Presidential elections | If you are considering tactical voting, consider these points

The presidential election early voting begins on Wednesday, and many voters are now thinking about their choice of candidate.

Factors that strongly influence the voting decision are researched among other things, the candidate's experience, foreign and security policy expertise, and the assessed ability to act as a values ​​leader.

Performance and election exams are probably also important.

Some voters may consider so-called tactical voting in these elections as well. That is, that you would vote for another candidate instead of your preferred candidate in order to achieve a certain goal.

There was a lot of talk about tactical voting in connection with the 2023 parliamentary elections. Sdp's was considered to have received at that time, votes from supporters of the Greens and the left-wing coalition, who wanted to prevent the birth of a right-wing government.

What kind of significance can tactics have in the upcoming elections? And what should the voter take into account if considering such a choice?

All right is at least that the situation in the presidential elections is more straightforward from the point of view of the voter than in the parliamentary elections, says the research doctor who studied tactical voting in connection with the last parliamentary elections Josefina Sipinen from the University of Tampere.

In parliamentary elections, the results are difficult to predict due to the electoral system, where there are several constituencies and the results are determined according to the so-called d'Hondt method.

This was noticed just in the last parliamentary elections. Leftists and greens who voted for Sdp “tactically” did not necessarily get the result they hoped for.

For example, in the constituency of Oulu, the Left Alliance lost a seat in the parliamentary elections, but the Social Democrats did not get any additional seats. The additional seats went to the coalition and Basic Finns.

Unlike parliamentary elections, the entire country is one electoral district in presidential elections, and the votes go to the candidate to whom they are given, Sipinen reminds.

In the first round of the election, possible tactics can be related to the fact that the voter tries to ensure that a candidate gets to the second round – or that someone does not get to the second round.

“Now the voter can think about which is more important to him: to vote for such a candidate, who has a very small chance of reaching the second round, or is it more important to cast his
own vote, for example, so that a candidate does not get elected,” says Sipinen.

Sami Borg Picture: Vesa Moilanen / Magazine photo

In the presidential election there is experience that tactical voting has affected the results.

However, it is difficult to make very accurate generalizations about its scale, as the layouts of the elections differ considerably from each other, emphasizes a long-time expert in election research Sami Borg. Borg currently works as the research manager of the Municipal Development Foundation (KAKS).

He refers to the 1994 elections, where Rkp Elisabeth Rehn considered to have received votes due to tactics.

The situation was suitable for tactics, because the polls showed that it was Rehn who would be the candidate who would have a chance of defeating the Sdp Martti Ahtisaari in the second round of the election.

According to Borg, tactical voting is favored in a two-stage election precisely in situations where there is a candidate in the top group of candidates that some people want to vote against. In addition, tactics are encouraged if the comparisons made between pairs of candidates show that in the second round there are differences in who can win the candidate in question.

The opinion polls seen so far do not suggest that a strong consolidation behind the secondary candidate will be seen in the upcoming elections, says Borg.

At the top of the polls are the coalition with fairly clear numbers Alexander Stubb (kok) and the candidate of the electorate association Pekka Haavisto (green), who are also, in the light of the measurements, the most even fighting pair in the second round.

However, the situation can still change, Borg reminds.

Sakari Nurmela Picture: Vesa Moilanen / Magazine photo

HS Gallups director of research at producer Verian (formerly Kantar Public). Sakari Nurmela estimates that the layout of the upcoming elections is such that the elections will probably not see at least extensive tactics against a certain candidate.

The possible tactic may be more of a calculation that one's primary choice does not appear to have a realistic chance of a runoff, and therefore the secondary candidate gets the vote.

From the background materials of the HS-galup, it can be seen that a clear part of both the Social Democrats and the left-wing allies were still in the December survey intending to stand behind Pekka Haavisto already in the first round of the election.

“For example, at least an equal number of Sdp supporters and a fair share of left-wing allies feel that voting for Haavisto is more attractive than voting for their own party,” sums up Nurmela.

Both Nurmela and Sipinen see that, for example, Sdp Talk in Urpilainen there is a risk of suffering from tactical voting.

However, it is difficult to see people's motives from the measurements. It is above all a personal election, and now there are many candidates with foreign policy experience.

Voting for another party's candidate is not necessarily about tactics.

“It is possible that the voter likes more than one candidate or party equally, and that the election format affects which party he ultimately votes for,” Sipinen estimates.

Still lifes can of course still live.

In the previous HS measurement of basic Finns Jussi Halla-ahon support was growing.

Nurmela states that if Halla-aho's support grew so much that his chances for the second round improved substantially, this could be reflected in the voting behavior of some.

“At this point, I don't think it's very likely, because he's still a brisk quarter of a million votes behind Haavisto. The difference is relatively large.”

Borg says that he generally thinks it is good that the primary candidate should be voted for in the elections.

In the presidential election, however, only one will be elected. In this case, the most reasonable person can end up voting so that a sufficiently suitable candidate with a chance of winning would end up in the second round. Early voting days are not necessarily the best moments for tactics.

“If you want to vote tactically, my only advice is that you should really vote on the actual election day and see the matter through,” he says.

“So, at the end of the election campaign, will something appear that would influence you to not want to vote for that primary candidate?”

Correction 15.1. at 10:40 a.m.: The news previously incorrectly said that Alexander Stubb would be the candidate of the electoral association. He is the candidate of the coalition.

Correction 15.1. 11:42 a.m.: In the previous version of the graphic describing the vote, electoral districts were incorrectly mentioned. In the presidential elections, you can vote for any candidate, i.e. there are no constituencies like in the parliamentary elections.