,
21 tweets,
5 min read
Read on Twitter
Ok, there's quite a bit of difference between my suggested tactical voting strategy for the European elections on Thursday, and those being circulated by others. You can see the various recommendations compared in the graphic below. I will comment more later in this thread... 
Here's my original recommendation, in its own thread. It comes with some overall comments, then a region by region breakdown with an explanation of each of my choices.
COMMENTS ON THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN RECOMMENDATIONS
1. My working assumption has been that "Labour" is *never* the right answer, not for a pure pro-Remain vote, even if that means risking an extra MEP potentially going to the Brexit Party.
1. My working assumption has been that "Labour" is *never* the right answer, not for a pure pro-Remain vote, even if that means risking an extra MEP potentially going to the Brexit Party.
2. Also, I believe that Change UK simply don't have the numbers anywhere. I admire what they're trying to do, but they're just too far, and the polls have them going in the wrong direction (see attached poll summary).
3. Real tactical voting involves boosting the party with the best chance of gaining MEPs in a region, or hanging onto gains predicted by poll numbers. It's too simplistic to suggest voting for the frontrunner in every region (sorry, Remain United)
4. I have taken a more pessimistic approach than Remain Voter. Their recommendations are based on tactical voting to secure an *extra* MEP in each region. My assumption has been that in areas where a gained MEP is shaky, it's better to prop up that gain rather than reach further.
Why? Because polls aren't an exact science, and circumstances are changing all the time. What seems like a narrow edge now can still turn into a loss, and what looked like an extra MEP evaporates. Their approach isn't wrong, it's just more ambitious.
5. At the end of the day, everyone's trying to help - I believe sincerely - and it's not a contest. If you vote one of LibDem/Green in England, SNP in Scotland and PC in Wales, you won't go far wrong even if it's not "absolutely optimal".
And of course, if you were originally planning to vote any party other than the above, and switch to them, that's a gain for the forces of pro-Remain.
Hopefully the above makes the differences clearer. At the end of the day it's up to you. The critical thing is to vote!
Hopefully the above makes the differences clearer. At the end of the day it's up to you. The critical thing is to vote!
A word on methodology and psychology: I considered the 2014 election data, 2 recent YouGov regional polls & 1 recent ComRes regional poll, as well as the national polls in the graphic further up the thread. I also looked at direction of travel based on the national poll averages.
But I didn't build massive fancy spreadsheets with hundreds of variables and run tons of simulations. I just ran through d'Hondt on each of the regional polls, played with the numbers a bit based on the national polls, and pondered what that seemed to imply.
I also assumed that tactical voting is something relatively minor. In a sense, millions of voters will be voting tactically, by switching e.g. from Labour to the LD or Greens. But that's already baked into the changing poll numbers. We shouldn't double count it.
No, I am talking about tactical voting based on recommendations, like the ones discussed in this thread. With the best will in the world, most people aren't glued to social media, or waiting for an updated voting recommendation to drop into their inbox.
That doesn't make tactical voting useless. If anything it makes it more important than ever. When what we have is a nudge, it's good to apply it *right*. But it means any ideas of mass vote transfers on a huge scale are probably overreaching.
So it's no good looking at a region and saying e.g. "If a third of all the Green and Change UK voters do XYZ, then..." because it's simply not going to happen. This is probably going to be the most "tactical" European election ever. Certainly likely to be the most important.
But if we look reality square in the face, it's important to acknowledge that isn't going to mean millions of voters switching their allegiance at the very last minute. We can push as hard and far as we can, and we should. But even beyond tactics, it's vital to encourage turnout.
And that means getting your friends, your family, your colleagues to vote, and to vote for one of the pro-Remain party. That's real tactics right there: if you can encourage just one voter who otherwise wouldn't have voted, or would have voted for the "wrong" side, that's huge.
And if you can encourage, two, or half a dozen, or a dozen or more, well, you're helping to shape history at that point.
Best of luck. And thanks for reading this far. I didn't realise this thread would go as long as it did when I started it, but we've reached the end now!
Best of luck. And thanks for reading this far. I didn't realise this thread would go as long as it did when I started it, but we've reached the end now!
Added: If Change UK (as an example) are on 4% in an area and your plan says "boost the LibDems by 1% from Change UK supporters", that's not 1% of 4% because national polls quote % of the entire voting base. So to gain that 1% you need a quarter of all Change UK voters to act.
That's why I stressed the importance of realism further up this thread. What may seem a small % change compared to 100% (i.e. all voters) may actually require huge behavioural changes amongst the voters planning to vote for a given smaller party.
Reminder: in case your eye skipped over it further up this thread, here's my original thread of voting recommendations region by region, with an explanation of each choice.
