Tactical Voting

Tactical Voting

One who can beat or outfox-z Henry Kissinger, Robert McNamara and Christian Laggard is one who can be considered a tactical expert.

I have to pen this since, Donald Trump and Macron in France failed to capitalize on their popular vote (not the main stream base) base they reawakened.

It was true for Ceylon, too.

A better example is a guy who tactically bet at a casino table and come out a winner against the statistical odds.

The casino is structured in such a way that the gambler always loses the big bet (he wins the smaller ones) and returns his winning to the table in one go.

In voting cycle the voter is always the loser and the only chance he/she has is wasted invariably.

This piece is to educate the intelligent voter to outfox his opponents or candidates in style.

Kumar David, Sarath Wijesuriya and Victor Ivan should expand on this strategy, since I am going to go into total hibernation, the moment election is declared open for nominations.

I am only worried about the size of the ballot paper, with so many candidates vying for the post.

I wish it to look like a rolled up toilet paper: if the Commissioner wishes how to design it, I may consider helping him.

We have a device that voter can use for his tactical (whims and fancies) voting.

It is called the second vote or the second or third option.

In my case, I have always used the rejection strategy politically correctly when change was the desired option.

I never voted for but always against the sitting political power. 

It was a protest vote. 

Now this time round that strategy is a dangerous option.

That is where the tactical voting comes into operation.

I am addressing this mainly to the local Tamil brethren, not the diaspora.

His/her first option is for his or her own choice.

Let the guy/girl be happy when the first option count is over to have a drink.

Nobody will get 50% of the vote in first count.

The second option should be used to outmaneuver the first option default by voting for a random guys in the list (not JVP) of candidates.

We had a strategy to get a non political third force (ousting JVP) but unfortunately that petered away.

That is why we have to use the Tactical Strategy, till time is right for political landscape to change (it might take a decade or two) course.

If we can make random guys (third and fourth) to beat the first and second choice and come out winners (again less than 50% of the total vote), we are forced to go for a third option count.

Third and fourth guy can now have to sip a soft drink and wait till the third option is counted.

When this counting is nearing completion, a few of the election counting officers would be having heart attacks (or at least pain) and the voter is having a snooze after the next day mid meal and has totally lost the interest of the final outcome.

The point I am driving at is that the whole system is a mockery of democracy.

Second and Third Options can outdo selecting of the best out of the bad lot choice and a bad one will be selected at the end of the third count, somebody like Nagananda.

The tactical strategy proposed should be used to outsmart the bad system.

Can our voter do it?

I guess not at all.

Abolition of the post of presidency and total overall of the political system is the need of the day.