Tactical Voting as a tool to overcome Democrat majorities

As a currently sitting Republican legislator, I can remind readers that the real fireworks occur in there, rather than in the hotly contested presidential race.  Indeed, every recession since the 1930’s has started under Democrat majorities and their anti-business policies and reckless borrowing.  Long ago, the Democrats could at least boast of offering some help to America’s working poor, though younger readers would find this idea alien.  Modern “Democrats,” if these politicians can honestly use the party label, win votes through wide scale voter fraud, vote buying, scare tactics, and taking advantage of millions of older Truman and JFK Democrats who spend no time on politics and who’ve been unaware of the hostile takeover by the Eastern Liberal Establishment.

We are not the only country facing this problem with Progressive Alliance affiliates like the Democrat Party.  In Britain, the Labour Party’s MP’s–at least their senior “front benchers” are almost all members of the infamous Fabian Society, which has been promoting Soviet style socialism all over the world, except that they’ve preferred to use the electoral process–rather than violent, bloody revolution to achieve their aims.  A quick look at what the Democrats have accomplished through our state legislatures while Americans slept:

  • Soviet style urban planning (under the guise of “Smart Growth” or “Growth Management”)
  • Soviet style gun control
  • Soviet style drug policy (under the guise of the “War on Drugs,” started under LBJ and Democrat congresses in 1967)
  • Soviet style abortion as a tool for population control and eugenics, found under almost all socialist governments
  • Karl Marx’s “heavy progressive or graduated income tax”

Underway are several other initiatives by Democrats, Labour, Canada’s NDP, and other Progressive Alliance affiliates:

  • Soviet style nationalization of land (see Marx’s Communist Manifesto, Ten Points)
  • Soviet nationalization of schools, healthcare, insurance, utilities, rail systems, utilities, etc

Any mention of this socialist agenda at any meeting by Democrat politicians or activists instantly results in a room full of screaming people who shout nasty remarks at you to ensure that no one else finds out the ultimate object of their policies.

And our fellow western allies are well aware of what the international socialist movement, and they are fighting it just as hard.  The difference is that they use two or three political parties to fight them off, rather than just one.  In Britain, aside from Margaret Thatcher’s Conservative Party, they have the Liberal Democrats (free market European liberals, rather than authoritarian socialists hiding behind the term) as well as Brexit-supporting UKIP.

Canada’s red threat is the New Democratic Party, though there’s nothing new about their agenda.  To keep them from taking over, conservative voters living in urban areas and college towns support Justin Trudeau’s Liberal Party, though the Liberals in British Columbia are more fiscally conservative and free market than most Republicans in the States.

In New Hampshire, we use tools like LibertyBallot.com before the September primary and November general election.  Liberty Ballot looks at voting records and public statements to find the most proliberty candidates running.  In Britain and Canada, there are many online tools that voters can use for their particular district to maximize the chance of keeping out one party or the other.  Indeed, polling before the 2015 election showed that, already, 25% of Britons were already planning on voting tactically.  In Britain, they call it Strategic Voting, but the strategy is basically the same everywhere in First Past the Post countries.

Political analysts have noticed that our urban areas are–under very heavy tax burdens–actually more fiscally and economically conservative than the rest of the country, but are so socially liberal that the Republican brand name has become toxic there.  Likewise, in college towns, as many as 85% of college students, hearing the Democrat talking points of their Marxist college professors, vote Democrat, compared with only about 50% of their non-college counterparts.  Responding to the same problem, Britain’s Liberal Democrats focused on these ridings and managed to flip every single college district in the country, allowing them to build a Liberal-Conservative coalition government in 2010 where Labour would otherwise have held an outright majority.  Britain was able to turn her economy around and even get interest rates and taxes down as part of the deal.

How would this work in America?  Well, we have the same kind of First Past The Post system, where someone can win a 3-way race with less than 40% of the vote, so long as they simply come out ahead.  Conservative voters in the greater Boston area might, for example, vote Libertarian, if the LP decided to focus its limited resources on some of the 170 House districts that never vote Republican.  Some centrist Republicans have even talked about breaking off and taking this tack themselves, if only to pick up a handful of legislative seats.

The minor party (LibDems in Britain) starts off a year before the election targeting every single household with even one Conservative Party voter in it.  Leaving a flyer that warns voters there that, “This is a Lib-Lab district,” conservative and libertarian voters know what to do.  In order to cost Labour a seat, they’ve got to bite the bullet and support the centrist Liberal Democrats, as the only way to prevent a socialist majority.  Conservative voters in Canada also support the Liberal MP if need be in order to prevent the socialist NDP from winning a seat.

Are these centrist parties solidly conservative?  Absolutely not.  Yet if Gov. Bill Weld had been the Libertarian nominee in 2016, a conservative living in the socially liberal northeast could most certainly see the value in voting for him, if only to cost Hillary Clinton a few electors and giving Donald Trump a better shot at winning the White House.  Likewise, a conservative or Republican living in one of the 170 safe Democrat districts could only cost Democrats a seat in the House of Representatives by supporting whichever minor party was campaigning the hardest and to pick up that seat.  Areas with a very cosmopolitan demographic may be offended by what they perceive as social conservatives who are opposed to them as people.  Parts of California and New York will probably never again elect a Pete Wilson styled candidate campaigning hard on immigration issues.  Cities like Boston and New York almost never elect anything but pro-choice candidates.

Yet we cannot allow George Soros, Michael Bloomberg, Tom Steyer, and the rest of these authoritarian gun grabbers to simply insert thousands of their agents into elected office around the country, slowly turning us into another Venezuela.  A two party system almost always guarantees that the socialist party holds the majority half the time, and every recession since the 1930’s has started under a Democrat congressional majority.  Unemployment rates and tax rates are nearly twice as high in Democrat-run jurisdictions.  All 15 of the 15 highest crime counties are run by Democrats.  And all 11 of the 11 highest per capita debt states suffer under corrupt, Democrat majorities.  Putting all of our eggs in one basket is not going to keep us safe from the Soros-Bloomberg Agenda.

About Max Abramson

A two-term State Representative, member of the New Hampshire Business Caucus, and longtime taxpayers advocate.