Friday, April 13, 2012

Strategic voting and "progressives"

I've never done it.  I've always voted for who I wanted to win.  It's primarily the left that promotes strategic voting, proportional representation, and all these other voting schemes.  Why?  Because they won't admit that all those parties are essentially the same and so they don't have the guts to merge into the "Progressive Party" like the federal PCs and Canadian Alliance did into the Conservatives.

So here we are in Alberta, with essentially five parties on the centre and left vying for a lot of the same votes and now a website called "Change Alberta" to help "progressives" decide which of the "progressive" candidates in their riding has the best chance of beating a conservative (although I would argue the PCs are not conservatives anymore).  With under 300 likes on their Facebook page, it looks like revolution, folks!

Strategic voting may work in a couple ridings with great focus and rigorous team work and if there's a minority gov't, these "progressives" could hold the balance of power, but there's so many parties on the centre left that it's not just NDP or Liberal to choose from.  As well, they just don't have the numbers, except, like I said, in maybe a few ridings in Edmonton.

The big problem with strategic voting is it is not a true reflection of the electorate and who they really want.  True NDP supporters went nuts for many years while their soft support continually went to the Liberals.  So I believe many of these strategic voters are fence-sitting liberals who've pitched themselves in the "progressive" camp.  The NDP federally and provincially in Alberta have moved to the centre.  I fail to see why Alberta "progressives" don't just vote for NDP candidates straight-up.  Look at what the NDP did in Quebec last federal election.  Shouldn't that be an example enough for them to see what they can accomplish?  To my friends on the NDP team, don't be fooled by these strategic voter schemes and continually promote your NDP candidate as THE candidate to challenge the PCs or Wildrose and support what you truly believe in, not what you are against.

As well, you've read my arguments on this word "progressive" that the left liberals use all the time now to describe themselves and their "beliefs".  Essentially, just when you thought the government couldn't get any bigger and our taxes couldn't be higher, they want the government to "progressively" grow with higher taxes to pay for it.   HA! Joke's on me!

And now, just like Alison Redford, they want to "Change Alberta".  Well, I like Alberta the way it is a lot actually.  That said, I and a heck of a lot of conservatives despise the current government who are progressively intruding into our lives and freedoms while ransacking the public purse and sneakily raising taxes.

Is it any wonder why in Q4 of 2011 compared to other provinces where people are leaving in droves that over 6000 net new people now live in Alberta for better paying market jobs, a lower cost of living, and lower taxes in Alberta?

Apparently, "progressives" want to change that.


2 comments:

Alex said...

strategic voting will benefit the Progs as long as its a close race. We are Likely to see the Liberals wiped out if that happens.

The Coalition idea kills strategic voting. Left is left and a lefty can pick whatever flavour they like most because they will all be in government if they get over 50%.

Anonymous said...

I voted strategically in 1993. The PC's were established and I preferred Reform. I watched the local mood and only broke Reform when it seemed they were better than vote splitters. I would have told a pollster that I liked Reform.

I plan to do some strategic voting in BC next election. I will vote Liberal if the local Conservative can't establish himself as the #2 candidate.

-Pete E