Why I won't be voting tactically

[altariel]

Meanwhile, in the present, the rough beast of the election slouches on - apparently the fate of the nation lies solely in the hands of a few lunatic tactical voters in Royston Vasey, or perhaps it was a Daschund called Colin, I forget now. Every other piece of political propaganda popping through my letterbox earnestly exhorts me to cast a tactical vote in order to keep out whoever.

Back, back, ye demons of cynicism! I shall not make my already meagre contribution to democracy even more pointless! I shall cast a vote that roughly approximates to my beliefs! The BBC as ever provides: here I may compare and contrast the relative merits of arsenic, strychnine, and hemlock. And on May 5th I shall take my poison, secure in the knowledge that I may have only cried out in the wilderness, but at least it was for something I nearly believe in.

Comments

[iainjcoleman.livejournal.com]

I don't have the data to answer that question directly. The best I can do is to point to a recent ICM opinion poll which asked the question "If you thought that the Liberal Democrats could win in your constituency would you vote for them, not change your vote, or switch to another party?" The results were:

Liberal Democrat 39%
Labour 31%
Conservative 26%

This would be a very different political landscape, in which the Liberal Democrats would hold many more seats (including, interestingly, North East Hertfordshire).