How Trudeau will work very hard on dumping FPTP

[The_Squid]

 If Trudeau doesn't pursue electoral reform in a meaningful way, he will be an utter failure as PM.

Edited October 25, 2016 by The_Squid

[cybercoma]

10 minutes ago, The_Squid said:

 If Trudeau doesn't pursue electoral reform in a meaningful way, he will be an utter failure as PM.

Absolutely correct. Between his waffling on electoral reform, his complete inaction on C-51, and his unwillingness to address the concerns of young workers, in just a year, he has already begun to rub young voters the wrong way.

[PIK]

3 minutes ago, cybercoma said:

Absolutely correct. Between his waffling on electoral reform, his complete inaction on C-51, and his unwillingness to address the concerns of young workers, in just a year, he has already begun to rub young voters the wrong way.

I see he was heckled and jeered by students the other day, they even turned their backs on him. That should screw him up. he wont be use to having kids now know he is a failure. Enough of the fashion shows and selfies, time to get to work.

[PIK]

16 minutes ago, The_Squid said:

 If Trudeau doesn't pursue electoral reform in a meaningful way, he will be an utter failure as PM.

This will be the right thing to do by not changing they way we vote. We have had 150 yrs of stable governments, why fix something that is not broken.

[The_Squid]

3 minutes ago, PIK said:

This will be the right thing to do by not changing they way we vote. We have had 150 yrs of stable governments, why fix something that is not broken.

Because it isn't as good as it can be...

We did fine when women couldn't vote too...  but we fixed that anyway (much to the chagrin of conservatives at the time).

[msj]

36 minutes ago, cybercoma said:

Absolutely correct. Between his waffling on electoral reform, his complete inaction on C-51, and his unwillingness to address the concerns of young workers, in just a year, he has already begun to rub young voters the wrong way.

Lucky for him young voters don't vote. 

Even luckier that they grow older and do vote - for the Liberals if not the Conservatives. 

[Argus]

1 hour ago, The_Squid said:

Because Harper appointees were based on "knowledge and skill"!   

Duffy...   Braseau....  Wallin...  Vic Toews as a judge...  an unqualified judge to the SCC...  Nigel Wright...  Bruce Carson...   Your bar for "knowledge and skill" is set very low indeed...

I'm not talking about political appointees to political jobs. As for Toews as a judge, can he be worse than many of the others we've already seen? I didn't think much of his politics but he is a lawyer, and I bet you have no idea how good he is - or isn't. Lots of Liberals have been given judgeships in the past - and future. Political parties always appoint those friendly with them to a variety of boards and positions, regardless of qualification. I'm talking about changing the hiring  and promotion process throughout the public service  based on race, language and various diversity quotas.

[PIK]

19 hours ago, The_Squid said:

Because it isn't as good as it can be...

We did fine when women couldn't vote too...  but we fixed that anyway (much to the chagrin of conservatives at the time).

Everybody can vote, this has nothing to do with allowing women to vote. We do not need European style log jams in our parliament and that is what will happen when you allow fringe groups to get hold of power.

[cybercoma]

17 minutes ago, PIK said:

Everybody can vote, this has nothing to do with allowing women to vote. We do not need European style log jams in our parliament and that is what will happen when you allow fringe groups to get hold of power.

So it's best to have representation that's not at all representative. Hell, if expediency is your concern, do you support having a dictatorship? We wouldn't even have to worry about ridiculous elections or the House. You could just get everything done that needs to be done.

Otherwise, if you think people should have a say in what government they get, then the House of Commons should be representative of how people vote. Today it is not and that's why Trudeau has a majority parliament despite 60% of the vote going to other parties.

Edited October 26, 2016 by cybercoma

[PIK]

It will ruin the country. We have a very success ful country and we should not be playing around with the rules. That is how progressives work, find something that is not broke and then break it. I and everyone else that agrees with me, is right on this. There is no ifs and buts on this one.  Years down the road and we have 30 parties running ...............................

[The_Squid]

1 hour ago, PIK said:

It will ruin the country. We have a very success ful country and we should not be playing around with the rules. That is how progressives work, find something that is not broke and then break it. I and everyone else that agrees with me, is right on this. There is no ifs and buts on this one.  Years down the road and we have 30 parties running ...............................

Progressive have always changed the voting system for the better...   allowing women to vote...  allowing non-whites to vote...  allowing native people to vote...  

Can you name one time progressives caused the voting system to "break"?

How many parties do you think currently run federally?

[-1=e^ipi]

11 hours ago, The_Squid said:

Progressive have always changed the voting system for the better...   allowing women to vote...  allowing non-whites to vote...  allowing native people to vote...  

Can you name one time progressives caused the voting system to "break"?

How many parties do you think currently run federally?

 

You have to understand that words like 'progressive' and 'liberal' have changed in meaning over the course of centuries.

The first British MP to support women getting the right to vote was John Stuart Mills. Yet he was a classical liberal, which is fairly different from what Trudeau is.

[SpankyMcFarland]

5 hours ago, -1=e^ipi said:

 

You have to understand that words like 'progressive' and 'liberal' have changed in meaning over the course of centuries.

The first British MP to support women getting the right to vote was John Stuart Mills. Yet he was a classical liberal, which is fairly different from what Trudeau is.

And he went on to found Mills and Boon.

[eyeball]

6 hours ago, -1=e^ipi said:

 

You have to understand that words like 'progressive' and 'liberal' have changed in meaning over the course of centuries.

These change from day to day now depending on who or what is being fought over. 

[Moonlight Graham]

From the Liberal Party website:

Quote

 

We are committed to ensuring that 2015 will be the last federal election conducted under the first-past-the-post voting system.

This committee will deliver its recommendations to Parliament. Within 18 months of forming government, we will introduce legislation to enact electoral reform.

 

I guess when the current system nabs you a nice majority, the old system doesn't look so bad any more!  I guess when you've been shut out of governing for a decade the above promise looked pretty good at the time!

On 2016-10-25 at 2:28 PM, cybercoma said:

Absolutely correct. Between his waffling on electoral reform, his complete inaction on C-51, and his unwillingness to address the concerns of young workers, in just a year, he has already begun to rub young voters the wrong way.

i think he's starting to rub most all voters the wrong way.  The honeymoon is long over.  I gave this gov a  real chance, but they've been a real disappointment. Same old Liberals.  You'd think getting kicked out of governing for a decade because of your arrogant corrupt ways would wake this party up.  Short memories they have I guess. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

[cybercoma]

4 hours ago, Moonlight Graham said:

i think he's starting to rub most all voters the wrong way.  The honeymoon is long over.

Monsef should step down. If the Liberals aren't going to bring in proportional representation by the next election as they promised, what's the point in having the Minister?

Elizabeth May is pissed.
 

Her response was in regards to what Rona Ambrose characterized:

Coyne has it right.

The Liberals should be ashamed of themselves.

[poochy]

That performance today by Monsef makes Calandra look good, it was deplorable, an insult to all of us.  The longer they are in power the more I feel I'm watching a high school student council run the country.

[Moonlight Graham]

1 hour ago, poochy said:

That performance today by Monsef makes Calandra look good, it was deplorable, an insult to all of us.  The longer they are in power the more I feel I'm watching a high school student council run the country.

OMG yes exactly.  Or a university student union council...wow that's actually a frighteningly accurate analogy, now I'm depressed...

[bush_cheney2004]

CBC columnist (or her editor) put it best...it is now a "tire fire" that Team Trudeau started themselves:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/opinion/electoral-reform-tire-fire-1.3876961

 

[Boges]

She needs to be dispatched pretty quickly. Her behaviour is an embarrassment to the party. 

Now do the Liberals have another Minority Female to replace her? Because, you know, it's 2016. 

The committee is correct. Any system should be put to the Canadian people in an referendum. Ontario put Mixed Member Proportional Representation on the ballot in 2007 and it was soundly defeated. 

[eyeball]

Ontario put it to the people? That's problematic right off the bat.

I'd rather we employ an international panel of constitutional experts as far from the influence of Canada's governments as possible to study the issues, put together a rigorous public education program about the various options and then present them to us.

The first option past the post wins. 

Edited December 2, 2016 by eyeball

[-1=e^ipi]

1 hour ago, Boges said:

She needs to be dispatched pretty quickly.

But she can't due to her race and sex. Since it's 2016.

[PIK]

1 hour ago, eyeball said:

Ontario put it to the people? That's problematic right off the bat.

I'd rather we employ an international panel of constitutional experts as far from the influence of Canada's governments as possible to study the issues, put together a rigorous public education program about the various options and then present them to us.

The first option past the post wins. 

Bring in people from failed states to tell us how to run our elections?? Really?

[?Impact]

1 hour ago, eyeball said:

put together a rigorous public education program about the various options and then present them to us.

I think I will be more influenced by the big money on TV ads then some government education program. Yet again the monied status quo wins.

[Boges]

3 minutes ago, ?Impact said:

I think I will be more influenced by the big money on TV ads then some government education program. Yet again the monied status quo wins.

Just like Unions fear-mongering during the last 3 Ontario elections.