Ask Your Mother Posted October 2, 2015 Report Share Posted October 2, 2015 I guess the ends in this case justifies the means. But we all need to be emailing our friends this link instead of arguing with and preaching to each other. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Guy Posted October 2, 2015 Report Share Posted October 2, 2015 (edited) There is always a strategic vote at every election because some Canadians use that as their criteria for making their decisions. It may be very important and larger in this election. I would not be surprised if the Liberals or Conservatives are significantlty ahead of each other in the polls on the day before the election that will give that party a 2% to 4% "boost" by those who will vote strategically the next day. This may even be bigger if the Conservatives are polling higher than either one of them. Edited October 2, 2015 by Big Guy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waldo Posted October 2, 2015 Report Share Posted October 2, 2015 is that apparent declining NDP vote going... strategically... somewhere? Per the latest overnight Nanos polling: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angrypenguin Posted October 2, 2015 Report Share Posted October 2, 2015 There is always a strategic vote at every election because some Canadians use that as their criteria for making their decisions. It may be very important and larger in this election. I would not be surprised if the Liberals or Conservatives are significantlty ahead of each other in the polls on the day before the election that will give that party a 2% to 4% "boost" by those who will vote strategically the next day. This may even be bigger if the Conservatives are polling higher than either one of them. This did not happen in the last election, and the Conservatives definitely polled higher. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angrypenguin Posted October 2, 2015 Report Share Posted October 2, 2015 is that apparent declining NDP vote going... strategically... somewhere? Per the latest overnight Nanos polling: As was pointed out to me yesterday, the Liberals and the Conservatives are still within their margin of error. EKOS/FORUM/Angus all showed the Conservatives ahead, and IIRC outside of their respective margin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marcus Posted October 2, 2015 Author Report Share Posted October 2, 2015 Which was never a problem before a conservative government got into power, right? But now it's a crisis of democracy! Oh my! It's always a problem. Whether it's the Liberals or the Conservatives being elected. What we have is disproportional. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted October 2, 2015 Report Share Posted October 2, 2015 So our voting system is ancient. Is that necessarily a recommendation for indefinite use? Do we still have horse-drawn carriages in the gaslit streets? The reason we ultimately switched from horse and buggy to cars was that cars were infinitely better faster and more comfortable. he improvement was obvious. As was the improvement from gaslight to electricity. The improvements from FPTP to PR appear to be considerably less obvious, and involve a number of dangers, the most important of which would be a shift from stable to unstable government, and from mainly majority government to a series of short term minority or coalition governments. And all of this for what, exactly? Because some people believe that, in theory, this is more democratic. In reality ,of course, the only reason this is being pushed by the left is the hope that it will permanently disenfranchise conservative voters. Let's be blunt. It's not greater democracy they're after but less of it. Their assumption is that the Liberals and NDP, perhaps with the Greens, will rule forever in harmony, and lead Canada to the promised land of progressive policies and programs with no taint of conservatism. You know, like Greece.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waldo Posted October 2, 2015 Report Share Posted October 2, 2015 In reality ,of course, the only reason this {FPTP} is being pushed by the left is the hope that it will permanently disenfranchise conservative voters. Let's be blunt. It's not greater democracy they're after but less of it. Their assumption is that the Liberals and NDP, perhaps with the Greens, will rule forever in harmony, and lead Canada to the promised land of progressive policies and programs with no taint of conservatism. You know, like Greece.... a profound analysis! Apparently... no party... evah... would consider a coalition with a "conservative" party! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angrypenguin Posted October 2, 2015 Report Share Posted October 2, 2015 a profound analysis! Apparently... no party... evah... would consider a coalition with a "conservative" party! Of course they would not. Take a look at the poll data, even the supporters of Liberals/NDP don't want that Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpankyMcFarland Posted October 2, 2015 Report Share Posted October 2, 2015 The reason we ultimately switched from horse and buggy to cars was that cars were infinitely better faster and more comfortable. he improvement was obvious. As was the improvement from gaslight to electricity. The improvements from FPTP to PR appear to be considerably less obvious, and involve a number of dangers, the most important of which would be a shift from stable to unstable government, and from mainly majority government to a series of short term minority or coalition governments. And all of this for what, exactly? Because some people believe that, in theory, this is more democratic. In reality ,of course, the only reason this is being pushed by the left is the hope that it will permanently disenfranchise conservative voters. Let's be blunt. It's not greater democracy they're after but less of it. Their assumption is that the Liberals and NDP, perhaps with the Greens, will rule forever in harmony, and lead Canada to the promised land of progressive policies and programs with no taint of conservatism. You know, like Greece.... My support for PR goes back decades and it is not just about Harper, or even Canada. I would like to see a government supported by a majority of voters which we have not had in Canada for more than twenty years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waldo Posted October 2, 2015 Report Share Posted October 2, 2015 Of course they would not. Take a look at the poll data, even the supporters of Liberals/NDP don't want that I guess you missed the "forever" emphasis... presuming on not accepting FPTP because no party... no party ever... forever and forever... would want to consider forming a coalition with a conservative government, well geezaz, that sure seems a touch insular, super-sensitive and frankly, bizarro! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angrypenguin Posted October 2, 2015 Report Share Posted October 2, 2015 (edited) I guess you missed the "forever" emphasis... presuming on not accepting FPTP because no party... no party ever... forever and forever... would want to consider forming a coalition with a conservative government, well geezaz, that sure seems a touch insular, super-sensitive and frankly, bizarro! Why does it seem bizarro? The Conservative party's values are completely against the values of the NDP/Liberals. I would not want Harper in any coalition with the NDP/Liberals as well. The EKOS poll reflected that well! Edited October 2, 2015 by angrypenguin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waldo Posted October 2, 2015 Report Share Posted October 2, 2015 Why does it seem bizarro? The Conservative party's values are completely against the values of the NDP/Liberals. I would not want Harper in any coalition with the NDP/Liberals as well. The EKOS poll reflected that well! perhaps you have no experience or understanding of coalition government... they're not necessarily driven by like ideology at all. Parties find accommodations within structured measures/intended legislation typically outlined within contractual agreements. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angrypenguin Posted October 2, 2015 Report Share Posted October 2, 2015 perhaps you have no experience or understanding of coalition government... they're not necessarily driven by like ideology at all. Parties find accommodations within structured measures/intended legislation typically outlined within contractual agreements. I get the idea, but I am against it. I am for the party that wins the most seats in the house is the one that governs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waldo Posted October 2, 2015 Report Share Posted October 2, 2015 I get the idea, but I am against it. I am for the party that wins the most seats in the house is the one that governs. and you've somehow taken this over-riding position that forever and ever and ever, a 'conservative' government could never win under PR... or alternatively form a working coalition with any other party! Has Harper so sullied the PR waters for you? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted October 2, 2015 Report Share Posted October 2, 2015 (edited) Why does it seem bizarro? The Conservative party's values are completely against the values of the NDP/Liberals. Certainly at the party level, unfortunately the natural conservative force that exists in everyone is amplified into a runaway effect when it's harnessed by a political party. I think if you look closely you'll find that progressive parties have conservative and liberal marbling throughout them just like people do. It works the other way too when progressive political parties get a little too full of themselves. These days however with the economy stagnating and threatening to shrink, and people becoming more agitated and meaner and with conservatism on the rise around the world as the apparent response to the stress of it all...I got a bad feeling about just how ugly the runaway effect will get as we get closer to the bottleneck we're approaching. The stampede is already underway in some places. Edited October 2, 2015 by eyeball Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted October 2, 2015 Report Share Posted October 2, 2015 My support for PR goes back decades and it is not just about Harper, or even Canada. I would like to see a government supported by a majority of voters which we have not had in Canada for more than twenty years. And still won't given how many people don't vote. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpankyMcFarland Posted October 2, 2015 Report Share Posted October 2, 2015 FPTP only allows simple choices: no choice between candidates of the same party and only two choices at the national level effectively. For example, Rob Anders would never have survived as a Conservative MP if voters in Calgary could have voted for another person from the same party. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted October 3, 2015 Report Share Posted October 3, 2015 (edited) FPTP only allows simple choices: no choice between candidates of the same party and only two choices at the national level effectively. For example, Rob Anders would never have survived as a Conservative MP if voters in Calgary could have voted for another person from the same party. A lot of PR systems, including, I believe, the one Mulcair wants, allows you even less choice. You vote the party, and the party puts forward a list, taking candidates from that list as they win a percentage of the vote. You don't get to choose among them at all. You don't even get to choose who your MP is if the whole riding votes for the winning party. Edited October 3, 2015 by Argus Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToadBrother Posted October 3, 2015 Report Share Posted October 3, 2015 A lot of PR systems, including, I believe, the one Mulcair wants, allows you even less choice. You vote the party, and the party puts forward a list, taking candidates from that list as they win a percentage of the vote. You don't get to choose among them at all. You don't even get to choose who your MP is if the whole riding votes for the winning party. That is a feature of party list systems but I don't see how it removes a voter's choice any more than the current system. After all, there are 337 MPs I will have absolutely no say at all in getting elected in just over two weeks. Under a party list system, I do have some indirect say in how many of a party's list candidates get elected, because they are selected based on overall popular vote percentages, which my vote will feed into. That being said, I hate party list systems, because I firmly believe every elected representative should have an actual direct geographical constituency. We have enough troubles with MPs being sheep who are completely overawed by their leaders, without creating a whole new class of MP that is literally pure party apparatchik. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted October 3, 2015 Report Share Posted October 3, 2015 I would be fine with a party list by province. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PIK Posted October 3, 2015 Report Share Posted October 3, 2015 FPTP only allows simple choices: no choice between candidates of the same party and only two choices at the national level effectively. For example, Rob Anders would never have survived as a Conservative MP if voters in Calgary could have voted for another person from the same party. So it all about stopping people you dont like from running? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToadBrother Posted October 3, 2015 Report Share Posted October 3, 2015 So it all about stopping people you dont like from running? You would have to ask a couple of Conservative riding associations that question, as they're the ones that stopped Anders from running, at least as a Conservative. No proposed electoral system world actually stop Anders from running. Providing he can come up with the deposit, he's free to run in any riding in Canada, and always will be. But it does suggest that where a bad candidate who would have got in because of party affiliation, might lose because voters have more effective options. I'd that a bad thing? If I'm a Tory voter, but the Tories in my riding picked someone like Anders, maybe under some other voting system, I might be able to rank another right of censer candidate higher. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted October 3, 2015 Report Share Posted October 3, 2015 I would be fine with a party list by province. You'd be fine with an MP who doesn't give a shit what happens to your riding, or how upset or angry the residents are? Because he won't. Your MP will be a complete tool of the party who doesn't need to worry in the least how unhappy you are with his or her performance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted October 3, 2015 Report Share Posted October 3, 2015 You'd be fine with an MP who doesn't give a shit what happens to your riding, or how upset or angry the residents are? Because he won't. Your MP will be a complete tool of the party who doesn't need to worry in the least how unhappy you are with his or her performance. As a balance is split off the CMAs. What you'd end up with is large mixed member constituencies. 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.