639 replies to this topic

[spanky123]

I will vote to support an alternative to the  FPTP  voting system.

 

I believe we can have more FAIR and HONEST representation under and alternative system, one where you are voting for the "Person" who is running for election, and not just the party the person represents.

 

That is what the Swedes said and now their fate is determined by neo-Nazis!

[Mike K.]

Lol, yeah!

[Casual Kev]

I really doubt the far-right wouldn't rise without PR in most European countries... you still have literal communist parties being represented in some countries, but they generally don't grow; that's because people simply aren't interested in their politics or message right now. Yet you've had far-right parties get 10%-20% of the vote out of the gate, without needing to be preaching their views in a legislative setting for a long time; or other parties preempting their rise and adopting many of their views (like in Austria and Italy). If say Sweden was FPTP the far-right tendencies would be reflected in the mainstream parties one way or the other because that's what many people are subscribing to right now. That's what basically happened with the GOP due to Trump.

 

So I think arguing that PR enables extremism is a bit silly. That might be true when an extremist party grows large enough to be kingmakers, but if they're that big already then they'd be a major faction within a mainstream party in FPTP and influencing their direction either way (or straight up hijacking the entirety of the party).

[Mike K.]

The Sweden Democrats won so many seats that 22 are empty. How’s that for good governance where you either lack representation or can expect a hastily chosen candidate?

The far right would not rise without PR, that’s the thing. PR too easily steers politics in the direction of societal whims, and no major party would ever associate itself with a fringe element to the point where a considerable portion of their platform would align with far left or far right ideology, and that protects society from extremism.

Let’s be honest here. PR is critical to the survival of left-leaning parties as their traditional base fractures. The NDP is desperate for PR. Without it they’ll never lead the province (and are only in power today due to a fluke alignment with Weaver). For the foreseeable future the NDP will be at the head of a left-leaning coalition and that’s a far better compromise than losing every election from this point forward (they couldn’t even win with the hate-on for the Liberals being as strong as it was).

FPTP works. It gets things done. The mess that is European politics is so bad that the continent has an unelected government based in Brussels that reins in the countries and steers the over arching agenda. Remove Brussels and you’d have absolute chaos.

[G-Man]

I think that using far right as a bogey man is a bit disingenuous and is being used to scare those that would tend to support this on the left. We so rarely have elections that reflect the actual votes that it is time to try something new.

[Mike K.]

Elevating extremism and political stalemates are a reality of PR.

In the end the losers remain the losers, but the winners are now tethered to allegiances which may be bittersweet or which may result in extremists carrying around the hammer. Sweden’s reality is just that, reality, which in BC the PR-backers are promising rainbows and roses.

[tedward]

Elevating extremism and political stalemates are a reality of PR.

 

 ^ Bullshit

http://voteprbc.ca/2...ight-extremism/

[RFS]

 ^ Bullshit

http://voteprbc.ca/2...ight-extremism/

I lost 10 IQ points from reading that article

[Mike K.]

v Bullshit

http://voteprbc.ca/2...ight-extremism/

Fixed that for you.

[Mattjvd]

PR would have landed the Libertarian party 2 to 3 seats, Christian Heritage 2 to 3 seats, Marxistist-Leninist 1 seat, Rhinoceros 1 to 2 seats, and Communist party 1 seat in the 2015 Federal election. Compared to 0 with FPTP.

 

EDIT: My mistake, that was based on % of popular vote "in ridings run" obviously those parties couldn't field candidates in all 338 ridings, so actualy % of popular vote is less.

Edited by Mattjvd, 28 September 2018 - 09:53 AM.

[Bernard]

We can not judge the outcomes of an election with a different voting system based on how people voted in a first past the post election.    The motivations of who people will vote for changed based on how the electoral system creates outcomes.   As an example, MMP has a huge strategic voting component in most places where it is used.

 

In most MMP models you get two votes, the first for your local candidate, the second for the party you support.   The most effective way to vote is to vote for a major party local candidate and then small party as your party of choice.   This means in MMP elections the two major parties will take 75% to 90% of the vote for the local candidates but only get 65% to 70% of the vote on the party side.   This inconsistency leads to some major problems.   There are rare MMP models that address this by only allowing for a single vote.  As far as I can tell, this is not what is intended here in BC.    Also, MMP is not actually considered a PR system but a hybrid model that I think takes the worst of both worlds.

 

I would like to have a better electoral system than first past the post but I am not convinced the options offered in the referendum are an improvement.  I could judge this better if the full details of the alternatives were spelled out, but we are not offered that in this vote.

[rjag]

https://foreignpolic...qzcEhaoDzd2mkeQ

 

 

 

Is Sweden Ungovernable? The rise of populist parties has made it nearly impossible to form governments across Europe—and the deadlock only fuels support for populists.

[Bernard]

Sweden is not ungovernable, they are not used to considering a minority government.    This is new political terrain for them.   In Canada half of our federal elections since 1957 have lead to minority governments and we do not expect a coalition to be formed.

[Bernard]

I have been vexed with how to approach this referendum.   I have been advocating for a better voting system for going on 40 years, in 2005 I ran the Yes side of the referendum, but I have been on the fence of how to vote but today I think I have come to peace with my decision.    I will be voting No and will only mark Urban Rural for alternative systems

 

What it comes down to me is that this referendum process is awful, it is a mess on every level.  I hate a bad process and do not think it tends to lead to good outcomes.

 

The three alternatives are all really bad options, there are many better ones out there but they managed to pick three that I think could be worse than the status quo but I can not be certain.    Other than the names of the proposed we have been given more or less no details.   The details matter because that is what really matters in an electoral system.

 

Just as an example, the proposed hybrid system called Mixed Member Proportional has a multitude of ways it can be implemented that provide really different results.   Do you get two votes or one?   Can a party game  the system by splitting into two related parties maximize the results on both sides of the ballot?   Do the parties control the decision of who is on the party list or not?   Will there be overhang seats or not?  Will list MLAs have any independence or will they have legally to do as the leader tells them to on each vote?  I could go on and on with questions about important details that have not been addressed at al.

 

I feel like I am buying a house and all I am allowed is to see a picture and know how many bedrooms and bathrooms it has.  The condition, neighbourhood, relative value, age, on-site visit etc are all unavailable, just trust the real estate agent that is is what you want.

 

Given how badly the referendum has been set up, I have no trust that these people would be able to design a functional electoral system if there is a yes vote.

 

People have told me "vote yes and then in two elections there will be another referendum and you can vote the system out.'   Sort of sounds like "get married, you can always get divorced".   As anyone who has done the divorce thing, it is a lot of hard work to undo a bad decision.

 

The single biggest reason I was considering voting Yes was that the No campaign is moronic and only consists of bullshit.   But I have to let go of my dislike of manipulative assholes and look at the question at hand for what it is.

 

Just some comments on the systems:

Urban Rural - why has one been proposed specifically to penalize rural residents?  

Dual Member Proportional - I have no idea why they decided on some newly proposed system that is somehow supposed be a better MMP, I think.   It is needlessly complex and unclear to me that it would bring results anyone is looking for

[LJ]

Divorce - find a woman you hate and buy her a house.

[Mystic-Pizza]

Well, now you have it folks.

 

Tonight Mayor Helps was re-elected based on the First Past The Post system because it allows the vote to be split.

 

When your Referendum Package arrives in the mail this week  VOTE FOR A NEW ELECTORAL SYSTEM.

 

 

VOTE AGAINST THE FIRST PAST THE POST!   Unless you want tragedies like we saw tonight happen again, and again, and again.

Edited by Mystic-Pizza, 20 October 2018 - 09:28 PM.

[Mike K.]

How would the new system positively affect a municipal election? There can only be one mayor.

[nagel]

How would the new system positively affect a municipal election? There can only be one mayor.

Where there's a will there's a way.

[57WestHills]

Well, now you have it folks.

Tonight Mayor Helps was re-elected based on the First Past The Post system because it allows the vote to be split.

When your Referendum Package arrives in the mail this week VOTE FOR A NEW ELECTORAL SYSTEM.


VOTE AGAINST THE FIRST PAST THE POST! Unless you want tragedies like we saw tonight happen again, and again, and again.

Isn't she pretty close to 50% for one, and secondly she it's a one person position.

[G-Man]

This result does show in a small form why everyone should be voting for proportional representation. Let's make at least our provincial elections actually accountable.