Evening Star

Yeah, whenever Layton or prominent members of the NDP talk about things like this, I start considering whether I should have voted Liberal.

But they've had the same leader for years and their policy priorities have remained similar. So I do think it's a good question exactly why they're resonating so much right now.

Ha, yeah, by all rights, I'm the exact sort of person who should be a Liberal but that party has just turned into an embarrassment.

Yeah, I'm hoping we can get over 55% in Windsor West this time.

The EKOS numbers are heart-stopping but... EKOS has consistently shown the Liberals and NDP higher and the CPC lower than every other pollster, right? We have Nanos suggesting a CPC majority and EKOS numbers that make an NDP government (despite a CPC plurality) plausible.

OK, reading the Wikipedia on Nebraska's legislature, this sounds all right to me:

I didn't know that about Nebraska, actually. I get what you're saying about how people tend to organize themselves into groups. And I'm not completely against 'caucuses' forming. But we can at least place restrictions on how much power these groups end up wielding over individual members. Yes, this is a major plus in my books.

Thanks! I found it, following the citation in the link, actually. #51 here: http://laws.justice.gc.ca/eng/Const/Page-3.html

Yeah, it's how Washington was elected. But why was it abandoned? Were there structural problems with it or was it simply that parties formed and became powerful? (My understanding was that the latter was the case.) Edit: OK, now I see that you've added this: -- This could actually sound like an argument in favour of nonpartisan democracy. I can see the corruption issue but what's wrong with just strictly enforcing rules about donations and lobbying? STV is basically the same as AV/instant-runoff voting, except with the possibility of multiple winners per constituency, right? So how is this PR, especially if you can have independent candidates?

Ha. It had a real impact though: http://ca.news.yahoo.com/liberal-fired-pamphlet-trashing-195019694.html

Is there an amendment to the Consitution or act of Parliament with a formula somewhere that indicates that the numbers will adjust themselves according to population? Only absolute numbers are spelled out in the 1867 Constitution (BNA) Act afaict, right? http://www.solon.org/Constitutions/Canada/English/ca_1867.html

That's very apt!

Interesting. They're not predicting that vote splits will help Conservatives anywhere. The number of NDP-CPC battles out West is intriguing.

Not just the West though. Ontario seems to suffer the most.

Actually, the figures in that table are less recent than in the one I linked. However, I read my own link hastily, it seems. You're right that ON, AB, and BC are underrepresented, especially ON.

I was just pointing out that Quebec is not over-represented in the Commons. (Ontario's number of seats, for example, is a little greater, proportionally, than its population.) I was responding to this:

Actually, Quebec is the province whose representation in the Commons is most proportional to its population: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Canadian_provinces_and_territories_by_population (based on these figures: http://www.statcan.gc.ca/daily-quotidien/100929/t100929b3-eng.htm ) I also don't agree that Quebec is unproductive per se, although I might agree that it can receive abundant and perhaps excessive federal subsidies and patronage. (Mulroney was probably the worst offender here btw.)

This is my favourite argument for media bias I've ever heard: The media has an overriding institutional slant because of young entry-level journalists who are trying to be hip! Who needs drivel from sociology textbooks?

i) Ideologues often tend to have more respect for people who seem ideologically driven, regardless of the ideology, than for wishy-washy centrists. ii) Strategically, a polarized two-party system would be in the CPC's long-term interest.

Thanks, I think that's a pretty good example of hateful demonizing of the left, of the sort we discussed on this thread: http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums//index.php?showtopic=18683&st=90 Opposing actions of the Israeli government does not make someone an anti-Semite. Afaik, Davies is not, and has never been, part of the Socialist Caucus, which is absolutely a fringe element within the party, probably smaller than the Christian fundamentalist element within the CPC. When has Layton expressed admiration for Castro or any other dictator?

This is false, at least as far as past elections have gone. (May be true this time if the NDP continues to dominate QC.) In 2008, the NDP won 37 seats (about 12%) with 18% of the vote. In 2006, they won 29 seats (9.4%) with 17% of the vote.

Could you describe such a system? I just read a little about the Dutch and Swedish systems. They still don't seem to ensure local representation in the way ours does (or should). I agree but I see this as a problem to be overcome, not something that should be exacerbated. (That said, I can assure that Brian Masse's popularity in Windsor West has much to do with him as a local representative and community member.) Why does nonpartisan democracy seem so much less popular than PR? It's completely constitutional and seems to actually strengthen the advantages of having a Parliament made up of local representatives. I'm actually curious. It doesn't seem to be used in many developed democracies at all. Maybe if we just greatly restricted political party funding and discouraged the level of party discipline that is currently enforced...?

Hm, could these numbers mean a Tory majority?

Seriously, punked? You'd prefer all-out Friedmanism to what we have now?

But this seems like a problem to me. Currently, our MPs have the right to sponsor bills and sit on committees because they were actually elected by and represent their local constituents. Members who would sit in the House because of PR would simply be party members who are there to fill a seat for their particular party. So it does not seem as fair for them to have the right as individuals to sponsor bills or sit on committees and have all the powers of actually elected members. I generally tend to think that PR gives political parties (as opposed to individual local representatives) too much power and importance. In any case, afaict, moving to proportional representation would be a constitutional amendment that would require the assent of both Houses of Parliament and the legislatures of seven provinces containing at least 50% of the country's population. (I'm no constitutional expert so someone correct me if I'm wrong.) I don't think anyone wants to reopen the constitution now. Alternative Vote/IRV would probably be constitutional though...?