Party Lines vs Constituents

[ToadBrother]

When some of my fellow constituents tried to set up a meeting with our MP, they were given a day and time only to show up and find out that he wasn't there that day. Honestly, our MP is terrible and he was re-elected.

Then you need to do your job and let everyone know. I'm not talking five or ten constituents, I'm talking about getting hundreds writing and phoning. Everyone just sort of assumes that because they get this small delegation into an MP or Minister's office that somehow it's all going to take off after that. But believe me, you get a constituency office being inundated, the MP will listen.

[August1991]

Then you need to do your job and let everyone know. I'm not talking five or ten constituents, I'm talking about getting hundreds writing and phoning. Everyone just sort of assumes that because they get this small delegation into an MP or Minister's office that somehow it's all going to take off after that. But believe me, you get a constituency office being inundated, the MP will listen.

And then what will the MP do? Raise the issue in caucus? (If the leader has chosen a really dumb path, then the MP will not be alone.)

More likely, the MP will understand that you're a good organizer, as in "church social". If I were the MP, I'd recommend that the party hire you as an organizer.

----

TB, this is depressing news for you but people vote the way they choose a restaurant for a quick lunch in a foreign city. The local candidate at best may sway 5% of the vote.

[Evening Star]

Exploring local restaurants is one of the best parts of visiting unfamiliar cities! What kind of Philistine eats McDonald's when they're travelling?

[August1991]

Exploring local restaurants is one of the best parts of visiting unfamiliar cities! What kind of Philistine eats McDonald's when they're travelling?

If you're on holiday in Italy (done that), or if you don't have kids (done that), then I would agree with your logic Evening Star.

But driving down the Interstate (I-95, in North Carolina IIRC) towards Disneyworld with a bunch of kids (trust me, I've done that too), I once suggested taking the next exit "to see what we would find". (I suffer even now the logic of your argument.)

----

In short Evening Star, there is a cost to know where to eat, or how to vote. Most people are not going to check out local restaurants, and most voters are not going to verify individual candidates.

Edited June 16, 2011 by August1991

[CPCFTW]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Results_by_riding_of_the_Canadian_federal_election,_2011

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canadavotes2011/#/231

At least do some research and tell us how many ridings were won by less than a majority (and tell us how many of those ridings was the NDP + Lib vote greater than the Cons). I went through AB, SK, and MB (51 or almost 1/3rd of their elected MPs ridings) and there was maybe 3-4 ridings where the NDP + Libs held at most a 1-2% lead over the CPC.

You're basically complaining that 1 in 10 MPs who were elected on a conservative platform aren't representing the interests of a slim majority (1-2% more of the vote). And you have unilaterally designated them as the majority by unilaterally uniting the parties and disenfranchising the voters who had differentiated between the parties for your own political opinion. Get over yourself. And while you're at it, get over losing.

Edited June 16, 2011 by CPCFTW

[Moonlight Graham]

Voters, not 'the system', perpetuate party discipline and cronyism/patronage.

All we have to do is vote the bums out if they don't act in the interest of we who elect them. If the buggers place the party ahead of constituents and are re-elected anyway, constituents need look no further than the nearest mirror to see who is to blame.

Seriously... who nominates candidates? Who chooses them? Works to get them elected? Pays the tab for their advertising? Who buys party memberships, and who marks those precious X's? If we aren't getting exactly what we want from our elected representatives, whose fault is it really?

agreed. but the system, or at least how it functions, is certainly a good part of the problem.

Edited June 16, 2011 by Moonlight Graham

[Keepitsimple]

You're being intentionally dense. The NDP and Liberals were so close in policies this election that Peter Mansbridge was practically mocking Jack Layton during an interview. It's plain to see that the Liberals and NDP are much closer in policies to each other than they are to the Conservatives, regardless of your assumptions about Liberal voters turning to the Conservatives first.

Forget the numbers and the facts even.

The entire point of this thread is just that: what does an MP do when his or her party's policies force them to vote against the wishes of their constituents?

Oh come on! That's very naive. The Liberals and Conservatives have always been very close on policy.....that's why the Liberals have had so much trouble voting against budgets over the past 5 years and why the media pundits have been constantly saying that the Liberals have to find a way to differentiate themselves from the Conservatives. As a pure ploy to regain some votes, they made a conscious decision to try and move Left to poach some NDPers. That was a disaster.....but if by some miracle the Liberals had managed to form a government, they would have reverted to policies that would have once again made them look very much like the Conservatives - minus Harper. And for the record, the NDP stands alone in its historical and current policies - they are NOT like the Liberals, regardless of that Party's attempt to poach votes.

[Molly]

The majority of constituents don't necessarily elect their representative. That's my point. Once elected, they're theoretically supposed to represent the interest of the majority of their constituents, however. So if the majority of your constituents voted for left-leaning parties and you won with a plurality of votes as a right-leaning candidate, how do you vote in the House?

As head cook in my household, it is my task to fulfill the culinary best interests of the folks who eat under my roof. Family member B would vote for T-bone (with lobster,usually), while family members C, D and E might opt for greasy pizza with cherry pie with ice cream as a chaser....

And I, who actually carry the responsibility for both content and cost, serve a lot of hamburger, and vegetables.

We elect an individual to act as our representative, not a party platform. Parties on the whole are not bound by thos stupid platforms, so why should our representatives, who we hope are somewhat more nuanced, be bound by them?

[Molly]

And have you and your fellow voters in the riding wrote your MP letters and told him this?

My solution is to have, as part of the vote, the question "Does the incumbent MP deserve his or her pension?"

Oh, yes! That's brilliant!

[Molly]

TB, this is depressing news for you but people vote the way they choose a restaurant for a quick lunch in a foreign city. The local candidate at best may sway 5% of the vote.

Explain Ralph Goodale.

[cybercoma]

We elect an individual to act as our representative, not a party platform. Parties on the whole are not bound by thos stupid platforms, so why should our representatives, who we hope are somewhat more nuanced, be bound by them?

Then why do MPs from the same party all vote the same way, if they're representing the best interests of their constituents? Sounds to me like their representing their own best interests or their party's best interests.

[ToadBrother]

TB, this is depressing news for you but people vote the way they choose a restaurant for a quick lunch in a foreign city. The local candidate at best may sway 5% of the vote.

You know, I don't actually buy that. I've never encountered anybody who votes actually taking the choice that lightly. I may not agree with the way some decide, but everything I've seen or heard since my first time voting twenty odd years ago tells me you're wrong.

[RNG]

You know, I don't actually buy that. I've never encountered anybody who votes actually taking the choice that lightly. I may not agree with the way some decide, but everything I've seen or heard since my first time voting twenty odd years ago tells me you're wrong.

Anecdotal, admittedly, but I vote against you. For two elections I voted for Rob Anders. Probably the worst MP we have had. But I supported the CPC platform. And whether it is right or wrong, the fact is that individual MP's have very little power. That's just how it is.

[M.Dancer]

Anecdotal, admittedly, but I vote against you. For two elections I voted for Rob Anders. Probably the worst MP we have had. But I supported the CPC platform. And whether it is right or wrong, the fact is that individual MP's have very little power. That's just how it is.

My MP is Carolyn Bennett.

Before her it was Barbara McDougal.

Some MPs have more power than others.

[Molly]

For two elections I voted for Rob Anders. Probably the worst MP we have had. But I supported the CPC platform.

Then blame yourself for bad governance.

I decided years ago that I could not/would not ever again vote for someone for their party affiliation who I could not vote for based on their individual merit. It has made voting quite a lot harder, but much more satisfying.

If you vote for and elect an idiot (crook, schnook or ignoramus), you don't have the right to be surprised to find that others have done the same, and that we are all then subjected to governance by idiots, criminals and jerks.

(Sharp up, eh?) :angry:

[RNG]

Then blame yourself for bad governance.

I decided years ago that I could not/would not ever again vote for someone for their party affiliation who I could not vote for based on their individual merit. It has made voting quite a lot harder, but much more satisfying.

If you vote for and elect an idiot (crook, schnook or ignoramus), you don't have the right to be surprised to find that others have done the same, and that we are all then subjected to governance by idiots, criminals and jerks.

(Sharp up, eh?) :angry:

So you are lucky enough to be in a riding where your MP is appointed to cabinet? Because if not, they are just a puppet of the party leader. And even then they mostly are.

I appreciate the principle of your position but IRL it don't matter.

Edited June 16, 2011 by RNG

[Molly]

So you are lucky enough to be in a riding where your MP is appointed to cabinet? Because if not, they are just a puppet of the party leader. And even then they mostly are.

Of course! I live in that stripe of wealthy commuter 'burbs north of Toronto. Practically every MP from around here is in the cabinet, whether they are worth the powder to blow them up, or not, smack dab halfway between Fantino and Clement, just over from Oda, and Van Loan... a hippety hop away from where Belinda Stronach used to reign....

My current MP was hand-picked by Jim Flaherty (another near neighbour), nominated and elected in spite of the resignations of most of the CPC constituency executive. It used to be Helena.

[Topaz]

I was wondering have any of you here ever asked your MP the question, where the MP loyalty lies, constituents or leader? I've been thinking of doing just that to see what the MP reply would be and their views.

[Molly]

I was wondering have any of you here ever asked your MP the question, where the MP loyalty lies, constituents or leader? I've been thinking of doing just that to see what the MP reply would be and their views.

You hardly need to ask that question when their actions speak for them.

I 'had a hard chat' with one in particular who was the beneficiary of a bloody lot of my hard work, who then betrayed that trust/tried to play both sides by supporting the leader's convenience while trying to posture as defending constituency interests, on a very big deal issue...

Long story, but the guy lost my respect over it, particularly because instead of taking his lumps for being a two-faced dodger (even if doing what he thought was the right thing), he tried the snow job on me, too.

[August1991]

Explain Ralph Goodale.

Or Roch Lasalle. What do you think of André Arthur, or Vegas?

These are outliers. Are they the future? No.

You know, I don't actually buy that. I've never encountered anybody who votes actually taking the choice that lightly. I may not agree with the way some decide, but everything I've seen or heard since my first time voting twenty odd years ago tells me you're wrong.

Be honest. Has your single vote ever changed anything? Edited June 18, 2011 by August1991

[Molly]

[quote name=August1991' date='17 June 2011 - 10:12 PM' timestamp='13

Or Roch Lasalle. What do you think of André Arthur, or Vegas?

These are outliers. Are they the future? No.

Be honest. Has your single vote ever changed anything?

[Molly]

Be honest. Has your single vote ever changed anything?

Okay, let's try that again.

You can prove any premise if all evidence to the contrary can be dismissed out of hand with a single word: 'outliers'. Argument not accepted.

But, I signed in to answer the 'single vote' question with two things: Firstly, one of my old constituencies came up with that rarest of events, a straight-up tie. A by-election was held to sort it out, and one of the two (the incumbent, no less) withdrew.

Now that's great fun, but one's influence is entirely in keeping with one's effort.

I know that I have made some concrete, visible, life-influencing differences. That's not just airy-fairy 'anyone can be prime minister' talk, but fact for which I can provide physical proof if necessary. If a 'single vote' consists only of a negligent eeny-meeny-miney, delivered only if it's convenent. then that one vote isn't going to sway much.

What that single vote gives us, though, is the opportunity and the invitation to fully participate in our own governance. From there, It's up to us to make that vote as valuable or as valueless as we see fit.

[Topaz]

Can't help thinking that many people run for MP's basically for the money and the benefits, so when voting does come, depending on their leader, go against the leader and you could find yourself seating as a independant and gone in the following elections. I have more respect for MP's who do go against their leader in voting , if that is what their constituents want and the leader should respect that.

[August1991]

I know that I have made some concrete, visible, life-influencing differences. That's not just airy-fairy 'anyone can be prime minister' talk, but fact for which I can provide physical proof if necessary. If a 'single vote' consists only of a negligent eeny-meeny-miney, delivered only if it's convenent. then that one vote isn't going to sway much.

I too can say that I have had concrete, visible effects on the world. Heck, we all affect the world when we buy a cup of coffee.

OTOH, I have voted in many elections and I can honestly say that if I had not voted, the result would have been exactly the same.

What that single vote gives us, though, is the opportunity and the invitation to fully participate in our own governance. From there, It's up to us to make that vote as valuable or as valueless as we see fit.

Uh no. In a democracy, politicians accept in effect to decide who has power through what amounts to a lottery. This is better than deciding power through birth, or cronyism.

[Molly]

I too can say that I have had concrete, visible effects on the world. Heck, we all affect the world when we buy a cup of coffee.

OTOH, I have voted in many elections and I can honestly say that if I had not voted, the result would have been exactly the same.

Uh no. In a democracy, politicians accept in effect to decide who has power through what amounts to a lottery. This is better than deciding power through birth, or cronyism.

Bollocks.

The result would be exactly the same without you because you percieve 'a vote' to be nothing more than a single randomly-placed X... and that's all the power you give it or claim. The power of the vote is that everyone has one, and we are all free to influence our fellows. The fact that you choose not to empower your vote is not a statement that votes have no power,or that you are wise and above all that, but that you are incredibly lazy, have no respect for the power you hold and seem to think squandering that power is cool. The lazier and more thoughtless and wasteful you are with your vote, the bigger and stronger mine is, so have at it.

Concrete proof of the influence of my vote: for a start, I can show you law reform commission reports that use my words to justify and explain recommendations that were subsequently adopted. Without votes, no one would ever have wanted to know. That's powerful stuff.

My vote is so powerful that folks that I chose 20+ years ago are still there, still influencing.

You want your vote to be meaningful? Hoist your arse and put it to work.

Lottery? Pfft! You don't know what you are talking about.