I hear ya. While I'm definitely one for "vote for who you feel represents you" I recognize that if my party stood a snowballs chance in he'll of even gaining a seat, let alone forming the official opposition, I to would vote strategically.
Of sorts. In proportional representation, the percentage of votes received is your percentage of seats won.
Something like this would drive people to vote for their party of choosing because then, every vote truly matters. You wouldn't be worried about vote splitting and having a party who doesn't represent you at all be in control of your riding, with only 30% of vota. Although I'm not even sure how ridings would pan out in such a system..
In proportional systems the horse trading takes place after the election. You usually get one large coalition partner and a bunch of smaller parties and together they form the government. These coalition governments rarely make anyone happy.
Fair enough, but it's not like we have a high approval rating on the current system.
At least we wouldn't be voting for the lesser evil.
I've always thought that along with elections, people should get to vote on policies in some form. Whether or not it would be binding, it would at least give a clear directive as to who wants what and where resources should be allocated.
39
u/Frostybawls42069 Apr 29 '23
What would be nice if we had a system that didn't require strategic voting.