Be careful if voting tactically. Because one site just made a massive cock-up.

Jo Swinson and Jeremy Corbyn
Support us and go ad-free

British politics is a mess, and it desperately needs a radical overhaul. Because under our current electoral system, some votes simply matter more than others. And tactical voting – having to vote for a party that’s not your first choice just because it has the greatest chance of winning – is all too often a necessity (particularly for progressives). But this election, there have been warnings of dodgy tactical-voting sites that are misleading voters. And a massive howler from one site could help to re-elect the Tories.

Absolute nonsense that could hand Boris Johnson the keys to Number 10

As ‘tactical.vote‘ highlighted on Twitter on 10 December, one recommendation from ‘Remain United‘ advocated voting for the Liberal Democrat candidate in Kensington – a seat which Labour currently controls – even though Labour was the main challenger to the Tories:

Read on...

Support us and go ad-free

Shortly after this tweet, The Canary checked the site and got the same result:

As actor Rob Delaney pointed out, the 2017 election results clearly show that the Lib Dems were *not* the main challenger to the Tories:

The current Lib Dem candidate, meanwhile, is Sam Gyimah – who was actually a Tory minister just last year. And his terrible voting record has seen him opposing “equality and human rights” laws, higher taxes for the super-rich, and climate action – all while backing privatisation, welfare cuts, and military interventions abroad. In short, he’s Tory through and through.

To be fair, Remain United “updated” its statistics after tactical.vote highlighted its dodgy position. But it only did so in a desperate attempt to justify backing Gyimah:

As tactical.vote responded:

The Canary has previously highlighted that there are numerous cases where Lib Dems are seeking the ‘progressive’ vote in seats where Labour is the main challenger to the Tories.

Be clear on who to trust

Some of the most marginal seats in the country are Dudley North, Newcastle-under-Lyme, Southampton Itchen, Richmond Park, and Crewe and Nantwich. As an example of how the Tories have screwed over these areas, the NHS in Dudley will be suffering to the tune of £182m a year by 2023 as a result of Conservative-led underfunding. The figure is £113m in North Staffordshire, £140m in Southampton, £110m in Richmond, and £103m in South Cheshire. The Tories have also made school funding cuts in these areas, and don’t plan to reverse these cuts any time soon. The Lib Dems, meanwhile, supported Conservative-led ideological austerity, and Swinson in particular has a terrible voting record. And that’s why lies about tactical voting could be so damaging.

While several tactical-voting sites seem to have a highly questionable Lib Dem bias, tactical.vote and tacticalvote.co.uk seem to be the most trustworthy. They agree that Lib Dems are only the main challengers to the Tories in a tiny handful of seats, and that a vote for Labour is the best choice almost everywhere. In the five ultra-marginal seats above, for example, Labour is the recommendation in all except Richmond Park.

Our current electoral system means tactical voting is vital if we want to get the Tories out of power. But be very careful whom you trust. And look at both the 2017 election results and tactical.vote’s recommendations. Because one misplaced vote could give Boris Johnson the keys to Number 10.

Featured image via YouTube – Good Morning Britain / Wikimedia – Sophie J. Brown

Support us and go ad-free

We need your help to keep speaking the truth

Every story that you have come to us with; each injustice you have asked us to investigate; every campaign we have fought; each of your unheard voices we amplified; we do this for you. We are making a difference on your behalf.

Our fight is your fight. You’ve supported our collective struggle every time you gave us a like; and every time you shared our work across social media. Now we need you to support us with a monthly donation.

We have published nearly 2,000 articles and over 50 films in 2021. And we want to do this and more in 2022 but we don’t have enough money to go on at this pace. So, if you value our work and want us to continue then please join us and be part of The Canary family.

In return, you get:

* Advert free reading experience
* Quarterly group video call with the Editor-in-Chief
* Behind the scenes monthly e-newsletter
* 20% discount in our shop

Almost all of our spending goes to the people who make The Canary’s content. So your contribution directly supports our writers and enables us to continue to do what we do: speaking truth, powered by you. We have weathered many attempts to shut us down and silence our vital opposition to an increasingly fascist government and right-wing mainstream media.

With your help we can continue:

* Holding political and state power to account
* Advocating for the people the system marginalises
* Being a media outlet that upholds the highest standards
* Campaigning on the issues others won’t
* Putting your lives central to everything we do

We are a drop of truth in an ocean of deceit. But we can’t do this without your support. So please, can you help us continue the fight?

The Canary Support us
  • Show Comments
    1. Tactical voting makes cheats of us all if we are impelled, forced, persuaded to vote against a political party we might otherwise vote for. ‘First past the post’ is a form of democracy for a corrupt society that deserves voting in a government that they eventually find wasn’t the government they wanted. ‘First past the post’ (a horse racing term) is a gamble, a high stakes hope-and-pray ballot-chit handed to ballot-bookies. Whatever government ‘races past the post first’ will have achieved so through the most cynical corruption we so patronisingly accuse other world regimes operating, as they most certainly do, with their manipulated general and municipal elections.

    Leave a Reply

    Join the conversation

    Please read our comment moderation policy here.