143 replies to this topic

[Wild Bill]

"But the Liberals did it"

The new conservative rallying call.

Who am I kidding when I say "new", more like their rallying call for the last six years.

You miss the point! Essentially, assuming many if not most of the critics here were alive at that time, the fact that they never complained about the situation when the Liberals were in power is proof that in truth they approved of it!

In other words, if their guy does it it's ok! It's only bad if the OTHER guy does it!

THAT"S why so many "conservatives" (actually, not really just conservatives - just people who disagree with YOU!) keep bringing it up! They're highlighting the hypocrisy.

[g_bambino]

Clearly youre not going to have a referendum on a defending our soil from a foreign invasion. Thats obvious. But that only accounts for a tiny tiny tiny percentage of our military activities.

Well, there's also the cases wherein an ally is in need of assistance, or NATO or UN missions that won't wait for 15 million Canadian votes to be tallied.

Iv argued against direct democracy a lot of different times.

I can only agree with it for constitutional changes to our system of government.

[dre]

Well, there's also the cases wherein an ally is in need of assistance, or NATO or UN missions that won't wait for 15 million Canadian votes to be tallied.


I can only agree with it for constitutional changes to our system of government.

Im losing confidence in our current system to the point where I have an open mind to trying some other things.

I cant even really participate in what we have now. Theres no slot that I fit in. It would be quite impossible for me to vote for any of our major parties so the most I can possibly do is spoil a ballot. The last three elections I just stayed home.

And Im not the only one. As more and more people realize this isnt effective representation, and the political pendulum becomes more and more of a wrecking ball, with governments taking turns implementing ideological mega programs, and cancelling the megaprograms of their predecessors that number will keep dropping.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/9a/Voter_turnout_in_Canada_1957-present.png

[cybercoma]

they never complained about the situation when the Liberals were in power is proof that in truth they approved of it!

How do you know? Were you posting here when Chretien was in power?

[Newfoundlander]

The way we vote isn't going to change.

[eyeball]

The way we vote isn't going to change.

The country is going down the toilet then.

Where's my plunger?

[Bryan]

I cant even really participate in what we have now. Theres no slot that I fit in. It would be quite impossible for me to vote for any of our major parties so the most I can possibly do is spoil a ballot. The last three elections I just stayed home.

I felt the same way you did back in the last 80's/early 90's. A lot of people did. We hated the parties being presented to us, and we thought the system that entrenched them wasn't fair. So we did something about it. That's a big reason why so many CPC supporters are such die-hards: we worked very hard to replace the established right of centre party. Then we worked even harder to replace the 'natural ruling party' in government. It took a lot of people a lot of hours and a lot of money to get it done, but we did it.

If enough people of other political persuasions had similar ideas, and a similar work ethic, they could do it too.

[Newfoundlander]

The country is going down the toilet then.

Where's my plunger?

If a party can form government with FPTP then why would they change the system? Harper had believed in electoral reform when the right was split, but when he started winning governments under FPTP he abandoned that idea.

[cybercoma]

It took a lot of people a lot of hours and a lot of money to get it done, but we did it.

And now you're flushing it all down the toilet, as Harper shows greater arrogance than Chretien ever did and Reformers like Trost get restless.

[Battletoads]

You miss the point! Essentially, assuming many if not most of the critics here were alive at that time, the fact that they never complained about the situation when the Liberals were in power is proof that in truth they approved of it!

In other words, if their guy does it it's ok! It's only bad if the OTHER guy does it!

THAT"S why so many "conservatives" (actually, not really just conservatives - just people who disagree with YOU!) keep bringing it up! They're highlighting the hypocrisy.

Quite a few assumptions you're making there, can't say I expected much from the con shills however.

Edited by Battletoads, 24 February 2012 - 09:58 PM.

[MiddleClassCentrist]

True, this would require some Canadians to vote twice but it would lead to better representation in Ottawa and would avoid many of the problems of PR.

AV does that.

AV allows you to rank your votes.

If your first choice doesn't win, then your second choice is tallied in until someone wins with a majority.

It's cheaper than runoff too.

[Battletoads]

And now you're flushing it all down the toilet, as Harper shows greater arrogance than Chretien ever did and Reformers like Trost get restless.

I do wonder how Harper will keep the insane members of his base quiet now that they no longer need to fear an election. After all if they can't force their unpopular social/fiscal plans on Canadians now, when else will they get a chance? I expect a lot of the language coming out of the former reformers to start mirroring what we're hearing from the American republicans.

Edited by Battletoads, 24 February 2012 - 08:33 PM.

[Derek L]

Clearly youre not going to have a referendum on a defending our soil from a foreign invasion. Thats obvious. But that only accounts for a tiny tiny tiny percentage of our military activities.

As I suggested in the “if you were PM thread”, one solution on consensus building with foreign military intervention could be a requirement that the Government forms a “War Cabinet” with the Official opposition {see Churchill/Atlee}……….In this way, you’re likely to have over 50% of the MP's on side, and the war itself won’t become a political football.

Edited by Derek L, 24 February 2012 - 08:35 PM.

[August1991]

Old thread. God knows what I posted above.

This idea of the Single transferable vote (STV) for better representation has been brought up and defeated twice in BC already. Why do you think it will be accepted federally?

We are not Europe. We still like some things to be unequal.

However this is done, it seems to me that our parliament should reflect the popular will at the local level.

You could implement some form of Alternative Voting; a preferential ballot system whereby you select in order of preference the candidates that you want. You can use this to run an instant runoff.

I happen to prefer the idea of a clear majority vote at the riding level for the MP. A run-off is simple, allows voters to know see candidate support and requires that citizens vote twice. (I happen to believe that citizens who exert effort to vote are probably better voters.)

----

Pliny and TB, I simply think that having a federal MP with easy-to-understand majority local support is a good thing. The US election system and the French presidential elections are based on this simple majority principle of run-offs.

[August1991]

And here's where things completely fall down for me. We do not live in a direct democracy. The popular will, whatever that may be at any given time (and let's be blunt, it's neither consistent in the short term nor non-contradictory in the longer term) is filtered by our representatives....

I agree 100%.

A British friend of mine told me via e-mail that in his opinion, and he is fairly politically astute, that this was more an anti-Lib-Dem vote than an anti-AV vote.

The problem with the FPTP system is that everyone and his brother-in-law has an explanation for how the others would have voted.

If local candidates had at least a majority of votes, or a majority of second choices, we could resolve this question - and then argue endlessly about what the extra data means.