why did strategic voting turn into voting Liberal?

149 posts / 0 new
Last post
Cody87

takeitslowly wrote:

i think the big media lied again and told voters NDP will not supprot a lib minority, they will in fact support HARPER AND IT WILL BE SO BAD AND CONFUSING!! AND WE NEED TO VOTE LIBERALS TO STOP HARPER AND MULCAIR!  THEY both hate justin and they are big bad meanie and we cant let them win!!LOL

When this article came out, I spent two days trying to convince New Democrats, including on here, that this was going to deliver Trudeau a majority unless the NDP set the record straight (assuming this was media spin) because if Tom couldn't be trusted to play nice in a minority, then there was a risk of Harper getting re-elected.

Newfoundlander_...

I keep hearing NDP MPs or former MPs blame the result on strategic voting and personally I think that's a bit foolish. People didn't rally around the party that had finished third in the previous election and that was polling third at the beggining of the election because they wre the most strategic choice to defeat Harper. The party needs to seriously look at why the Liberals were able to do so well and take so many votes away from them.

Conservatives are getting slack for saying that it's too soon to say what went wrong in their campaign and that a deeper analysis of the reuslts is needed. And while I can name a number of issues with them and their campaign I think they're right to not jump to conclusions - like the NDP appear to be doing  - as to why they lost.

Arthur Cramer Arthur Cramer's picture

-

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

Quote:
And while I can name a number of issues with them and their campaign I think they're right to not jump to conclusions - like the NDP appear to be doing  - as to why they lost.

But the NDP has already lost nearly four days of strategic planning.  What, you think they stand any kind of chance if they wait to choose a new leader and a new stragegy and get campaigning on MONDAY?

Newfoundlander_...

Mr. Magoo wrote:

Quote:
And while I can name a number of issues with them and their campaign I think they're right to not jump to conclusions - like the NDP appear to be doing  - as to why they lost.

But the NDP has already lost nearly four days of strategic planning.  What, you think they stand any kind of chance if they wait to choose a new leader and a new stragegy and get campaigning on MONDAY?

What?

What I'm saying is people keep coming out and blaming strategic voting for the NDP loss. There was a lot more too it than just that. More serious discussions will likley happen but if people are closing their minds and simply say that the loss was due to strategic voting then they'll have trouble making gains moving forward. 

 

jjuares

Newfoundlander_Labradorian wrote:

I keep hearing NDP MPs or former MPs blame the result on strategic voting and personally I think that's a bit foolish. People didn't rally around the party that had finished third in the previous election and that was polling third at the beggining of the election because they wre the most strategic choice to defeat Harper. The party needs to seriously look at why the Liberals were able to do so well and take so many votes away from them.

Conservatives are getting slack for saying that it's too soon to say what went wrong in their campaign and that a deeper analysis of the reuslts is needed. And while I can name a number of issues with them and their campaign I think they're right to not jump to conclusions - like the NDP appear to be doing  - as to why they lost.


Exactly. Strategic voting killed them AFTER they fell from first to third. The key part was going from first to third.

Cody87

Newfoundlander_Labradorian wrote:

What?

What I'm saying is people keep coming out and blaming strategic voting for the NDP loss. There was a lot more too it than just that. More serious discussions will likley happen but if people are closing their minds and simply say that the loss was due to strategic voting then they'll have trouble making gains moving forward. 

You're absolutely correct. This logic applies to a few other scapegoats the NDP partisans like too, like:

-mainstream media

-stupid voters (getting fooled by dem fiberals/liebrals again)

-stupid voters (getting fooled by empty-suit Trudeau, clearly a man-child who's lacks any intellect at all and is totally not-ready)

 

The good news, though, is that I think even some of the fierce NDP partisans on this board do understand that the results of this election were driven, at least in part, by the campaign that was run by the NDP and not these other factors. I was quite disappoined by Craig Scott's analysis, what with him being an MP he should know better.

The only big myth I still see being floated around here by basically all the NDP partisans who have been active since the election is the belief that the NDP earned by it's own merits the 31% of the vote and 100+ seats it won in 2011. The 2011 NDP had good merit, to be sure, but one strong campaign against a weak opposition (the Ignatieff liberals) does not a commited base make.

The 2015 NDP campaign was at least as bad as the 2011 Liberal campaign, and Trudeau's campaign was comparable to Jack Layton's campaign in 2011. When you consider the historical relative strength of the parties, if the NDP hadn't gone into this election with a clear lead it would have been even worse for them.

The Liberals were almost wiped out after two consecutive bad campaigns. The NDP, a historically weaker party, cannot afford to make that mistake.

Newfoundlander_...

jjuares wrote:
Newfoundlander_Labradorian wrote:

I keep hearing NDP MPs or former MPs blame the result on strategic voting and personally I think that's a bit foolish. People didn't rally around the party that had finished third in the previous election and that was polling third at the beggining of the election because they wre the most strategic choice to defeat Harper. The party needs to seriously look at why the Liberals were able to do so well and take so many votes away from them.

Conservatives are getting slack for saying that it's too soon to say what went wrong in their campaign and that a deeper analysis of the reuslts is needed. And while I can name a number of issues with them and their campaign I think they're right to not jump to conclusions - like the NDP appear to be doing  - as to why they lost.

Exactly. Strategic voting killed them AFTER they fell from first to third. The key part was going from first to third.

Exactly!  Why did momentum build for an almost unknown candidate in my riding of St. John's East in the last several weeks of the campaign when we had a well respected parliamentarian like Jack Harris on the ballot who had prebiously won over 70% of the vote? Why was the Deputy Leader of the party taken out by her Liberal opponent in Halifax? If people were voting strategically shouldn't they have voted for these people? 

I have no doubt strategic voting was a key factor for many towards the end of the campaign - I've heard people say they had a Ryan Cleary sign on their lawn and voted for Seamus O'Regan on election day - but figuring out why people went to the third place party rather than the official oppositon needs to be figured out.

Arthur Cramer Arthur Cramer's picture

Pondering wrote:

takeitslowly wrote:
but trudeau said he will take a really long look at the TPP.  Give him a chance, he just hasnt read it yet..how can he possibly know whats in it..its not like its been released. maybe he will really hate it and tear it apart..

He won't rip it up unless he is convinced that it is the right thing to do and/or what the majority of Canadians want.

From watching the National Lisa Raitt and Megan Leslie were good friends even though one was a Conservative and the other NDP and both presumably passionate supporters of their own parties.

Apparently, Megan did not think that Lisa was a minion of the devil.

That is bull Pondering! Trudeau has already put the whip on it! He has also said there will be no free vote on it. Seriously, what part of the Corproate Rights proviisions being bad is hard to understand?

I'm going back to the last time you insulted me and making the same poiint. If the Big Pharama provisions remain, it would result in our medical system becoming unsustaniable, so says people like Jim Stafford, Paul Krugman, and Joeseph Stiglitz. You've heard of them I persume?

If my wife had gotten sick under the regime that the TPP would impose, I'd be unable to care for her and she would die sooner, and in greater pain and misery than medically inevitable. Now, that may not be a big deal to you, or Junior, but its a big deal to me! And before you go after me playing politics, you brought up at leat twice the issue of you and your husband's pension and how you were screwed by the Quebec government. If you can talk about real life impact, so can I!

So don't tell me that I can't talk with a first hand expeerinece about how Junior's solely polical decisionis woudl affect me and my dear, departed wife (blesed be her memory)!

And as to Junior doing what people want, people didn't vote for Junior because of what he promsied, but because he LIED about the NDP and confsued the masses. That is what happened. And you are wrong about how people are reacting to NAFTA. Just becauser YOU don't read anything about it, or experience it apparentlly, doesn't mean others haven't and simply do not in any way share your apparently glowing opinon of NAFTA.

This is not a game! Junior's decisons will impact the lives of thousands, and at a minimum appreciably affect their qualilty of life if not potentially under the right set of circumstances entirely possible, kill some of them.

You Libs won't take responsiblity for anything. Everthing in isolation for you. You don't seem to be able to serparate pragmatic from morall. As a general ruel, LPC partisans seem to lack the moral center that is very noticeable in New Dems and Tories. That's what make you guys so damn dangerous, and why our quality of life has declined.

I related how my wife would have been affected, and your remark back was so flipant, and unfeeling. You couldn't leave it like that, you not only had to disagree, you had to make sure you scored policial points. And you hurt me terribly!

That is not what i am doing; prople's lives will  be affected in a very real way by acceptane of the TPP. The jig is up, the game is afoot, Junior is left lose running around in the Candy store, and there is a real llikihood he will punish Canadians for voting for him unaware, with hubristic ontuseness. As I said, Lincoln said you can fool most of the people some of the time.

n Canada some of the time appears to have been at least 148 years so far!

wage zombie

Newfoundlander_Labradorian wrote:

Exactly!  Why did momentum build for an almost unknown candidate in my riding of St. John's East in the last several weeks of the campaign when we had a well respected parliamentarian like Jack Harris on the ballot who had prebiously won over 70% of the vote? Why was the Deputy Leader of the party taken out by her Liberal opponent in Halifax? If people were voting strategically shouldn't they have voted for these people? 

Just because people were voting strategically, it doesn't mean they were doing so in any kind of informed way.

Pondering

Arthur Cramer wrote:

You Libs won't take responsiblity for anything. Everthing in isolation for you. You don't seem to be able to serparate pragmatic from morall. As a general ruel, LPC partisans seem to lack the moral center that is very noticeable in New Dems and Tories. That's what make you guys so damn dangerous, and why our quality of life has declined.

...
That is not what i am doing; prople's lives will  be affected in a very real way by acceptane of the TPP. The jig is up, the game is afoot, Junior is left lose running around in the Candy store, and there is a real llikihood he will punish Canadians for voting for him unaware, with hubristic ontuseness. As I said, Lincoln said you can fool most of the people some of the time.

n Canada some of the time appears to have been at least 148 years so far!

Is it your contention that the majority of Canadians are currently against trade deals such as NAFTA, TPP and CETA? If that is so, why didn't the NDP run on that? It would be the obvious policy to differenciate themselves from the Liberals and Conservatives. It's right up there with environmental protection and the switch to a green economy. Wait, that's the Leap manifesto isn't it?

https://leapmanifesto.org/en/the-leap-manifesto/

 

ilha formosa

Mighty AC wrote:

That was the result of a wave of momentum and support for JT, kind of like Jack was able to achieve last time around.

bekayne wrote:

That's not "strategic voting", that's "bandwagon voting"

Another contributing factor was the Libs better ad campaign. It generally had a positive, though highly varnished tone. They found a simple word that resonated among Canadians: fairness. What proportion of voters can articulate the differences between NDP and Lib philosophies and policies? What proportion goes on the feeling conveyed to them in audio-visual media? The Libs won the battle fought among the message-makers behind the scenes.

KarlL

A sane view on the thread topic from Michael Hollett at Now Magazine:

I could complain about how a desperate rush to the strategic voting that so pains me almost wiped out the NDP.

But had the Dippers been seen as the party of change and managed to hold on to their front-runner status, strategic voting would have served them instead of the Liberals. All things being equal, they fell to third in the polls, and no amount of reminding voters that they were closer in seats than the Libs to toppling the Cons would change that. (emphasis added)

Hopefully to be of only academic interest in future with a new electoral system in place.

 

pookie

Likely not the case, but I can't help wondering if all the talk of hung Parliaments and the "first place finisher gets to go first" might have had an impact.  Certainly, it was discussed more than in any other campaign I can remember.  It was clear throughout that the Cons had a base of support that simply would not budge.  In a 3-way battle, the only way to overcome that and ensure that Harper would not have a chance, would be to vote for a strong finish by another party.  The Libs' rejection of coalition may also have helped them (though in diff circs I could see that stance helping the NDP as well).

HisHighness

Please dippers, keep thinking you lost because of strategic voting. Yeah, that's it. Go ahead and keep Mulcair and run the same campaign in 2019, it was just the stupid voters who didn't know their MP was already an NDP.

You lost because we were better, we lost in 2011 because our leader was a dumpster fire and we ran a terrible campaign. And Jack Layton (God rest his soul) was a used car salesman of a campaigner.

Here in Nova Scotia we saw first hand what a disaster NDP governments always are and gave Leslie and Stoffer the boot they so richly deserved. I gotta hand it to Leslie though, that woman could sell ice to Esimos, she had so many people fooled into thinking she was a good MP. Yeah, good MPs actually, yunno get stuff done. Something Andy Fillmore will surpass her in about 17 minutes after he's sworn in. The NDP are great at BSing people into thinking they're good at governing, but then when people actually experience them governing or in the case of the Quebec NDP in 2011 being complete wastes of space they come back where they belong, to the Liberals. In 2011 Quebeckers could have taken their ballots and flushed them down the toilet and they would have gotten exactly the same result as they got with the NDP.

And now that we're going to bring in ranked ballot (Sorry, no PR I'm afraid, we won and you lost so you don't get your way) you can look forward to 2019, as you'll be looking back at 2015 being the "good old days" when you still had seats in Parliament.

HisHighness

Double post, apologies.

Unionist

HisHighness wrote:
I gotta hand it to Leslie though, that woman could sell ice to Esimos, she had so many people fooled into thinking she was a good MP.

I've asked for this troll to be banned for his (obviously a "he") disrespectful racist language. I'm also asking babblers not to respond to his provocations until such time as he can be heaved.

Thanks.

Debater

With regard to this whole issue of strategic voting, it's important to look at the overall turnout and the numbers.

The Liberals didn't just win because of strategic voting.  They won because they increased the voter turnout and brought in new voters who hadn't voted before or who hadn't voted in recent elections.

That's what the Obama campaign & the DNC under Howard Dean did in 2008.  They realized they had to stop playing in just the same old swing states and needed to expand the Electoral College opportunities for the Democrats.

That's how they ended up winning states like Virginia & North Carolina that hadn't gone Democratic in decades.  Even Bill Clinton, a White Southerner, didn't win those states.  Yet Obama did.  Why?  The DNC engaged new young voters & racial minorities who had felt excluded in prior elections.

The Trudeau Team clearly did this, as well.  They didn't just convince NDP/PC voters to vote Liberal.  They brought in new voters.  That's often the only way you can beat the Republicans or the Conservatives.

Arthur Cramer Arthur Cramer's picture

You can spin this new voters things any way you want. But you can't do it without addressing the question of the decietful and dishonest campaing run by the Libs This was Obama/Trdueaumaina. Its OBVIOUS the Libs think these are their votes permanently. This is not the case. The Libs will govern as they always do, they Lie. The voters will figure this out, and throw the rascal out. Trudeau is a 1 term PM.

MegB

HisHighness wrote:

Please dippers, keep thinking you lost because of strategic voting. Yeah, that's it. Go ahead and keep Mulcair and run the same campaign in 2019, it was just the stupid voters who didn't know their MP was already an NDP.

You lost because we were better, we lost in 2011 because our leader was a dumpster fire and we ran a terrible campaign. And Jack Layton (God rest his soul) was a used car salesman of a campaigner.

Here in Nova Scotia we saw first hand what a disaster NDP governments always are and gave Leslie and Stoffer the boot they so richly deserved. I gotta hand it to Leslie though, that woman could sell ice to Esimos, she had so many people fooled into thinking she was a good MP. Yeah, good MPs actually, yunno get stuff done. Something Andy Fillmore will surpass her in about 17 minutes after he's sworn in. The NDP are great at BSing people into thinking they're good at governing, but then when people actually experience them governing or in the case of the Quebec NDP in 2011 being complete wastes of space they come back where they belong, to the Liberals. In 2011 Quebeckers could have taken their ballots and flushed them down the toilet and they would have gotten exactly the same result as they got with the NDP.

And now that we're going to bring in ranked ballot (Sorry, no PR I'm afraid, we won and you lost so you don't get your way) you can look forward to 2019, as you'll be looking back at 2015 being the "good old days" when you still had seats in Parliament.

This is a nasty piece of work. I don't have grounds to ban you but you're on notice.

Arthur Cramer Arthur Cramer's picture

Pondering wrote:

Arthur Cramer wrote:

You Libs won't take responsiblity for anything. Everthing in isolation for you. You don't seem to be able to serparate pragmatic from morall. As a general ruel, LPC partisans seem to lack the moral center that is very noticeable in New Dems and Tories. That's what make you guys so damn dangerous, and why our quality of life has declined.

...
That is not what i am doing; prople's lives will  be affected in a very real way by acceptane of the TPP. The jig is up, the game is afoot, Junior is left lose running around in the Candy store, and there is a real llikihood he will punish Canadians for voting for him unaware, with hubristic ontuseness. As I said, Lincoln said you can fool most of the people some of the time.

n Canada some of the time appears to have been at least 148 years so far!

Is it your contention that the majority of Canadians are currently against trade deals such as NAFTA, TPP and CETA? If that is so, why didn't the NDP run on that? It would be the obvious policy to differenciate themselves from the Liberals and Conservatives. It's right up there with environmental protection and the switch to a green economy. Wait, that's the Leap manifesto isn't it?

https://leapmanifesto.org/en/the-leap-manifesto/

 

Ponderng, yeah, yeah, yeah. Snark as always. I'm not wasting my time replying to you. Its not worth it. So, whatever, "Pondering".

Pondering

Arthur Cramer wrote:

Ponderng, yeah, yeah, yeah. Snark as always. I'm not wasting my time replying to you. Its not worth it. So, whatever, "Pondering".

Yeah well two can play that game! This is me not replying back to you for not replying to me! So there!

iyraste1313

"Had the NDP won their centrist position would have been cemented. Like Harper's social conservatives, the more progressive arm of the party would have been silenced."

Apologies for going back on this thread...but this matter is too important not to consider!

The suggestion is of course that with the Party in defeat, the way now is open for potential changes, more radical changes!

This suggestion must be challenged.....the Party has been evolving toward their mushy middle far too long, with entrenched people and finances, well in control! Likewise the Greens so long entrenched in their mushy climate change rhetoric and technology fix!

No anyone serious keen on some change in direction in this country, now must consider a third option!

But by force of necessity, built on a civil society movement, based on such principles of regional self reliance and autonomy, anti corporatocracy, pro populist democracy, anti bankster finance parasite capitalism (prison fro the banksters!) and anti fascist anti imperialist!

Such an option must be clear and visionary. No tolerance for corruption and compromise!

It can succeed, only by first building such a movement! 

Arthur Cramer Arthur Cramer's picture

Pondering wrote:

Arthur Cramer wrote:

Ponderng, yeah, yeah, yeah. Snark as always. I'm not wasting my time replying to you. Its not worth it. So, whatever, "Pondering".

Yeah well two can play that game! This is me not replying back to you for not replying to me! So there!

Pondering, Wink

lagatta

I guess because the derogatory term "Esimos" is misspelled?

That is one of the most vicious posts I've read here in a long time.

Unionist

Arthur Cramer wrote:

Pondering wrote:

Arthur Cramer wrote:

Ponderng, yeah, yeah, yeah. Snark as always. I'm not wasting my time replying to you. Its not worth it. So, whatever, "Pondering".

Yeah well two can play that game! This is me not replying back to you for not replying to me! So there!

Pondering, Wink

I don't want to reply to either one of you... so can I get involved in this conversation?

Kiss

MegB

MegB wrote:

HisHighness wrote:

Please dippers, keep thinking you lost because of strategic voting. Yeah, that's it. Go ahead and keep Mulcair and run the same campaign in 2019, it was just the stupid voters who didn't know their MP was already an NDP.

You lost because we were better, we lost in 2011 because our leader was a dumpster fire and we ran a terrible campaign. And Jack Layton (God rest his soul) was a used car salesman of a campaigner.

Here in Nova Scotia we saw first hand what a disaster NDP governments always are and gave Leslie and Stoffer the boot they so richly deserved. I gotta hand it to Leslie though, that woman could sell ice to Esimos, she had so many people fooled into thinking she was a good MP. Yeah, good MPs actually, yunno get stuff done. Something Andy Fillmore will surpass her in about 17 minutes after he's sworn in. The NDP are great at BSing people into thinking they're good at governing, but then when people actually experience them governing or in the case of the Quebec NDP in 2011 being complete wastes of space they come back where they belong, to the Liberals. In 2011 Quebeckers could have taken their ballots and flushed them down the toilet and they would have gotten exactly the same result as they got with the NDP.

And now that we're going to bring in ranked ballot (Sorry, no PR I'm afraid, we won and you lost so you don't get your way) you can look forward to 2019, as you'll be looking back at 2015 being the "good old days" when you still had seats in Parliament.

This is a nasty piece of work. I don't have grounds to ban you but you're on notice.

Actually, I've changed my mind. So long.

Pondering

Sometimes autocratic mods can come in handy. 

terrytowel

From the National Post

Quote:
As election day approached, in fact, canvassers for the NDP in Toronto reported hearing eerily similar messages at the doors: We like you, they were told, but we see the Liberals as the best way to get rid of Stephen Harper.

http://news.nationalpost.com/features/the-liberal-resurrection#sthash.Jb...

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

Quote:
Sometimes autocratic mods can come in handy.

I can't endorse this in every context, but I've heard it suggested that the most effective and efficient form of government is a benevolent dictatorship.

mark_alfred

I took offence at the bigoted reference to Inuit, but the rest of HIsHighness' post just sounded like what I typically hear from Liberals in pubs. 

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

Are "pubs" like a Tim Horton's, but with ale?

Pondering

Mr. Magoo wrote:

Quote:
Sometimes autocratic mods can come in handy.

I can't endorse this in every context, but I've heard it suggested that the most effective and efficient form of government is a benevolent dictatorship.

lol

Mighty AC

Arthur Cramer wrote:
You can spin this new voters things any way you want. But you can't do it without addressing the question of the decietful and dishonest campaing run by the Libs This was Obama/Trdueaumaina. Its OBVIOUS the Libs think these are their votes permanently. This is not the case. The Libs will govern as they always do, they Lie. The voters will figure this out, and throw the rascal out. Trudeau is a 1 term PM.
He successfully positioned himself as the leader to back for positive and progressive change and so far has started down the right path. We will see what happens, but in just a few days JT has made me feel hopeful instead of mostly shameful. It's a nice feeling for a change.

NDPP

"JT has made me feel hopeful instead of mostly shameful..."

https://youtu.be/OTvO_SeTvrU

And now...?

 

Cody87

NDPP wrote:

"JT has made me feel hopeful instead of mostly shameful..."

https://youtu.be/OTvO_SeTvrU

And now...?

 

Remind me again what the NDP's position on the Palestinian-Israeli conflict is?

Oh...

quizzical

settle down cody he's not playing favourites, he hates the Liberals and NDP equally.

Webgear

Sealed

NDPP

 

Hate Libs more as they have power - ndp only a pale, inept imitation anyway. Mickey-mouseland politics.

Arthur Cramer Arthur Cramer's picture

Niqab stance taken by Mulcair gaveLPC the election, http://ontarionewswatch.com/onw-news.html?id=945 

KarlL

KarlL wrote:

Mulcair's support was falling/Trudeau's was rising even before the niqab issue bit, especially in Ontario and Atlantic, where the gap widened around September 21 and did not converge again.  Even in Quebec, Mulcair was already sliding from October 19 onward.

See: http://www.nanosresearch.com/library/polls/20151018%20Ballot%20TrackingE...

What the Niqab did was shatter the loose association of sovereigntists and federalists, progressives and even some bleus in QC, who had come together to vote for Jack Layton in 2011.  

And, it seems, put Harper beyond the pale for a lot of urban and suburban voters across Canada as he kept playing on the niqab and doubled down with the public service and snitch-line stuff.

I am not saying that the NDP campaign was a lost cause pre-niqab but it was losing.

It may be comforting to blame someone else's dastardly move but it was already underway.

 

 

KarlL

dp

 

 

Arthur Cramer Arthur Cramer's picture

KarlL wrote:

KarlL wrote:

Mulcair's support was falling/Trudeau's was rising even before the niqab issue bit, especially in Ontario and Atlantic, where the gap widened around September 21 and did not converge again.  Even in Quebec, Mulcair was already sliding from October 19 onward.

See: http://www.nanosresearch.com/library/polls/20151018%20Ballot%20TrackingE...

What the Niqab did was shatter the loose association of sovereigntists and federalists, progressives and even some bleus in QC, who had come together to vote for Jack Layton in 2011.  

And, it seems, put Harper beyond the pale for a lot of urban and suburban voters across Canada as he kept playing on the niqab and doubled down with the public service and snitch-line stuff.

I am not saying that the NDP campaign was a lost cause pre-niqab but it was losing.

It may be comforting to blame someone else's dastardly move but it was already underway.

 

 

NOPE! There is NO question that Mulcair's principled Niqab stand in the face of sure electoral damage, something Junior would have best waffled on if the shoe had been on the other foot, is the main explanation for why the Libs won. No question! Spin all you want Karl.

Aristotleded24

Where did strategic voting come from? It happened largely because of the governments of Brian Mulroney and Mike Harris, and a complete disgregard for various regional differences.

Prior to the 1980s, there was no talk of "strategic voting," and it's hard to believe now, but the Liberals were struggling badly in the mid-80s. Meanwhile, in Western Canada, the clear anti-conservative vote was the NDP, federally and provincially (with a few exceptions in Winnipeg and Vancouver). This was most clear in the 1988 election, where anti-Mulroney forces backed the Liberals in Ontario and the NDP in Saskatchewan and BC. Many people were so angered by Mulroney's victory that they convinced themselves that a "vote split" between the Liberals and NDP was the reason Mulroney got in, and if they had only worked together Mulroney would have lost. In particular, they accused the NDP of ignoring free trade, unlike the Liberals who made it the only issue they ran on. Unfortunatley for the Liberals, free trade was primarily a concern in Ontario, whereas Quebec supported the deal. Unfortunately, with the media based in Central Canada, they assumed like they always do that what happens in Ontario is (or should be) represenative of what goes on in the rest of Canada. This idea became so powerful that 5 years later the whole country bought into it when Chretien comfortably trounced the PCs. Ever since then, the Liberals have always used fear of whatever incarnation of the right-wing as their ticket back to power.

Similarly, people were majorly horrified with what Mike Harris did in Ontario, that they decided that a Liberal government was the price to pay for getting him out of office. They tried this in 1999 without success, and in 2003 with. Unfortunately, the Ontario NDP lost seats in both election, and a comfortable Liberal majority delivered Dalton McGuinty and his arrogance, regressive health care premiums, a broken promise on the GST/HST, and a permanent low election turn-out that became normal under his watch.

In short, "strategic voting" is a simlpistic analysis of what goes on in Ontario thinking it should apply to other regions. Western provinces, on the other hand, have voted for NDP governments with a marginal presence for Liberal MLAs (right now there are 2 Liberal MLAs between the Rocky Mountains and Lake of the Woods).

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

Mr. Magoo wrote:

Are "pubs" like a Tim Horton's, but with ale?

I believe that would be Homer Simpson's vision of heaven.

Geoff

Strategic voting didn't "turn into" voting Liberal. Strategic voting has always meant voting Liberal.

Debater

No, not always.

It depends on the riding.

Progressive voters have chosen the NDP in certain provinces and certain ridings.

You can see that in a few places in this election, such as Vancouver Island, where the NDP was chosen as the main vehicle to wipe the Cons off of there.

Plus, Quebecers voted for the NDP in 2011 as the best way of taking down the BQ.

terrytowel

Geoff wrote:

Strategic voting didn't "turn into" voting Liberal. Strategic voting has always meant voting Liberal.

Not when Mulcair kept saying 3x a day "Only the NDP can defeat Stephen Harper"

or when Brad Levign said "The NDP is only 35 seats away from forming government"

Pages