Machiavelli's Blade

Let’s explore a fresh analysis of the Tory leadership contest, with a focus on Stages 2, 3, and 4, using mathematical reasoning and game theory to uncover a Machiavellian ploy by Team Jenrick. In this multi-stage political game, Jenrick’s tactical vote-lending seemingly lured James Cleverly into a false sense of confidence. Believing he was isolating Kemi Badenoch, Cleverly unknowingly played into Jenrick’s hands. The strategy, designed to manipulate Cleverly into reacting and weakening Badenoch, ultimately backfired, leading to Cleverly’s own elimination and highlighting how intricate political gambits can unravel unpredictably.

Introduction

The Tory leadership contest transcends mere vote accumulation; it is deeply influenced by strategic alliances, tactical voting, and the principles of game theory, all of which shape the final outcome. This article examines the voting dynamics in Stages 2, 3, and 4 of the contest, highlighting how Robert Jenrick likely orchestrated a manipulation of James Cleverly’s support to impede Kemi Badenoch. However, Cleverly’s misjudgments and overconfidence ultimately led to the failure of this alliance to produce the desired results.

Stage 2: Initial Voting Dynamics

In the second round of voting, Stride had been eliminated in Stage 1, leaving four candidates: Robert Jenrick, Kemi Badenoch, James Cleverly, and Tom Tugendhat.

The Stage 2 results were as follows:

- Robert Jenrick: 33 votes (+2)

- Kemi Badenoch: 28 votes (+10)

- James Cleverly: 21 votes (+6)

- Tom Tugendhat: 20 votes (no change)

At this stage, the competition between Badenoch, Cleverly, and Jenrick was intensifying, as Tugendhat's support remained stagnant. With Tugendhat on the brink of elimination, his votes became a pivotal point for Jenrick and Cleverly’s strategic considerations. Kemi Badenoch's sudden rise of 10 votes indicated growing support, raising alarm bells for both Jenrick and Cleverly, who shared an interest in blocking her progress.

Stage 3: Tugendhat's Elimination and Jenrick’s Vote-Lending Strategy

With Stride eliminated after Stage 2, his 16 votes became a crucial factor in shaping the voting dynamics in Stage 3. This is where game theory came into play, as both Jenrick and Cleverly maneuvered to claim Tugendhat’s voters while also blocking Badenoch.

The results for Stage 3 were:

- James Cleverly: 39 votes (+18)

- Robert Jenrick: 31 votes (-2)

- Kemi Badenoch: 30 votes (+2)

Here, Jenrick’s vote count dropped slightly, indicating a probable vote-lending strategy in which he inflated Cleverly's vote total. This move was likely calculated to ensure Cleverly could surpass Badenoch in Stage 3, while Jenrick himself consolidated his base for the final showdown. Crucially, by lending votes to Cleverly, Jenrick positioned him as a stronger contender, misleading Cleverly into believing he had sufficient support to remain in the race.

To understand the dynamics of Jenrick's strategy, let's break down the numbers mathematically.

- Tugendhat's Votes: After Tugendhat’s elimination, his 20 votes were up for grabs. The likely expectation was that Cleverly, who shared similar political positions, would claim a plurality of these votes, with the remainder distributed between Jenrick and Badenoch.

- Let’s assume Cleverly received 12 votes from Stride's camp.

- Jenrick might have lent 6 votes to Cleverly to further boost his total.

This leads to the following vote counts:

- James Cleverly: 21 (existing) + 12 (Stride) + 6 (Jenrick) = 39

- Robert Jenrick: 33 (existing) - 6 (lent to Cleverly) = 27 votes, but Jenrick received 4 additional votes elsewhere, bringing his total to 31.

This move achieved Jenrick’s immediate goal of preventing Cleverly from being eliminated in Stage 3, but it had broader game-theoretical implications for the next stage.

Game Theory Implications in Stage 3

Jenrick’s vote-lending strategy was a classic example of a non-cooperative game. Both he and Cleverly aimed to survive the elimination rounds while ensuring Badenoch was weakened. However, by lending votes to Cleverly, Jenrick induced Cleverly into believing he was in a stronger position than he was.

In this case, Jenrick made a strategic first move, lending enough votes to Cleverly to give him the false impression that he could survive into the final round. Jenrick likely calculated that Cleverly would view his 39 votes as a safe margin, leading Cleverly to assume he would garner additional support in the next round, especially from Tugendhat’s remaining backers. However, Cleverly miscalculated the final equilibrium of the game—thinking he could gain more than the 3 additional votes needed to stay ahead of Badenoch in the next round.

Stage 4: Cleverly’s False Confidence and Elimination

In Stage 4, the contest narrowed to three candidates: Cleverly, Jenrick, and Badenoch. The results were as follows:

- Kemi Badenoch: 42 votes (+12)

- Robert Jenrick: 41 votes (+10)

- James Cleverly: 37 votes (-2, eliminated)

Cleverly’s elimination in Stage 4 was the culmination of his miscalculations in Stage 3. After Jenrick’s vote-lending in the previous round, Cleverly was confident that he could secure at least 3 more votes to surpass the critical threshold of 42 votes needed to stay in the contest. However, Cleverly's strategic misstep was in assuming that the vote-lending in Stage 3 was genuine support, rather than a temporary boost designed by Jenrick to manipulate the outcome.

The Mathematics of Cleverly’s Miscalculation

Cleverly entered Stage 4 with 39 votes and needed to retain these while also securing at least 3 additional votes to remain competitive against his opponents, Kemi Badenoch and Robert Jenrick. His expectations likely stemmed from a belief that his earlier support was solid and that he could pull additional votes from the Tugendhat camp or undecided voters.

Expected Votes Breakdown

1. Votes Needed for Survival: Cleverly needed at least Vc≥42 votes to avoid elimination, where: VC = Total votes cleverly ends with in Stage 4
2. Current Votes: Cleverly starts with a Vcinitial of 39
3. Votes required from Tugendhat’s remaining backers (Tugendhat had 20 votes in Stage 3) and undecided voters. Let’s denote the expected votes from these groups as Vt (votes from Tugendhat’s backers) and Vuv (votes from undecided voters).

Thus, the equation for Cleverly’s total votes can be expressed as:

Actual Voting Dynamics in Stage 4

The actual outcomes in Stage 4 were:

• Kemi Badenoch: 42 votes (+12)
• Robert Jenrick: 41 votes (+10)
• James Cleverly: 37 votes (-2)

Now let’s analyze the votes received by each candidate.

1. Votes for Badenoch: Vb = 30 + 12
2. Votes for Jenrick: Vj = 31 + 10
3. Votes for Cleverly: Vc = 39 - 2

Implications of Cleverly’s Expectations

Cleverly’s expectations can be broken down further:

• He assumed he would gain votes Vt + Vu based on his prior standings and expectations of Tugendhat’s backers aligning with him due to shared political views.
• However, this assumption proved flawed as votes shifted primarily to Badenoch, indicating a misjudgment of voter preferences and alliances.

Miscalculations and Assumptions

Cleverly's miscalculation can be formalized as:

• Let P be the probability Cleverly assigns to gaining votes from Tugendhat's backers:

Given that:

• Vtactual (actual votes from Tugendhat’s backers) = 0 (he received no votes from them).
• P(Badenoch) ends up being higher than Cleverly anticipated, as Badenoch siphons votes effectively due to her growing appeal.

Game Theory and the Breakdown of Cooperation

In the framework of game theory, Cleverly and Jenrick were engaged in a sequential game where each player's actions had significant implications for the other’s outcome. The decision of Jenrick to lend votes to Cleverly in Stage 3 created a misleading narrative for Cleverly regarding his actual support.

Jenrick's Strategic Move

1. Vote-Lending Strategy: By lending votes in Stage 3, Jenrick artificially inflated Cleverly’s vote count, leading him to believe he could safely secure more votes in Stage 4 VcInflated = Vcinitial + Vjlend
2. Expected Cooperation: Cleverly was unaware that Jenrick’s vote-lending was a tactical maneuver. Believing he only needed three votes from Tugendhat who shared a similar centrist stance, Cleverly instructed some of his own backers to shift their support toward Jenrick, aiming to bolster their collective strength against Badenoch in the race for the final two. Meanwhile, Jenrick likely recalled his lent votes, a detail that Cleverly remained oblivious to.
3. Final Outcomes: Cleverly miscalculated his standing in the game, leading to his elimination. Vc < 42

The Art of Political Strategy and Game Theory

In the Tory leadership contest, the intricate dynamics of vote-lending, strategic alliances, and game theory were prominently featured. Robert Jenrick’s calculated decision to lend votes to James Cleverly in Stage 3 was not merely an act of support; it was a strategic ploy aimed at obstructing Kemi Badenoch. This maneuver inadvertently led Cleverly to a false sense of security, fostering overconfidence that ultimately contributed to his downfall. Cleverly’s miscalculations in Stage 4 sealed his fate, resulting in his elimination and setting the stage for a face-off between Jenrick and Badenoch.

From a game theory perspective, this contest illustrated how sequential decision-making and strategic manipulation can shape outcomes in political arenas. Jenrick’s initial move to lend votes pushed Cleverly into a precarious position, triggering a breakdown in cooperation that ultimately favored Jenrick's overarching strategy.

As the Machiavellian blade was cast over the bookies' favorite, the contest underscored the significance of understanding voter behavior and the art of leveraging alliances in political contests. While the outcome was not optimal for both contenders, Jenrick's deft manipulation of the voting dynamics highlighted the critical role of strategy in navigating complex political landscapes.