Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

Liberal Dissension


Industrious1

Recommended Posts

18 minutes ago, Warhippy said:

We don't....have popular vote in Canada.

 

That's an American thing

I believe there is room in Canada for a little election reform.  In fact, it was a pillar of an election platform not too many years ago.  Not sure what happened between here and then but it certainly did not materialize.  

 

Are you a proponent of the "First Past the Post" system?  Personally, I'd like to see an update to our electorate in a way to bring it into the modern era (not sure what that would look like, but there are people far smarter than me that can contribute to that).  

Edited by Industrious1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Industrious1 said:

I believe there is room in Canada for a little election reform.  In fact, it was a pillar of an election platform not too many years ago.  Not sure what happened between here and then but it certainly did not materialize.  

 

Are you a proponent of the "First Pass the Post" system?  Personally, I'd like to see an update to our electorate in a way to bring it into the modern era (not sure what that would look like, but there are people far smarter than me that can contribute to that).  

Oh gods do we ever need reform here.  No I loathe FPTP and what we currently have is trash.

 

I advocated for two options during the electoral form promise that never happened.  In BC and federally.  

 

What we have is archaic and needs immediate updating.

 

Just now, BoKnows said:

I know that, but the popular vote does exist even if it is just a metric.

The issue is, because they see it; they attempt to somehow use it as a means to an ends in their arguments.

 

It once again erodes the understanding of how our system of government works.  

 

The "they" in this instance, are the people who also think we have first amendment rights and constantly mistake our system for an American one

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Warhippy said:

Oh gods do we ever need reform here.  No I loathe FPTP and what we currently have is trash.

 

I advocated for two options during the electoral form promise that never happened.  In BC and federally.  

 

What we have is archaic and needs immediate updating.

 

On this we can agree.  3-4 Urban centers deciding the fate of the entire country is clearly something multiple people (from multiple parties) have identified as a problem long before us keyboard warriors noticed it.  

 

Now we just need to wait for the follow through.....

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Warhippy said:

The issue is, because they see it; they attempt to somehow use it as a means to an ends in their arguments.

 

It once again erodes the understanding of how our system of government works.  

 

The "they" in this instance, are the people who also think we have first amendment rights and constantly mistake our system for an American one

I think the people that point it out are doing so out of frustration since who they supported lost, same could be said for Hillary and her supporters after the 2016 election.

5 minutes ago, AfterMath35 said:

Also correct me if im wrong. Wasn't electoral reform one of his many big promises?

I believe so, but I have no idea of the details of the proposed reform.

  • Cheers 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, AfterMath35 said:

Also correct me if im wrong. Wasn't electoral reform one of his many big promises?

It was.

I voted for him that election. 

His other promise was to legalise weed which he did. Which was huge, big win for Canada. $43bil into our GDP since. 

I was very disappointed that he didnt follow through on his ER promise and havent voted Lib since.

 

I support PR. 

Would have been great for the states as well. A world where Trump never was POTUS would have been less divided. And, no he didnt create the division but he sure did stoke it. 

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, AfterMath35 said:

Also correct me if im wrong. Wasn't electoral reform one of his many big promises?

It was, that and weed legalization; we all would be better off if he delivered on electoral reform and left weed as quasi-illegal.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Industrious1 said:

I believe there is room in Canada for a little election reform.  In fact, it was a pillar of an election platform not too many years ago.  Not sure what happened between here and then but it certainly did not materialize.  

 

Are you a proponent of the "First Past the Post" system?  Personally, I'd like to see an update to our electorate in a way to bring it into the modern era (not sure what that would look like, but there are people far smarter than me that can contribute to that).  

I support FPTP system as it prevents over enthusiastic voters from certain geographical areas from dominating elections be it urban centers or these days Alberta. 

 

That said I want the riding to be decided by rank choice as that will produce a winner that have the popular vote. 

 

I for one despise PR as I see that removes politicians from being accountable to or champion the need of their local community. If we go PR I at least want it to be sequestered off to each province rather than the national popular vote. 

 

For the record I also defend the electoral college down in the states except I want the electors to be divided up by the popular vote in each state rather than winner takes all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Industrious1 said:

On this we can agree.  3-4 Urban centers deciding the fate of the entire country is clearly something multiple people (from multiple parties) have identified as a problem long before us keyboard warriors noticed it.  

 

Now we just need to wait for the follow through.....

3-4 urban center is where the majority of Canadians live. I see no problem with that. Elections are decided by population not land mass. 

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, 24K PureCool said:

3-4 urban center is where the majority of Canadians live. I see no problem with that. Elections are decided by population not land mass. 

Fair, but there is a growing segment of the population that disagrees and would like to see some type of change to bring our system into the modern era.  

 

I am one of them, but I respect and see the point that you are making in your statement.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, 24K PureCool said:

3-4 urban center is where the majority of Canadians live. I see no problem with that. Elections are decided by population not land mass. 

The problem is Quebec and Ontario contain so many of the seats, that they pretty much decide the election while the western side of the country has a small voice. While we are the same country, the geographical distance between us creates different needs and circumstances. I can see why most of the prairie provinces feel ignored. I believe Ontario and Quebec have 199 of the 338 total seats, and both provinces are in close proximity to each other. I get that it is based on population density, but life in the prairies and life in the city are quite different and both their interests need to be looked after.     

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Bure_Pavel said:

The problem is Quebec and Ontario contain so many of the seats, that they pretty much decide the election while the western side of the country has a small voice. While we are the same country, the geographical distance between us creates different needs and circumstances. I can see why most of the prairie provinces feel ignored. I believe Ontario and Quebec have 199 of the 338 total seats, and both provinces are in close proximity to each other. I get that it is based on population density, but life in the prairies and life in the city are quite different and both their interests need to be looked after.     

The problem is that the prairie provinces  want to be dictating social policy to the rest of the country.  If they stopped trying to force social conservatives through, they'd have more of a say.

Edited by King Heffy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, King Heffy said:

The problem is that the prairie provinces  want to be dictating social policy to the rest of the country.  If they stopped trying to force social conservatives through, they'd have more of a say.

As you say, this is the issue.  However, recognize that right now that is what is happening but in reverse.  Either way, we have unhappy Canadians wishing to be heard.  

 

The simplest answer is election reform (not the only answer, but the most glaring).  Are you a supporter of the current system, or do you believe that we should move forward with a system that better represents all Canadians?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Industrious1 said:

Fair, but there is a growing segment of the population that disagrees and would like to see some type of change to bring our system into the modern era.  

 

I am one of them, but I respect and see the point that you are making in your statement.  

One change I would love to see but I dont think they ever would change it, is to determine the # of seats in each province based on their % of the national GDP from the previous term. It would reward the provinces working hard to create a better economy. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Industrious1 said:

As you say, this is the issue.  However, recognize that right now that is what is happening but in reverse.  Either way, we have unhappy Canadians wishing to be heard.  

 

The simplest answer is election reform (not the only answer, but the most glaring).  Are you a supporter of the current system, or do you believe that we should move forward with a system that better represents all Canadians?

I prefer ranked ballot personally.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, King Heffy said:

I prefer ranked ballot personally.

Ranked ballots is interesting, I've read through it a few times...not sure I totally grasp all of it (but that could be said of numerous things in my life).

 

What I've seen though, makes sense to my limited understanding.  The GDP idea that Bure had is interesting as well, although I have friends in the maritimes that would be furious at such an approach.  

Edited by Industrious1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Industrious1 said:

Ranked ballots is interesting, I've read through it a few times...not sure I totally grasp all of it (but that could be said of numerous things in my life).

 

What I've seen though, makes sense to my limited understanding.  The GDP idea that Bure had is interesting as well, although I have friends in the maritimes that would be furious at such an approach.  

You can't please everyone unfortunately.  As Harry Neale once said in regards to being a head coach "you'll often always have one third of the room with you and one third of the room against you.  One third of the room will be undecided or neutral.  The trick is to win over that one third".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, NewbieCanuckFan said:

You can't please everyone unfortunately.  As Harry Neale once said in regards to being a head coach "you'll often always have one third of the room with you and one third of the room against you.  One third of the room will be undecided or neutral.  The trick is to win over that one third".

Ya, and embracing US style extreme rhetoric and embracing the social conservative flavour isn't winning that third over.  Throw the PPC into the mix, and their third isn't as strong as it needs to be in order for the Cons to win.  

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...