Voting Strategically and Responsibly
E-Day minus 8
As we enter the final week of the election
campaign, the Conservatives haven’t moved any closer to a majority. In fact, they may have fallen back. The latest Nanos poll reports a 2% point drop in CPC
support in the past two days to 29% – back to where it was when the campaign started.
The trade deal and niqab controversy haven't helped them.
The Liberals have moved ahead of the NDP in projected seat counts. Will a Liberal surge of strategic voting cause the NDP vote to collapse, or will the NDP regain ground in the last eight days? The polls cannot be relied on to answer this question.
The final election results will be determined in part by the effectiveness of the two campaigns, including their capacity to get out their vote, and the NDP's ability to hold off the Bloc’s challenge in Quebec. For the most part, however, the results will turn on how anti-Harper voters resolve the tensions created by having to choose between three parties – and, in Quebec, four.
I have only really suffered from that kind of painful indecision once in my lifetime. In 1975, I was tempted to forsake my deeply rooted party loyalty to vote "strategically", but my gut led my brain to mark the ballot in a way that I later realized was entirely the correct decision. Not an expedient one but still a pragmatic one. It was one of many decisions, taken over many decades, to help build a social democratic movement strong enough to provide an option to alternating Conservative and Liberal governments.
You see, I had a CCF sign on my tricycle when I was three. Most of us don’t have as well developed a political reflex as I have.
In this election, strategic voting has come to mean casting a vote to achieve a single and immediate tactical goal: ousting an unpopular Prime Minister. And that is undoubtedly an important consideration given the rules of our electoral system.
In this final week, however, we can also pause for broader strategic thinking: reflecting on the point or purpose of the whole democratic exercise and rebalancing a set of short, medium and long term goals.
It is one thing to remove the present government, but who and what should take its place? Why vote if not for something as much as against something?
We can vote for a policy platform – as a whole or in parts.
We can vote for a change of personnel in Ottawa.
We can vote for a new Parliament – a certain mix of MPs to constrain or enable a government until the next election.
And, we can make our X work harder by setting our expectations even higher. We can vote for the Canada we want to live in and hope to leave our grandchildren. We can also choose to support a democratic movement that organizes us around a shared vision, clear principles and a concrete set of policies and programs.
As we head to our respective polling places, this kind of strategic thinking leads us to ask different questions. What were the conditions that gave rise to these political parties and formed their leaders? How did they perform in the past when faced with a crisis or an opportunity? What does their track record tell us about how they will lead when the pressures of office are greater than those of the campaign?
I remember who turned back Jewish refugees from Nazi Germany seeking entry into Canada in 1938. I remember who sought to deport Canadians of Japanese descent at the end of the Second World War. I remember who implemented the War Measures Act in 1970. And I'll never forget who, in the face of public hostility, stood up against these policies.
Today, I know who spoke for me when Bill C-51 was introduced in the House of Commons. I know who stood up to Harper and Duceppe when they injected the sensitive and divisive niqab issue into this election – and who was not pushed off a principled position despite the political costs. And I know who was quick to respond with compassion and intelligence to the world's most recent refugee crisis.
Others will have a different view of history and different priorities for the future. That’s really what elections and voting are about. That’s what I think it means, in the end, to vote strategically and responsibly.
Yesterday, I voted in the Advance Poll. I was again struck by the fact that voting turns us into citizens and makes us a country. The place where I voted, the Lakefield Scout Hall, felt special – almost celebratory – with its Elections Canada signs and officers there to help us exercise our franchise. I signed in and picked up my ballot, lingering a bit to chat with my neighbours after marking the spot that has earned my X and deserves my support over the long haul.
The Liberals have moved ahead of the NDP in projected seat counts. Will a Liberal surge of strategic voting cause the NDP vote to collapse, or will the NDP regain ground in the last eight days? The polls cannot be relied on to answer this question.
The final election results will be determined in part by the effectiveness of the two campaigns, including their capacity to get out their vote, and the NDP's ability to hold off the Bloc’s challenge in Quebec. For the most part, however, the results will turn on how anti-Harper voters resolve the tensions created by having to choose between three parties – and, in Quebec, four.
I have only really suffered from that kind of painful indecision once in my lifetime. In 1975, I was tempted to forsake my deeply rooted party loyalty to vote "strategically", but my gut led my brain to mark the ballot in a way that I later realized was entirely the correct decision. Not an expedient one but still a pragmatic one. It was one of many decisions, taken over many decades, to help build a social democratic movement strong enough to provide an option to alternating Conservative and Liberal governments.
You see, I had a CCF sign on my tricycle when I was three. Most of us don’t have as well developed a political reflex as I have.
In this election, strategic voting has come to mean casting a vote to achieve a single and immediate tactical goal: ousting an unpopular Prime Minister. And that is undoubtedly an important consideration given the rules of our electoral system.
In this final week, however, we can also pause for broader strategic thinking: reflecting on the point or purpose of the whole democratic exercise and rebalancing a set of short, medium and long term goals.
It is one thing to remove the present government, but who and what should take its place? Why vote if not for something as much as against something?
We can vote for a policy platform – as a whole or in parts.
We can vote for a change of personnel in Ottawa.
We can vote for a new Parliament – a certain mix of MPs to constrain or enable a government until the next election.
And, we can make our X work harder by setting our expectations even higher. We can vote for the Canada we want to live in and hope to leave our grandchildren. We can also choose to support a democratic movement that organizes us around a shared vision, clear principles and a concrete set of policies and programs.
As we head to our respective polling places, this kind of strategic thinking leads us to ask different questions. What were the conditions that gave rise to these political parties and formed their leaders? How did they perform in the past when faced with a crisis or an opportunity? What does their track record tell us about how they will lead when the pressures of office are greater than those of the campaign?
I remember who turned back Jewish refugees from Nazi Germany seeking entry into Canada in 1938. I remember who sought to deport Canadians of Japanese descent at the end of the Second World War. I remember who implemented the War Measures Act in 1970. And I'll never forget who, in the face of public hostility, stood up against these policies.
Today, I know who spoke for me when Bill C-51 was introduced in the House of Commons. I know who stood up to Harper and Duceppe when they injected the sensitive and divisive niqab issue into this election – and who was not pushed off a principled position despite the political costs. And I know who was quick to respond with compassion and intelligence to the world's most recent refugee crisis.
Others will have a different view of history and different priorities for the future. That’s really what elections and voting are about. That’s what I think it means, in the end, to vote strategically and responsibly.
Yesterday, I voted in the Advance Poll. I was again struck by the fact that voting turns us into citizens and makes us a country. The place where I voted, the Lakefield Scout Hall, felt special – almost celebratory – with its Elections Canada signs and officers there to help us exercise our franchise. I signed in and picked up my ballot, lingering a bit to chat with my neighbours after marking the spot that has earned my X and deserves my support over the long haul.
Good sense of history
ReplyDeleteFortunately in Courtenay-Port Alberni I can vote both strategically and principally with my single X. Bout I still think the most important thing is to get rid of Harper.