General Question

Navicerts's avatar

Does strategic voting break democracy?

Asked by Navicerts (1points) April 24th, 2008

People love to give their vote to “winners”, it frustrates me that people don’t simply take an objective look at the candidates and choose the one that they think will best lead the nation. Some people do this to an extreme extent with a 100% strategic vote while the majority pick one of the top 2 candidates (per party), imo.

Observing members: 0 Composing members: 0

3 Answers

wildflower's avatar

I think a two-party system and absolute majority is a bit stifling to a democracy. It isn’t true representation of the voting public. As a result I guess many voters have to choose ‘the lesser of two evils’ because the ideal is not on the ballot.

kevbo's avatar

I voted for Nader in 2000, which wasn’t very strategic, and yet democracy broke about as badly as one could imagine. (I suppose you could argue that proves your point.)

It would be nice to see multiple parties having to form coalitions. Perhaps someone from Europe could speak to the efficacy of a system with multiple parties.

wildflower's avatar

There’s obviously pros and cons to coalition governments. You can be pretty sure to have a candidate (and possibly MP) who represents your views and before any reforms or changes can be even suggested, they will have to be backed by the coalition.
The downside us of course that changes may happen very slowly as a result of all the interests involved

Answer this question




to answer.

This question is in the General Section. Responses must be helpful and on-topic.

Your answer will be saved while you login or join.

Have a question? Ask Fluther!

What do you know more about?
Knowledge Networking @ Fluther