Electoral Reform a Must for Real Democracy in Canada.

[jacee]

Endless compromise does not make sense in every case, and endless compromise is what PR proposes.

"Endless compromise" means you're still breathing, Michael: That's called LIFE.

The alternatives are ...

- Take power yourself, or

- Submit to the power of someone else

We collaborate, cooperate and compromise all day every day. We should expect as much from the politicians who represent us.

[Fletch 27]

"Endless compromise" means you're still breathing, Michael: That's called LIFE.

The alternatives are ...

- Take power yourself, or

- Submit to the power of someone else

We collaborate, cooperate and compromise all day every day. We should expect as much from the politicians who represent us.

Its called "Conspiring" in proportional representation Jacee,,,, Please.. see my link to Italy this week and last... In politics, its all about getting and keeping power in PR... FPTP assured the mandate and agenda are HELD TOO, if not, your out.... No sleeze like in PR....

[Mighty AC]

How is it working in Germany or Norway or Switzerland or Denmark or Zimbabwe?

[Fletch 27]

How is it working in Germany or Norway or Switzerland or Denmark or Zimbabwe?

Im Danish.... Take a guess why im here!!! As Danish as can be but sick and tired on 50% or greater taxes and NOT being able to raise a family or Company... Its sickening....

The "Fat TAx"??? Yes, worked out well and forced by the left... it drained BILLIONS from the economy and bled regular citizens of taxes... DO SOME F_ING RESEARCH prior to singing the praises of what you know NOTHING abaout.... Try google....

I can speak for what i know and have endured... You may want to step off of your PR pedestal...

[Mighty AC]

Government should enact the wishes of the majority while protecting the rights of the minority. The Danish parliament is far more representative of the wishes of the population than ours. Thus, the laws you speak of were passed by politicians representing the majority of the Danish citizens. Your problem lies with the beliefs of your countrymen, not parliament.

You are obviously angry and seemingly very young. My advice to you is to do a little research and control your language. Your appearance and attitude are important if you want to be taken seriously. Back your positions with reasonable arguments and people will listen and discuss them. They may not agree with you but in the end they will understand your position a little better, and that's a good thing.

[kairos]

The Italian comment is assinine. What difference is Berlusconi's Conservatives to Harper's conservatives ruling with a minority government without proportional representation? Conservatives are skilled at divide and conquer. With a coalition government, at least Berlusconi's government cannot get away with carte blanche, they have to have the acceptance of other parties that they form a coalition with. In this sense its better with proportional representation since other parties can stop them from doing whatever they want.

It would be much worse under a non proportional system in Italy. Since Berlusconi with the help of his corrupt crooks would no doubt design electoral ridings to maximize their numbers, which would allow them to get a majority government with a minority of the vote. Like the Republicans in the States did in 2000 allowing their unelected un-democratic leader to steal the election despite losing the popular vote. This is why conservatives hate the idea of proportional representation. They fear the demos being represented, and they fear true democracy.

Edited March 5, 2013 by kairos

[Fletch 27]

The Italian comment is assinine. What difference is Berlusconi's Conservatives to Harper's conservatives ruling with a minority government without proportional representation? Conservatives are skilled at divide and conquer. With a coalition government, at least Berlusconi's government cannot get away with carte blanche, they have to have the acceptance of other parties that they form a coalition with. In this sense its better with proportional representation since other parties can stop them from doing whatever they want.

It would be much worse under a non proportional system in Italy. Since Berlusconi with the help of his corrupt crooks would no doubt design electoral ridings to maximize their numbers, which would allow them to get a majority government with a minority of the vote. Like the Republicans in the States did in 2000 allowing their unelected un-democratic leader to steal the election despite losing the popular vote. This is why conservatives hate the idea of proportional representation. They fear the demos being represented, and they fear true democracy.

A lot of assumptions you have there... The left has simply overpowered ANY for of rational thought... Same as Greece where less than HALF the country is considered "private sector".... All the others are Public Union!! Simply out of control and at the whim of a bunch on old men shaking hands and agreeing to stay in power "Together"....... This is what you want????

Here we go with your over-used NDP catch phrases.. "Divide and conquer"... "Hidden agenda",,, "Transparency",, "Muzzling"....... OYe-VEy..

[bush_cheney2004]

... Like the Republicans in the States did in 2000 allowing their unelected un-democratic leader to steal the election despite losing the popular vote.

Nonsense....the 2000 U.S. election was conducted per the constitution and upheld by the US Supreme Court. Mr. Gore didn't even win his home state.

[kairos]

Fletcher that response was hysterical and I've never voted NDP.

Bush-Cheney 04 Bush's brother who was the governor of Florida rigged the election. When it came to a recount the Rs prevented a recount, because they knew the 500 vote margin in their favour was false.

Preventing a recount is against Democracy. Sorry the Rs destroyed any last sense of U.S. democracy in that moment.

Edited March 5, 2013 by kairos

[Fletch 27]

Government should enact the wishes of the majority while protecting the rights of the minority. The Danish parliament is far more representative of the wishes of the population than ours. Thus, the laws you speak of were passed by politicians representing the majority of the Danish citizens. Your problem lies with the beliefs of your countrymen, not parliament.

You are obviously angry and seemingly very young. My advice to you is to do a little research and control your language. Your appearance and attitude are important if you want to be taken seriously. Back your positions with reasonable arguments and people will listen and discuss them. They may not agree with you but in the end they will understand your position a little better, and that's a good thing.

Just see Link:

http://www.economist.com/blogs/freeexchange/2007/12/the_strains_of_danish_commitme

The Fat TAx was put in place SIMPLY To retain support and Build/solidify a coalition. Trust me,, No anger here, just happy to be in Canada with a system that Works... Speaking from experience of coarse...... Unless you would like to deny that as well

[Fletch 27]

Fletcher that response was hysterical and I've never voted NDP.

Bush-Cheney 04 Bush's brother who was the governor of Florida rigged the election. When it came to a recount the Rs prevented a recount, because they knew the 500 vote margin in their favour was false.

Preventing a recount is against Democracy. Sorry the Rs destroyed any last sense of U.S. democracy in that moment.

When your old enough to vote.. Just remember my words! LOL...

Comparing HArper to Berlusconi? Cmon...

[bush_cheney2004]

...Bush-Cheney 04 Bush's brother who was the governor of Florida rigged the election. When it came to a recount the Rs prevented a recount, because they knew the 500 vote margin in their favour was false.

Nope....the Supreme Court invoked the equal protection clause to void the recount....all legal like. Subsequent recounts have consistently found Bush to have won Florida.

Preventing a recount is against Democracy. Sorry the Rs destroyed any last sense of U.S. democracy in that moment.

More nonsense....the U.S. is a constitutional republic with democratic principles....but no monarch with funny hats.

[kairos]

When your old enough to vote.. Just remember my words! LOL...

I've been voting for over a decade. Is arrogance a strictly conservative trait?

Comparing HArper to Berlusconi? Cmon...

I'd compare Berlusconi more with Mulroney.

[kairos]

Nope....the Supreme Court invoked the equal protection clause to void

the recount....all legal like. Subsequent recounts have consistently

found Bush to have won Florida.

The Supreme Court were stacked with Daddy's ideologues. In this case they acted like the mafia instead of Judicial Officials. The Supreme court was directly responsible for ending any sense of Democracy in the electoral system.

More nonsense....the U.S. is a constitutional republic with democratic principles....but no monarch with funny hats.

That's why I chose my words carefully. I said sense of democracy, not implying that it was a democracy, only that there were democratic trappings in the electoral system until the 2000 Supreme Court turned the U.S. into an appointed Theocracy.

[Fletch 27]

I've been voting for over a decade. Is arrogance a strictly conservative trait?

I'd compare Berlusconi more with Mulroney.

Sorry, But now i see why you want/demand/desire PR!

Thanks for that.. I way not bring up the Liberal scandals and pandering

[jacee]

Mighty AC, on 05 Mar 2013 - 14:21, said:

How is it working in Germany or Norway or Switzerland or Denmark or Zimbabwe?

Im Danish.... Take a guess why im here!!! As Danish as can be but sick and tired on 50% or greater taxes and NOT being able to raise a family or Company... Its sickening....

The "Fat TAx"??? Yes, worked out well and forced by the left... it drained BILLIONS from the economy and bled regular citizens of taxes... DO SOME F_ING RESEARCH prior to singing the praises of what you know NOTHING abaout.... Try google....

I can speak for what i know and have endured... You may want to step off of your PR pedestal...

Government should enact the wishes of the majority while protecting the rights of the minority. The Danish parliament is far more representative of the wishes of the population than ours. Thus, the laws you speak of were passed by politicians representing the majority of the Danish citizens. Your problem lies with the beliefs of your countrymen, not parliament.

You are obviously angry and seemingly very young. MySQL advice to you is to do a little research and control your language. Your appearance and attitude are important if you want to be taken seriously. Back your positions with reasonable arguments and people will listen and discuss them. They may not agree with you but in the end they will understand your position a little better, and that's a good thing.

Ya, Fletch. For starters explain the Danish system for us, compared to STV and MMP we're talking about here?

You've probably done it before, but now would be good too.

Somebody giving the orders, without consulting with all stakeholders, and everyone else obeying?

How many people do you trust to give the orders to all the rest of us?

Edited March 5, 2013 by jacee

[Mighty AC]

Just see Link:

http://www.economist.com/blogs/freeexchange/2007/12/the_strains_of_danish_commitme

The Fat TAx was put in place SIMPLY To retain support and Build/solidify a coalition. Trust me,, No anger here, just happy to be in Canada with a system that Works... Speaking from experience of coarse...... Unless you would like to deny that as well

Your link does not back your opinion, it simply states that people with means are fleeing high taxes. It does not mention PR or the fat tax that was tried and will now be removed.

The Danish parliament closely represents how people actually vote, thus the decisions they make, good or bad, are more representative of the wishes of the population. The same can't be said for decisions made by Canadian governments.

The decision to implement a long gun registry was made by a Liberal government given dictatorial majority power by less than 40% of the electorate. The current Harper government used its absolute power, granted by less than 40% of voters, to gut environmental protection with a budget bill. Would those same decisions have been made in a proportional parliament? Possibly, but then at least they would have been committed by a group elected by the will of the people, representing an actual majority of voters.

[Fletch 27]

Your link does not back your opinion, it simply states that people with means are fleeing high taxes. It does not mention PR or the fat tax that was tried and will now be removed.

The Danish parliament closely represents how people actually vote, thus the decisions they make, good or bad, are more representative of the wishes of the population. The same can't be said for decisions made by Canadian governments.

The decision to implement a long gun registry was made by a Liberal government given dictatorial majority power by less than 40% of the electorate. The current Harper government used its absolute power, granted by less than 40% of voters, to gut environmental protection with a budget bill. Would those same decisions have been made in a proportional parliament? Possibly, but then at least they would have been committed by a group elected by the will of the people, representing an actual majority of voters.

That Money-Waster almost died if you recall with the Liberal and NDP Coalition support. IN this case... Jack Supported Steve HArper.. OBVIOSLY upsetting his BASE!~ Well, Unless things just changed..

Hence Mulcairs desire to bring back the long-gun..

http://www.ipolitics.ca/2012/04/09/mulcair-pledges-to-restore-long-gun-registry/

[bush_cheney2004]

The Supreme Court were stacked with Daddy's ideologues. In this case they acted like the mafia instead of Judicial Officials. The Supreme court was directly responsible for ending any sense of Democracy in the electoral system.

The supreme court justices were appointed and confirmed in accordance with the U.S. Constitution by democratically elected representatives, something that seems to escape your analysis from afar.

That's why I chose my words carefully. I said sense of democracy, not implying that it was a democracy, only that there were democratic trappings in the electoral system until the 2000 Supreme Court turned the U.S. into an appointed Theocracy.

The U.S. was never designed to be a mob rule democracy....it had articles of confederation and real constitution soon after that. No kings or queens required.

Edited March 5, 2013 by bush_cheney2004

[Mighty AC]

That Money-Waster almost died if you recall with the Liberal and NDP Coalition support. IN this case... Jack Supported Steve HArper.. OBVIOSLY upsetting his BASE!~ Well, Unless things just changed..

Hence Mulcairs desire to bring back the long-gun..

http://www.ipolitics.ca/2012/04/09/mulcair-pledges-to-restore-long-gun-registry/

No comment about your lack of evidence or PR? This was not an invitation to discuss the registry in a PR thread. I simply highlighted two much maligned decisions implemented with the power provided by false majorities.

I am stating that FPTP can be partially culpable for the implementation of bad decisions as it grants governments power they did not earn from the electorate. Proportional parliaments can be held responsible for not passing legislation you deem desirable; however, a proportional electoral system cannot be blamed for bills that are passed.

[kairos]

The supreme court justices were appointed and confirmed in accordance

with the U.S. Constitution by democratically elected representatives,

something that seems to escape your analysis from afar.

Democratically elected? You just said the U.S. is not a democracy. But OK I'll agree there are democratic trappings in the system. It is possible to demoratically elect people and for them to overturn any sense of Democracy by appointing their ideologues to the Supreme Court, and for the Supreme Court to defeat any sense of democracy by not allowing a recount in a rigged election that comes down to 500 votes which would decide the fate of 310 million people and the world and that is what happened.

The U.S. was never designed to be a mob rule democracy....it had

articles of confederation and real constitution soon after that. No

kings or queens required.

Having fair elections isn't mob rule. Rigging elections is authoritarianism, which was not what the U.S. was designed to be.

Edited March 5, 2013 by kairos

[Michael Hardner]

Imposed ideology will, for the most part, disappear and committees will be active in crafting and shaping bills again. That's a good thing.

You actually have no idea that that result will happen. It is impossible to predict such a thing. I see a succession of impasses, minority governments and coalitions.

The social cons will no doubt have trouble finding support for some of their social ideas. However, a united right is still the largest voting block and would carry the most power. Conservatives will find common ground with other parties on many fiscal and crime related issues.

Carry the most power how ? In a perpetual minority government ? They would be shut out, for the most part, except where the liberals would agree with them.

Furthermore, in such a scenario you could cause catastrophe.

I don't know what we're trying to fix here, except possibly denying the conservatives power and adjusting some theoretical mathematics that we don't agree with.

[Michael Hardner]

"Endless compromise" means you're still breathing, Michael: That's called LIFE.

The alternatives are ...

- Take power yourself, or

- Submit to the power of someone else

We collaborate, cooperate and compromise all day every day. We should expect as much from the politicians who represent us.

LIFE is not endless compromise, but at least you are acknowledging that we will have endless compromise.

[bush_cheney2004]

Democratically elected? You just said the U.S. is not a democracy. But OK I'll agree there are democratic trappings in the system. It is possible to demoratically elect people and for them to overturn any sense of Democracy by appointing their ideologues to the Supreme Court, and for the Supreme Court to defeat any sense of democracy by not allowing a recount in a rigged election that comes down to 500 votes which would decide the fate of 310 million people and the world and that is what happened.

More nonsense...the U.S. Constitution is the highest law in the land, not somebody's ideas about democracy from Canada. The U.S. elections process doesn't owe "the world" anything.

Having fair elections isn't mob rule. Rigging elections is authoritarianism, which was not what the U.S. was designed to be.

Have you ever voted in a U.S. election ? Are they only "rigged" when the outcome does not match your expectations or ideology from Canada ? Your Queen (head of state) recognized President Bush as very much legitimate. Take it up with her.

Edited March 5, 2013 by bush_cheney2004

[kairos]

More nonsense...the U.S. Constitution is the highest law in the land,

not somebody's ideas about democracy from Canada. The U.S. elections

process doesn't owe "the world" anything.

The U.S. Constitution in this case did not prevent tyranny. The weasels managed to get away with it despite it. The U.S. violates the world, especially after the Bush authoritarian government was installed by the Supreme Court.

Have you ever voted in a U.S. election ? Are they only "rigged" when

the outcome does not match your expectations or ideology from Canada ?

Your Queen (head of state) recognized President Bush as very much

legitimate. Take it up with her.

No, I've only voted in Canadian elections. The Queen is not democratically elected. The fact one un-elected head of state recognizes the legitimacy of another doesn't change the fact its still a non-elected Head of State.