Mayoral Elections - who’s best for cyclists

You are reading a single comment by @Backstop and its replies. Click here to read the full conversation.

•

Benedict

@Backstop

I’m not sure that I agree or maybe I’m being dumb. Or possibly a bit of both.

If cyclists voting green meant that Khan didn’t get the 50%, it would be a strategic failure, right?

Your point assumes Bailey gets over 50% but that’s a big assumption to have up front as a reason to preemptively split the vote.

Sounds like - ‘we’re going to loose anyway, may as well vote green’.

But why lose in the first place? Does that make any sense?

•

Backstop in reply to @Benedict

cyclists voting green meant that Khan didn’t get the 50%, it would be a strategic failure, right?

No, not under transferable votes. Khan will get lots of first choice, but possibly under 50%. Therefore a top two runoff is almost inevitable, probably khan vs bailey.

Most first choice green votes will have khan as second choice and therefore khan wins to the exclusion of the shitface bailey, but with a notable amount of votes that prefer green to him.

It's a great form of democracy that allows you to make your honest choice without fear that second best loses to worst choice.

•

Benedict in reply to @Backstop

This makes sense - thanks for explaining.

I didn't realise that it was so unlikely / impossible for a candidate to get 50%. If that's the case and the second choices will be counted, then may as well use the transfer to send a message.

Annoying that not all greens back LTNs though.

About

Avatar for Backstop @Backstop started