marcus Posted October 9, 2015 Author Report Share Posted October 9, 2015 but this whole idea of convincing someone to vote stratigically ....to ensure one canidate did not win, well in my opinion i don't think it's right..... And politicizing the niqab in order to take attention away from the real issues is? The system is broken. My vote, in Vancouver, is worth 1/5th of a vote by some old white guy in the rural area. That's not right. If many voters' #1 priority is to get rid of Harper, It's perfectly right to vote strategically. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 9, 2015 Report Share Posted October 9, 2015 Must piss you guys off to no end that there may be a chance that the Cons might win once again.....How desperate do you have to be to devise this scheme up.....And still call it a democratic election.......My party can't win , so i'll vote for the other team.....it's finding a loop hole in the system and taking advantage of it.....desperate times i guess.....and desperate people.....whats next paying people to vote for your party......You feel that it's a problem for the 2/3 of the population that don't support Harper to work together? However, the fact that Harper swallowed the PC party to avoid vote splitting allowing him to take advantage of the vote distorting FPTP system that grants dictatorial power to a party that received 1/3 of the vote, is acceptable? What if we simply had a voting system that elects the parliament that Canadians actually vote for, wouldn't that be preferable? The Liberals, NDP and Greens, who combined represent the majority of Canadians, are all calling for such a system, where every vote has equal power, regardless of where you live or who your neighbours support. As long as we are stuck with an electoral system that wastes over half of the votes cast, strategic voting makes sense. Provided that Harper doesn't get a majority, the system can be fixed and we will never have to vote strategically again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smeelious Posted October 9, 2015 Report Share Posted October 9, 2015 Provided that Harper doesn't get a majority, the system can be fixed and we will never have to vote strategically again. You are giving too much credit to leaders that really haven't proved they could accomplish something like this. Also, with the way the current polls are going, the Liberals have Zero incentive to change the voting system. Now...If by some miracle....The Liberals and the Conservatives are tied in seats...Lizzy May could become the Electoral Hero we Deserve. Another thing...before the voting system gets changed we will likely have another FPTP election as a referendum on changing the voting system anyway. Especially with the seat numbers being so close. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dialamah Posted October 9, 2015 Report Share Posted October 9, 2015 Also, with the way the current polls are going, the Liberals have Zero incentive to change the voting system. The cynic in me says yeah; the eternal optimist says.. This time it'll be different. Now...If by some miracle....The Liberals and the Conservatives are tied in seats...Lizzy May could become the Electoral Hero we Deserve. It seems the second choice of Green voters is NDP, and there are plenty of NDP/Lib voters who would like to vote Green, if they didn't think it would be wasting their vote. Maybe if Green and NDP combined they'd have a better shot at forming government. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted October 9, 2015 Report Share Posted October 9, 2015 And politicizing the niqab in order to take attention away from the real issues is? The system is broken. My vote, in Vancouver, is worth 1/5th of a vote by some old white guy in the rural area. That's not right. If many voters' #1 priority is to get rid of Harper, It's perfectly right to vote strategically. Come on, are you that disillusioned to think that a new government be it NDP, or Liberal, or a combination of both, will bring sunshine and rainbows.... The current system may not be perfect, but it is the one we have in place right now, to change it is going to require the new government to put that in place.....until then the current system is what we have to work with.....and it was never intended for strategic voting.....which can be used to undermine the whole voting process, or outcome of a fair election.....[/size] That old white guy living in that rural area has different concerns than you do, so what....do you think someone in the city gives a rats ass about dairy production, or farming..... If that many people want to get rid of Harper, then there is no really worry is there......[/size] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted October 9, 2015 Report Share Posted October 9, 2015 You feel that it's a problem for the 2/3 of the population that don't support Harper to work together? However, the fact that Harper swallowed the PC party to avoid vote splitting allowing him to take advantage of the vote distorting FPTP system that grants dictatorial power to a party that received 1/3 of the vote, is acceptable? What if we simply had a voting system that elects the parliament that Canadians actually vote for, wouldn't that be preferable? The Liberals, NDP and Greens, who combined represent the majority of Canadians, are all calling for such a system, where every vote has equal power, regardless of where you live or who your neighbours support. As long as we are stuck with an electoral system that wastes over half of the votes cast, strategic voting makes sense. Provided that Harper doesn't get a majority, the system can be fixed and we will never have to vote strategically again. I think it is a problem when people , citizens start to organize to ensure someone else does not get voted back in.....it is the system we have in place right now, there are lots of systems or laws that i don't agree with, I'm a big fan of capitol punishment , but you don't see me shooting convicted felons, why because it is again'st the law, and the rules that govern our nation..... It is a way to to misuse the system, while it may be ok for you to use it to upset the Cons, what if it was used in other ways.....to discredit or swing votes to say the Green party..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted October 9, 2015 Report Share Posted October 9, 2015 You are giving too much credit to leaders that really haven't proved they could accomplish something like this. Also, with the way the current polls are going, the Liberals have Zero incentive to change the voting system. Now...If by some miracle....The Liberals and the Conservatives are tied in seats...Lizzy May could become the Electoral Hero we Deserve. Another thing...before the voting system gets changed we will likely have another FPTP election as a referendum on changing the voting system anyway. Especially with the seat numbers being so close. I'm almost certain Canadians will be back at the polls in before the summer....all parties have already clearly stated they would not work together..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToadBrother Posted October 9, 2015 Report Share Posted October 9, 2015 I'm almost certain Canadians will be back at the polls in before the summer....all parties have already clearly stated they would not work together..... No, they've said they wouldn't work with the Tories, and the Liberals won't be forging a formal coalition. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToadBrother Posted October 9, 2015 Report Share Posted October 9, 2015 I think it is a problem when people , citizens start to organize to ensure someone else does not get voted back in.....it is the system we have in place right now, there are lots of systems or laws that i don't agree with, I'm a big fan of capitol punishment , but you don't see me shooting convicted felons, why because it is again'st the law, and the rules that govern our nation..... It is a way to to misuse the system, while it may be ok for you to use it to upset the Cons, what if it was used in other ways.....to discredit or swing votes to say the Green party..... It's no more a misuse of the system than voting for a party because they promise to give you money. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PIK Posted October 9, 2015 Report Share Posted October 9, 2015 No, they've said they wouldn't work with the Tories, and the Liberals won't be forging a formal coalition.Yes they will, but they will never use the word coalition. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToadBrother Posted October 9, 2015 Report Share Posted October 9, 2015 Yes they will, but they will never use the word coalition. As I've said many times, it will be a confidence and supply agreement. The NDP will still wield enormous influence, because some of the Liberals' pledges, like tax cuts, are supply bills and will require support in Parliament. In return, the NDP will get considerable influence over government policy and legislation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted October 9, 2015 Report Share Posted October 9, 2015 But voting for the party that promises to put the most money in your pocket is morally right? You don't think the 30% of Canadians who pay no income taxes vote that way? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToadBrother Posted October 9, 2015 Report Share Posted October 9, 2015 You don't think the 30% of Canadians who pay no income taxes vote that way? And what if they do? If that's a perfectly acceptable stance for a voter, then why isn't "Anybody But Conservatives" an acceptable stance for any voter or group of voters? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BC_chick Posted October 9, 2015 Report Share Posted October 9, 2015 That is not what this is about for me, i not loyal to one party.....i vote for the party i think best suits me, and what i think is best for me, my family,my riding and for the country........in that order....not because i want second place, unless they had something to offer.....but because that was the original intention of voting....I thought you would understand, and you were talking about supporting the green party, because you liked may 's platform, and the green candidate in your riding, because she was the better choice... you've said your not a big fan of the NDP....so why would you vote that way.....because the greens are not going to get elected....again i support the idea of having a back up vote, but this whole idea of convincing someone to vote [/size]stratigically ....to ensure one canidate did not win, well in my opinion i don't think it's right..... A while ago I said I'm going to vote Green but I qualified that by saying it's because the NDP candidate in my riding was running a 90% chance of winning. Since then a lot of that support has bled to the LPC candidate essentially resulting in a closer race between the CPC and NDP candidates. I'm watching closely now but if the trend continues you bet I will be voting strategically for the NDP candidate. If the race was between the CPC candidate and LPC, I'd vote LPC. The only time I voted NDP even though the LPC and CPC were running a tight race was last time when Iggy was leading the LPC and that's because I really didn't see much of a difference between the LPC and CPC. It's all about the spectrum and which 'better' candidate has a shot of winning in my riding. If the day comes where we have proportional representation, then yes, I will vote for the party but under the current system, strategic voting 'needs to be done' as the OP said. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PIK Posted October 9, 2015 Report Share Posted October 9, 2015 That is so sad BC chick. The hate towards conservatives in this country by member of the left is very disheartening. You been fed so much bull tghru the media and you suck it all up. I would be embarrassed to be that way. And I see harper was rushed by someone in BC at a rally. HDS at is worst. As they say be careful what you wish for. I know I cant afford a liberal or NDP government. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToadBrother Posted October 9, 2015 Report Share Posted October 9, 2015 That is so sad BC chick. The hate towards conservatives in this country by member of the left is very disheartening. You been fed so much bull tghru the media and you suck it all up. I would be embarrassed to be that way. And I see harper was rushed by someone in BC at a rally. HDS at is worst. As they say be careful what you wish for. I know I cant afford a liberal or NDP government. Perhaps instead of blaming those who want Harper out, you should ask why it is that after nine years, the Tories have reached a point where they a large number of Canadians are willing to vote for the party most likely defeat the Tory candidate in their riding. As to what you can or cannot afford, I would start to count on some sort of a Liberal minority at this point, either immediately after the election, or after the Tories' defeat at the first Speech from the Throne. And really, why is that bad? No government should have a permanent lock on power. That doesn't produce good governments, it produces ailing, incompetent and corrupt regimes like the Alberta PC governments. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted October 9, 2015 Report Share Posted October 9, 2015 And really, why is that bad? No government should have a permanent lock on power. That doesn't produce good governments, it produces ailing, incompetent and corrupt regimes like the Alberta PC governments. The problem comes when you replace that government with one that's worse, as Alberta is finding out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToadBrother Posted October 9, 2015 Report Share Posted October 9, 2015 The problem comes when you replace that government with one that's worse, as Alberta is finding out. The problem here is that in reality Alberta would be a mess no matter who won. Partisans will always pose every election as the election to end all elections, that if the voters pick the wrong party, the world will come to an end. It just simply isn't so, Argus. Whatever you imagine will happen, Canada will survive and prosper regardless of who wins on the 19th. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted October 9, 2015 Report Share Posted October 9, 2015 The problem here is that in reality Alberta would be a mess no matter who won. Partisans will always pose every election as the election to end all elections, that if the voters pick the wrong party, the world will come to an end. It just simply isn't so, Argus. Whatever you imagine will happen, Canada will survive and prosper regardless of who wins on the 19th. You clearly aren't in Ontario. The people of Ontario have seen what years of arrogant, incompetent misrule can do to them, and Trudeau strikes me as the exact same kind of politician as Dalton Mcguinty was. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToadBrother Posted October 9, 2015 Report Share Posted October 9, 2015 You clearly aren't in Ontario. The people of Ontario have seen what years of arrogant, incompetent misrule can do to them, and Trudeau strikes me as the exact same kind of politician as Dalton Mcguinty was. And Ontario will survive as well. Perhaps the Ontario Conservatives will finally pick a candidate who isn't an idiot, though judging by their latest choice, they seem keen to keep the Liberals in power. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
On Guard for Thee Posted October 9, 2015 Report Share Posted October 9, 2015 You clearly aren't in Ontario. The people of Ontario have seen what years of arrogant, incompetent misrule can do to them, and Trudeau strikes me as the exact same kind of politician as Dalton Mcguinty was.Kind of like how Harper is? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BC_chick Posted October 9, 2015 Report Share Posted October 9, 2015 (edited) That is so sad BC chick. The hate towards conservatives in this country by member of the left is very disheartening. You been fed so much bull tghru the media and you suck it all up. I would be embarrassed to be that way. And I see harper was rushed by someone in BC at a rally. HDS at is worst. As they say be careful what you wish for. I know I cant afford a liberal or NDP government. It's not hate for the CPC, it's about having a *spectrum* of choice and voting for the better candidate among those who have a shot to win. If the race was between the LPC and NDP, I'd vote NDP but it doesn't mean I 'hate' the LPC. If you ever stepped out of your hyper-partisanship, you'd understand the meaning of better candidate. Frankly, I find it 'sad' that some people will vote blindly for one party no matter what the repercussions will be of that choice. Edited October 9, 2015 by BC_chick Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marcus Posted October 9, 2015 Author Report Share Posted October 9, 2015 Come on, are you that disillusioned to think that a new government be it NDP, or Liberal, or a combination of both, will bring sunshine and rainbows.... The current system may not be perfect, but it is the one we have in place right now, to change it is going to require the new government to put that in place.....until then the current system is what we have to work with.....and it was never intended for strategic voting.....which can be used to undermine the whole voting process, or outcome of a fair election..... The current system makes my vote worth less than others. So it's broken and I owe nothing to it. That's besides the point. It's perfectly fine, both legally and morally, to vote strategically. If one of my top priorities is to get Harper out of office, then I will vote in a way that best achieves that goal. That old white guy living in that rural area has different concerns than you do, so what....do you think someone in the city gives a rats ass about dairy production, or farming..... If that many people want to get rid of Harper, then there is no really worry is there......[/size] I didn't say he doesn't have different concerns. What I said was that it's not right that his vote is worth 4-5 times more than mine. Many people do want to get rid of Harper. In fact, majority do but that's not enough as evident from the last elections and the possibility of Harper coming back to power again (possibly in a majority government) this election with a minority support. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted October 9, 2015 Report Share Posted October 9, 2015 Kind of like how Harper is? No honest person can say Harper has damaged the country in any way. This government's problem is largely a lack of style, and not so much a lack of substance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToadBrother Posted October 9, 2015 Report Share Posted October 9, 2015 No honest person can say Harper has damaged the country in any way. This government's problem is largely a lack of style, and not so much a lack of substance. Ah, and now it's down to the NO True Scotsman fallacy. 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.