-
This is it really. It's just a shame that the majority of the population are so disengaged that they don't really understand how the voting system works.
I've had a lot of friends gleefully tell me they're 'voting Green' recently, without knowing a) who their local candidate is and b) without knowing whether they live in one of the very few seats that the Greens actually have a chance of winning (they don't). It's great that people are taking an interest, but it would help if people actually understood how FPTP works.
-
I'd like to know your reasoning behind this. I'm not convinced it's true. I also think that what looks to be a multiple term era of coalition politics in this country is a prime opportunity to try and increase the level of Green representation in parliament.
One of the interesting things is that there are a lot of people claiming they would vote Green but are going to vote "tactically". I'm not sure of what tactics people think they're employing but keeping Conservatives out isn't a tactic, it's an objective. A lot of people who claim to be voting tactically are actually just voting for the largest national opposition party. That may not be the best opposition candidate in the constituency. Despite the current coalition position, a Lib Dem candidate beating a Conservative candidate would be a better outcome than a forlorn vote for a Labour candidate. Afterall, with Green confidence and supply, a short-term Labour-regions coalition lame duck governance with a Cons to Lib Dem shift wouldn't be worse than a Con-Lib alliance. Afterall, it did work for Wilson.
One thing that does seem certain. If you vote tactically, you may not get the government you want or need but you will get the government you deserve.
The latter.
I'd like to vote for the greens but that is essentially just a vote for another tory coalition so I'm voting Labour. The left (if one can include Labour, that is) are pretty fragmented across a few parties so being tactical and going for a majority party would be much more useful.