What if the individual voter could choose which riding to vote in (in a single member plurality system)?
This multi-player simultaneous move game would be madness! The only way there would even be a game (and not just pure pandemonium) is if there were an assumption that only some voters would bother choosing a different riding than the one they physically resided in. That is, the more educated/informed voters, for whom finding information about which party is likely to win where is less costly, are more likely to choose a different riding to up their chances of being the swing voter.
Imagine how nuts it would be, though: polling and predictions can only be made on the assumption that no one ‘moves’ their vote. Once those stats are out, people will start moving. But the moving changes the demographics of the districts because they are not ceteris paribus moves but rather simultaneous ones. And then maybe there could be predictions on how people would move, which would then change once again how people actually move.
Would you want to ‘mess’ with this game? Under what circumstances would you ‘move’? I guess… if I were in a riding that was super safe in any party, I’d move, on the logic that outsiders won’t move into mine because it’s more costly for them to try to change the result. Then again, maybe they’d rationalise that many people in this super safe riding are moving out, so their chances of being the swing voter is actually higher. *brain explodes*
What’s the Nash equilibrium? I don’t think there is one. There would always be incentive for someone to move. So maybe this isn’t such an interesting/viable game to look at.
But what if there were some constraints? For example: you can only move to an adjacent riding.
This is actually different from proportional representation (ie. popular vote), isn’t it.
I’m an ideas machine this weekend! :D