An election reminder. If you can't vote for the candidate you want because they won't get enough support to win then vote against the one you don't want by voting for the candidate best placed to beat them. You don't have to like them personally, just want to take a step along the road.
#GE24 #GE2024 #VoteTactically
@AlisonW unfortunately I've already seen how that turns out. When everyone vote just because they don't want the other candidate win, they do not feel any obligation to hold their candidate accountable. So each election year all the candidates need to do is just not to be as bad as the other candidate. And the bar keeps getting lower every time until you end up with a dictator. It happened in my home country and it is happening to all Western countries.

@jessica_fey @AlisonW

This is true, there is a major accountability problem when voters continually give a blank check to the 2nd worst candidate for the virtue of not being the absolute worst. When emboldened politicians take advantage of this, democracy suffers. In the article below which discusses this topic, Malik quotes Ralph Nader as saying "if you always vote for the lesser of two evils, you will always have evil, and you will always have less"

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/article/2024/jun/03/keir-starmer-labour-left-rishi-sunak-tories

Starmer? Sunak? Millions know they are different but still feel alienated. Ignore that at your peril

There is no point scolding people who refuse to be part of what feels like a political monoculture, says Guardian columnist Nesrine Malik

The Guardian
@adamsaidsomething @jessica_fey @AlisonW it didn't work out to well for Nader, no matter how nice that sounds. And enabling the far right because you have a problem with the electoral system (which is what this is: it's an artifact of FPTP, and I agree it *truly* sucks) is not a good thing to do in my view.