Date Posted: April 11, 2011
Print Edition: April 8, 2011
By Trevor Fik (Staff Writer) – Email
In an electoral system where a party can get one million votes across the country and still not come away with a seat in parliament, voters are becoming increasingly indifferent to the Canadian political system. This is aggravated by the fact that an immensely unpopular federal election approaches just as the Canadian economy is beginning to emerge from the ruins of a recession. With voter apathy at an unprecedented high, those casting their ballot not wishing to throw away their vote have begun to adopt the practice of strategic voting.
Strategic voting (sometimes referred to as “negative voting”) is a system by which individual voters cast their ballot based on keeping a front-running candidate from winning, rather than voting for who they would prefer to win. This system, while seen as wasting a vote by some, allows for individuals who would otherwise not vote at all to have a say in the democratic system.
The Canadian first-past-the-post voting system is particularly susceptible to strategic voting, as it does not allow for majority representation. A candidate can win a seat in parliament without coming away with the majority of votes, as long as he has more than the other guy. Keeping votes from a front running candidate, while voting for a third or fourth place party, can be an effective means by which to control the outcome of an election.
Strategic voting can also be a way by which you can have a say on a party’s platform and issues, when you would otherwise let your opinion fall by the wayside in the face of indifference.
At VoteForEnvironment.ca, Toronto environmentalist and founder of NOW magazine Kevin Grandia set up a website preceding the 2008 federal election that tracked voting in each Canadian riding in order to give voters an idea of how to best dispose of the front-running Conservative Party. Grandia set up the site based on his passion for the environment, and his displeasure at the Conservative platform regarding it.
For those interested in the issues, but less than enthused about the politics, strategic voting is an outlet by which people can have their say on topics while keeping a safe distance from the venomous political landscape.
Political candidates are not immune to the effects of strategic voting, as noted with one Ontario NDP member who pulled out of the upcoming federal election and threw his endorsement behind the second place Liberal party. Ryan Dolby of the Elgin-Middlesex-London riding shocked the NDP brass by withdrawing his candidacy in favour of the trailing Liberal party.
“I think it’s the best decision on behalf of my family, my community, and my country to do whatever I can to make sure there isn’t a Conservative victory, especially in this riding,” noted Dolby.
While this way of voting may seem like an ineffective stop gap against a failing democratic system, it allows voters a chance to be part of the political realm at a time when they would sooner not be involved. Fulfillment of a civic duty such as voting is important as it allows for individuals to have a say in government. Even if the vote comes from the place of not wanting somebody to win a seat in parliament, it is the ability to take action that defines the democratic system.
It does seem rather undemocratic in a progressive society to vote for someone who you are not entirely convinced will make an adequate leader. While many place their vote based on perceived leadership qualities, the political realm is increasingly becoming about picking the lesser of two evils. At its core however the democratic system is about allowing the people to have a say in who is in control of government and what those in control do to properly govern the nation. While strategic voting may not be ideal, in the fragmented world of Canadian politics it is the most positive approach.
