Campaign 2008: Canadian Version

[CanadianGuitarist 0]

How the election would look if we had Proportional Representation:

 

Con - 117

Lib - 80

NDP - 55

Bloc - 31

Green - 22

IND - 2

 

How exactly does PR work? I understand the basic concept, but I need a little more detail.

[cbacon 0]

Basically the amount of seats in parliament would be in proportion to the popular vote. There are several types of PR, the type most recently endorsed in Ontario, was Mixed Member Proportional:

 

Mixed member proportional representation, also termed mixed-member proportional voting and commonly abbreviated to MMP, is an 'additional member' voting system used to elect representatives to numerous legislatures around the world. MMP is similar to other forms of proportional representation (PR) in that the overall total of party members in the elected body is intended to mirror the overall proportion of votes received; it differs by including a set of members elected by geographic constituency who are deducted from the party totals so as to maintain overall proportionality. Therefore, the additional party seats are compensatory: they top up the local results. In Germany MMP is called "personalized proportional representation" as distinct from the PR system used before MMP superseded it.

 

In BC, there was referendum for the Single Transferable Vote system. It needed a super majority to pass and failed, but it is coming up for another referendum:

 

The Single Transferable Vote (STV) is a system of preferential voting designed to minimize wasted votes and provide proportional representation while ensuring that votes are explicitly expressed for individual candidates rather than for party lists. It achieves this by using multi-seat constituencies (voting districts) and by transferring all votes that would otherwise be wasted to other eligible candidates. STV initially allocates an elector's vote to his or her most preferred candidate and then, after candidates have been either elected or eliminated, transfers surplus or unused votes according to the voter's stated preferences.

 

There are also other variants and hybrids of PR. Ultimately, its a far more democratic voting system.

[Jobber of the Week 0]

On the other hand, PR turns things into national issues. As it is, you're PRESUMABLY voting for someone from your neck of the woods to represent your area's situation in Ottawa. But people vote for parachutes and generally put the national agenda over their own local issues.

 

You're SUPPOSED to be electing your MP on things like "I'll bring more money for projects like highways to our riding" and not on things like "our party supports a national decriminalization of marijuana" but unfortunately nobody ever does.

[The Metal Maniac 0]

You're SUPPOSED to be electing your MP on things like "I'll bring more money for projects like highways to our riding"

 

The problem here though, is that if you vote for an MP strictly because of what he says he's going to do for your riding, you still HAVE to consider what the overall party's opinion on that issue is. If, for example, your local NDP MP promises to build more roads in your area, but the NDP's stance was that they weren't gonna build new roads for a few years...well, who do you think the MP is gonna side with when he's in parliament?

 

So while I agree that you should pay attention to what your local MP says he wants to do, you simply can't ignore the party's overall stances on things, because 99% of the time, your MP is going to tow the party line.

[... 0]

All I know is that Rob Anders and Jason Kenney have pictures of Stephen Harper (who lives in Anders' riding) in a compromising position with a goat and Chinese boy. Otherwise those albatrosses would have been gonzo long ago. Then again, knowing the retards that inhabit Calgary to the west of Crowchild Trail and south of Glenmore Trail, I'm not surprised.

[Red Baron 0]

Apparently Stephane Dion is now a hermit since his defeat.

 

I would hide too if I lost that badly.

[CanadianChris 0]

Apparently the Liberals got the lowest percentage of votes since Confederation. That won't look too good on the ol' resume.

[the.weej 0]

On the other hand, PR turns things into national issues. As it is, you're PRESUMABLY voting for someone from your neck of the woods to represent your area's situation in Ottawa. But people vote for parachutes and generally put the national agenda over their own local issues.

 

You're SUPPOSED to be electing your MP on things like "I'll bring more money for projects like highways to our riding" and not on things like "our party supports a national decriminalization of marijuana" but unfortunately nobody ever does.

 

I understand this perspective, but it's important to consider how much more disciplined Canadian political parties are than ones in the US or UK. It's not unusual for Congressmen or Senators in America to vote against the party line for various reasons - up here, simply abstaining in a vote is asking to be marginalized in caucus. Voting AGAINST the party leader means you better be crossing the floor tomorrow, because you're guaranteed to be turfed. Most Canadians definitely vote because they identify with a party/party leader, and it makes sense, because what the party leader believes is the de facto ideology of all the rest of his MPs.

[CanadianGuitarist 0]

A letter in the Toronto Sun yesterday taught me that each party receives 1.89 or so for each vote placed in their favour.

 

The hell is that? That's obscenely costly, even with the lower voter turn-out this year. Should Detroit get the first crack at Steve Stamkos for winning the Stanley Cup as well?

 

Naturally, the Sun defended it. The response was tiptoeing around facism. I'll post it later, I'm saving the paper in vain, hoping to finish off the last couple bits of the crossword.

[Red Baron 0]

I'm pretty sure the 1.89 was a number from someone's GAA and they forgot to edit it.

[CanadianGuitarist 0]

I'm pretty sure the 1.89 was a number from someone's GAA and they forgot to edit it.

 

Impossible. The response to the letter did not include the words "Fire the coach". Probably the only page in that day's paper that did not.

[... 0]

Episode V: The Liberals Strike Back.

 

Or maybe not. The term "Constitutional Crisis" has been thrown around, and this might be the one time the Governor General actually earns a paycheque. The question I have to ask is: what the hell are the Tories thinking? Their recklessness bit them in the ass. Maybe the notion of another couple of years in a minority was too much to bear and Harper's team is falling on its own sword. Let the Grit/NDP coalition take over for a while and then come screaming back with a new leader?

 

My advice to the states: you've talking and joking about it for years. Screw waiting around for Obama to take the oath of office, invade us NOW and just fucking get it over with.

 

A letter in the Toronto Sun yesterday taught me that each party receives 1.89 or so for each vote placed in their favour.

 

The hell is that? That's obscenely costly, even with the lower voter turn-out this year. Should Detroit get the first crack at Steve Stamkos for winning the Stanley Cup as well?

 

Naturally, the Sun defended it. The response was tiptoeing around facism. I'll post it later, I'm saving the paper in vain, hoping to finish off the last couple bits of the crossword.

 

Even money says the Always Classy Sun has changed their tune on the policy in the past 48 hours.

[ZGangsta 0]

Harper's got to realize that 60 or more percent of the country voting for leftist political parties does NOT mean that the country wants to be governed from the right, that's the only way he'll have any success.

 

My hope is that the opposition parties can stare down Harper and actually get him to do something realistic about the economy, or topple his government and for a coalition gov. As long as it's not Dion in charge.

[... 0]

Word on the street is it's going to be a Liberal if the coalition comes off. I can't see them selecting Dion considering the character assassination of him. (I mean, really, did he fuck Mike Duffy's girlfriend or something?) I can see it either being Bob Rae, Ignatieff, Gerard Kennedy, or as an outside pick, Ralph Goodale.

[CanadianChris 0]

Rae is apparently doing a lot of the behind the scenes wrangling on this, so I could see him as PM. Of course, that would make the leadership race a foregone conclusion, so maybe not.

 

Tories are worried enough that they put the vote on the economic statement off for a week.

 

A letter in the Toronto Sun yesterday taught me that each party receives 1.89 or so for each vote placed in their favour.

 

The hell is that? That's obscenely costly, even with the lower voter turn-out this year. Should Detroit get the first crack at Steve Stamkos for winning the Stanley Cup as well?

 

Naturally, the Sun defended it. The response was tiptoeing around facism. I'll post it later, I'm saving the paper in vain, hoping to finish off the last couple bits of the crossword.

Chretien put this in about four years ago, at the same time that he basically abolished huge donations from businesses and other large organizations. It's actually been hailed as a terrific idea abroad. It eliminates the perception that politicians are in the back pocket of industry and special interest groups, and gives fledgling parties like Green who collect a lot of votes but can't get anyone elected in this system a hand in moving forward. It amount to about $30 million, which really isn't that big a deal in the grand scheme of things.

[dubq 0]

Weird..

[CanadianChris 0]

Bullshit like the Tories using a legitimate economic crisis as an excuse to try and wipe their rivals off the face of the earth does piss me off to no end.

 

The more I see of Harper, the more I believe he hates actually governing.

[ZGangsta 0]

Bullshit like this pisses me off to no end. I have no interest in seeing some "caretaker" government that didn't even win an election brought into office. You can't even wait 6 months let alone 6 weeks before pulling something like this? Even though I'm sure I'm not the only who doesn't want another election - this is something that we as taxpayers should get to vote on.

 

Pointing out that the Conservatives received a renewed minority mandate last month to guide the country through the worst financial crisis in decades, Harper said his government has taken several steps since the Oct. 14 vote to bolster the economy — including injecting billions of dollars of liquidity into Canada's credit markets.

 

The Official Opposition disagrees, saying the government hasn't offered any serious plan to assist workers and businesses in hard-pressed sectors such as manufacturing, the automotive industry and forestry.

 

..and boy oh boy am I sick of hearing this one. I mean, sympathies to anyone who loses their job.. but since when is it government or taxpayer responsibility to bail out any business? The auto industry has been digging it's own grave for years now.. it's time they laid in it.

I hate this attitude on one hand and completely want to agree with it on the other hand. True, the auto companies have been digging their own graves for years, but letting them fail will make things SO much worse.

 

But yeah, Harper is a complete scumbag. His response to a huge economic crisis is not to do anything substantive about it, but rather to try and put his own party in a better financial situation than the others.

[CanadianGuitarist 0]

How exactly would a coalition government work? I mean this literally, in two senses: Do they actually wrest power from Harper, or just agree to work together to overturn every Tory motion? In a more accurate sense, it's pretty tough to imagine any of the three leaders working together.

 

I still stand by my "ridiculous" claim re: 1.89 per vote, although I suppose 30 million isn't that big a deal all things considered. Still, Harper's motives for eliminating it in the first place seem suspect; his intent to stick with it after all seems spineless. I know that's giving him "damned if he does, damned if he doesn't" stance, but, oh well.

[CanadianChris 0]

They want to overturn the government and take power themselves. Always a danger when there's a minority, since the party with the most seats still needs support from at least one other party to govern.

 

Even if the coalition succeeds in taking power, it's tough to imagine them keeping it for more than a year and a half or so.

 

Re the election payment: If you think of it as you paying whoever you vote for $1.95 out of your tax contribution, it's really not that bad. But that's just my opinion.

[Lord of The Curry 0]

 

 

Jermaine McKenzie from Flight of The Conchords is clearly the bastard son of Tony Clement.

[Jobber of the Week 0]

Chretien put this in about four years ago, at the same time that he basically abolished huge donations from businesses and other large organizations. It's actually been hailed as a terrific idea abroad. It eliminates the perception that politicians are in the back pocket of industry and special interest groups, and gives fledgling parties like Green who collect a lot of votes but can't get anyone elected in this system a hand in moving forward. It amount to about $30 million, which really isn't that big a deal in the grand scheme of things.

And then you have parties like the Bloc who net so many votes that they can compete without raising any money at all.

 

If this were stopped, the BQ would become some guys touring in a bus since they haven't raised cash for years. And that's probably why Harper wants to eliminate it, since his cuts to culture and crap about how they want to destroy Canada keeps moving his goalposts further and further away in Quebec, so by doing this he could cut them down at the knees.

 

This is why the BQ won't join the coalition (ruling the country would mean they would be required to care about all the provinces, heaven forbid!) but will support what they're doing.

 

..and boy oh boy am I sick of hearing this one. I mean, sympathies to anyone who loses their job.. but since when is it government or taxpayer responsibility to bail out any business? The auto industry has been digging it's own grave for years now.. it's time they laid in it.

Governments aren't corporate nannies, but they are market nannies. When the market goes south, there is some pressure that they should be assist those who are struck a malfunctioning market, within reason (i.e. anyone without a sound business plan who was going to fail in a stable market probably isn't worth saving, which is what auto is facing right now.)

 

Case example: Airline industry after 9/11.

 

How exactly would a coalition government work? I mean this literally, in two senses: Do they actually wrest power from Harper, or just agree to work together to overturn every Tory motion? In a more accurate sense, it's pretty tough to imagine any of the three leaders working together.

I'm pretty sure the Crown can ask the opposition to form government instead. There's been a lot of jokes this week about Harper having Jean killed.

[ZGangsta 0]

Chretien put this in about four years ago, at the same time that he basically abolished huge donations from businesses and other large organizations. It's actually been hailed as a terrific idea abroad. It eliminates the perception that politicians are in the back pocket of industry and special interest groups, and gives fledgling parties like Green who collect a lot of votes but can't get anyone elected in this system a hand in moving forward. It amount to about $30 million, which really isn't that big a deal in the grand scheme of things.

And then you have parties like the Bloc who net so many votes that they can compete without raising any money at all.

 

If this were stopped, the BQ would become some guys touring in a bus since they haven't raised cash for years. And that's probably why Harper wants to eliminate it, since his cuts to culture and crap about how they want to destroy Canada keeps moving his goalposts further and further away in Quebec, so by doing this he could cut them down at the knees.

And this is what pisses me off so much. As much as I hate the Bloc, the fact is we're heading into a recession and Harper is trying to put a knife in the other parties instead of doing something about it.

[Jobber of the Week 0]

Whether you like him or not, you have to admit that Harper has a way of acting like Canada is his own personal RISK map of the world.

 

At least over here we still have the good sense to flip the hell out if legislation powers are used to simply improve somebody's chances in the next election.

[ZGangsta 0]

Whether you like him or not, you have to admit that Harper has a way of acting like Canada is his own personal RISK map of the world.

 

At least over here we still have the good sense to flip the hell out if legislation powers are used to simply improve somebody's chances in the next election.

Except sadly the majority of people I talk to up here have no idea what goes on with the Canadian government. Seems that a 'political discussion' with anyone I know amounts to whining about how they heard there may be another election and then talking about how 'deeply touched' they are about the election of Barack Obama.

[Lord of The Curry 0]

So Layton, Duceppe and Dion all signed the coalition papers and are presenting them to Michaele Jean tomorrow. Looks like Harper is done.

[ZGangsta 0]

It's pretty funny seeing some comments on news articles and such where people are screaming that this is treason and the other parties should be jailed. No, this is a perfectly legal constitutional procedure and Harper himself sent a letter to the Governor General (back when Paul Martin had a minority government) asking to be appointed Prime Minister of a coalition government when the Liberals fell and was in talks with the Bloc about supporting him.

 

Actually my favorite comment I keep seeing/hearing is people from Alberta who claim that they are so outraged with the Liberals/NDP having the support of a separatist party that they want to separate Alberta from Canada if this coalition thing goes through.

 

Also the screams of "I VOTED FOR HARPER! HE SHOULD BE PM!" No, you did not vote for Stephen Harper as PM, no one did. That's not how our elections work.

[RavishingRickRudo 0]

WHAT IS GOING ON?!?!??!

[RavishingRickRudo 0]

You can TELL, that this was Laytons plan all along. That mustache can't hide everything, Jack!

[Lord of The Curry 0]

He should grow it out, Southern plantation owner style and twirl it for every second of every news conference.