Political parties are getting ruthlessly efficient at finding votes. Is it bad for democracy?
In September's election, the federal Liberals won the right to govern with the support of less than a third of voters, a record low for a ruling party. They achieved this by hyper-targeting ridings they knew could change the result, and ignoring ones that couldn't. With the example of the past two elections to go on, other parties are following suit in aiming for maximum vote efficiency. What happens when the best strategy to win involves ignoring most of the population? Is this a natural outcome of a longstanding strategy, or a warning that our governments are getting less representative every time we go to the polls? GUEST: Stephen Maher, journalist and writer
Audio is streamed directly from the publisher (rogers.simplecastaudio.com) as published in their RSS feed. Play Podcasts does not host this file. Rights-holders can request removal through the copyright & takedown page.
Show Notes
In September's election, the federal Liberals won the right to govern with the support of less than a third of voters, a record low for a ruling party. They achieved this by hyper-targeting ridings they knew could change the result, and ignoring ones that couldn't. With the example of the past two elections to go on, other parties are following suit in aiming for maximum vote efficiency.
What happens when the best strategy to win involves ignoring most of the population? Is this a natural outcome of a longstanding strategy, or a warning that our governments are getting less representative every time we go to the polls?
GUEST: Stephen Maher, journalist and writer
We love feedback at The Big Story, as well as suggestions for future episodes. You can find us:
Through email at [email protected]
Or @thebigstory.bsky.social on Bluesky