Monday, May 26, 2014

A vote for Andrea is a vote for Hudak? Nonsense

This election I’ve heard a lot of rhetoric from Liberals attempting to weasel votes instead of earning them.

In fact, that’s why we have an election on our hands: Liberals feeling entitled to support they didn’t earn.

Instead of Wynne seeking support for her 2014 budget, she ran attack ads. Instead of delivering on her 2013 budget promises, she broke them. Instead of working with the NDP, she issued ultimatums.

Instead of giving Andrea Horwath something to believe in, Liberals expected her to abandon her principles and overlook years of corruption, waste and mismanagement.


Now Liberals have the gall to say: a vote for Andrea Horwath is a vote for Tim Hudak. Not only is this sleazy rhetoric anti-democratic, nothing could be further from the truth.

Under our corrupt voting system First-Past-the-Post, a party only needs 40% of the vote to get 4 years of absolute power (instead of a 50% absolute majority in the developed world.)

But considering Hudak is on the right side of the political spectrum, that means he needs 40% of the right-leaning vote to win a majority — not the left.

Left votes don’t benefit Hudak

So whether a left-leaning person votes Liberal or NDP, it won’t benefit Hudak.

The real danger lies in the Liberal party alienating right-leaning voters — like Jeffrey Simpson — trying to out-left the NDP.

Since the Liberals are in the center, it’s their job to split the right-leaning vote and keep the neo-con party out of 40% majority territory.

Real Liberal agenda

The real reason the Liberals want left-leaning votes — the real reason Wynne forced this election in the first place — is so the Liberals could win their own fake majority.

In 2011, they missed a majority by one seat. This time around Wynne’s strategy is to squeeze out the NDP to win all the power.


Like Andrea, don’t be coerced into abandoning your principles to prop up a corrupt and regressive Liberal party that has made life hard for struggling families over the past 11 years. Vote with your conscience.

If you are a progressive voter, why vote for a party suddenly pretending to be the NDP when you can vote for the real thing?

Andrea is the real deal. Her platform is the most progressive. She has no reason to campaign from the left and govern from the right as Liberals are so fond of doing.


  1. "So whether a left-leaning person votes Liberal or NDP, it won’t benefit Hudak." - this is nonsense.

    In a close contest between the OLP and PCs, a left-leaning vote for the NDP removes by one the number of votes the PCs need to get in order to win. For instance, say it was 40-40-20 for PC-OLP-NDP. If one of those lib supporters votes NDP instead it is the PCs go from a tie to winning. So yes, absolutely, voting NDP instead of the Liberal party helps the PCs in any riding where it is a contest between the PCs and the OLP and the NDP doesn't stand a chance of winning (the majority of close ridings).

    Surprised that someone with a blog dedicated to voting reform wouldn't understand this most basic point about our current system.

    1. I do understand the issue. Your hypothetical numbers, however, are meaningless.

      In 2011, for example, Harper won 54% of the seats on 40% of the vote. This is because of center-left vote splitting. It allowed Harper to win dozens of center-left ridings. If we had PR or ranked ballot voting, this would not have happened.

      So the vote-splitting effect means the Cons win a majority at 40% of the vote instead of 50% like in countries that have democratic voting systems.

      The Liberal party straddles the center. They have to reach leftwards and rightwards to get votes. If their platform is too far to the left or unappealing to right-leaning voters, the Con party will get 40% or more of the vote and win a majority.

      So all the action happens on the RIGHT side of the spectrum. If Iggy had managed to win just a couple percentage points of blue Liberal or red Tory votes, he would've kept Harper out of majority territory (e.g. 38% like 2008,) then the NDP & Liberals would've formed the government. (Like they could've in 2008 - but Iggy rejected the coalition.)

      Same goes for the Ontario election. If Wynne allows Hudak to win 40% of the vote, it's game over. But it will be because of Wynne's failure to secure those right-leaning votes, not because of anything that happens on the LEFT-side of the spectrum.

      Frankly, if the PCs had a competent leader and Wynne was running on her "out-left the NDP" platform, the PCs would've easily gotten 45% of the vote - landslide majority.

      So one can only hope that Hudak's incompetence outweighs Wynne's.

      As for left-leaning votes, the Liberals are not entitled to them. This is a democracy. They must earn them.


Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.