Let’s begin with the unequivocal points. Cross-voting, or the practice of filling your preferences in the ballot across party lines, is allowed. It is legal. It is legit. It does not nullify your vote. You can start with a 1 next to a candidate from AD, you can continue with a 2 and 3 next to PN candidates and then you can even move on to a 4 and 5 next to PL candidates. Hell, you can even go back to the PN for number 6 and back again to AD for number 7.
So you see. Do not believe the lies that are out there. You can and should cross-vote. Why? Because elections are not only about governance and governability but also about who represents you in parliament. Even if there is a remote chance that the number 5 on your ballot becomes useful to select a member from your district it is advisable to use it. Cross-voting allows you to influence not only which party goes on to govern but also allows you to select which members of the other party you would prefer to represent your district in parliament. That, my friends, is the “single-transferable vote” which is a much happier term than “cross-voting”.
In a way you could see STV as trying to make your vote as effective as possible since it keeps bouncing from one candidate to another until finally one of the candidates you chose actually gets to use it to get into parliament. As for government forming the all important number is the number 1. That is the vote that also counts for your party of choice – it allows you to say two things: (1) that you would prefer the candidate you marked number 1 as the best option to represent you in parliament and (2) that you would want his party to govern. That second assumption does not move down the lines. The governance assumption starts and stops with the number 1.
So why vote AD with a number 1 if they can never govern? Well in that case this vote takes on a new and fundamentally important meaning. Voting AD number 1 has nothing to do with if and when it will form a coalition or form part of the opposition. (It could eventually but that should not be your motivation). Voting AD number 1 is you telling the system that you want to damn well make sure that a third party gets into parliament. You are saying that you damn well want to make sure that the only open party unencumbered by private or business interests and that is honest and clear on every policy gets to have a seat in our chamber of representatives.
That, my friends is a positive vote. So here are some do’s and dont’s from J’accuse:
1. YES YOU CAN – cross-vote.
2. YES YOU CAN – move from one party to another.
3. YES YOU SHOULD – vote AD number 1 if you REALLY want to make history
4. NO YOU SHOULD NOT – scribble on the document, use X’s or any other signs that are not numbers
5. NO YOU SHOULD NOT – believe the PLPN lies.
Spread the word. It appears that there are quite a few who ignore these basic principles. It also appears that our two main parties who are the paladins and guardians of our democratic process are quite happy to nurture this ignorance. You need another reason to vote AD? Seriously?
12 replies on “Cross-voting and angry voters”
Oh come one, if Briguglio couldn’t even get himself to vote AD last time round, why should anyone be voting for them? And what guarantee do you have that AD will be immune to business especially if they are the kingpins in parliament?
Your concern are answered here re: Mike Briguglio Gorg: http://www.akkuza.com/2013/03/05/briguglios-faux-pas/
yes I have the word of AD and their policies to guarantee me that. Seeing as they do not get interest free loans from businessmen (PN) or have obvious funding for multimillion lira election campaigns (PL), I think I am on a good track here. You on the other hand fail to see the wood for the trees. With all due respect if that is your reason not to vote AD, then your vote seems to be on its way to be wasted. Do consider a number 2 though… as an afterthought.
Have Alternattiva said that they will never take interest free loans and donations from business? Business will not back them because they have nothing to offer, but if they have a seat and particularly if they control parliament, then it would be completely a different picture. My decision not to vote AD is ideological – I do not agree with their left-leaning policies and I do not feel that the social issues they champion should be what makes me decide who to support. I am happy that you think my vote is wasted. Let me know how useful your vote was after the election.
PS: I have given Alternattiva my 2 vote in previous elections.
Mate, if AD wanted interest free loans and donations they would have already had them.
Can you honestly compare teh 3 campaigns and say that AD’s expenditure is anywhere close to PN and PL’s? Really? The only tool AD had was its manifesto.
Finally, AD’s policies were always liberal and as you put it, left leaning. There was no suddent change in AD’s policies. So if you really voted #2 to AD then you really do not have any excuse to do so again, or vote AD #1.
Speaking in terms of history…. voting AD is actually a “waste” of your vote. The author of this article is right… voting is also about choosing your representative. How likely is it, that an AD candidate is actually elected and represent your interests…. voting 1 AD means that’s your are letting someone else make the choice for you. Only vote for a party that will bring real change and real progress in this country… which party that is… is up to you.
Speaking in terms of history… perpetuating the current status quo is a “waste of your vote”. When you vote AD you are sending out a message for change. You are saying clearly, loudly and proudly that you want a third party in parliament. As for voting for a party that will bring real change and real progress… aside from AD I don’t see any!
Having a single MP from AD would not change anything. We need real change. There is only one party who has the trust of the people and the capacity to bring a clean sweep in this country. I am also interested to know which changes AD would bring… since their election campaign was pretty flimsy to say the least.
Do you really think a party’s worth can be judged by their election campaigns? It’s been a PNPL circus!
AD’s electoral manifesto is as far from flimsy as it’s possible to be, and clearly defines a host of sorely needed changes across the board. I suggest you read it before badmouthing them: http://www.alternattiva.org/mothership/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/AD_Manifesto2013_A4.pdf
Read the manifesto…. still a long way to go. I don’t judge a party by their political campaigns. I trust in a strong leader with a clear vision. Just today I heard how on Bondi+ Mr. Briguglio said that in the past he voted for PL even though he was part of the AD movement. That does not sound like a clear vision to me…. cross-voting is not always the best option…
The beauty of democracy is that everyone is free to elect his preferred bunch of conmen eh Reuben?
EXACTLY…. politicians are mostly corrupt… thats a fact and the ones who aren’t… will become corrupt eventually. Power has corrupted the most noble of souls. Having said that… there is no point in electing a third party with the expectation that the said party will be anything better then the other two. The only thing that would create would be a more volatile political situation (like the one the Brits have at them moment). We are better off having only two parties with the good and the bad that such a system brings.
Hi, I have created an animation about the voting process based on Philip leone Ganado’s article (which I read first). http://vimeo.com/bernardmagri/votingfordummies