Why ProjectDemocracy.ca is Ridiculous

The website projectdemocracy.ca is being passed around, and is a strategic voting site meant to advise people who to vote for in order to block a Conservative majority. On the surface this seems like a good idea, but if you look at it closely, the site is deeply flawed, and appears if anything, to simply be a means of bolstering the faltering Liberal Party. Let's analyze some surface problems, before looking at their "Key Contests" and who they advise to vote for.

Although the site is useful in that it takes the latest poll numbers and uses them to extrapolate to individual ridings, the graphic on their front page for the overall make up of parliament does not reflect this polling and has yet to change. It remains locked on the threat that if an election were held today the Conservatives would win a majority. None of the current polls reflect this, and most show the Conservatives picking up a few seats, but continuing to remain in minority territory. So this is just a scare tactic.

Secondly the site is meant to advise "progressive" voters on who their best choice would be, and the site's founder Alice Klein claims to be a "post-partisan progressive". I am not sure what progressive is supposed to mean in the Canadian context. In the US it became a popular term for people who opposed the Bush regime, but were squarely within the confines of the Democrats. Now if blocking Harper is such a concern because his policies are not "progressive", then why anyone would advise voting for the Liberals is beyond me. The Liberals, especially under leader Michael Ignatieff, have routinely voted in favour of just about everything the Conservatives put forth in the House of Commons. A vote for the Liberals is a de facto vote for the Conservatives, so long as we have a minority parliament situation. Furthermore the Liberals are notorious for campaigning from the Left and ruling from the Right. Jean Chretien was the master of this. During campaigns he'd propose all kinds of great sounding policies like affordable universal child care, decriminalization of marijuanna, boosting social programs, etc. and in power the government would then forget all about these proposals and proceed to chop away at any existing "progressive" programs.

Then we have the perpetual puzzle that is the Bloc Quebecois. In many ridings in Quebec, Project Democracy actually advises their "progressive" audience to vote for a Bloc candidate. This is possibly even more perplexing than telling progressives to vote Liberal. If we think of Canada as a federation made up of unique and distinct sub-units (ie provinces), then Canada is much like the European Union. And which parties in Europe does the Bloc Quebecois most resemble? Well obviously the anti-EU nationalist parties, such as the very right wing Finnish National Party who just made major gains in the recent Finnish election. These nationalist Euroskeptic parties are all solidly right wing, they think the EU federation is out to undermine their national distinctiveness, and they all think immigrants will somehow erode their national cultures. This could very well be a description for the Bloc Quebecois. While the older members of the party, such as Gilles Duceppe, have their roots in the Left, when back in the 60s and 70s nationalist parties were associated with left wing anti-colonial movements, today nationalism is just parochialism, which is a decidedly non-progressive stance.

Finally the idea of strategic voting, despite its aim, thoroughly prevents change. In the latest poll, released today, it has the Liberals and NDP in a tie for second place. Thus if the NDP continues this momentum they could displace the Liberals as the main opposition to the Conservatives. But if everyone "strategically votes" based on the extrapolated results of the last election, many of these new NDP supporters would simply have to swallow their new found enthusiasm and vote Liberal, thus preventing any actual shift in the Canadian political landscape, and in fact, keeping Canada decidedly less "progressive".

The site also assumes that Conservative-supporters will only support Conservatives, and the voters of the Greens, NDP, Liberals, and Bloc Quebecois, would all prefer each other over the Conservatives. This is frankly ridiculous, especially in places like BC, and polling data on second choices do not reflect this idea whatsoever. I will use second choice data in my analysis of their key contests in order to correct this ridiculous assumption.

Now let's look at their advice for who to vote for in their key ridings. I won't cover all of them, since many of them are legitimate 2 party races where a shift from the other parties could make a difference, while some can hardly be considered key contests anymore given the latest polling numbers (they really should update their site more often to reflect these changes, there is another complaint, old information). I want to point out a few examples where ProjectDemocracy's advice is flat out wrong.

Beauport--Limoilou, Quebec
ProjectDemocracy says: BQ, Voters Prefer: NDP
Conservatives won this last time narrowly, however with the NDP surge in Quebec, it is shaping up to be a 3-way race between Conservatives, BQ, and NDP. Project Democracy claims the Bloc have the only chance of unseating the Conservatives, so you should vote for them. However if you take second choice into account, the NDP are actually the preferred party among the electorate to win this riding. Once the trailing Liberal and Green vote are redistributed, the NDP pulls into 2nd place. Redistribute the Bloc vote, and the NDP pulls off a narrow win.

Desnethé--Missinippi--Churchill River, Manitoba
ProjectDemocracy says: Liberals, Voters prefer: Conservative
I have no idea why this is a key contest. The Conservatives have a sizable lead which is maintained when the NDP and Green votes are redistributed.

Egmont, PEI
ProjectDemocracy says: Liberal, Voters prefer: Conservative
This oddball riding in PEI is without a doubt a key contest as the Liberals and Conservatives are in a dead heat. But there is virtually no Green or NDP support here, which means there is no need for strategic voting. If anything redistrubting votes from the smaller fringe parties could very well hand the riding to the Conservatives. Strategic voting is definitely not advised here!

Portneuf--Jacques-Cartier, Quebec
ProjectDemocracy says: BQ, Voters prefer: NDP
Here is another 3 way race in Quebec where project democracy goes for the Bloc Quebecois candidate, even though once you redistribute votes, the NDP would actually be the ones to beat the Conservatives.

Roberval--Lac-Saint-Jean, Quebec
ProjectDemocracy says: BQ, Voters prefer: Conservative
Here is a 2 candidate race between the Bloc and Conservatives, so Project Democracy says do strategic voting, and don't actually vote for who you want to win. But if people actually did do strategic voting here, and Green, NDP, and Liberals decided to just vote for either Conservative or Bloc, they would end up transferring more votes to the Conservatives! In this riding, strategic voting is counter productive.

St. John's South--Mount Pearl, Newfoundland & Labrador
ProjectDemocracy says: Liberal, Voters Prefer: Liberal
Last election this was a close race between the Liberals and NDP, with the Conservatives a very distant second. It is looking like it will shape up to be another close race between these 2 parties. So if the point is to block the Conservatives, why is this a key contest, and why have they endorsed the Liberal? In similar close ridings between NDP and Liberal they say vote your preference.

Overall the whole notion of strategic voting is flawed. Project Democracy perpetuates the idea that "vote splitting" between all other parties is what gets Conservatives elected. Meanwhile the Liberal Party is saying that in the last election nearly 1 million traditional Liberal voters simply stayed home as a protest against their party. Liberal voters have been staying home in droves ever since the sponsership scandal, and this is a major factor in many ridings where the Conservatives pulled out narrow victories over the Liberals. The idea that Green and NDP voters somehow owe it to the Liberals to vote for them in order to beat the Conservatives, when traditional Liberal Party voters would rather stay home then support their party, is a ridiculous premise that Project Democracy rests their whole flimsy apparatus on.