Mixed Member Proportional representation

[capricorn]

And having MP's elected off "party lists" is going to make that any better? Surely you jest.

Just to be clear, the "party lists" contain the names of "selected" representatives. They are not "elected" representatives. A vast difference IMO.

[mikedavid00]

Just to be clear, the "party lists" contain the names of "selected" representatives. They are not "elected" representatives. A vast difference IMO.

My Riding - Liberal Nomination

On Dec. 2 Omar Alghabra won the Liberal nomination .. Alghabra declared: “This is a victory for Islam! Islam won! Islam Won!”

Mr. Khaled Outhman a principal supporter of Mr. Alghabra held the microphone and shouted (inside a hall in a Christian community center) "The result tonight is a prove for Muslims unity and a victory for Islam, and that Arab mean Muslims and although Mr. Hazineh (the riding president) keep telling me he is a Christian I am telling him that he better be a muslim" He also said that this is the beginning to take over other ridings in Mississauga and later take over Canada. He also added "Do not vote Conservative they are against Islam and Muslims". For each of this statement the Alghabra's supporters cheered and clapped.

Edited September 29, 2007 by mikedavid00

[jbg]

Treason. Rank treason.

[mikedavid00]

Treason. Rank treason.

Ok so 52% of people in Ontario are born in other countries.

These people for the most part are situated around the GTA. So we have high populations of minorities who know all about exploiting political systems, after all, it's what they do back home in their 3rd world countries like Iran. They are heavily concentrated in certain areas. They have figured out already how to hijack nominations and have done that very well. Sikh's make descisions of who will be Liberal leader.

Now can someone give an example of how immigrants might figure out a way.. a loophole to take advantage of this Proportian representation?

Or, does this actually give them less votes or less of a voice? The next step is to have a Sikh Party of Canada. It's almost around the corner I'm sure...

How will this help them?

[kengs333]

My Riding - Liberal Nomination

On Dec. 2 Omar Alghabra won the Liberal nomination .. Alghabra declared: “This is a victory for Islam! Islam won! Islam Won!”

Mr. Khaled Outhman a principal supporter of Mr. Alghabra held the microphone and shouted (inside a hall in a Christian community center) "The result tonight is a prove for Muslims unity and a victory for Islam, and that Arab mean Muslims and although Mr. Hazineh (the riding president) keep telling me he is a Christian I am telling him that he better be a muslim" He also said that this is the beginning to take over other ridings in Mississauga and later take over Canada. He also added "Do not vote Conservative they are against Islam and Muslims". For each of this statement the Alghabra's supporters cheered and clapped.

Source?

[kengs333]

Just to be clear, the "party lists" contain the names of "selected" representatives. They are not "elected" representatives. A vast difference IMO.

It's extremely unlikely that any party would dare "select" or "appoint" people to the list without some sort of consultation with party members. Again, more disinformation from the "no" side.

[kengs333]

And having MP's elected off "party lists" is going to make that any better? Surely you jest.

MPPs. This is provincial. However candidates are selected, if they don't live up to the voter's expectations, they and the party gets bad press, party gets less votes next time around.

Show me where the problems you people are claiming will result from MMP is happening in other countries, etc. with MMP. Nobody has been able to do this so far.

[ScottSA]

If that's how the system is set up, then they're simply doing what is permitted to be done in order to get into political power. The system is designed to allow for such changes because the whole purpose is to elect people who represent their community, and if a community is 65% Chinese, then isn't it logical that the somebody of Chinese origin would perhaps be the best representative? Unless you want to change the system to only allow Canadian-born people of European

It may be "reasonable," but it's the antithesis of democracy nonetheless. The workability of democracy demands a determination of community will, which for all intents and purposes means the will of the majority. Democracy was designed and is ONLY functional in a homogenous society, or 'demos,' with perceived commonality of interest. Unfortunately we don't have that anymore, or are losing it rapidly, and when it goes, democracy will be mere steps behind it. The notion of "racial bloc plurality" is clearly unworkable.

Edited September 29, 2007 by ScottSA

[jennie]

It may be "reasonable," but it's the antithesis of democracy nonetheless. The workability of democracy demands a determination of community will, which for all intents and purposes means the will of the majority. Democracy was designed and is ONLY functional in a homogenous society, or 'demos,' with perceived commonality of interest. Unfortunately we don't have that anymore, or are losing it rapidly, and when it goes, democracy will be mere steps behind it. The notion of "racial bloc plurality" is clearly unworkable.

Do you mean non-white/non-Christian "racial block plurality" ?

[ScottSA]

Do you mean non-white/non-Christian "racial block plurality" ?

Go away. You're better suited to the kindergarten room. It's down the hall and to the left.

[Argus]

It's extremely unlikely that any party would dare "select" or "appoint" people to the list without some sort of consultation with party members. Again, more disinformation from the "no" side.

Hardly disinformation. "consulting" party members, whatever that means, is not the same as being elected. For example, all votes in the House by NDP MPs are whipped. Any MP who dares to vote against the party line is expelled. That is the kind of democracy you see in the NDP. And other parties often aren't a whole lot better. Party members who want to get on those lists will have to have showed their "loyalty" over many years, which means doing what they're told. Those who oppose the party will have faint hope of ever being chosen for the list. It'll be one more way for the party backroom boys to control things.

[kengs333]

Hardly disinformation. "consulting" party members, whatever that means, is not the same as being elected. For example, all votes in the House by NDP MPs are whipped. Any MP who dares to vote against the party line is expelled. That is the kind of democracy you see in the NDP. And other parties often aren't a whole lot better. Party members who want to get on those lists will have to have showed their "loyalty" over many years, which means doing what they're told. Those who oppose the party will have faint hope of ever being chosen for the list. It'll be one more way for the party backroom boys to control things.

Actually, yes, I think "consulting party members" will basically boil down to electing the candidates. How many people will stick around in a party that starts dictating what they have to do and think? Members join parties in order to participate in the political process.

Most people vote for parties and leaders, anyway, not the local candidate. I like the candidate in my riding for the party I'll likely be voting for, but I'd probably like someone else that was nominated to run in the riding just as much. Ultimately, it's what the party stands for--or, in this case, some of their specific policies. As it stands, we only vote for one MP, we have to accept the other's for the party without question.

[kengs333]

It may be "reasonable," but it's the antithesis of democracy nonetheless. The workability of democracy demands a determination of community will, which for all intents and purposes means the will of the majority. Democracy was designed and is ONLY functional in a homogenous society, or 'demos,' with perceived commonality of interest. Unfortunately we don't have that anymore, or are losing it rapidly, and when it goes, democracy will be mere steps behind it. The notion of "racial bloc plurality" is clearly unworkable.

Yes, I see where you're coming from.

[mikedavid00]

Source?

You don't know about that? Everyone here in Toronto during the time heard of this.. well anyone following politics. The Liberal party issued a statement saying they would look into it and nothing happened.

[mikedavid00]

Yes, I see where you're coming from.

Kengs can you tell if at all it's possible for immigrants to exploit this?

I really don't know how to vote. I naturally don't like the sound of new civil servants in any way, shape, or form, and I usually do not trust our politicians judgement and competance (see John Tory), but I do believe that the Parlimentary system only works under an honoroble, homogenous society or it can easily by exploited as you saw with Bob Rae losing and hijacked Libearl Nominations. All with immigrants getting in the way.

So please again, can someone tell me how immigrants can exploit this proposed system to gain further power into our political system?

Or just tell me, even if far fetched, how it could be faintly possible they could exploit this.

I can't vote for a new system that can be further exploited... like.. it might make sense reading it on paper and such, but I'm concerned about exploitation.

I never thought of this, but the CPC should be winning the election becuase of mcguinties lackluster job. Tory was exploited by having to pander to immigrant votes which is now costing him the election becuase of his poor judgement. If there wasn't these few groups trying to exploit or system, this wouldn't be happenning. TOry is a product of immigrant exploitation and thus once again, have meddled with out political system and affected another outcome.

So I'm very concerned about exploitation as far as immigrants are concerned.

Thanks

[jennie]

Tory was exploited by having to pander to immigrant votes which is now costing him the election becuase of his poor judgement.

I thought the impetus for Tory's platform came from the Christian schools.

It seemed to me that was evident when he said creationism could be taught with evolution in public schools.

[kengs333]

Kengs can you tell if at all it's possible for immigrants to exploit this?

I really don't know how to vote. I naturally don't like the sound of new civil servants in any way, shape, or form, and I usually do not trust our politicians judgement and competance (see John Tory), but I do believe that the Parlimentary system only works under an honoroble, homogenous society or it can easily by exploited as you saw with Bob Rae losing and hijacked Libearl Nominations. All with immigrants getting in the way.

So please again, can someone tell me how immigrants can exploit this proposed system to gain further power into our political system?

Or just tell me, even if far fetched, how it could be faintly possible they could exploit this.

I can't vote for a new system that can be further exploited... like.. it might make sense reading it on paper and such, but I'm concerned about exploitation.

I never thought of this, but the CPC should be winning the election becuase of mcguinties lackluster job. Tory was exploited by having to pander to immigrant votes which is now costing him the election becuase of his poor judgement. If there wasn't these few groups trying to exploit or system, this wouldn't be happenning. TOry is a product of immigrant exploitation and thus once again, have meddled with out political system and affected another outcome.

So I'm very concerned about exploitation as far as immigrants are concerned.

Thanks

Unless legislation is passed restricting the right to vote, hold party memberships to people who are of European extraction, how can things not be "exploited" in some way. There have always been problems. Before immigration of large numbers of visible minorities it was, language, social class, religion that was often used as a means of exploiting parties and votes. The NDP started off as a Christian party that simply wanted to represent dirt poor farmers on the prairies. Now it's a haven for radical feminists, labour radicals, gay rights activists, Communists, etc. These are all things that the Christian founders of the party would find abhorrant. So how did this all come about then?

The party lists that would be drawn up would be voted on by members from throughout the province, thus lessening the likelihood of certain factions within the party being able to elevate certain candidates.

[jbg]

The party lists that would be drawn up would be voted on by members from throughout the province, thus lessening the likelihood of certain factions within the party being able to elevate certain candidates.

But those factions, if they control more than 3% of the vote, could form their own parties to "work around" that problem.

[mikedavid00]

But those factions, if they control more than 3% of the vote, could form their own parties to "work around" that problem.

What?

My ears just perked up!

Please explain further. Keep in mind the grass roots Libearl party is an immigrant party. It's a party of for people of the third world and nothing more. The immigrants were able to decide who got in powr during the Liberal convention. They were able to hijack riding nominations and give unpropotional representation around the province and eventually in Parliment (see ruby dalah and the countless others who 'don't belong' in Parliment and 'cheated' their way in).

[kengs333]

But those factions, if they control more than 3% of the vote, could form their own parties to "work around" that problem.

Anyone can start a party with a little bit of money and a few signatures, but there's more to it than that. It requires finding candidates that hold similar beliefs, have political experience, have the inclination to enter the stressful world of public service, raising funds, dealing with all of the small issues that parties have to deal with. Even if they receive over 3% of the vote, that only entitles them to ONE seat. That means that they would be able participate in all of the aspects of parliamentry democracy; participate in debate, raise concerns about issues in one's constituancy, vote, etc. But that's about it. They can't single-handedly legislature, stop the working of government in Ontario, etc. Even if there were a small group of parties with one or two seats, they would probably be so differing in ideology that they'd never vote in a block. It should be kept in mind that in FPTP systems such as in Britain, it is also possible for "single-issue" or so-called fringe parties to get elected. (There is currently a party that was elected simply because people in one constuancy were concerned about their local hospital.) In the end, the primary purpose of MMP is to make the seating arrangement more reflective of the vote, which basically will only have a significant effect on the three main parties.

[kengs333]

What?

My ears just perked up!

Please explain further. Keep in mind the grass roots Libearl party is an immigrant party. It's a party of for people of the third world and nothing more. The immigrants were able to decide who got in powr during the Liberal convention. They were able to hijack riding nominations and give unpropotional representation around the province and eventually in Parliment (see ruby dalah and the countless others who 'don't belong' in Parliment and 'cheated' their way in).

Okay, you're starting to get a little outrageous.

[mikedavid00]

Okay, you're starting to get a little outrageous.

Ok I'm going to have to spend time and read up on this..

Immigrants are extrememly organized from the Temples and Mosques. Things that were deemed not possible have happened.

I wish I could find that letter to the Toronto Sun from a life long Liberal member who said that his membership was hijacked when Wajid Khan get elected. He said he looked around and for the first time most of the audience seemd to be or an arab, islamic descent and he found this a very serious problem for things to come.

If we are proposing to give minorities more a voie in any other way, I find this very serious.

I still have no idea how this works.

BTW, there is already a Chinese party in Vancouver.

A sikh party would dominate ridings in Ontario that's for sure. While just a seat to you, they can mobilize with all other immigrants demanding things they all have in common - wanting free money, wanting a free ride becuase there aren't enough jobs to go around.

[kengs333]

Ok I'm going to have to spend time and read up on this..

Immigrants are extrememly organized from the Temples and Mosques. Things that were deemed not possible have happened.

I wish I could find that letter to the Toronto Sun from a life long Liberal member who said that his membership was hijacked when Wajid Khan get elected. He said he looked around and for the first time most of the audience seemd to be or an arab, islamic descent and he found this a very serious problem for things to come.

If we are proposing to give minorities more a voie in any other way, I find this very serious.

I still have no idea how this works.

BTW, there is already a Chinese party in Vancouver.

A sikh party would dominate ridings in Ontario that's for sure. While just a seat to you, they can mobilize with all other immigrants demanding things they all have in common - wanting free money, wanting a free ride becuase there aren't enough jobs to go around.

I understand the general point you're making, but the way you do it is a little over the top...

[jbg]

Anyone can start a party with a little bit of money and a few signatures, but there's more to it than that. It requires finding candidates that hold similar beliefs, have political experience, have the inclination to enter the stressful world of public service, raising funds, dealing with all of the small issues that parties have to deal with. Even if they receive over 3% of the vote, that only entitles them to ONE seat. That means that they would be able participate in all of the aspects of parliamentry democracy; participate in debate, raise concerns about issues in one's constituancy, vote, etc. But that's about it. They can't single-handedly legislature, stop the working of government in Ontario, etc. Even if there were a small group of parties with one or two seats, they would probably be so differing in ideology that they'd never vote in a block.

But they can, in conjunction with other nutbar groups, bring down the government. In Israel, the "religious" party can, too frequently, wreak havoc with a threat to crater the government.

[jbg]

Please explain further. Keep in mind the grass roots Libearl party is an immigrant party. It's a party of for people of the third world and nothing more.

Clearly they're a lot more or they wouldn't have a majority government. The risk I worry about is MPP's being able to literally have their own agenda on any/all issues other than ones of direct concern to their ethnic group.

If you like MMP, you'd love the example the Bloc set as HM's opposition.