Thread by @uk_domain_names

Here's why tactical voting is so confusing and so difficult:
1. It needs to include Tory voters AND Labour voters.
2. "Stop the Tories" is not the same as "Stop Brexit".
3. Many Labour supporters want to focus tactics on STT.
4. Everyone else wants to focus tactics on SB.

Remember: even Labour Leave voters want to "Stop the Tories". But they don't want to "Stop Brexit". That's why STT isn't the same as SB.

This distinction may seem like splitting hairs, but it's critical to understanding the problem.

- For many Labour supporters (Leave & Remain) the very worst future is another 5 years of Tory rule.
- For most supporters of other parties, the very worst future is Brexit. But since we're being brutally honest, a majority Corbyn government doesn't look too hot to them either.

Labour supporters' solution: a Labour government. Ticks all the boxes: stops the Tories, and gives a softer Brexit (probably) or Remain (maybe).

Everyone else's solution: a coalition of likeminded parties, all of whom want to stop Brexit to some degree.

Here's the difficult bit. Deep, deep breath. And another. Ok, let's go.

Labour supporters, if they want to Stop the Tories, should accept everyone else's solution. Because it would definitely STT. If that's more important to them than Leave/Remain, then go for it.

So the "maximise the numbers for a coalition" strategy has several advantages:
1. It could attract *some* Labour Leavers too because it will STT
2. It doesn't put off voters from other parties because Corbyn won't get his majority
3. It makes tactical voting "easier"

Let's expand on 3.

If the decision is to maximise overall MP numbers for a coalition, then tactical voting should aim to put *one of the future coalition partner's MPs into power*. In some seats that will be Labour, others LD, others SNP or whatever.

Nobody wins everything. Everyone wins some. And overall the future coalition gets a lot more MPs than it would otherwise.

Or we can go with what we have now, which is a mess.