Tactical behavior with IRV

[clay shentrup]

Get this. I just called the Australian Green Party here:
02 6140-3217

The guy said one of the most common calls he gets is, "why should I
vote for the Green Party, when that's just wasting my vote?"

Why would people ask such a bizarre question, since they have the
preferential system (Instant Runoff Voting)?

He explains, there's widespread voter miseducation on the preferential
system. And the two major parties are happy to help that along by
doing whatever possible to keep it obfuscated.

People even are confused about the above-the-line voting. They ask the
GP how they're "preferencing" in House elections. They explain, "YOU
are making the choice on your ballot, not us -- it's not above-the-
line voting."

And they get these calls frequently. He explained it was one of the
most common calls he gets.

So my question is, would this be different with Approval Voting? Would
people somehow worry that voting Green would weaken their (tactical)
vote for Democrat for instance?

[Sean Walker]

> So my question is, would this be different with Approval Voting? Would
> people somehow worry that voting Green would weaken their (tactical)
> vote for Democrat for instance?

I'd expect that many people would probably bullet vote in the
beginning, and given the prevalence of the 'LNH degrade to plurality'
idea among even ostensibly educated, it could take hold among the
voter base. Although, I don't expect it to matter nearly as much since
Approval is much more obvious about who your vote will help. It might
also not matter if it does manage to break a duopoly and so it is no
longer a wasted vote.

[Explodicle]

It's possible. If Green and Democrat are very close to winning in the
polls, a tactical voter might want to vote only for the party he likes
best, even if he really approves of both.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tactical_voting#Approval_voting

[clay shentrup]

On Jun 14, 8:39 pm, Sean Walker <crazy.gold.shi...@gmail.com> w

> I'd expect that many people would probably bullet vote in the
> beginning, and given the prevalence of the 'LNH degrade to plurality'
> idea among even ostensibly educated, it could take hold among the
> voter base. Although, I don't expect it to matter nearly as much since
> Approval is much more obvious about who your vote will help. It might
> also not matter if it does manage to break a duopoly and so it is no
> longer a wasted vote.

What do you mean? This AU Green is saying that voters, because they
don't understand the system, are tactically supporting their favorite
major party. Presumably Approval users would do the same thing. Why do
you think they wouldn't support their favorite candidate too?

[Sean Walker]

That was exactly my point. The reason they would not vote for their
favorite would be ignorance, but I think it would be far less with
approval because you can clearly see that voting your favorite won't
hurt you, whereas it isn't clear (or always true) for IRV.