.

[WestCoastRunner]

Why are you so against democracy? Why draw the line with having a seat? Shouldn't others have a chance for a voice, so they can get enough support to actually win seats?

Of course they should. You are of course twisting my words as usual.

[Smallc]

Joe Clark

Preston Manning

Look where that got them.

[G Huxley]

Re: Australia the Greens have 10 seats in the Australian Senate.

Edited September 20, 2015 by G Huxley

[Evening Star]

Unsure, but the countries have massive amounts of seats allotted to what you refer or others refer to as fringe parties e.g. the pirate party in Sweden.

Because they use different electoral systems. That's a different issue.

[Smallc]

Of course they should. You are of course twisting my words as usual.

You're drawing an arbitrary line, just like me. You think your's is better, for some reason.

[WestCoastRunner]

It most definitely is. I'm actually very offended by it.

I'm offended that you are deciding who should be on the debate stage if it is wasting your time but not mine.

[Smallc]

Unsure

So you make another unsubstantiated claim, is what you're saying.

[Smallc]

No it's not. It's all about choice for Canadians and having as much exposure as possible to the candidates.

The choice doesn't change. The people putting on the debates should be free to set their own criterion.

[Smallc]

Re: Australia the Greens have 10 seats in the Australian Senate.

So what? They use a different electoral system for their senate. That doesn't prove what you initially claimed.

[WestCoastRunner]

The choice doesn't change. The people putting on the debates should be free to set their own criterion.

Sounds like you are setting the criteria.

[Smallc]

I'm offended that you are deciding who should be on the debate stage if it is wasting your time but not mine.

I didn't get to decide. I simply agree with the decision.

[Smallc]

Sounds like you are setting the criteria.

I don't work for the Globe and Mail, or for the Munk organization.

[G Huxley]

Because they use different electoral systems. That's a different issue.

Yes and they have a more democratic attitude.

[G Huxley]

So you make another unsubstantiated claim, is what you're saying.

You make a selective quote. I said in addition: "but the countries have massive amounts of seats allotted to what you refer or others refer to as fringe parties e.g. the pirate party in Sweden."

[G Huxley]

So what? They use a different electoral system for their senate. That doesn't prove what you initially claimed.

I was referring to the different electoral systems being part of my vision of Democracy since the context was "my vision of Democracy."

[Smallc]

You make a selective quote. I said in addition: "but the countries have massive amounts of seats allotted to what you refer or others refer to as fringe parties e.g. the pirate party in Sweden."

Which has nothing to do with the debate stage and everything to do with electoral systems that differ from ours.

[Smallc]

I was referring to the different electoral systems being part of my vision of Democracy since the context was "my vision of Democracy."

This is about the debate.

[G Huxley]

Which has nothing to do with the debate stage and everything to do with electoral systems that differ from ours.

Agreed but you referred to my vision of democracy and that is part of my vision of democracy.

[Smallc]

Agreed but you referred to my vision of democracy and that is part of my vision of democracy.

I was referring specifically to the context of the debate. I'm not sure how I feel about changing our electoral system. I support it in some ways, but in other ways, I think it's dangerous.

[G Huxley]

In Canada 'the pirate party' would be considered fringe, but in Sweden where they have a different approach they are mainstream.

Often what keeps parties 'fringe' is simply the fact that they have been intentionally sidelined and not given a fair chance, not that they aren't considered an option by many people if they have equal opportunities.

Edited September 20, 2015 by G Huxley

[TimG]

Often what keeps parties 'fringe' is simply the fact that they have been intentionally sidelined and not given a fair chance, not that they aren't considered an option by many people if they have equal opportunities.

What keeps most parties fringe is they represent narrow special interests that most people cannot relate to. A former fringe party only becomes mainstream if the moderate their views to match what the mainstream parties offer and the electorate is looking for a change. Of course, some electoral systems can reward protest votes (e.g. the pirate party) but they still remain at the margins when it comes to political decision making. Edited September 20, 2015 by TimG

[G Huxley]

Protest votes are still votes. In Sweden they count, whereas in Canada the protest votes are thrown in the gutter so no protest is really registered. That's what makes Sweden's system more democratic.

People who protest shouldn't be deemed fringe and sidelined. Democracy needs protest and needs to take it seriously.

Without dissent and differing views there is no democracy.

Edited September 20, 2015 by G Huxley

[Canada_First]

Democracy is about having a choice. Many other countries have democracy in a way that I envision it including Sweden, Germany and Australia.

So move to one if those countries. Leave our country alone. Thank you.

[Canada_First]

The Green Party has what, 2 or 3 seats? She should be allowed to participate in any debate with the 3 leaders.

Only parties with Official party status in the House should be in the national debates. Right now the Greens really don't matter at all. 12 seats and up.

[TimG]

Protest votes are still votes. In Sweden they count, whereas in Canada the protest votes are thrown in the gutter so no protest is really registered.

Nonsense. The votes are counted and registered. Every political system requires that fringe parties meet a minimum threshold before they get official representation. The only difference between Canada and other countries is the fringe view must reach a higher threshold.