Tactical Voting, a how-to:

nesf

I've seen quite a few posts from people questioning whether it's even possible to vote tactically against someone in the upcoming elections. It's very possible and I thought it might be useful to explain how it's done. This will be patently obvious to most of you but I hope a few people may find this interesting.

As an example I'll use the South constituency which is the one I'm most familiar with and which has a classic two horse race for the third seat that makes it easy to explain how to approach the situation. I'll also refer to the Dublin constituency for a more complicated example.

Generally tactical voting is only effective with "last seat" candidates. It's a bit pointless to waste effort tactically voting against someone who's practically guaranteed a seat (i.e. Brian Crowley and Sean Kelly in the South for example). However, often there is a lot of competition for that final seat and it indicates where your vote should go.

In this case the two horse race is Alan Kelly of Labour versus Kathy Sinnott an Independent. So, a vote for one is as good as a vote against the other. In my case, I've no particular liking for Alan Kelly but I dislike Kathy Sinnott a lot so I'll be giving Kelly my first preference. You can swap it around if you want to vote against Kelly.


In the Dublin constituency it's more interesting in that it's a three horse race between Mary Lou of SF, Eoin Ryan of FF and Joe Higgins of the Socialists. Here say you want to vote against Ryan, your ideal first and second preferences would be a combination of Joe Higgins and Mary Lou according to which you'd prefer to see take it.


In its essence, tactical voting is about not voting for who you prefer but who has the best chance of knocking out those you dislike most. It's a cynical way of approaching things but it's the best course of action if one particular candidate bothers you a lot.


Addendum: I didn't explain why you don't vote something like "Brian Crowley 1, Alan Kelly 2" and I feel that I probably should since some people might not realise how our election system works. In our national elections (and as far as I know in our European elections) only part of the votes from a candidate are redistributed as surplus. They do not look at all their votes and work out which way statistically the transfers should follow, they instead redistribute the ballots starting with the last one to be counted and working backwards from there. So if your vote happens to be counted early then there is almost no chance of it being redistributed in the surplus. For this reason you shouldn't give your first preference to a guaranteed seat winner if you want it to count later on. You should instead vote for Alan Kelly (in this example) as your number 1 or choose some candidate that is almost assured of being eliminated early on (such as local issue Independent with little popular backing, such as Alexander Stafford in the South constituency). The reason you'd go for the latter option is because by doing so your vote is moved towards the end of the line and stands a better chance of being counted late and of being moved on as surplus, so in this case you might vote "Alexander Stafford 1, Brian Crowley 2, Alan Kelly 3", with the goal of making sure Brian Crowley is elected while still aiming at making sure your vote passes on to Alan Kelly to help him win the third seat (because before your vote is added to Brian Crowley's pile, every first preference vote is counted first, so your vote would be ahead of all those to be passed on as surplus if there is one redistributed).

This of course assumes the PR system for the Euros works the same way as the PR system for our national elections. Regardless, you should bear this in mind for the Local elections as this is the system used there.

Scofflaw

It's also worth considering what nesf says if you are planning to give your first preference to someone who will probably make quota first time. Their surplus will be distributed, so you should, again, give your second preference to whichever of the other candidates in the race for the last seat you least dislike, to make it the more likely the one you really don't want to see in there doesn't get in.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Hitman Actual

Okay, what's the best tactical way to vote in the NW so, where the top three are relatively close, and the next three candidates are all relatively close with about half as many votes, according to the last poll:

Irish Times TNS/MRBI Poll wrote:

Declan Ganley of Libertas is stuck on just 9 per cent of the first-preference vote in the North West constituency and has shown no improvement since the last poll.


Pat “The Cope” Gallagher of Fianna Fáil, with 20 per cent, leads the field in the constituency, followed by Independent Marian Harkin, on 19 per cent, and Jim Higgins of Fine Gael, on 17 per cent.


The second Fine Gael candidate, Joe O’Reilly, has gained 2 points to 10 per cent, with a massive share of the vote in his native Cavan and the surrounding counties, while Sinn Féin candidate Pádraig MacLochlainn has slipped back to 9 per cent.

And by 'best tactical way', I mean for it to work against Ganley, obviously. Would trying to get transfers to Joe O'Reilly be the best way? Or is it best to just vote for the top 3, as it currently stands?

Edit: Getting transfers to Joe O'Reilly is obviously pointless, now that I think about it.

PopeBuckfastXVI

Hitman Actual wrote: »

Okay, what's the best tactical way to vote in the NW so, where the top three are relatively close, and the next three candidates are all relatively close with about half as many votes, according to the last poll:




And by 'best tactical way', I mean for it to work against Ganley, obviously. Would trying to get transfers to Joe O'Reilly be the best way? Or is it best to just vote for the top 3, as it currently stands?

Edit: Getting transfers to Joe O'Reilly is obviously pointless, now that I think about it.

I'm voting Harkin (19%), Higgins (17%), Gallagher (20%) in that order.

Bracketed figures are latest poll results.

There's no way Higgins is not getting elected when FG transfers come in to play, same probably with Gallagher and FF transfers (yep they're still there).

Harkin is the only possible target for Ganley, and even though she is quite secure I'm giving her my first preference. None of the others are getting in in NW.

sink

I'm in the Dublin constituency. My natural first preference would be for Gay Mitchell (FG) followed distantly by Eoin Ryan (FF) and Proinsias De Rossa (Lab). But I want to kick out Mary Lou MacDonald (SF) and keep out Patricia McKenna (Ind) at any cost (not concerned with Caroline Simmons as she doesn't have even a remote chance). Mitchell and De Rossa are all but guaranteed to be returned to their seats. So going by the latest polls I'm thinking of giving my first preference to Eoin Ryan and my second preference to Joe Higgins followed by Eibhlin Byrne and Deirdre De Burca. Is that the best way to keep those two out?

nesf

sink wrote: »

I'm in the Dublin constituency. My natural first preference would be for Gay Mitchell (FG) followed distantly by Eoin Ryan (FF) and Proinsias De Rossa (Lab). But I want to kick out Mary Lou MacDonald (SF) and keep out Patricia McKenna (Ind) at any cost (not concerned with Caroline Simmons as she doesn't have even a remote chance). Mitchell and De Rossa are all but guaranteed to be returned to their seats. So going by the latest polls I'm thinking of giving my first preference to Eoin Ryan and my second preference to Joe Higgins followed by Eibhlin Byrne and Deirdre De Burca. Is that the best way to keep those two out?

What's your position on Joe Higgins?

nesf

PopeBuckfastXVI wrote: »

Harkin is the only possible target for Ganley, and even though she is quite secure I'm giving her my first preference. None of the others are getting in in NW.

Indeed, Ganley has even gone as far as to publicly target her iirc. She's definitely in a more precarious position than either of the other two.

sink

nesf wrote: »

What's your position on Joe Higgins?

I don't agree with his politics but I can tolerate them. He seems honest and hard working with genuine concern for his constituents so while I wouldn't necessarily vote for him, I have no problem using him to vote against someone else for whom I have an active disliking.

Yoda

Anyone but The Chairman

PopeBuckfastXVI

nesf wrote: »

Indeed, Ganley has even gone as far as to publicly target her iirc. She's definitely in a more precarious position than either of the other two.

She's the only one who's transfers don't matter to him, if they're surplus transfers she's in and he's out, and if they're elimination transfers he's in and she's out. Either way it doesn't affect the outcome for him, it'll have been decided before the transfers.

BendiBus

I'll be voting DeBurca, Ryan, Higgins.

I want a strong green showing but don't expect her to win a seat. Ryan is next as he's my preference to keep Mary Lou out. I'd even prefer Higgins over the Shinner hence his third place.

And just to make it really clear, I'll then vote all the way down with McDonald in last.

nkay1985

I'm in the South and I'll be voting Ferris followed by Kelly. I don't think Ferris has a chance at getting in so I want to make sure my vote helps to keep Sinnott out. If Kelly gets in, I'll be looking proudly at the transfers from Ferris to him that get him elected knowing that I did my bit to keep her out!

is_that_so

In East it doesn't matter what way people vote as it seems obvious where the seats are going and the only question is whether you want FG to have two seats. If FG had had any sense they would have pushed for a lot more Phelan No. 1s , even in the north of the constituency, as McGuinness will walk it with a fairly decent sized surplus.

Beau

Right so for East, even though I prefer Childers I should vote Phelan No.1 to prevent Aylward getting in? or an Independent like Tallon 1, 2 Childers and then Phealen?

turgon

I followed this tactical voting. However I did give Colm Burke my no1, and A Kelly 2. However nesf thinks Burke doesnt stand a chance, I personally havent seen poll figures lately for some reason.

nkay1985

turgon wrote: »

I followed this tactical voting. However I did give Colm Burke my no1, and A Kelly 2. However nesf thinks Burke doesnt stand a chance, I personally havent seen poll figures lately for some reason.

Yeah it looks like he doesn't really stand a chance. It'd be huge for FG if they did manage two seats but it doesn't look like that's going to happen. So hopefully Alan Kelly will beat out Kathy Sinnott.

nesf

turgon wrote: »

I followed this tactical voting. However I did give Colm Burke my no1, and A Kelly 2. However nesf thinks Burke doesnt stand a chance, I personally havent seen poll figures lately for some reason.

Colm Burke faces the problem that there's not really enough FG votes to go around for two candidates and Sinnott will amass enough votes to be far ahead of him when the transfers come out. It's possible but I'd highly doubt he'll place ahead of either Alan Kelly or Kathy Sinnott when the votes are counted. We'll quite possibly see that his transfers are the decider between Kelly and Sinnott. Which would be interesting.

Our man in Havana

FG made a huge mistake in running 2 people in the south.

turgon

I dont think so, seems as Kelly will get in anyway.

turgon

RTE Exit poll shows Ferris at 15; Burke at 13; A Kelly 11 and Sinnot 10 or something like that.

The thing about Ferris is pretty sad, people just voting for her because shes hot. Stupid electorate, stupid candidates, stupid government.

We will have to wait for 22 hours before first round announced.