Had a thought (tactical voting)

holnrew

I was having a poo and wondered whether this would work... Instead of announcing the number of votes each candidate got in each constituency, just announce the winner. Then people won't know how close the race was and would be more likely to vote for who they want. Is this feasible or is it dumb?

Moe_Zambeek

So, don't tell anyone the tally of votes once they're counted, so they can't just jump in their time machine, go back a day and change their vote based on the actual result? 

Interesting plan

ICBM

How about a better idea - replace the undemocratic FPTP system, which usually rewards the largest minority rather than the majority and encourages tactical voting, with a better system of election which represents the electorate fairly and makes tactical voting irrelevant?

http://www.electoral-reform.org.uk/single-transferable-vote

Emp_Fab

ICBM said:

How about a better idea - replace the undemocratic FPTP system, which usually rewards the largest minority rather than the majority and encourages tactical voting, with a better system of election which represents the electorate fairly and makes tactical voting irrelevant?

http://www.electoral-reform.org.uk/single-transferable-vote

As correct as you are, let's just abandon that idea.  The public were offered the opportunity to move towards a more proportional system a few years back with the AV referendum and they emphatically choose the status quo. 

Thus reinforcing my long-held belief that most people are morons.

ICBM

Emp_Fab said:

The public were offered the opportunity to move towards a more proportional system a few years back with the AV referendum and they emphatically choose the status quo. 

Thus reinforcing my long-held belief that most people are morons.

No, they were offered a rigged choice between the status quo and an alternative which was perceived to favour the larger established parties - arguably the worst of all systems. They - probably rightly - chose to reject that.

The moron was Clegg, who ran straight into Cameron's intentional trap.

chrispy108

Or people could just vote for what they want and see what happens.

Here's Brighton Pavillion:
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/24/BrightonPavilionGraph.png

Did the people voting for the Green party waste their vote in the years until they won? No, because if they hadn't voted for them, people wouldn't have voted for them and won the seat.

The press and people on social media are happy to repeat clichés like "safe seat" and bang on about majorities, but then talk about "wasted votes". Last time I looked at this there were a couple of seats in the country were the majority was bigger than the number of non-voters, yet the people tell you it's a safe seat so don't bother voting. If the size of the majority matters (it does - it sends a strong signal about what policies people in that region want) then your vote hasn't been wasted.

Axe_meister

How about we move elections to a saturday/sunday and make voting compulsary.
 

strtdv

STV has its drawbacks too, see the Northern Ireland Assembly for more on this..

Heartfeltdawn

Axe_meister said:

How about we move elections to a saturday/sunday and make voting compulsary.
 

Overall costs would increase immensely through having to pay election staff more to work at the weekend. There would be issues around whether weekend voting would affect certain classes of voter in terms of turnout far more than others (for example, hotel and hospitality sectors would say the weekend was their busiest time. Polling attendance is liable to be harder for those folk if held at weekends). 

The Sun had an article that says the Electoral Commission had a 2008 consultation and found little evidence to say that voting figures would increase if voting were to be held on a Sunday. 

Legionreturns

It would mean schools that are used as polling stations don't have to close for the day, saving lots in childcare or lost wages for some

Heartfeltdawn

Legionreturns said:

It would mean schools that are used as polling stations don't have to close for the day, saving lots in childcare or lost wages for some

About 1 in 10 schools are used for polling duties. Not all of them close. Some reported for 2015 that they arranged off-school visits for classes/year groups rather than shutting down completely. Obviously that is far harder to do with a snap election that gives you sod all prep time. 

Sunday voting would mean some savings in childcare and reduced lost wages for some people but not all. This is one of the problems with approaching voting time using the '9 to 5' working schedule. Those people who don't work 9 to 5 Mon-Fri - what demographics will they be from? Will moving to Sunday disadvantage one group excessively? In the more service orientated world that we live in, it has to be considered. 

You then move onto faith groups. Voting on a Saturday would be seen as wrong by more Orthodox Jews and the Keep Sunday Special crowd would have plenty to say about Sunday voting. Interestingly Alex Salmond floated the idea that the ScotRef vote could be on a Saturday but the religious considerations came into play. 

Handsome_Chris

holnrew said:

I was having a poo and wondered whether this would work... Instead of announcing the number of votes each candidate got in each constituency, just announce the winner. Then people won't know how close the race was and would be more likely to vote for who they want. Is this feasible or is it dumb?

It is both feasible, in that it could easily be carried out, but also really dumb.

ICBM

To be honest I don't see what the problem with tactical voting is anyway, in lieu of a better electoral system.

Rocker

ICBM said:

How about a better idea - replace the undemocratic FPTP system, which usually rewards the largest minority rather than the majority and encourages tactical voting, with a better system of election which represents the electorate fairly and makes tactical voting irrelevant?

http://www.electoral-reform.org.uk/single-transferable-vote

This is the only election system that the results actually reflect the choices made by the voters.  Counting takes longer but so what?  An extra day or two hardly matters....

english_bob

Rocker said:

ICBM said:

How about a better idea - replace the undemocratic FPTP system, which usually rewards the largest minority rather than the majority and encourages tactical voting, with a better system of election which represents the electorate fairly and makes tactical voting irrelevant?

http://www.electoral-reform.org.uk/single-transferable-vote

This is the only election system that the results actually reflect the choices made by the voters.  Counting takes longer but so what?  An extra day or two hardly matters....

I can't work out whether you're defending first past the post or agreeing that single transferrable vote would be better.

PolarityMan

online voting, assuming it could be made secure would solve scheduling issues and vote counting issues, i bet it would increase turn out too.