House Representation and Electoral Reform

[cybercoma]

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

[cybercoma]

Why is democratic and electoral reform such taboo?

[ReeferMadness]

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.

[Canadian Blue]

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.

[speaker]

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.

[ReeferMadness]

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.

[bush_cheney2004]

....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.

[punked]

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.

[cybercoma]

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.

[punked]

CPC

Green

NDP

Lib

CHP

MLPC

LTN

and an IND

[cybercoma]

What's LTN?

[bush_cheney2004]

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

[-VMG-]

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.

[punked]

What's LTN?

Libertarian party of Canada.

[bush_cheney2004]

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.

[punked]

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.

[-VMG-]

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.

[bush_cheney2004]

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....

[-VMG-]

What the hell are you even talking about?

[bush_cheney2004]

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.

[-VMG-]

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...

[bush_cheney2004]

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.

[-VMG-]

You don't get it... i'm tired of trying to explain it... it's really quite simple... but whatever.

[bush_cheney2004]

You don't get it... i'm tired of trying to explain it... it's really quite simple... but whatever.

Crying "uncle" already.....adieu.

[cybercoma]

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.