Every election, millions of us head to the polling station in a conflicted state of mind – should I vote for the party I most believe in, or should tactical considerations come into play?
Often, people hold their noses and vote, not for the party they most want to support but for the one they perceive as most likely to stop another party from winning in their area.
That’s not real choice. That’s damage control.
Under First Past the Post, tactical voting has become a major feature of our general elections in the UK – a symptom of a system that forces voters to game the rules instead of expressing their opinions and values.
The Politics of Fear
First Past the Post is designed for a situation in which two big parties dominate the political scene. But Britain is no longer a two-party country, if it ever was. More and more evidence is building, from election results and polling, that people want the option of voting for a wide range of parties.
Unfortunately, the straitjacket of First Past the Post does not allow voters to express their democratic choice and be safe in the knowledge that this will be properly reflected in the electoral outcome.
A situation where three, four, five or even six parties are in contention and only one position is available, is a recipe for random and chaotic results, with candidates able to win with the support of less than a third of voters. This has the potential to scare voters, as they may have a strong desire that the one available elected position in their area does not go to a party they strongly dislike.
So, we learn to play the game. We study tactical voting websites. We ask, “Who can actually win here?” instead of “Who do I actually support?” And in seat after seat, we end up voting for the least bad option.
At the 2024 General Election, tactical voting was again prevalent. In marginal seats across the country, millions voted to block rather than to back. In our post-election survey, we found that over a quarter (28%) of people indicated they had opted for a tactical vote.
When Choice Doesn’t Feel Like Choice
This is how First Past the Post turns politics into a guessing game. You might like a smaller party’s policies, but you know they can’t win under FPTP, so you switch to a bigger party that doesn’t really reflect your views. Multiply that across the country and you get election results that don’t match what voters actually think.
And it’s why millions of people feel politically homeless – stuck between what they want and what they think they can get away with voting for.
Voting Should Be About Hope, Not Strategy
Proportional Representation (PR) changes everything.
Under systems like the Single Transferable Vote (STV), your vote doesn’t have to be tactical. You can rank candidates in order of preference – backing who you really want first and adding fallbacks if needed.
If your favourite doesn’t make it, your vote moves to your next choice. No need for “stop them” strategies. No need to hold your nose. Every preference counts towards shaping the result. That means you can vote for what you believe in, not just what you’re told is “realistic.”
Real Votes, Real Representation
In a proportional system like STV, seats match votes. If a party wins 15% of the national vote, they get roughly 15% of the seats. Every vote contributes to the outcome. No one has to pretend to support someone they don’t.
It’s a system built on honesty rather than fear. One that encourages genuine debate and lets new ideas grow instead of being squeezed out by “tactical” arithmetic. And the result is a Parliament that looks more like the country that elected it.
Time to Vote for What We Believe In
We shouldn’t have to vote tactically to stop someone else. We shouldn’t have to choose the least bad option. Democracy should give us the freedom to vote for what we actually support – and the confidence that our vote will count wherever we live.
Proportional Representation, through the Single Transferable Vote, can give us that freedom. It lets us vote with hope, not fear. It’s time to end the politics of tactical voting – and start building a democracy that reflects what people really think, not what they feel forced to do.
Do you agree? Add your name to our call for a fairer voting system that would end tactical voting.
Add yor name →