Review of Tactical Voting Websites

LCER's Malcolm Clark has reviewed a selection of the websites specifically created to encourage tactical voting at this election. Their analysis and contribution to the electoral reform debate was assessed on 31 March 2005 and may change as the election campaign progresses. If you feel that a site's comments / position do not accurately reflect your Labour candidate - or if you wish to encourage the site to explore the issue of voting reform and its benefits in more depth - please contact the website directly and make your views known.

So Now Who Do We Vote For?   http://sonowwhodowevotefor.net

The site, a logical follow-on by John Harris to his book of the same title, bills itself as a resource for disillusioned Labour voters. It advocates anti-Labour tactical voting only in safe Labour seats and where there is a strong Lib Dem/Nationalist challenge to a loyal New Labour candidate. The need for electoral reform is mentioned, though it is disappointing not to see it as prominently or passionately discussed as in the book. The site is easy to navigate and, creditably, is the only one to combine an editorial ‘steer’ on who to vote for together with comments from constituents and other tactical voting websites, enabling people to make up their own mind on whose advice to follow. Importantly for LCER, the site does take account of an MP’s overall stance on issues like electoral reform and also takes a more nuanced view of the parliamentary votes on Iraq. As Harris notes in his recommendation to vote Labour in the Lab-Lib Dem marginal in Bristol West:

“This site starts from the idea that the Labour Party should be aligned in a more social democratic, pro-public sector, pro-equality, internationalist direction. Valerie Davey would so clearly be part of that shift that it barely needs restating. Also, Iraq-wise, we don't subscribe to the idea that only MPs who voted the right way on 118 are in the clear. Division 117, had it been won, would have made it impossible to go to war. Rebelling on 118 involved voting against the government when that decision had already been lost. In that sense, it seems unnecessarily hard-line to only back the small number of Labour MPs who voted against the government on the latter. So, to repeat: Vote Labour in Bristol West, we're saying.”

The same type of points can be made for MPs like Anne Campbell in Cambridge; and Harris duly does that. He recommends voting Labour in Cambridge and mentions that Campbell “opposed military action against Iraq and resigned from her position as PPS to Patricia Hewitt over the issue, and also opposed the government's proposals for top-up fees”. Well done to him for producing such intelligent analysis and setting the benchmark for other sites to follow.

Tactical Voter      www.tacticalvoter.net

The popular anti-Tory site from last time is back, and now its sights are set firmly on high profile Conservative MPs with small majorities. Tacticalvoter.net defines itself as “an independent campaign … supported by voters frustrated by the current voting system”. Yet, apart from a few mentions on the accompanying blog, this theme is not much elaborated upon. The most useful aspect of the site, once it is fully operational, will be its “vote-swapping” feature, where-by voters can make a pact to ‘swap’ their vote with someone in another constituency, by agreeing to support each other's parties, and have the best chance of beating the Conservatives in both seats. One disappointment is that the site does not make a distinction between seats that were safe in 2001 and ones that, due to the current political climate, are no longer so. Thus seats such as Cambridge, won in 1992, where Labour is now facing a strong challenge from the Lib Dems, are treated no differently from heartland seats such as the Prime Minister’s own constituency. Better for the site to recognise the threat that anti-Labour tactical voting might do in those constituencies and revert to its standard advice for Lab-Lib Dem marginals: that “as the site is neutral between Labour and the Liberal Democrats, we don't get involved in straight contests between the two progressive parties”.

Strategic Voter       www.strategicvoter.org.uk

This site advocates voting tactically for anti-war candidates and the best placed anti-war party in each constituency. The site’s aim is to punish the government over the Iraq war, and to get a more pro-peace House of Commons. The site is impressively put-together and easy to navigate. It has several unique functions: quick breakdowns of marginal seats into their different categories of contest; a note of the potential ‘size of the tactical voting pool’ in each constituency; and, controversially, a calculation of where the parties currently stand in each seat. The methodology used and the recommendations that result are open to question; especially as Labour MPs who voted against the war in important parliamentary votes and amendments but not on the final resolution are considered fair game. Furthermore, little account is taken of the ability of experienced Labour backbenchers to influence the future direction of their party and Parliament, compared to new MPs from Lib Dems or minor parties. Tactical voting against pro-war Labour MPs in Lab-Conservative contests could also have damaging consequences, allowing the Tory candidate to win and thus diminishing the prospects of the peace and democratic reform agenda.

A redeeming feature of Strategic Voter is that has by far the most information about electoral reform than any of the other tactical voting sites. Its step-by-step guide on the current voting system is highly accessible and well written, cogently arguing the case for reform and why it should be such a central part of the progressive agenda. Not only this, but the site editors have taken on board suggestions to include a special section on Labour MPs who support electoral reform and to ensure that such support is reflected in their commentary on the relevant constituencies.

Vote 4 Peace       www.vote4peace.org.uk

This site is specifically aimed at providing support and financial backing to selected pro-peace MPs and candidates standing in marginal constituencies at the election. A number of LCER-supporting MPs (David Drew, John Grogan, Christine McCafferty, Tony Clarke, Tony McWalter, Derek Wyatt) are among that list. The people behind the site are hoping to “build support for a constructive politics of peace and democracy” – so one assumes they are electoral reformers, even though this is not made explicit.

Backing Blair      www.backingblair.co.uk

An ironic title, as the site advocates voting anti-Labour in all but the thirteen seats with the most rebellious Labour MPs. The analysis on this site is polemical and lacks any political sophistication. The recommendation in each constituency is simply to vote for the second placed party in an effort to reduce the number of Labour MPs. Electoral reform does not seem to be on this site’s agenda; only getting rid of Blair.

Elsewhere on the web ......

the Chartist         www.chartist.org.uk
features articles on tactical voting, including one by Kingston PPC Nick Parrott.