The myth of the “wasted vote”.
A wasted vote is voting for a candidate you don't believe in. If you are voting for a person who you believe can have a positive impact on your life, then it is not 'wasted'.
A “wasted vote” is not voting for an “underdog party”. A wasted vote is voting for a candidate you don’t believe in. If you are honestly voting for a person who you believe can have a positive impact on your life, then it is certainly not wasted.
Someone must be elected. If you believe the election is a two horse race - think again. Major parties can best formulate new policy positions for emerging public discourse with information they receive from their non-constituents. They want more votes and are more likely to attract “third-party” voters than “other-major-party” voters. Their policies are therefore adapted based on third-party polling figures. The third party vote is, therefore, the carrot that drives the donkey.
Imagine the following scenario:
Two “major party” candidates are running in a tight election in which there are also two “minor party” candidates - let’s call them the Brown Party and the Orange Party. The major parties poll 39% and 41% of the vote respectively, for a total of (80%). 41% wins. Meanwhile, Orange party polls 11% and Brown Party polls 9% - the remaining 20%. It’s highly likely that both major parties will - in the next election cycle - adopt some Orange party policy positions in order to attract that portion of the electorate: in the one case that 11% would surely put them in the winners column, and in the other case it would surely keep them there. At the same time, the victorious party may be content to appeal to the Brown party as that could potentially give them a leading edge.
As such, it is not third party votes that are thrown away. Quite the contrary: they may count the most in determining policy making even within the major parties.
Great Britain is a democracy: you have the power. There seems to exist a certain fatalism in this country, an overwhelming assumption that we cannot change the two party system - but we can, and all it needs is third-party votes. In the same way that companies will go where the money is, politicians will go where the votes are: we can disrupt the system by placing our votes elsewhere.
We want your views
who would you vote for? Be an advocate of Common Decencycommitting to our shared core beliefs - and vote for the Pillars of Common Decency.
Do some basic research on what is happening in your own constituency. Check out our constituency pages under MPs in the menu on this site.
Who might the "interesting" candidates be? Is your MP decent?
Would they sign up to Common Decency?
Please comment below or e-mail us on This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
People in this conversation
Comments (17)
-
I keep hearing about how people are going to vote for Big Party X to make sure that Big Party Y don't get into power. They don't like Big Party X but Big Party Y is worse and voting for little party Z is a wasted vote - because they will never get enough votes to be in power.
Well, no they won't if you keep giving your vote to another party!
It takes no effort at all to vote for the party you really want but a heck of a lot of effort to live with that truly wasted vote, term after term. -
I have always voted, the right to vote was campaigned for long before my time, we now take it as given that it is our right to have a vote, to have a say in our democracy. Well recently I have been so disgusted with all the parties, and the media, I am fed up with the name calling, the much raking and no real policies from anyone, that I decided not to vote in May. Well I watched the budget yesterday, I still have not decided who to vote for, but I don't think it will be current opposition, they all reminded me of the nodding dogs one used to see in the back windows of cars many years ago. Still have the choice to make, still no one party or for that matter one new idea or solution to our countries current problems have as yet surfaced, perhaps the televised leaders debate will help me make up my mind, but somehow I doubt it. I think what I am trying to get across is that all politicians of all parties should be seriously worried when voters like myself are finding politics such a put off that they no longer feel inclined to vote at all
-
during a discussion at work, a colleague indicated that he was going to vote for big party X, when asked how big party X would improve his life, the response was that big party X wouldn't improve his life. but If big party Y were elected his life would be worse. He supports a small party Z but feels that his vote for small party Z won't make a difference.
-
during a discussion at work, a colleague indicated that he was going to vote for big party X, when asked how big party X would improve his life, the response was that big party X wouldn't improve his life. but If big party Y were elected his life would be worse. He supports a small party Z but feels that his vote for small party Z won't make a difference.
-
I think the problem most people have is that they want to vote but that they feel that none of the candidates is worthy of their vote!
My personal view is that we in the UK ought to have the "none of the above" option on the ballot paper. By having that option many (many) more would turn out to vote - which is something everyone wants. It would send a clear message to politicians, namely "none of you are representing me". It would stop people voting for people they didn't believe in (protest votes) just to vote against the mainstream parties - the neutral "none of the above" vote would achieve the same without risk of accidental representation by a party you didn't intend to govern locally. It would stop politicians using the excuse of "our voters didn't turn out because X".
It works in other countries and it's much needed in this country too! Hopefully in time no-one will ever need to vote for "none of the above"... -
The key is to change the voting system.
The vote for the individual has to be separated from the vote for the Party.
The MP in my constituency is a good person and good MP – he should be in parliament. I would vote for him but I don’t want to lend my support to the policies his party promotes. I will probably vote for the party with the philosophy I support, even if the candidate is inferior, unhappy in the knowledge my vote won't make any difference anyway. It's a rotten voting system.
For reasons of simple democracy we should have a PR voting system. But choosing the right system is crucial.
We still need parties – the short hand ‘brand’ for manifesto of policies and a team to promote them.
But the vote for the MP should not be combined with the vote for the party. The MP should be the best candidate to be the local MP.
DPR Voting is a PR system that allows the voter two votes, one for the MP and one for the Party. You can vote for the best candidate (regardless of party) and the best party. Unlike AMS or MMP there are no party list MPs - Every MP is a constituency MP.
This shifts influence over the MP away from the party and towards the electorate, and encourages more independent minded MPs.
Voting and counting is simple and it would be simple to introduce.
for more details see http://www.dprvoting.org -
Finally someone who explains and writes things in plain english. Thank you Brian. I always vote and I always read and listen to all the jargon (policies), but every election on tha day i need to make my cross in the box I am always left wondering what my vote really means and what it is I am actually voting for. Keep spreading your Layman message and hopefully we the citizens can make a change for the better #commondecency
-
From the above I am not clear whether your campaign is (1) to encourage people to vote, even if your chosen candidate has no chance of being elected; or (2) to encourage people to vote for a 'fringe' minority party.
If the former, I am with you 100%. In my constituency Big Party X will win, and the others, including Big Party Y, stand no chance. I shall still vote for Y because it represents my view; while I accept the democratic will that people of this area want someone else.
Vote for a fringe minority party: if that party represents your view, of course vote for them. However, I would be reluctant to advocate voting for them as a 'protest vote'. This can lead to our having an MP who represents (1) a party who have naive, unrealistic, and potentially dangerous views; or (2) a party which superficially appeals as not being part of the soggy liberal elite in the 3 main parties, but underneath has some nasty views and members. [You may be able to guess to whom I refer].
I am ambivalent on "Vote for X to keep Y out, even though I do not particularly like X". If in fact you prefer Party Z then vote for Z; but if not it is better to vote than to abstain.
P.S. I have the same birthday as Brian May. Now that is irrelevant. -
From the above I am not clear whether your campaign is (1) to encourage people to vote, even if your chosen candidate has no chance of being elected; or (2) to encourage people to vote for a 'fringe' minority party.
If the former, I am with you 100%. In my constituency Big Party X will win, and the others, including Big Party Y, stand no chance. I shall still vote for Y because it represents my view; while I accept the democratic will that people of this area want someone else.
Vote for a fringe minority party: if that party represents your view, of course vote for them. However, I would be reluctant to advocate voting for them as a 'protest vote'. This can lead to our having an MP who represents (1) a party who have naive, unrealistic, and potentially dangerous views; or (2) a party which superficially appeals as not being part of the soggy liberal elite in the 3 main parties, but underneath has some nasty views and members. [You may be able to guess to whom I refer].
I am ambivalent on "Vote for X to keep Y out, even though I do not particularly like X". If in fact you prefer Party Z then vote for Z; but if not it is better to vote than to abstain.
P.S. I have the same birthday as Brian May. Now that is irrelevant. -
Thank you for your comment 'Essex Boy'. We are indeed encouraging people to vote. We want to encourage people to be colour blind when they vote; instead of voting based on the party, you should find out about the candidates in your area and vote for the one that will best represent your views. It is never a wasted vote because after the election is over the people in power will look at the electorate and see the various increases or decreased in parties votes. They will realised what policies gain a better response and this will influence their own policies. The voting outcomes very much reflect people's views and if more people believe their vote is not wasted, more people will make the effort to go and vote.
Common Decency Team -
I have a lot of questions! My MP, Martin Caton, told me the QUEEN IS THE ONLY PERSON ABOVE THE LAW! How can MPs work for us the PEOPLE, when they are forced to take an OATH to the Queen. If they refuse to protect the Queen, but instead represent the people who voted them in, they are fined £500, lose their salary and seat in Parliament. Please tell me how this is DEMOCRACY? And why it is worth me voting? Because the QUEEN seems to control everything! Including fracking our homes.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1042737/Now-MPs-want-ditch-500-year-oath-allegiance-Queen.html
HOUSE OF LORDS SEATS ARE NOT BASED ON VOTING, THEY GET APPOINTED BY THE QUEEN. They are in charge of Shaping Laws, Investigating Issues, asking questions and challenging them. The Queen signs off ALL LAWS.
There is not one Elite person that will help me auction off my engagement ring to give free support for mothers to earn from home. This Academic Paedophile Crises in the UK has been covered up by the rich and powerful, which is why children, mothers and families get "0" support.
http://butterflylullaby.blogspot.co.uk/2015/04/who-are-you-voting-for-may-2015-uk.html
One thing is clear and that is money controls the media. If Dr Judith Reiman PhD from the Law University was unable to get her Eye Witness Statement in the papers about the Academic Paedophiles promoting Child abuse through our Education System. How have you got in the MEDIA?
Regards,
Sharon J. Bainbridge -
I crunched numbers on this in "The Case For Voting Libertarian" on my website then again on my bilingual blog: libertariantranslator.com
Understanding how spoiler votes change laws made LP activism painless and rewarding. Did you know that the Prohibition Amendment making beer a felony came about in a dozen election campaigns averaging 1.4% of the vote for the dry party? Recent changes in the wake of the George Bush asset forfeiture crash reveal increasing awareness that prohibition caused the Crash and Depression. -
Louis Vuitton handbags was built-in in the year 1905, in France on the French coastline,Fashion headlines news report: Data of Foreign luxury Chanel Handbags]goods online retail platform Baghunter.You can tell more women are taking up deep sea diving by glancing at the list of luxuryOriginal Rolex Watchesmanufacturers rushing to release suitably feminine Rolex Air King for this sport.1:1 Replica Breitling Watches is probably best known for waterproofing its Omega Watches Replica .Louis Vuitton handbags Rolex Air King.Original Rolex Watches Chanel Handbags[/url] 1:1 Replica Breitling Watches Omega Watches Replica,while the movement is still theReplica Tag Heuer, it has been absolutely blacked out and fabricated arresting through an exhibition case back.
Louis Vuitton handbags
Original Rolex Watches
1:1 Replica Breitling Watches
Chanel Handbags]
Rolex Air King
Omega Watches Replica
Replica Tag Heuer -
Louis Vuitton handbags was built-in in the year 1905, in France on the French coastline,Fashion headlines news report: Data of Foreign luxury Chanel Handbagsgoods online retail platform Baghunter.You can tell more women are taking up deep sea diving by glancing at the list of luxuryOriginal Rolex Watchesmanufacturers rushing to release suitably feminine Rolex Air King for this sport.1:1 Replica Breitling Watches is probably best known for waterproofing its Omega Watches Replica,while the movement is still theReplica Tag Heuer, it has been absolutely blacked out and fabricated arresting through an exhibition case back.
Louis Vuitton handbags
Original Rolex Watches
1:1 Replica Breitling Watches
Chanel Handbags]
Rolex Air King
Omega Watches Replica
Replica Tag Heuer
Leave your comments
Post comment as a guest