Editing Tactical voting

Jump to navigation Jump to search

Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you log in or create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.

The edit can be undone. Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then save the changes below to finish undoing the edit.

Latest revision Your text
Line 7: Line 7:
 
There are different types of tactical voting:
 
There are different types of tactical voting:
  
'''Compromising''' (sometimes '''favorite-burying''' or '''useful vote''') is a type of tactical voting in which a voter insincerely ranks an alternative higher in the hope of getting it elected.  For example, in the [[first-past-the-post election system|first-past-the-post]] election, a voter may vote for an option they perceive as having a greater chance of winning over an option they prefer (e.g., a left-wing voter voting for a popular moderate candidate over an unpopular leftist candidate).  [[W:Duverger's law|Duverger's law]] suggests that, for this reason, first-past-the-post election systems will lead to two party systems in most cases.   
+
'''Compromising''' (sometimes '''favorite-burying''' or '''useful vote''') is a type of tactical voting in which a voter insincerely ranks an alternative higher in the hope of getting it elected.  For example, in the [[first-past-the-post election system|first-past-the-post]] election, a voter may vote for an option they perceive as having a greater chance of winning over an option they prefer (e.g., a left-wing voter voting for a popular moderate candidate over an unpopular leftist candidate).  [[Duverger's law]] suggests that, for this reason, first-past-the-post election systems will lead to two party systems in most cases.   
  
 
'''Compromising-compression''' is a compromising strategy that involves insincerely giving two candidates an equal ranking.  
 
'''Compromising-compression''' is a compromising strategy that involves insincerely giving two candidates an equal ranking.  
Line 21: Line 21:
 
== Strategy-free voting methods ==
 
== Strategy-free voting methods ==
  
It has been shown by the [[Gibbard-Satterthwaite theorem]] that it is impossible for a voting method to be both strategy-free and deterministic (that is, select the same outcome every time it is applied to the same set of ballots).  The [[Random Ballot]] voting method, which selects the ballot of a random voter and uses this to determine the outcome, is strategy-free, but may result in different choices being selected if applied multiple times to the same set of ballots.
+
It has been shown by the [[Gibbard-Satterthwaite theorem]] that it is impossible for a voting method to be both strategy-free and deterministic (that is, select the same outcome every time it is applied to the same set of ballots).  The [[random ballot]] voting method, which selects the ballot of a random voter and uses this to determine the outcome, is strategy-free, but may result in different choices being selected if applied multiple times to the same set of ballots.
  
 
However, the extent to which tactical voting affects the timbre and results of the campaign varies dramatically from system to system: see below.
 
However, the extent to which tactical voting affects the timbre and results of the campaign varies dramatically from system to system: see below.
Line 30: Line 30:
 
Of these three, Labour and the Liberal Democrats are most similar. Many people who prefer the Liberal Democrats vote for the Labour candidate
 
Of these three, Labour and the Liberal Democrats are most similar. Many people who prefer the Liberal Democrats vote for the Labour candidate
 
where Labour is stronger and vice-versa where the Liberal Democrats are stronger, in order to prevent the Conservative candidate from winning.
 
where Labour is stronger and vice-versa where the Liberal Democrats are stronger, in order to prevent the Conservative candidate from winning.
 
In 2010, Liberal and Conservative governments shared the vote of the UK voters creating a hung government, it was decided that Conservatives and Liberal Democrats will perform as a power-sharing government. However this was not the first time the country has been run in a similar fashion as Liberal and Conservative governments alternated in power until World War I and Labour formed two short-lived minority governments in 1923-24 and 1929-31.
 
  
 
In the 1997 UK General Election, the [[Democratic Left (United Kingdom)|Democratic Left]] organised GROT - Get Rid Of Them - a tactical voter campaign.  In 2001, the Democratic Left's successor organisation the [[New Politics Network]] organised a similar campaign [http://www.tacticalvoter.net tacticalvoter.net]. Since then tactical voting has become a real consideration in British politics as is reflected in by-elections and by the growth in sites such as www.tacticalvoting.com who encourage tactical voting as a way of defusing the two party system and empowering the individual voter.
 
In the 1997 UK General Election, the [[Democratic Left (United Kingdom)|Democratic Left]] organised GROT - Get Rid Of Them - a tactical voter campaign.  In 2001, the Democratic Left's successor organisation the [[New Politics Network]] organised a similar campaign [http://www.tacticalvoter.net tacticalvoter.net]. Since then tactical voting has become a real consideration in British politics as is reflected in by-elections and by the growth in sites such as www.tacticalvoting.com who encourage tactical voting as a way of defusing the two party system and empowering the individual voter.
Line 66: Line 64:
 
*[[vote swapping]]
 
*[[vote swapping]]
 
*[[electoral fusion]]
 
*[[electoral fusion]]
*[[First Past the Post electoral system]] entry, in the subheading on ''3.2 Tactical voting''.
 
  
 
== External links ==
 
== External links ==
  
 +
*[http://emptymoat.blogspot.com/2004/07/tactical-voting-can-be-weak-strategy.html Tactical Voting Can Be a Weak Strategy] -- Article on tactical voting within larger strategic considerations
 
*[http://tacticalvoter.net/?show=about&PHPSESSID=db7f6a5f3610d425c2094608542e1e1d tacticalvoter.net] -- UK Tactical Voting  
 
*[http://tacticalvoter.net/?show=about&PHPSESSID=db7f6a5f3610d425c2094608542e1e1d tacticalvoter.net] -- UK Tactical Voting  
 
*[http://www.votepair.org VotePair.org] VotePair is a banding together of the people who started tactical voting online in the 2000 elections..
 
*[http://www.votepair.org VotePair.org] VotePair is a banding together of the people who started tactical voting online in the 2000 elections..
*[http://www.voteroll.com VoteRoll] VoteRoll is a vote blog roll system developing statistics for people voting online.
+
 
*[http://www.tacticalvoting.org tacticalvoting.org] Info on tactical voting for the 2010 UK General Election
+
 
 
=== Sources ===
 
=== Sources ===
  
Line 80: Line 78:
 
* Brams, Herschbach, "The Mathematics of Elections" (sic?), ''Science'' (2000)
 
* Brams, Herschbach, "The Mathematics of Elections" (sic?), ''Science'' (2000)
 
* [http://www.crest.ox.ac.uk/papers/p94.pdf Extending the Rational Voter Theory of Tactical Voting], Stephen Fisher (2001)
 
* [http://www.crest.ox.ac.uk/papers/p94.pdf Extending the Rational Voter Theory of Tactical Voting], Stephen Fisher (2001)
* [http://fc.antioch.edu/~james_green-armytage/vm/define.htm#strategy Strategy definitions] by James Green-Armytage
 
  
 
[[Category:Voting theory]]
 
[[Category:Voting theory]]
 
{{fromwikipedia}}
 
{{fromwikipedia}}

Please note that all contributions to Electowiki are considered to be released under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-SA 4.0) (see Electowiki:Copyrights for details). If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly and redistributed at will, then do not submit it here.
You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource. Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!

Cancel Editing help (opens in new window)

Templates used on this page: