Putting lipstick on a pig but its still a pig

[TOM4CWB]

Grassy,

Every single person who is eligible to vote... should vote.

To say you are smarter than every one else who does not agree with your point of view... is why bloody wars got/get started!

Islamic State... for instance!

[newguy]

Tom if everyone who was eligible to vote voted Harper would be toast for sure.

[stonepicker]

You guys are so worried about harper being in government that you can't see and enjoy the world around you! But ya i get your point of view, everybody who disagree's with you is wrong.

[grassfarmer]

TOM, You really don't understand the point I'm making do you?
I'm all for everyone voting, the more the merrier.
Just pointing out that Canadians seem to have little experience of tactical voting compared to what we had in Europe.

For example my constituency in the upcoming AB election. Traditionally a PC seat but elected Joe Anglin under the WR banner last time only for the WR party to turn on him and set up his constituency chairman to contest his candidacy. So now Joe, our sitting MLA is standing as an independent. WR is running their rather unpopular candidate and the PCs are running plus an NDP.
It's really a 3 horse race and clearly there are enough people disgruntled with the PCs as was shown by the election of the WR candidate last time. It looks to me like the anti-PC vote will split between the WR and the Independent allowing the PCs to win. This is where voters need to get tactical and vote en masse for either the WR or Independent candidate (including the NDP voters whose vote is essentially wasted in this instance if they vote NDP)
I don't think they will, whereas in Europe this kind of thing does happen. Sometimes a candidate would even hint in the closing days of an election race if they were trailing in the polls that they wouldn't mind their supporters voting tactically for another candidate if it helped the greater cause.
I think people here will vote on traditional party lines and a majority anti-PC constituency will finish up electing a PC candidate.

That was my point and although this example talks about defeating a PC candidate there are places where it may apply to defeating an NDP or Liberal candidates if it results in better overall Government.

[Tucker]

You know Grassy that didn't seem to be a problem for you socialists when it was the PC and Reform splitting the right wing vote for a decade.

[grassfarmer]

Thats the kind of dumb-ass reply that will ensure our politics won't change.
I'm not a socialist and I wasn't here when that was happening so don't blame it on me.

As I said I for one am prepared to hold my nose and vote tactically if it is for the good of the democracy, I've done it before and I'd do it again - including voting PC if that were needed.

Guarantee you'd never vote for a mildly left wing party that you would wrongly call "socialist" though.

And so we continue with huge majority, long reign Governments that we all know breed entitlement, corruption and poor governance.

[Jay-mo]

"Just pointing out that Canadians seem to have little experience of tactical voting compared to what we had in Europe."

Seems like Europe is the place to be!

[TOM4CWB]

Grassy
Democratic systems results in the best governments even though you don't like them.
We get the government we deserve.
Which is the one that is elected.
I'm Looking at this from 10,000'
Alberta folks were right last election.
They will be correct this time as well.
Cheers!

[grassfarmer]

Oh yeah, Alison Redford was a real winner. *facepalm*

[tweety]

Too complicated for this sask dummy. You don't know what others are voting so its hard to be strategic. Kinda like a poker game, you only know once the cards are played