cybercoma Posted December 7, 2008 Report Share Posted December 7, 2008 (edited) I posted this in another thread, but perhaps it needs further examination. % of vote / % of seats Liberals 26.24% / 25% NDP 18.2% / 12% Coalition 44.44% of vote / 37% of seats CPC 37.63% of vote / 46.43% of seats When I look at the numbers in that light, I have a hard time not supporting the coalition. That they need the Bloc's support to pass legislation only further serves to highlight the problems with our electoral system. Electoral reform needs to happen sooner rather than later. The only way that is going to be possible is if Canadians stand up and demand it. Although I support Harper and the CPC, this type of misrepresentation of the vote is unacceptable in a modern democracy. Am I wrong here? Edited December 7, 2008 by cybercoma Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted December 7, 2008 Author Report Share Posted December 7, 2008 Why is democratic and electoral reform such taboo? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReeferMadness Posted December 7, 2008 Report Share Posted December 7, 2008 I posted this in another thread, but perhaps it needs further examination.% of vote / % of seats Liberals 26.24% / 25% NDP 18.2% / 12% Coalition 44.44% of vote / 37% of seats CPC 37.63% of vote / 46.43% of seats When I look at the numbers in that light, I have a hard time not supporting the coalition. That they need the Bloc's support to pass legislation only further serves to highlight the problems with our electoral system. Electoral reform needs to happen sooner rather than later. The only way that is going to be possible is if Canadians stand up and demand it. Although I support Harper and the CPC, this type of misrepresentation of the vote is unacceptable in a modern democracy. Am I wrong here? You're absolutely right. And if you add the green vote to the coalition, they have a majority without the bloc at all. Electoral reform is always tricky because the government in power almost always gains by the FPTP system. Also, electoral reform would severely hurt the bloc and this would become a unity issue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canadian Blue Posted December 7, 2008 Report Share Posted December 7, 2008 I doubt it would stack up as nicely as many presume. If their were to be a coalition many 'blue liberals' would leave en masse to the CPC. My preference would be for the left to united, and for our Parliament to have only two major parties encompassing the various factions on the left and the right. As well give more power to individual MP's so they don't feel beholden to the party. However I doubt what I'd like to see would ever come about. I would be willing to accept STV or Multi-Member Ridings along with an elected Senate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
speaker Posted December 7, 2008 Report Share Posted December 7, 2008 You're absolutely right. And if you add the green vote to the coalition, they have a majority without the bloc at all.Electoral reform is always tricky because the government in power almost always gains by the FPTP system. Also, electoral reform would severely hurt the bloc and this would become a unity issue. This elections Canada site gives the results by the various, and I mean various, parties and individuals running. http://enr.elections.ca/National_e.aspx The two parties that have the most to lose are the New Conservatives and the Bloc. I guess that means any chance of the coalition bringing electoral reform doesn't stand a chance. I expect that the Liberals make a lot of capital in other elections from the splits in votes giving them more seats than they deserve. I think we'll have to elect independants and the greens and the christian heritage party, for any real progress. The last thing we need is a two party state, which translates into a one party state. I prefer a system where everyone can have their own voice to one in which everyone has the same voice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReeferMadness Posted December 8, 2008 Report Share Posted December 8, 2008 I doubt it would stack up as nicely as many presume. If their were to be a coalition many 'blue liberals' would leave en masse to the CPC. My preference would be for the left to united, and for our Parliament to have only two major parties encompassing the various factions on the left and the right. As well give more power to individual MP's so they don't feel beholden to the party. However I doubt what I'd like to see would ever come about. I would be willing to accept STV or Multi-Member Ridings along with an elected Senate. I'd be more than happy with that if it turned out that way. I think it's very likely, though, that the CPC would rediscover its roots and splinter. It remains to this day a shotgun wedding of fiscal conservatives, social conservatives and libertarians. I think the result would be at least 2 and maybe 3 parties. Your preference sounds very much like the American system. Forced to vote between 2 parties, I'd probably just stay home. The world is not a binary entity. After what I've seen this week, I'd be happier if there were no parties - just members of parliament. Then maybe we could dispense with this whole left-right paradigm and focus on the issues. BC nearly got STV in 2005 and it could still happen in 2009. I think there would be some short term problems but long term, it could lessen the polarization of politics. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted December 8, 2008 Report Share Posted December 8, 2008 ....Your preference sounds very much like the American system. Forced to vote between 2 parties, I'd probably just stay home. The world is not a binary entity. After what I've seen this week, I'd be happier if there were no parties - just members of parliament. Then maybe we could dispense with this whole left-right paradigm and focus on the issues. Ahem...the American system has more parties than Canada. On an actual ballot...like clockwork....no drama required. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted December 8, 2008 Report Share Posted December 8, 2008 Ahem...the American system has more parties than Canada. On an actual ballot...like clockwork....no drama required. When I got my Wisconsin ballot this year there was 4 parties on it. When I went to vote in my ridding there was 9 parties. 9 is defiantly more then 4 I think. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted December 8, 2008 Author Report Share Posted December 8, 2008 When I got my Wisconsin ballot this year there was 4 parties on it. When I went to vote in my ridding there was 9 parties. 9 is defiantly more then 4 I think. You had 9 parties on your ballot? I had 4: Conservative, Liberal, New Democrat, Green. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted December 8, 2008 Report Share Posted December 8, 2008 CPC Green NDP Lib CHP MLPC LTN and an IND Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted December 8, 2008 Author Report Share Posted December 8, 2008 What's LTN? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted December 8, 2008 Report Share Posted December 8, 2008 (edited) When I got my Wisconsin ballot this year there was 4 parties on it. When I went to vote in my ridding there was 9 parties. 9 is defiantly more then 4 I think. I don't live in Wisconsin....I recall 8 choices plus a write in. Lot's of history for multiple American political parties.....it's no big deal: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_polit...e_United_States Edited December 8, 2008 by bush_cheney2004 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-VMG- Posted December 8, 2008 Report Share Posted December 8, 2008 There are 5 main parties in Canada... 1 can be considered a non federalist party (BQ). In the united states there are 2. voting for anyone else is a throw away vote... In Canada there are mainly 4.. Voting for any but 2 is a throw away vote. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted December 8, 2008 Report Share Posted December 8, 2008 What's LTN? Libertarian party of Canada. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted December 8, 2008 Report Share Posted December 8, 2008 In the united states there are 2. voting for anyone else is a throw away vote... Patently false....my vote helped to Elect Reform Party candidate Jesse Ventura. Ross Perot got 18% of the vote in '92. In Canada there are mainly 4.. Voting for any but 2 is a throw away vote. That's great....but those who want to make themselves feel better about coalitions or a circle jerk Parliament won't do well by pointing at the USA's system. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted December 8, 2008 Report Share Posted December 8, 2008 Patently false....my vote helped to Elect Reform Party candidate Jesse Ventura. Ross Perot got 18% of the vote in '92.That's great....but those who want to make themselves feel better about coalitions or a circle jerk Parliament won't do well by pointing at the USA's system. Oh you are in Minn. Minn doesn't count they are crazy up there. My ballot some positions went uncontested I have never seen that on a Canadian ballot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-VMG- Posted December 8, 2008 Report Share Posted December 8, 2008 Patently false....my vote helped to Elect Reform Party candidate Jesse Ventura. Ross Perot got 18% of the vote in '92.That's great....but those who want to make themselves feel better about coalitions or a circle jerk Parliament won't do well by pointing at the USA's system. Actually i'm completely wrong now that i think about it... You can't compare the systems because they are not really alike.. Voting someone for president that isn't one of those 2 parties is a throw away vote. Voting for a congressman of a different party... in some cases could be considered throwing your vote away... depending where you live i suppose. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted December 8, 2008 Report Share Posted December 8, 2008 Actually i'm completely wrong now that i think about it...You can't compare the systems because they are not really alike.. I know...but people do it all the time on this forum. Go figure..... Voting someone for president that isn't one of those 2 parties is a throw away vote. Then all votes are throw away votes. Voting for a congressman of a different party... in some cases could be considered throwing your vote away... depending where you live i suppose. See above.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-VMG- Posted December 8, 2008 Report Share Posted December 8, 2008 What the hell are you even talking about? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted December 8, 2008 Report Share Posted December 8, 2008 What the hell are you even talking about? How many votes are "losing" votes...regardless of the party number? Your contention about throw away votes is a logical fallacy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-VMG- Posted December 8, 2008 Report Share Posted December 8, 2008 How many votes are "losing" votes...regardless of the party number? Your contention about throw away votes is a logical fallacy. I'm saying 90% of people are either going to vote democrat or Republican.... So if you vote for a different candidate it's pretty much a throw away vote. I live in alberta... i go to the polling station... i put an X beside the Green Candidate, I could say voting pretty much for anyone except Conservative is a useless vote because they always win. The only up side is that the party gets 2 dollars for every vote... so it's not totally thrown away... but really it's a vote thrown away in most situations if you don't vote democrat or Republican. I suppose you could say losing votes are thrown away... but if the difference is within 2-3% it could mean something. You put "losing" in quotation, i never said losing votes... i said thrown away... if you vote independent the likelyhood they are going to be elected is close to none... Voting for the greens when 95% vote conservatives and 5% vote liberal is a thrown away vote... there is no chance the greens will win.... now if 49% vote con, and 49% vote liberal... a vote for liberal is not thrown away... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted December 8, 2008 Report Share Posted December 8, 2008 I'm saying 90% of people are either going to vote democrat or Republican.... So if you vote for a different candidate it's pretty much a throw away vote. But this is not true all the time...see 1992 I live in alberta... i go to the polling station... i put an X beside the Green Candidate, I could say voting pretty much for anyone except Conservative is a useless vote because they always win. A vote does not have multiple states....it is either cast or it is not cast...that's it. The only up side is that the party gets 2 dollars for every vote... so it's not totally thrown away... but really it's a vote thrown away in most situations if you don't vote democrat or Republican. No it is not....if only to maintain major party status. I suppose you could say losing votes are thrown away... but if the difference is within 2-3% it could mean something. They mean nothing individually. Only the aggregate can have impact (i.e. winning or prevailing for a runoff) You put "losing" in quotation, i never said losing votes... i said thrown away... if you vote independent the likelyhood they are going to be elected is close to none... That is completely irrelevant. The vote is as good as any other...smells exactly the same. Voting for the greens when 95% vote conservatives and 5% vote liberal is a thrown away vote... there is no chance the greens will win.... now if 49% vote con, and 49% vote liberal... a vote for liberal is not thrown away... You are adding qualifications and suppositions...your original contention does not hold water. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-VMG- Posted December 8, 2008 Report Share Posted December 8, 2008 You don't get it... i'm tired of trying to explain it... it's really quite simple... but whatever. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted December 8, 2008 Report Share Posted December 8, 2008 You don't get it... i'm tired of trying to explain it... it's really quite simple... but whatever. Crying "uncle" already.....adieu. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted December 8, 2008 Author Report Share Posted December 8, 2008 Does the discrepancy in these numbers not concern anyone? If the electoral system were fair, the CPC would have the amount of seats that the coalition currently holds and the coalition would have the number of seats the CPC currently have. FPTP is not a very just way of electing people. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.