"Despite fact this election feels like it's been going on for 17 years." Oh, Nish! Come to the US! Our election *has* been going on for 17 years! OK, actually nearly 8.
What is it with Left and Progressive podcasts to just completely ignore Wales? We are moving to our SECOND version of proportional voting yet not a single mention in a podcast about proportional voting
They think the UK = England. I'll see titles talking about new legislation etc. and it'll be something we've had in Northern Ireland or Scotland for ages :\
If they're anything like pod save America, I don't think they're really that left, especially by UK standards. Pod Save don't really even support Medicare for All candidates, let alone something like the NHS. It's all relative I guess. I'd recommend Novara Media instead if you want something actually left-wing.
Thank you for going in depth on how our voting system works! As a young person nobody has really cared to explain these things to us, its just assumed that it is common knowledge. I had a few ideas of what it was but this will make it a lot easier to explain it to my friends. many of them are not bothering to vote or have no clue how to even register let alone vote.
The young will be most impacted by the election as they have a more long term future than the old who do vote. Party politics is broken in this country but it doesn't mean people shouldn't get involved. If only to vote for change and then, hopefully, lobby for bigger change Incidentally, the only other European countries that have first-past-the-post are Belarus and Russia - hardly a shining endorsement of it
Hasnt it always been so. I'm 61 and no one explained it to me either. I've had to learn the hard way and its been frustrating and angering to see just how unjust and undemocratic democracy is.
Well, good that PodSave has been helpful for you in getting your friends involved, and clearing up how it all works. If you haven't seen them, I'd recommend having a look at CGPGreys videos on voting systems. Very informative, and very... 'lamen friendly' for lack of a better term.
We left the EU as a result of people voting "non-tactically" for UKIP. It can have an impact. We've also seen the media constantly using "vote share" as a reason to justify giving more time to the likes of Farage. The Greens probably won't win any more MPs this election, but massively boosting their vote share will still have a big impact. It's a rare chance to do it without fear of a Tory win as well.
absolutely, people completely misunderstand the way alternative parties work in a fptp 2 party system. Their influence doesn't come from winning elections, but from LOSING elections (for one of the main parties). The leverage of a party running to the left of labour, or to the right of the tories, is that they threaten to reduce the margins of, or potentially even lose a few seats for, the party they are outflanking. People say they don't want to vote e.g. green because it might allow the Tories to win their seat but misunderstand that, if they support the Green's policy platform, that is a good thing! The only reason labour should ever cater to a smaller left party and its voters, either by adopting some of their demands, or through making electoral pacts in future to allow them to have some seats, is if they are losing votes, and potentially losing seats to it! That is how UKIP got their demands met, not through winning seats, but through threatening to unseat MPs in Tory marginals (by cutting into Tory vote share, not enough to win, but enough for the Tories to lose)
Except if no one bothers voting tactically, then the tories might still win a majority. People aren't saying "vote tactically" just to mess with you. They're saying it because if the anti-tory vote is split between all the other parties, then the Tories can still get the largest vote share in each of their constituency seats, and then they'll be the ones in power. Sitting here and pretending like theres no chance that the tories can win, is a very dangerous assumption. Thats not how our voting system works.
@@tweda4 even if every tactical voter (13%, according to the figures on the podcast) chooses not to vote tactically, Labour would still win. The margin is that high. Yes, there's a chance the Tories could still get in if all the polls are totally wrong. But by that measure there's also a chance that the Greens could form the next government, if we're talking about what could *theoretically* happen and ignoring all polling. So taking the "tactical" approach of only voting Green in Brighton would rob them of a majority. Yes, that'll never actually happen. But neither will a Tory victory.
@@deano2099 It was 13% + 11% thinking about how the vote would swing (potentially also tactically voting). So around 24%. Aside from that though, that and the polls that you're thinking of, are all national polls. As was the point made earlier in the video. If in a constituency 29% vote Tory, 12% Vote green, 28% Vote Labour, 22% Vote LibDem, 6% Vote independent, and 13% Vote Reform, then Tories win the seat. Tactical voting amongst 1/2% of that constituency is enough to decide between it going Tory or going Labour. Who needs 13%? Even if a lack of tactical voting isn't going to give the Tories a majority (which I still think is possible), it can still leave them big enough to cause trouble for parliamentary procedure. And maybe more importantly for the individuals in that constituency, they've still got a Tory MP representing and exerting control over the constituency!
@@tweda4 yeah tactical voting could certainly result in a smaller Labour majority. I don't think that's a bad thing necessarily either though (makes it harder to sideline the few proper lefties remaining in that party). I'm not saying people are free to vote how they want and it won't have any impact at all. Just that if everyone who considers themselves to the left of Labour were to vote Green (or SNP/Plaid where applicable) we could see a real big Green vote share, that no, would not translate to seats, or power, but could massively raise the profile of the radical left and actually set them up for a genuine run at making something happen next election. (Or at worst, scare Labour into thinking they need to be more Green to retain those voters). That's the benefit of not voting tactically. And I'm someone who has voted tactically my entire life and is finally staring down the barrel of an election where I can vote for the party I actually want to see in power with very little risk, and I'm seizing that opportunity. I'd urge you to at least consider it, one lifelong tactical voter to another!
A great discussion on tactical voting, but I have to say, despite how hard you tried to stick to the balanced view, most of us on the left were recently talking up tactical voting to ensure that we got rid of the Tories. It feels like a lack of internal consistency on our part to talk about what a bad idea it is now, only when it might go against us.
Also, taking it up now when it isn't actually necessary lol. Voting "tactically" in this election is actually a bad thing; if some left wing parties threaten labour majorities in some marginals, or even lose labour some seats, that would literally be a good thing for both the left and for democracy!
I live in a labour/SNP marginal. I’m not voting for the SNP given their far right swing. The labour candidate seems fine so I’ll probably vote for them.
Honestly, from someone in a country where we have a proportional system (hondt), tactical voting still exists. It looks a bit different, but every election there is a discussion about it. I do not mean to say that first pass the post is great, it is not, but changing the system won’t fully change this issue
I’ve always voted tactically for Labour. But this year I cannot, Starmer has been pulling the party too far right. Copying the tories in so many ways (immigration, Gaza, austerity, etc). Especially as a trans/NB person I can’t vote for a party lead by a transphobic bigot. We desperately need electoral reform.
I'm voting Green here, Labour will win by a landslide in this seat, so no need to worry thankfully. Obviously, this is different depending on where you are in the country however if Labour's likely to beat out the Tory candidate, or you have an independent up against a Labour candidate who can win, or lib dem, etc it's worth voting for them instead. But yes, we sorely need electoral reform - and also parties to care more about young people, we can shift them by getting the young out to vote. The boomers vote, the young don't. That's why they also don't care about us.
I dont feel like its a wasted vote to vote Green. They are the only party that is being honest and saying in order to create the country with better infrastructure then we need to invest and that will cost money and that money will come from a fairer tax system. Labour arent saying, the Conservatives are saying they will spend more but lower taxes and Reform are just banging on about immigrants. I know we dont have proportional representation but i want to put my vote where it deserves to be and the environment, better social and health care and a fairer tax system are my key comcerns.
It really depends on how big the Tory vote is in your area. If Labor (or some other non-Tory party) is guaranteed a win, vote how you want. Otherwise, be responsible. Voting isn't a mode of self-expression; it's a strategic political action.
No. Vote for who best fits your values. Tactical voting just keeps us locked into the same old crap. Neither of the two main parties have anything I want to see in government so Im taking my vote elsewhere.
It's interesting to read arguments like yours. I'm an American, and the Republicans have been such a harmful party that voting for anyone other than a Democrat (I.e., the person with the best chance of beating them) is hugely irresponsible. Are Labour and the Tories not that different in the UK? Here it feels like every election is an attempt to hold off disaster.
Giving up SKY TV to be able to give your children a private education is far different than giving it up to afford the basics of living. The fact that he didn't realise this just shows how privileged and out of touch he is!
I'm confident Sky did exist when he was living with his parents. I also believe his parents weren't making a financial choice, like mine, I expect they considered the dish attached to the house to be common and therefore distasteful.
There was also a huge snob value about having satellite dishes on your house - it was very much seen as working class. I doubt Sunak's parents saw themselves as working class.
This sounds identical to the issues in Canada. But Trudeau promised to change our system, got in with a majority, then changed his mind. Now we are facing a conservative government in the next election, even though the Liberals and NDO (left of centre) parties are about 65% of the vote.
So I think Joe is technically correct in terms of the way votes play out at national level and that is also overcomplicating what it means for the average person to vote tactically in their constituency. True, it is rare that a voter is informed enough to make their voting calculus based on margins at the last election and boundary changes but also it is strange to say that someone thinks they are voting tactically but aren't. Vast swathes of people have voted Lib Dem to keep out the Conservatives with success at several elections across the SW and SE of England and they were not confused. They voted tactically and it worked. This was possible because, in the vast majority of cases, you do not need that data to decide whether to vote FOR something (with your heart) or vote AGAINST something (with your head) in your constituency. What you actually need is knowledge of your own preferences and how that relates to the number 1 and number 2 parties where you live, which is binary and - more importantly - generally obvious. Why obvious? Because a) historically the margins and outcome are not that close b) when change happens it often goes with big (or at least locally obvious) swings and c) it's about what you think. Many constituencies (sure not all) switch between two parties and most people in a constituency see what is happening in their area and have a sense of where to best put their X based on what people are saying, signs in the window etc. Pollsters lack this feeling for obvious reasons, not least the cost of constituency-level research. Add to that the fact that most people who actually go out to vote are not swing voters (even if a lot of people are shy tories or say they are undecided because they are voting UKIP or Reform) and most FPTP elections are about getting out your base and keeping your opponents' base (bases?) at home. Why am I bothering to say this? Because tactical voting is one of the few levers we have under FPTP and making it seem complicated is not very helpful if the goal is to get the least worst outcome. We can call it a mini-max regret strategy and get in the weeds, but when faced with the decision I don't think it is that complicated. Do you want Michael Gove out? Do you want him out more than you would enjoy voting Green or Labour? If yes to both, then vote Lib Dem. Do you have imperfect information on what others are doing? Yes. Does it matter? Not really because all you can really control is your vote. None of this requires detailed historical knowledge of boundaries or margins. PS. Belarus is absolutely irrelevant. Not a dictatorship because of FPTP, not a useful comparison that's just hyperbole.
I think the once in a lifetime is the existential threat. This could be the last time the Tories ever get into power leaving either the Libdems or god help us Reform as the official opposition from now on.
Having a right wing Labour Party in power for 5 years telling everyone immigration is bad is terrifying given there's already so much anti-immigrant sentiment. And when they do very little to materially improve people's lives it's perfectly set up for Reform / a far right tory party to smash the next election.
Yeah. I dont watch this channel that often, because they have these wierd and frankly stupid takes. Like, JFC, its not hard to grasp the point thats being made. The Tories popularity is through the floor right now. If all the voters that don't want Tories work together, they might be pushed down to third or fourth largest party. That could spell the end of the Tory party as we know it. And how often does an electorate kick a party out of power so hard that the party itself falls apart? Not bloody often!
@@tweda4 But then outside of how great we'd all feel for a couple of weeks after that, would that actually be a good thing? Or just open the door for someone like Reform to arise as the new opposition? I can see arguments for and against it, but I don't see it as an obviously good option.
I voted tactically last year, for council election, without knowing it. Knew labour/greens wouldn’t win so voted to Lib Dems. Lib Dems won 41% and conservative 40% so it was close. This year I’ve done more research and gone onto tactical vote websites to confirm I’m going to vote Lib Dems. Time for conservatives to go. I hope they come third but maybe Rishi keeps his seat so he has to step down as mp. That may hurt his pride more than losing his seat and coming second
Please cover how independent candidates are faring, if you havent already. Boundary Review changes aside - when was the last time we saw 450÷ Independent candidates standing out of 650 seats? Why is this happening?
You do need to know the last poll results to vote tactically, but in my area, it is a very safe Tory seat so initially I was going to vote Green, or Lib Dem or Independent depending on who stands, in the knowledge that my vote doesn't count anyway. However a recent poll gave Labour a slim chance of winning because Reform decided to stand a candidate so I changed my mind and I will be voting Labour. I'm not impressed with Starmer, I wanted him to win the Labour leadership because I thought he'd work with the whole range of Labour support but alas he has that same flaw where getting into power is everything, even that means misleading voters but he will be better than the Tories. And tbh even if I thought he was exactly the same as the Tories (I don't) I would still vote to remove the Tories from power. Rookie governments are better than experienced ones, if you have two parties that are basically the same and you don't like them - always vote for the one not in power.
This one really cuts the Gordian knot I’ve got going on with my options. I don’t want to vote tactically, but I’m being sort of advised to do that. It’s a knotty one.
can you please encourage people to vote, it's not biased, but I think you have a responsibility to not go along with people not engaging. no wonder we're in trouble.
i don't think you should tactically vote, since even if they dont win, if an independent or a minor party does get a large portion of the votes, it can still affect things, especially determining the ways people will tactically vote next election, but i also understand that the margin that the tories lose by should also be as big as possible
My understanding of proportional voting doesn’t work. Surely as you vote for your local mp, PV doesn’t work, fptp or AV work. As it’s 1 seat that the say 60k local votes elected. Then the party with the most seats has the majority nationally. Trying to learn, as I’m just starting really give a shit.
Proportional respresentation with local MPs is tricky but can be done - Scotland uses an Additional Member system for example, so 2/3rds of those elected are local representatives, and then the remaining third are allocated from party lists in order to make the entire house proportionally in line with the total vote share.
I've always been a Green voter - since the early 80s in the days of the Ecology Party. However, as I live in Westminster - a Tory 'safe seat', I have to hold my nose and vote Labour. That's tactical voting - profoundly negative and encouraging voter apathy. The good news is that our Labour candidate is 1/4 on with the bookies, but we need PR.
Tactical voting is inherently flawed, it's result this particular election is hand starmers changed labour and even larger majority with absolutely no mandate to do anything of value to the British public other then simply not being the Tories. That bar is so low that people are missing the cart for the horse and the obvious continuity austerity that this changed labour is due to deliver. Your vote isn't wasted if you don't tactical vote. Vote with intention and purpose find the party who's POLICIES reflect what you want, do not give your only leverage in politics for free to spite a party that's already set itself on fire.
@@markwelch3564 yeah yeah I see it now I think I saw protest vote and recently that's only ever been hurled at me as an implication that the vote is in fact wasted. I apologise.
The tactical voting methodology is flawed aswell. Going off previous elections, it doesn't factor reform well. Also, it's objective is flawed. Getting rid of the tories is necessary and will be cathartic but we need a change in political consensus.
I was persuaded to vote tactically in 1983, didn't work and felt horrible, swore i would never do it again. Fortunately the advised candidate in Grantham and Bourne is the one I would vote for with my heart. Would be great to see Vipul ad MP in Thatcher's birth place.
I agree but I wouldn't say it the same way. I won't vote for the political concensus and direction that has brought us here. This eliminates many parties.
Yeah like there's not been awful damage done to it by the Tories - a vote for anyone who is not one of the top 2 in your constituency is a wasted vote. It is your right to throw your vote away though so go ahead.
@BHJBHJ424 couple of questions. Do you know what short money is? How is it possible to know the top 2 parties in a given constituency? So much has changed.
@@BHJBHJ424sending a message to starmer and his tory-adjacent mates that they need to do better and offer something to progressives is not a wasted vote. I'd say voting unconditionally for a leader who lied to his own membership, reneges on any progressive policies at the slightest opposition and is carrying on tory spending plans is a better example of a wasted vote. It's such a narrow way too look at voting, to say "unless the person I vote for is elected my vote is wasted" - just look at the impact UKIP have had without winning a single MP through the ballot box (they had defections).
@@BHJBHJ424 of course there has been terrible damage done and starmer has no plans to change any of that, if it was only labour or the tories on the ballet i simply wouldn't vote. I am not going to spend the next five years watching labour continue to sell off our services and know that i voted for it.
I'm a weird (slightly privileged) position where I would vote tactically, but the party I would vote tactically for (the Lib Dems) are the party I would actually want to vote for in my constituency.
As an American it is insane for me to see some of the same takes about voting for Bernie instead of Hilary in the general election be regurgitated by the man arguing for the Green Party. I’m not sure how I feel about tactical voting but I can definitely see parallels to our over confidence during the 2016 election
And we’re seeing it currently with Biden and younger voters. What’s happening in Gaza is an absolute tragedy and travesty, but Biden has numerous and massive legislative victories. Then there’s the fact that we’ve seen what a Trump administration is like. Grifting, cozying up to authoritarians, nepotism, rampant corruption, next to zero governance and on it goes.
We had pr for European voting and as a result I had no idea who my mep was. I used to support pr but i think the inevitable coalitions will end up like the teresa may stalemate. I think direct democracy should be the change.
The ones thing that worries me about PR is that more disadvantaged areas would have even less representation in Westminster. What do you think the solution to this would be under PR?
"It's worth pointing out that Rishi Sunak is currently richer than the king" 😂 Coco's jabs don't get enough credit
Starmer is a multi millionaire too.
"Despite fact this election feels like it's been going on for 17 years."
Oh, Nish! Come to the US! Our election *has* been going on for 17 years! OK, actually nearly 8.
JFC this.
I thought EXACTLY that when he said it!
Femi was great. You should have him on again and take his contributions more seriously.
What is it with Left and Progressive podcasts to just completely ignore Wales? We are moving to our SECOND version of proportional voting yet not a single mention in a podcast about proportional voting
They think the UK = England. I'll see titles talking about new legislation etc. and it'll be something we've had in Northern Ireland or Scotland for ages :\
If they're anything like pod save America, I don't think they're really that left, especially by UK standards. Pod Save don't really even support Medicare for All candidates, let alone something like the NHS. It's all relative I guess.
I'd recommend Novara Media instead if you want something actually left-wing.
Vote for a party that actually supports pr... that means ditching Labour
Actually it doesn't, a lot of labour candidates want PR so find out what they support. That is more likely to get PR in.
@@davidlawton5553 Labour rejected their own members vote for PR...
Yes REFORM
Thank you for going in depth on how our voting system works! As a young person nobody has really cared to explain these things to us, its just assumed that it is common knowledge. I had a few ideas of what it was but this will make it a lot easier to explain it to my friends. many of them are not bothering to vote or have no clue how to even register let alone vote.
The young will be most impacted by the election as they have a more long term future than the old who do vote. Party politics is broken in this country but it doesn't mean people shouldn't get involved. If only to vote for change and then, hopefully, lobby for bigger change
Incidentally, the only other European countries that have first-past-the-post are Belarus and Russia - hardly a shining endorsement of it
It’s in their interests not to encourage young people to vote.
Hasnt it always been so. I'm 61 and no one explained it to me either. I've had to learn the hard way and its been frustrating and angering to see just how unjust and undemocratic democracy is.
Well, good that PodSave has been helpful for you in getting your friends involved, and clearing up how it all works.
If you haven't seen them, I'd recommend having a look at CGPGreys videos on voting systems. Very informative, and very... 'lamen friendly' for lack of a better term.
This Joe geezer had top bants
We left the EU as a result of people voting "non-tactically" for UKIP. It can have an impact. We've also seen the media constantly using "vote share" as a reason to justify giving more time to the likes of Farage. The Greens probably won't win any more MPs this election, but massively boosting their vote share will still have a big impact. It's a rare chance to do it without fear of a Tory win as well.
absolutely, people completely misunderstand the way alternative parties work in a fptp 2 party system. Their influence doesn't come from winning elections, but from LOSING elections (for one of the main parties). The leverage of a party running to the left of labour, or to the right of the tories, is that they threaten to reduce the margins of, or potentially even lose a few seats for, the party they are outflanking. People say they don't want to vote e.g. green because it might allow the Tories to win their seat but misunderstand that, if they support the Green's policy platform, that is a good thing! The only reason labour should ever cater to a smaller left party and its voters, either by adopting some of their demands, or through making electoral pacts in future to allow them to have some seats, is if they are losing votes, and potentially losing seats to it!
That is how UKIP got their demands met, not through winning seats, but through threatening to unseat MPs in Tory marginals (by cutting into Tory vote share, not enough to win, but enough for the Tories to lose)
Except if no one bothers voting tactically, then the tories might still win a majority.
People aren't saying "vote tactically" just to mess with you. They're saying it because if the anti-tory vote is split between all the other parties, then the Tories can still get the largest vote share in each of their constituency seats, and then they'll be the ones in power.
Sitting here and pretending like theres no chance that the tories can win, is a very dangerous assumption. Thats not how our voting system works.
@@tweda4 even if every tactical voter (13%, according to the figures on the podcast) chooses not to vote tactically, Labour would still win. The margin is that high.
Yes, there's a chance the Tories could still get in if all the polls are totally wrong. But by that measure there's also a chance that the Greens could form the next government, if we're talking about what could *theoretically* happen and ignoring all polling. So taking the "tactical" approach of only voting Green in Brighton would rob them of a majority.
Yes, that'll never actually happen. But neither will a Tory victory.
@@deano2099 It was 13% + 11% thinking about how the vote would swing (potentially also tactically voting). So around 24%.
Aside from that though, that and the polls that you're thinking of, are all national polls.
As was the point made earlier in the video.
If in a constituency 29% vote Tory, 12% Vote green, 28% Vote Labour, 22% Vote LibDem, 6% Vote independent, and 13% Vote Reform, then Tories win the seat.
Tactical voting amongst 1/2% of that constituency is enough to decide between it going Tory or going Labour. Who needs 13%?
Even if a lack of tactical voting isn't going to give the Tories a majority (which I still think is possible), it can still leave them big enough to cause trouble for parliamentary procedure.
And maybe more importantly for the individuals in that constituency, they've still got a Tory MP representing and exerting control over the constituency!
@@tweda4 yeah tactical voting could certainly result in a smaller Labour majority. I don't think that's a bad thing necessarily either though (makes it harder to sideline the few proper lefties remaining in that party).
I'm not saying people are free to vote how they want and it won't have any impact at all. Just that if everyone who considers themselves to the left of Labour were to vote Green (or SNP/Plaid where applicable) we could see a real big Green vote share, that no, would not translate to seats, or power, but could massively raise the profile of the radical left and actually set them up for a genuine run at making something happen next election. (Or at worst, scare Labour into thinking they need to be more Green to retain those voters).
That's the benefit of not voting tactically. And I'm someone who has voted tactically my entire life and is finally staring down the barrel of an election where I can vote for the party I actually want to see in power with very little risk, and I'm seizing that opportunity. I'd urge you to at least consider it, one lifelong tactical voter to another!
A great discussion on tactical voting, but I have to say, despite how hard you tried to stick to the balanced view, most of us on the left were recently talking up tactical voting to ensure that we got rid of the Tories. It feels like a lack of internal consistency on our part to talk about what a bad idea it is now, only when it might go against us.
Also, taking it up now when it isn't actually necessary lol. Voting "tactically" in this election is actually a bad thing; if some left wing parties threaten labour majorities in some marginals, or even lose labour some seats, that would literally be a good thing for both the left and for democracy!
I live in a labour/SNP marginal. I’m not voting for the SNP given their far right swing. The labour candidate seems fine so I’ll probably vote for them.
Honestly, from someone in a country where we have a proportional system (hondt), tactical voting still exists. It looks a bit different, but every election there is a discussion about it. I do not mean to say that first pass the post is great, it is not, but changing the system won’t fully change this issue
Explain tactical vote under a pr system
I’ve always voted tactically for Labour. But this year I cannot, Starmer has been pulling the party too far right. Copying the tories in so many ways (immigration, Gaza, austerity, etc). Especially as a trans/NB person I can’t vote for a party lead by a transphobic bigot.
We desperately need electoral reform.
I'm voting Green here, Labour will win by a landslide in this seat, so no need to worry thankfully. Obviously, this is different depending on where you are in the country however if Labour's likely to beat out the Tory candidate, or you have an independent up against a Labour candidate who can win, or lib dem, etc it's worth voting for them instead.
But yes, we sorely need electoral reform - and also parties to care more about young people, we can shift them by getting the young out to vote. The boomers vote, the young don't. That's why they also don't care about us.
Labour are Left leaning not Right..
@@alice1374vote Reform or we get more or in fact worse of the same!!!
I dont feel like its a wasted vote to vote Green. They are the only party that is being honest and saying in order to create the country with better infrastructure then we need to invest and that will cost money and that money will come from a fairer tax system. Labour arent saying, the Conservatives are saying they will spend more but lower taxes and Reform are just banging on about immigrants. I know we dont have proportional representation but i want to put my vote where it deserves to be and the environment, better social and health care and a fairer tax system are my key comcerns.
It really depends on how big the Tory vote is in your area. If Labor (or some other non-Tory party) is guaranteed a win, vote how you want. Otherwise, be responsible. Voting isn't a mode of self-expression; it's a strategic political action.
No. Vote for who best fits your values. Tactical voting just keeps us locked into the same old crap. Neither of the two main parties have anything I want to see in government so Im taking my vote elsewhere.
It's interesting to read arguments like yours. I'm an American, and the Republicans have been such a harmful party that voting for anyone other than a Democrat (I.e., the person with the best chance of beating them) is hugely irresponsible. Are Labour and the Tories not that different in the UK? Here it feels like every election is an attempt to hold off disaster.
Giving up SKY TV to be able to give your children a private education is far different than giving it up to afford the basics of living. The fact that he didn't realise this just shows how privileged and out of touch he is!
He also forgot sky didn't exist when he was a child 😂
@@stung3848it did
I'm confident Sky did exist when he was living with his parents. I also believe his parents weren't making a financial choice, like mine, I expect they considered the dish attached to the house to be common and therefore distasteful.
@@Grandude77 yeah think it existed but may have been called bskyb
There was also a huge snob value about having satellite dishes on your house - it was very much seen as working class. I doubt Sunak's parents saw themselves as working class.
I don’t have Sky TV right now. #Canadian
If every party seems to be behind "tactical voting" may as well install ranked choice right?
and with so many candidates being parachuted in from central office, we may as well switch to a party list system
This sounds identical to the issues in Canada. But Trudeau promised to change our system, got in with a majority, then changed his mind. Now we are facing a conservative government in the next election, even though the Liberals and NDO (left of centre) parties are about 65% of the vote.
So I think Joe is technically correct in terms of the way votes play out at national level and that is also overcomplicating what it means for the average person to vote tactically in their constituency. True, it is rare that a voter is informed enough to make their voting calculus based on margins at the last election and boundary changes but also it is strange to say that someone thinks they are voting tactically but aren't. Vast swathes of people have voted Lib Dem to keep out the Conservatives with success at several elections across the SW and SE of England and they were not confused. They voted tactically and it worked.
This was possible because, in the vast majority of cases, you do not need that data to decide whether to vote FOR something (with your heart) or vote AGAINST something (with your head) in your constituency. What you actually need is knowledge of your own preferences and how that relates to the number 1 and number 2 parties where you live, which is binary and - more importantly - generally obvious. Why obvious? Because a) historically the margins and outcome are not that close b) when change happens it often goes with big (or at least locally obvious) swings and c) it's about what you think.
Many constituencies (sure not all) switch between two parties and most people in a constituency see what is happening in their area and have a sense of where to best put their X based on what people are saying, signs in the window etc. Pollsters lack this feeling for obvious reasons, not least the cost of constituency-level research. Add to that the fact that most people who actually go out to vote are not swing voters (even if a lot of people are shy tories or say they are undecided because they are voting UKIP or Reform) and most FPTP elections are about getting out your base and keeping your opponents' base (bases?) at home.
Why am I bothering to say this? Because tactical voting is one of the few levers we have under FPTP and making it seem complicated is not very helpful if the goal is to get the least worst outcome. We can call it a mini-max regret strategy and get in the weeds, but when faced with the decision I don't think it is that complicated.
Do you want Michael Gove out? Do you want him out more than you would enjoy voting Green or Labour? If yes to both, then vote Lib Dem. Do you have imperfect information on what others are doing? Yes. Does it matter? Not really because all you can really control is your vote. None of this requires detailed historical knowledge of boundaries or margins.
PS. Belarus is absolutely irrelevant. Not a dictatorship because of FPTP, not a useful comparison that's just hyperbole.
We badly need tactical voting in the seat that Andrew Feinstein is fighting for, he has two Tories he is facing off against.
Really glad Femi explained the once in a lifetime comment from Carol that the rest of the panel chose to mock!
I think the once in a lifetime is the existential threat. This could be the last time the Tories ever get into power leaving either the Libdems or god help us Reform as the official opposition from now on.
Having a right wing Labour Party in power for 5 years telling everyone immigration is bad is terrifying given there's already so much anti-immigrant sentiment.
And when they do very little to materially improve people's lives it's perfectly set up for Reform / a far right tory party to smash the next election.
By the same measure it's also a once in a lifetime chance to vote with your heart for who you really want to see win without fear of a Tory victory.
Yeah. I dont watch this channel that often, because they have these wierd and frankly stupid takes.
Like, JFC, its not hard to grasp the point thats being made. The Tories popularity is through the floor right now. If all the voters that don't want Tories work together, they might be pushed down to third or fourth largest party.
That could spell the end of the Tory party as we know it.
And how often does an electorate kick a party out of power so hard that the party itself falls apart? Not bloody often!
@@tweda4 But then outside of how great we'd all feel for a couple of weeks after that, would that actually be a good thing? Or just open the door for someone like Reform to arise as the new opposition? I can see arguments for and against it, but I don't see it as an obviously good option.
16:21 why ignore the fact that tactical voting websites exist with large campaigns?!
It only helps if people use them.
Sunak missing the D-Day thing was weird. He couldn't prerecord an interview the next day?
I can't vote for Labour
Isn't there a candidate in your constituency? I thought they stood everywhere. Not sure about NI TBF
@@Grandude77maybe the poster means they will not as Labour are shit
You presume. I choose to presume people employ "can't" and "won't" as appropriate.
@@Grandude77 you'd be wrong though
Yeah. I know.
I voted tactically last year, for council election, without knowing it. Knew labour/greens wouldn’t win so voted to Lib Dems. Lib Dems won 41% and conservative 40% so it was close. This year I’ve done more research and gone onto tactical vote websites to confirm I’m going to vote Lib Dems. Time for conservatives to go. I hope they come third but maybe Rishi keeps his seat so he has to step down as mp. That may hurt his pride more than losing his seat and coming second
Please cover how independent candidates are faring, if you havent already.
Boundary Review changes aside - when was the last time we saw 450÷ Independent candidates standing out of 650 seats?
Why is this happening?
You do need to know the last poll results to vote tactically, but in my area, it is a very safe Tory seat so initially I was going to vote Green, or Lib Dem or Independent depending on who stands, in the knowledge that my vote doesn't count anyway. However a recent poll gave Labour a slim chance of winning because Reform decided to stand a candidate so I changed my mind and I will be voting Labour.
I'm not impressed with Starmer, I wanted him to win the Labour leadership because I thought he'd work with the whole range of Labour support but alas he has that same flaw where getting into power is everything, even that means misleading voters but he will be better than the Tories. And tbh even if I thought he was exactly the same as the Tories (I don't) I would still vote to remove the Tories from power. Rookie governments are better than experienced ones, if you have two parties that are basically the same and you don't like them - always vote for the one not in power.
Holy crap I never thought I'd here Nish Kumar again.
Vote for what you believe in. Right wingers always do. I'm sure that's at least partly why they have so much influence even when they don't win.
This one really cuts the Gordian knot I’ve got going on with my options. I don’t want to vote tactically, but I’m being sort of advised to do that. It’s a knotty one.
17:30 If the labour members vote to instate PR does the labour party have to adopt this direction?
can you please encourage people to vote, it's not biased, but I think you have a responsibility to not go along with people not engaging. no wonder we're in trouble.
i don't think you should tactically vote, since even if they dont win, if an independent or a minor party does get a large portion of the votes, it can still affect things, especially determining the ways people will tactically vote next election, but i also understand that the margin that the tories lose by should also be as big as possible
Very good discussion on tactical voting and PR.
Nobody likes the Tories, but the D-day story is a storm in a tea cup - stop insulting us
This has the whif of the BBC with al it entails. Good luck.
My understanding of proportional voting doesn’t work. Surely as you vote for your local mp, PV doesn’t work, fptp or AV work. As it’s 1 seat that the say 60k local votes elected. Then the party with the most seats has the majority nationally. Trying to learn, as I’m just starting really give a shit.
Proportional respresentation with local MPs is tricky but can be done - Scotland uses an Additional Member system for example, so 2/3rds of those elected are local representatives, and then the remaining third are allocated from party lists in order to make the entire house proportionally in line with the total vote share.
I've always been a Green voter - since the early 80s in the days of the Ecology Party. However, as I live in Westminster - a Tory 'safe seat', I have to hold my nose and vote Labour. That's tactical voting - profoundly negative and encouraging voter apathy. The good news is that our Labour candidate is 1/4 on with the bookies, but we need PR.
"it's been fine" 😂
If Joe actually did take the time to look at the numbers ho would see that people do actually vote tactically.
Wasn’t his point that uninformed tactical voting cancels itself out, so is hidden?
Postal Vote, Photo's from palastine, note stating "none deserve this privilage"
Don't look at the screen and you'd think Dan Snow is the guest. He has the same voice.
Vote Fiona Lali, RCP!
Is Rishi really richer than the King? Aren't the king's land holdings worth billions of pounds and Rishi is "only" worth like 750 million pounds?
As a family, the Sunaks are wealthier than the Windors from what I've heard
I’ve always favoured ranked-choice over proportional allocation.
I prefer STV, it's essentially the same thing but requires a candidate to have a majority.
Tactical voting is inherently flawed, it's result this particular election is hand starmers changed labour and even larger majority with absolutely no mandate to do anything of value to the British public other then simply not being the Tories. That bar is so low that people are missing the cart for the horse and the obvious continuity austerity that this changed labour is due to deliver. Your vote isn't wasted if you don't tactical vote. Vote with intention and purpose find the party who's POLICIES reflect what you want, do not give your only leverage in politics for free to spite a party that's already set itself on fire.
I agree - it's not a protest vote, it's a strategic vote
@@markwelch3564 wow what a brilliant refutation of every point made.
@@therandomoguy3809 I am refuting by agreeing? I think there's some crossed wires here...
@@markwelch3564 yeah yeah I see it now I think I saw protest vote and recently that's only ever been hurled at me as an implication that the vote is in fact wasted. I apologise.
The tactical voting methodology is flawed aswell. Going off previous elections, it doesn't factor reform well. Also, it's objective is flawed. Getting rid of the tories is necessary and will be cathartic but we need a change in political consensus.
I was persuaded to vote tactically in 1983, didn't work and felt horrible, swore i would never do it again. Fortunately the advised candidate in Grantham and Bourne is the one I would vote for with my heart. Would be great to see Vipul ad MP in Thatcher's birth place.
But I like it in the sand…
No way I'm voting for labour couldn't care less whether it's tactical, I won't be complicit in the awful damage they're going to do to this country.
I agree but I wouldn't say it the same way. I won't vote for the political concensus and direction that has brought us here. This eliminates many parties.
Yeah like there's not been awful damage done to it by the Tories - a vote for anyone who is not one of the top 2 in your constituency is a wasted vote. It is your right to throw your vote away though so go ahead.
@BHJBHJ424 couple of questions. Do you know what short money is? How is it possible to know the top 2 parties in a given constituency? So much has changed.
@@BHJBHJ424sending a message to starmer and his tory-adjacent mates that they need to do better and offer something to progressives is not a wasted vote. I'd say voting unconditionally for a leader who lied to his own membership, reneges on any progressive policies at the slightest opposition and is carrying on tory spending plans is a better example of a wasted vote.
It's such a narrow way too look at voting, to say "unless the person I vote for is elected my vote is wasted" - just look at the impact UKIP have had without winning a single MP through the ballot box (they had defections).
@@BHJBHJ424 of course there has been terrible damage done and starmer has no plans to change any of that, if it was only labour or the tories on the ballet i simply wouldn't vote. I am not going to spend the next five years watching labour continue to sell off our services and know that i voted for it.
I'm a weird (slightly privileged) position where I would vote tactically, but the party I would vote tactically for (the Lib Dems) are the party I would actually want to vote for in my constituency.
Very interesting. So much homework for voters.
Had to watch to see what everyone looked like since I always liked to pod save the UK. Good stuff!
As an American it is insane for me to see some of the same takes about voting for Bernie instead of Hilary in the general election be regurgitated by the man arguing for the Green Party. I’m not sure how I feel about tactical voting but I can definitely see parallels to our over confidence during the 2016 election
And we’re seeing it currently with Biden and younger voters. What’s happening in Gaza is an absolute tragedy and travesty, but Biden has numerous and massive legislative victories.
Then there’s the fact that we’ve seen what a Trump administration is like. Grifting, cozying up to authoritarians, nepotism, rampant corruption, next to zero governance and on it goes.
❤❤❤
Love Femi's Scottish twang. Ironic Twyman seems effortless... not a twy hard. Wasclwey. As usual,
We had pr for European voting and as a result I had no idea who my mep was. I used to support pr but i think the inevitable coalitions will end up like the teresa may stalemate. I think direct democracy should be the change.
The ones thing that worries me about PR is that more disadvantaged areas would have even less representation in Westminster. What do you think the solution to this would be under PR?
Bing bong
Oh nish, what happened? Femi? Really?
Hi!
Like no. 420. Nice.
Vote reform 🇬🇧🏴🇯🇲🇱🇰
It is commemoration not celebration. Nish mate, get it right.