conservative candidate win, but would have lost had the 3rd place NDP voters voted strategically for the 2nd place Liberal candidate.

A Conservative candidate win, but would have lost had the 3rd place Liberal voters voted strategically for the 2nd place NDP candidate.

Haha, so wait .. you get to look at the numbers, but I don't get to look? I'm sure my guess would be as poor as memory! (and my memory is poor, I can guarantee you that) My strength, if I even have one, is in synthesis, not recall. That's what Google is for.

I can say with some certainty - and this is what you are after - that (a) > ( by a large margin.

Three things:

- you are speaking strictly of the last election, I was talking generally of elections historically

- even one riding would be horrific, if there was an intent to intentionally misinform those voters in that riding what strategic voting really entails (which I allege to have been the case)

- this is the most important one: You are talking crazy talk! The point is people giving up their favored choice chasing after a carrot that doesn't exist. Are you suggesting that all Liberals would vote NDP to stop the CPC or that all NDPers would vote Liberal to stop the CPC? What world is this? The point is that in some instances, NDP supporters buy into the idea that voting Liberal is necessary to 'stop' the Conservatives, even when voting NDP would actually get them the candidate of their choice. In some cases this leads to the Liberal who they didn't really want, winning. In rarer cases, this leads to the Conservative candidate who they really didn't want, winning. There has been no strategy to pursue the same sort of electoral manipulation from the other side, so there can be no direct parallel. People *never* vote NDP strategically to 'stop' the Conservatives, and that idea is never promoted. As it shouldn't be. ('Lend me your vote', as poor a campaign as that was, was something different. Ill-conceived, maybe, but something different).

The last data I saw that mapped voter intention (preferred candidate or party) to actual voter behavior was in, I believe, 2004. I would love to get my hands on whatever data you are working with. Or are you just doing a 'if every single NDP voter had voted Liberal in this riding' or 'if every single Liberal voter had voted NDP in this riding' sort of number shuffle? That doesn't seem very meaningful to me.

The context was mattm, in Ottawa Center, thinking about voting Liberal to stop the Conservatives. In Ottawa Center!

I don't win the drink. Cards on the table, let's see the numbers.

[SaggyBalls]

Yeah!

Let's see the numbers for all the ridings in Canada.

At least point us to it.

[color:purple]Maybe we'll be able to strategically vote smarter.

[Hux]

Ok so I lost the piece of paper, but it was something like - Conservatives would lose 41 seats to Liberals, and 11 to the NDP. Basically if the NDP and Liberals were one party (and united under the Liberal or NDP candidate who came 2nd in 2006) the Conservatives could never form a government in this country. I’ll post the confirmed #’s when I find it…

You are talking crazy talk! The point is people giving up their favored choice chasing after a carrot that doesn't exist.

The debate over the carrot is one that could go on for hours, ie. The NDP mantra “Liberal Tory same old storyâ€, which I personally find to be offensive to the Liberal Party history of forming governments that have helped forge one of the most progressive countries in the world (Judiciary, healthcare – ya ya with Tommy Douglas – Charter, etc.) I have enough scars on my head from banging my head into the wall after hearing this kind of NDP dogma over the years, so we’ll save that debate for another day.

- even one riding would be horrific,

So one less NDP seat down in the corner of the House would be more horrific than a Harper government? Sounds like NDP self interest yet again…

Are you suggesting that all Liberals would vote NDP to stop the CPC or that all NDPers would vote Liberal to stop the CPC? What world is this? The point is that in some instances, NDP supporters buy into the idea that voting Liberal is necessary to 'stop' the Conservatives, even when voting NDP would actually get them the candidate of their choice.

Something inbetween that's called strategic voting and it's a reality in THIS world, we have FPTP so why not manipulate the system we currently have to produce a better result? People can vote however they want for any motivation. But I’m mainly highlighting that by the #’s in the 2006 election - if you were to transfer the NDP vote over/ie. the beginnings of united progressive vote (and I’m not including the Green vote in this either) the Conservatives would be hard pressed to form a gov’t…add the Greens and they might not win any seats outside of the prairies.

I mean, the Liberals could take seats from the Conservatives in Alberta (!) for f*cks sakes but no, 10-15% have to be heroes and vote NDP.

In rarer cases, this leads to the Conservative candidate who they really didn't want, winning.

Can you give a recent example?

[d_rawk]

The debate over the carrot is one that could go on for hours, ie. The NDP mantra “Liberal Tory same old storyâ€, which I personally find to be offensive to the Liberal Party history of forming governments that have helped forge one of the most progressive countries in the world (Judiciary, healthcare – ya ya with Tommy Douglas – Charter, etc.) I have enough scars on my head from banging my head into the wall after hearing this kind of NDP dogma over the years, so we’ll save that debate for another day.

I hear ya, and I think I do understand where you are coming from. But I guess that's the thing -- there are some people who support the NDP for reasons that would preclude them from voting Liberal, and some people who vote Liberal for reasons that would preclude them from voting NDP. At least at this stage in the game. The Liberals really *do* have a great history in and for this country. I think my own abrasiveness probably puts me in the "minor schoolyard crush, but why does he [the LPC] have to be so selfish, mean and lie to me all the time?" territory. I have a lot of respect for the legacy of the party and for its potential. I feel like that got compromised along the way - and could speculate on the various reasons I think that to be the case, but we've probably been through that already, and now isn't really the appropriate time anyways.

The "Liberal, Tory, same old story" tag is an over-simplication, I'll give you that - but it does point to the underlying sentiment of the Liberal Party having compromised itself over the last period (and an understanding of the Liberal Party being disingenuous and dishonest over that same timeframe). Moralistic prigs that they are, NDP types usually seem to favour honesty and integrity over political power. But I don't think they are alone in that sentiment. We've seen recently the way this sentiment shared more broadly nationally has played out.

That's not to say that no Liberals are honest or possessing integrity (they can be and do), or that all NDPers are honest or possessing integrity (they can be dishonest and don't). Most of that scorn and those slogans are out of concern that the Liberal Party has been losing its way and in danger of not maintaining that great historical legacy going forward, and wanting to exert pressure to bring it back to its greatness - a greatness that, even if not lost entirely, at least got lost from public view. You're right - it could go on for hours. I'll move on.

So one less NDP seat down in the corner of the House would be more horrific than a Harper government? Sounds like NDP self interest yet again…

Well not exactly. What I was saying, and I think it is at least reasonably clear, is that an intentional attempt to deceive voters, even if in the end that had only had actual consequence for one riding, would be a horrific abuse of public trust. The intent, more than the effect. (Smelling a possible 'but doesn't the ends justify the means?' argument coming on and this potentially getting awkwardly philosophical. To the next point.)

Something inbetween that's called strategic voting and it's a reality in THIS world, we have FPTP so why not manipulate the system we currently have to produce a better result? People can vote however they want for any motivation. But I’m mainly highlighting that by the #’s in the 2006 election - if you were to transfer the NDP vote over/ie. the beginnings of united progressive vote (and I’m not including the Green vote in this either) the Conservatives would be hard pressed to form a gov’t…add the Greens and they might not win any seats outside of the prairies.

Strategic voting is definitely a reality, and makes a lot of sense for a lot of people. I'm just saying that not every NDP supporter would vote Liberal, and not every Liberal voter would vote NDP. There are some very real differences there, and there are a multitude of different factions within each party. To certain supporters of the NDP, the Liberals are no more appealing than the Conservatives. I'm sure this is just as true as for certain supporters of the Liberals would would never, ever vote for the NDP, given a choice.

Can you give a recent example?

I believe most of the examples I have seen come out West, quite probably from BC. I know that this is sort of your political stomping grounds, so maybe you would have something fresher than my memories from elections past. In Ontario, I believe we have discussed Oshawa, for one, during previous elections as an example of this. I would be willing to go through older documents and see what I have noted down.

[Booche]

Hux will dig this.

[SaggyBalls]

[mattm]

The context was mattm, in Ottawa Center, thinking about voting Liberal to stop the Conservatives. In Ottawa Center!

In my defense, I've only lived in ottawa center for a little bit now and the only election I've been through was provincial in which liberal signs were plastered all over the place here (and liberals won for that matter).

The last federal election I was in I lived in the Ottawa -- Vanier riding which is liberal and also what I voted for at the time for the purpose of not having the PC's win (which they did anyway the bastards).

Prior to that I didn't even live in ottawa so I'm still new to this place.

Where I grew up it's a PC/LIB race and for the record: Had the people that voted NDP (~8000/~60000) voted liberal, even just 1200 of them, libs would have won. So count simcoe north as one of those ridings in the contest above.

Edited October 1, 2008 by Guest

[bradm]

The context was mattm' date=' in Ottawa Center, thinking about voting Liberal to stop the Conservatives. In [b']Ottawa Center!

In my defense, I've only lived in ottawa center for a little bit now and the only election I've been through was provincial in which liberal signs were plastered all over the place here (and liberals won for that matter).

For what it's worth, according to

http://www.rogerstv.com/get.asp?lid=16&rid=4&tid=25519&ttl=6&arid=4

the all-candidates debate for Ottawa Centre will be on Rogers 22 on Thursday, October 02, 2008 at 9:00 PM.

Aloha,

Brad