Interesting politics happening in my riding, that really show how the split on the left allows the Conservatives to win with little more than a third of the popular vote.

My riding is Saanich-Gulf Islands and the current MP is Conservative Cabinet Minister, the "Honourable" (and heavily hair-gelled) Gary Lunn.

While my part of the riding, the Gulf Islands part, is probably the most small-g green oriented area in Canada as well as being solidly left, we are attached to the most conservative community in the general Vancouver Island area, the Victoria suburb of Saanich. Saanich holds the majority of the population in the riding and if the vote was restricted to Saanich the Cons would always win with a majority of the popular vote. In the Gulf Islands polls we have always voted in the majority for Green or NDP candidates.

Here's the results of the last election:

Gary Lunn CON 37.15% (24416 votes)
Jennifer Burgis NDP 26.54% (17445 votes)
Shelia Orr LIB 26.09% (17144 votes)
Andrew Lewis GRN 9.94% (65.33 votes)
Others < 1%

Looking at the results, it's clear to see how the vote was split on the left.

This time around Gary Lunn will be running for his 4th term, I believe. The Liberals last year made a big splashy announcement that they would be running noted environmentalist Briony Penn. I don't know if she was ever a Green Party member but she is definitely green-oriented as well as having some local name recognition as a host of an environmentally-themed TV show a few years ago.

The NDP decided to go green also and got former Green Party of Canada executive Julian West to hold their banner. I don't know if he's ever had any history as an NDP supporter but has made a lot of noise as a supporter of proportional representation.

As far as the Green Party banner goes, here's where it get really interesting. Not wanting to be seen as splitting the vote, prominent members of the Green Party sent a letter to members in the riding prior to the last nomination meeting asking them to vote for "none of the above". Signed by the Green Party's climate change critic he said, "The Green Party does not have the chance of actually winning that riding, they don't have the infrastructure or the manpower to get out the vote" and "At best, they would double their historic vote if they had a stronger candidate; That's not the case. At this point the strongest environmental candidates are not running for the Green Party."

The candidate they were seeking to avoid re-nominating was Andrew Lewis who is also a past national Green Party deputy leader.

The totally ironic thing here is that Penn, West and Lewis if sitting together in a room discussing the issues would probably agree on just about everything. If things go as they have in the past several elections in this riding the 3 of them will probably get more votes collectively than Lunn. But I have no doubt that on October 14th, Lunn will once again win the election with either the NDP or Libs coming in second or third and the Greens coming in fourth.

As someone who would like to see Lunn have to go back to working in his family's bakery, I am completely at a loss on how to vote. I would prefer that the 3 other candidates just sit down and draw straws to see which 2 of them will drop out.

Of the 3 my least favourite is the Liberal, simply because I have never voted for that party, although I don't mind Dion when compared to right wingers like Martin and Chretien who previously led the party. I would hold my nose and vote Liberal this time if I thought Penn could beat Lunn, but I have no confidence that this would happen.

Although not as stark as in this riding, I suspect that many people who do not want the Cons to win are facing similar frustrating choices in their ridings. To me, it's just a sad commentary on our broken electoral system, that the Cons could possibly win a majority government and all the unchecked power that implies, without ever being close to having the majority of Canadians wanting them to have that power.

Voting strategically is only a crap shoot in most cases, since there are never any local riding polls taken or available. We simply have to take a guess and see what happens on election day.

Funny how people grasp at straws to try and avoid the inevitable. Does this, like most polls to date, mean a Conservative majority is imminent?

Funny how people grasp at straws to try and avoid the inevitable. Does this, like most polls to date, mean a Conservative majority is imminent?

No it means many of us are tired of First Past the Post. Where getting 37 % means you can act like you are speaking for the majority of Canadians.

Down with first past the post. We're big enough and rich enough to run off elections until a winner claims 50% plus one. That or some sort of voting where you could rank your choices, or other proportional representation system.

Funny how people grasp at straws to try and avoid the inevitable. Does this, like most polls to date, mean a Conservative majority is imminent?

The polls do not indicate that a Con majority is imminent SINC, although given our system of electoral mis-representation, it could be a possibility depending on how various vote-split scenarios in many ridings turn out. At present Harper's polling numbers are still within the margin of error from the 2006 election totals. I don't see where his 28 extra seats will come from, but our system makes predictions based on current overall or regional poll numbers only a guessing game.

I'd love to hear from someone who believes in the idea of democracy and majority rule, how a party receiving less than 50% +1 of the vote has the right to garner majority government power.

I have no idea would could happen in this election, by I think vote-splitting will be the story if Harper increases his seat count to majority territory.

Squabbling among those out of power is common. Put them in a room together and they'll be at each other like the aliens in the bar scene from Star Wars, not shaking each other's hands in agreement.

Here's the results of the last election:

Gary Lunn CON 37.15% (24416 votes)
Jennifer Burgis NDP 26.54% (17445 votes)
Shelia Orr LIB 26.09% (17144 votes)
Andrew Lewis GRN 9.94% (65.33 votes)
Others < 1%

Looking at the results, it's clear to see how the vote was split on the left.

I'm not sure that this illustrates vote splitting on the left - as mentioned in a previous post, the only one of the four major parties that has consistently been on the left is the NDP.

While the Liberals have moved to the left since the last election, they are still a centrist party - and were even more so when the results posted above were obtained.

Elizabeth May has moved the Greens to the left a bit, but in the last election the Jim Harris claimed to be both pro environment *and* pro business - while the party slogan was "Not left or right, but ahead".
The totally ironic thing here is that Penn, West and Lewis if sitting together in a room discussing the issues would probably agree on just about everything.
Even if this were true, there are significant policy differences between the parties they represent - see above.
Voting strategically is only a crap shoot in most cases, since there are never any local riding polls taken or available. We simply have to take a guess and see what happens on election day.
In most cases I don't think strategic voting makes sense unless the riding is *very* close and you think you could live with the candidate and party you are voting strategically for.

I'll bet a few NDP supporters in Vancouver Kingsway who voted strategically for the Liberals in the hopes of keeping the Tories out were kicking themselves a few days later last time around...

Our MP here in Victoria is NDP member Denise Savoie, and she's a personable, reasonable, effective MP as near as I can tell.

GA, I'm completely with you on the vote-splitting thing. In ridings where the pattern is obvious, the minority parties should coordinate their attack rather than fight amongst themselves.

Having said that, I'm encouraging my "disgusted Republican" friends (of which there are many) to vote for Ron Paul this year. :D

No it means many of us are tired of First Past the Post. Where getting 37 % means you can act like you are speaking for the majority of Canadians.

Sure. Let's bring in a new system. Then when whoever gets elected, we can all squabble about how they weren't voted in on first ballot choice, or they only won because the other parties split the 2nd and 3rd votes. Yup! A different voting system will make ALL the arguments go away.

All the whining and complaining about majority governments voted in on less than 50% is just that - whining and complaining. Just accept it people. The general voting public is too stupid to really understand politics, and they end up voting for who has the most lawn signs, or who their parents voted for.

I will say this--I have never enjoyed strategic voting and have never felt good about it afterward. If I can't bring myself to vote for one of the majors, I just vote for the smaller party I would most like to encourage.

I'm not sure that this illustrates vote splitting on the left - as mentioned in a previous post, the only one of the four major parties that has consistently been on the left is the NDP.

While the Liberals have moved to the left since the last election, they are still a centrist party - and were even more so when the results posted above were obtained.

Elizabeth May has moved the Greens to the left a bit, but in the last election the Jim Harris claimed to be both pro environment *and* pro business - while the party slogan was "Not left or right, but ahead".

Yes, I should have said to the left of the Cons

Even if this were true, there are significant policy differences between the parties they represent - see above.

That would vary depending on the riding and the individuals involved. In this case I think there would be broad general agreement, although the candidates might have to officially represent their party positions.

Sure. Let's bring in a new system. Then when whoever gets elected, we can all squabble about how they weren't voted in on first ballot choice, or they only won because the other parties split the 2nd and 3rd votes. Yup! A different voting system will make ALL the arguments go away.

All the whining and complaining about majority governments voted in on less than 50% is just that - whining and complaining. Just accept it people. The general voting public is too stupid to really understand politics, and they end up voting for who has the most lawn signs, or who their parents voted for.

Good argument GT! We should avoid anything that you find difficult to understand or that you think the stupid voting public can't deal with.

I guess since most countries in the world can deal with proportional representation systems just fine, this doesn't say too much about your estimation of Canadian's brainpower does it?

As to whining and complaining, of all the posts so far in this thread yours looks like the one that most fits that definition. With such a cynical attitude I don't even know why you bothered to respond to this thread.

I will say this--I have never enjoyed strategic voting and have never felt good about it afterward. If I can't bring myself to vote for one of the majors, I just vote for the smaller party I would most like to encourage.

Which is why I've voted Green Party the last couple of elections, and will be doing so again this election.

Good argument GT! We should avoid anything that you find difficult to understand or that you think the stupid voting public can't deal with.
I never said we shouldn't change the voting system. I just said that it won't solve anything, and people will still whine and complain.

I guess since most countries in the world can deal with proportional representation systems just fine, this doesn't say too much about your estimation of Canadian's brainpower does it?
I deal with Canadian brainpower on a daily basis, and I know for a fact that the majority of Canadians know NOTHING of politics.

As to whining and complaining, of all the posts so far in this thread yours looks like the one that most fits that definition. With such a cynical attitude I don't even know why you bothered to respond to this thread.
It's because I love you, and I need to be close to you.

I will say this--I have never enjoyed strategic voting and have never felt good about it afterward. If I can't bring myself to vote for one of the majors, I just vote for the smaller party I would most like to encourage.

I've never felt good about it either and so far haven't done so. In my riding I wouldn't even know which would be a good strategic vote anyway.

But I would indulge in it if it might keep a seat from Harper, as well as getting rid of Lunn who isn't really a great MP, IMO.

It's because I love you, and I need to be close to you.

OK, that's just giving me the creeps, especially considering your ongoing problems with locating your pants. ;)

I never said we shouldn't change the voting system. I just said that it won't solve anything, and people will still whine and complain.

I thought that's why we had ehMac.

Sure. Let's bring in a new system. Then when whoever gets elected, we can all squabble about how they weren't voted in on first ballot choice, or they only won because the other parties split the 2nd and 3rd votes. Yup! A different voting system will make ALL the arguments go away.

All the whining and complaining about majority governments voted in on less than 50% is just that - whining and complaining. Just accept it people. The general voting public is too stupid to really understand politics, and they end up voting for who has the most lawn signs, or who their parents voted for.

Accepting a crappy situation is for losers, perhaps using a 600 year old system isn't fair. Maybe Canadians aren't as stupid as you hope they are.
Getting the political system focused on finding solutions to issues instead of spending all of their time and resources on retaining power would be refreshing.

My my, how the tide has turned. The Liberals won three consecutive majorities from 1993 to 2000 due to vote splitting on the right. Riding after riding, especially in Ontario, was won by Liberals even though the cumulative PC/Reform/Alliance votes were greater.

At the time, there were many calls to vote strategically on the right. It took some compromises to finally get it together on the right. form the new Conservatives and voila, a minority victory by Paul Martin's Liberals in 2004.

So now that system is hurting the "left" after a decade of benefitting from it? I can't say I'm at all sympathetic.

My my, how the tide has turned. The Liberals won three consecutive majorities from 1993 to 2000 due to vote splitting on the right. Riding after riding, especially in Ontario, was won by Liberals even though the cumulative PC/Reform/Alliance votes were greater.

At the time, there were many calls to vote strategically on the right. It took some compromises to finally get it together on the right. form the new Conservatives and voila, a minority victory by Paul Martin's Liberals in 2004.

So now that system is hurting the "left" after a decade of benefitting from it? I can't say I'm at all sympathetic.

Good for you. And when the boomerang comes around in 4 or 5 years don't complain that you hate the current system.
When is a good time for some change?
B.C. came close, I wish they would have pulled it off and showed the rest of the country a different paradigm.

Our MP here in Victoria is NDP member Denise Savoie, and she's a personable, reasonable, effective MP as near as I can tell.

She's my MP as well.

I could make the same arguments that GA made, except from the other side. The total of Liberal + Conservative votes is much higher than the NDP in my riding. I can't stand the NDP and their policies and I find the Liberals to be much more palatable. My second choice after Conservative would be Liberal, but my first choice is Conservative.

GA's riding area (Saltspring) has lot of lefties on it (although MacNutt would have taken exception to that), while my area of Victoria (Oak Bay) has lots of right wing people. But, my vote gets drowned out by all the people who live downtown and tend to be more left-wing.

So, situationally, GA and I have lots in common.

But I still don't agree with proportional representation. Let's keep in mind that the Conservatives did not have a majority government with their 36% of the vote last time around. The other parties supported their government.

GA, if you want to be represented, then maybe you should reconsider the leader of your party. Last time around, he said he wouldn't bother to sit down with Harper to discuss common ground. He said it would take a research team to even compromise on anything. Those statements are so polar opposite to the spirit of PR, which you advocate. :rolleyes:

.

However, I wasn't clear enough in my post, but I am glad you brought up the missing part.

I am referring to the day after the last election. That's when Layton made those comments. Pretty hypocritical to say that Parliament should continue 3 years on. :rolleyes:

Good for you. And when the boomerang comes around in 4 or 5 years don't complain that you hate the current system.
When is a good time for some change?
B.C. came close, I wish they would have pulled it off and showed the rest of the country a different paradigm.

All I'm saying is that when it benefitted the Liberals in the 90s, there wasn't much complaining from "the left". And really, how much real vote splitting is there now? I get the impression that NDP and Green are on the left and people who vote for them do so with no illusions about them forming a gov't. Most ardent NDPers I know won't vote Liberal no matter what. That's because they realize the awful truth - there really isn't much difference between the Liberals and Conservatives. They are both Centrist parties and they have to be to win an election. They have to appeal to as many people as possible.

Agreed. Which entails, all too often, speaking out of both sides of your mouth, and hoping your consituents have a very short memory.

I agree hhk. I think there is more difference between the NDP and Liberals than there is between the Conservative and Liberals.

Again, I challenge people think otherwise to answer the question I have posed a number of times. Why did the NDP only gain a fractionally higher percent of the vote when the Liberals tanked last election? Why did the Conservatives gain three times as many votes than the NDP did?

Hey, I'll play. Here's a few ideas.

Jack Layton.

The belief that the NDP wouldn't know how to handle money and would therefore squander it.

The suspicion that they would set up a committee to decide each and every little thing.

The fear that they have little experience in being at the helm federally and would cave under the pressures of actual responsibility.

I agree hhk. I think there is more difference between the NDP and Liberals than there is between the Conservative and Liberals.

Again, I challenge people think otherwise to answer the question I have posed a number of times. Why did the NDP only gain a fractionally higher percent of the vote when the Liberals tanked last election? Why did the Conservatives gain three times as many votes than the NDP did?

I disagree. Your argument is a red herring. The Liberal's represent a Center Left and the Conservative's represent both the Right and maybe Center Right.

All you have to do is look at the legislative focus of the Liberal party on social issues and you can see that it is more Center Left than true Centrist. The same cannot be said of the Conservative party.

The fact that people voted for the Liberal's clearly indicate that they did not want to vote for the Conservatives.

What Canada needs is more coalition/strategic voting by those not interested in seeing the Conservative party slip a majority thru on our "first past the post system".

He wanted an election now so that tomorrow's by-elections would be pre-empted; so that the spirit of the election in the US sweeping in Barack Obama wouldn't spill over into Canada as well; so that the economic downturn now in force wouldn't nosedive as expected and devour his government a few months later.

This is, imho, very very true. Obama's election will send "winds of change" around the world, not least of which up here.

This is, imho, very very true. Obama's election will send "winds of change" around the world, not least of which up here.

"winds of change" Isn't that a Scorpions tune? ;)

This is, imho, very very true. Obama's election....

McCain up by 10 today: USA Today/Gallup

...will send "winds of change" around the world, not least of which up here.

This is, imho, very very true. Obama's election will send "winds of change" around the world, not least of which up here.

What sort of change? Because Obama is African American and has "soft eyes", do you really expect him to be different than any other US President?

I was involved in politics in the 90s. I managed a federal campaign. I left the business because the two-party system in Canada basically grinds up any principles that a candidate might have and turns it an unrecognizable pulp.

Same thing in the U.S. In order to garner the support of your party, you must turn into one of "them". Any extreme views you might have - whether left or right, must be jettisoned in order to gain the support necessary to win the nomination. There is no other way.

Believe me, McCain and Obama are more alike than you think.

The last real chance the US had for any kind of change was Ross Perot. That's because he couldn't be bought. And he was insane.

I agree hhk. I think there is more difference between the NDP and Liberals than there is between the Conservative and Liberals.

Again, I challenge people think otherwise to answer the question I have posed a number of times. Why did the NDP only gain a fractionally higher percent of the vote when the Liberals tanked last election? Why did the Conservatives gain three times as many votes than the NDP did?

Simple. Swing voters. People who don't hold any allegiance to one party or another. They vote either Liberal or Conservative. They don't vote NDP.

I don't see why that is hard to grasp.

My riding is Saanich-Gulf Islands and the current MP is Conservative Cabinet Minister, the "Honourable" (and heavily hair-gelled) Gary Lunn.

Then it is the responsibility of your riding to punish the sins of Mr. Lunn. Never has such a brain damaged retard tainted a Parliament, and his Ministry is in a complete shambles. Not to mention all of the money that disappeared so quickly, with fake budgets and fake purchases, with all of the cash most probably directed at purchasing influence or pandering for votes. He is the poster boy for why we should drug test our Parliamentarians. WikILeaks reveals the stunted mind of Mr. Lunn, his playground bully ways, and his utter stupidity, when he attempted to singlehandedly turn the Ottawa Valley / Montreal Island into the biggest ecological disaster since Chernobyl...

If that loser was running in my riding - I'd even consider voting for a Fiberal, because there has never been a bigger retard anywhere.

Lunn has probably learned from the error of his ways. He will be a model Parliamentarian this time around, I'll bet!

Australia uses such a system, but it is pretty complex and I haven't figured it out myself. But instead of just checking a box, you rank the candidates in some kind of order.

Of course, my preferred method would be a Big Brother election, where the candidates are locked in a house, and one is voted out every week. Of course, they would have to preform feats of strength and other tasks in order to win HOH and POV. Such contests could include:

- A giant pile of cash and who can resist stealing it for some daft white elephant project the longest
- Most logical and clear answer to a question in the least number of words
- All candidates wear a white body suit and the one with the least number of stains wins (more from Kenny vs. Spenny than from BB)
- Giant steak dinner placed in front of Garth Turner, candidate who guesses the closest to the number of actual minutes Turner can resist swallowing it whole wins
- In the same vein, Garth Turner is to present a seminar of his political views, candidate who guesses closest to the number of seconds before Garth Turner says something stupid wins
- Best possible gerrymandering of a riding
- Most influence peddled in an hour, or most voters glad handled in an hour
- Most innovative new tax scheme that doesn't look like a tax
- Best comment possible to attract votes in Quebec that is the most insulting to the rest of Canada

I'd just like the whole concept of voting candidates out - and the best will survive. Plus, they should allow someone to be voted out of Parliament on a weekly basis, it will promote a certain will to survive, and perhaps will motivate some members into not being the absolute worst.

Lunn has probably learned from the error of his ways. He will be a model Parliamentarian this time around, I'll bet!
Yeah, he'll be a backbencher, back in the corner where the curtain is always blowing and billowing. Harper would be a fool to give that idiot another shot at Cabinet, that is, if he can survive this election and get back in. He is the weakest link in the Conservative Party, and if it wasn't for the Clements-Baird bondo job, Chalk River would have been the scandal that took down the government.

I've heard that the Green Party is fiscal conservative leaning versus the NDP which is of course tax-and-spend.

Paul Martin is a small "l" Liberal as the PCs under Mulroney were small 'c' Conservatives. Voters are looking for the moderate government usually.

GratuitousApplesauce...

Firstly I want to thank you for starting this thread with that comprehensive first post! I think your situation highlights the frustration many of us feel... my own situation is opposite of your's, however it's the same in that my voice is never heard in any election (provincial or federal) in my riding which Calgary East (federally) and looked like this in 2006:

Conservative - Deepak Obhrai - 26,766
Liberal - Dobie To - 5,410
NDP - Patrick Arnell - 4,338
Green - Mark Taylor - 2,954
Other - 422

The Cons so thoroughly trounce everyone that I honestly wonder why I bother to go and vote sometimes... but I DO because I feel I'm lucky to at least have that right... even if I do get a sock shoved in my mouth... ;) It really doesn't matter how I decide to vote this time around AGAIN though... the riding will go Conservative.

We have an MP like your Mr. Lun in Calgary, not in my riding but the one in Calgary West:

Rob Anders - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rob_Anders)

This man has a serious case of "hoof in mouth disease"... ;) however all attempts to get rid of him have failed. Since I have had personal dealings with him on a labour related issue, I know what it's like to try and hold a conversation with him. It ain't gonna happen... any sort of debate was at the time one-sided. I have no reason to believe it's changed, since I know people who live in the riding.

In any case, you might want to keep an eye on this:

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/mini/CTVNews/20080907/election2008_poll_080907?s_name=election2008&no_ads=

I watched last night and they said they'd keep it updated. That might be a good thing in a country this size... it's not a foregone conclusion in their opinion.

This new Conservative party is a "gift" from Alberta... enjoy! I watched them from grassroots on up... time to build our own roots maybe? :)

GA, if you want to be represented, then maybe you should reconsider the leader of your party. Last time around, he said he wouldn't bother to sit down with Harper to discuss common ground. He said it would take a research team to even compromise on anything. Those statements are so polar opposite to the spirit of PR, which you advocate. :rolleyes:

I'm not sure which you consider to be "my" party. I don't have a party. Generally I'm in agreement with much of what the NDP comes up with as well as the Greens. I've been known to agree with the Liberals and at times even some (gasp) Conservatives. I've only ever voted for NDP and Green both federally and provincially, but I once voted for a fringe party in Vancouver in the early '90s when it was clear that the Liberal was going to win in my riding.

I took a stab at being a Green Party of BC member a few years ago, but didn't like it much. I cancelled my membership and after a few tries got them to stop sending me junk mail solicitations.

My my, how the tide has turned. The Liberals won three consecutive majorities from 1993 to 2000 due to vote splitting on the right. Riding after riding, especially in Ontario, was won by Liberals even though the cumulative PC/Reform/Alliance votes were greater.

At the time, there were many calls to vote strategically on the right. It took some compromises to finally get it together on the right. form the new Conservatives and voila, a minority victory by Paul Martin's Liberals in 2004.

So now that system is hurting the "left" after a decade of benefitting from it? I can't say I'm at all sympathetic.

And at the time many Reform party and Progressive Conservative people were speaking out for a system of proportional representation and I agreed with them.

As someone who supports the ideas of democracy, this to me isn't about the left winning, it's about accurately reflecting the wishes of the majority, whatever that may be.

I know that my views are to left of the majority of Canadians and I don't think it would be fair to impose my views on that majority. What I do think would be fair is that political viewpoints along the scale from left to right be reflected in political power structures do the degree that they are held and there is a system in place that can allow for deals and compromises to be made between the groups. Pro-rep systems do this better than what we use now.

I don't think that either the left or the right should be shut out, and I don't think that it's fair for a minority view to be in a situation to shut out the rest. Proportional representation is about fairness in political representation and that is why it is supported by people on both the left and right. Those who want to grab majority government power and lord it over others whether they like it or not, love our current system. Well they love it, IF their party are the ones that get to do the lording.

GratuitousApplesauce...

Firstly I want to thank you for starting this thread with that comprehensive first post! I think your situation highlights the frustration many of us feel... my own situation is opposite of your's, however it's the same in that my voice is never heard in any election (provincial or federal) in my riding which Calgary East (federally) and looked like this in 2006:

Conservative - Deepak Obhrai - 26,766
Liberal - Dobie To - 5,410
NDP - Patrick Arnell - 4,338
Green - Mark Taylor - 2,954
Other - 422

In your situation, even under most Pro-rep scenarios the Conservative would still win, since he has an absolute majority of votes. But usually under PR systems the popular vote is taken into account so that those who voted for parties that can get at least 5% of the vote can see representatives elected under party lists or through multi-member ridings.

In other words Dreambird, your vote doesn't get tossed in the trash, it actually translates in some level of political representation.

Down with first past the post. We're big enough and rich enough to run off elections until a winner claims 50% plus one. That or some sort of voting where you could rank your choices, or other proportional representation system.

Another election, another wasted vote (http://www.canada.com/calgaryherald/news/theeditorialpage/story.html?id=89f28626-50ab-417c-86c2-6d62f4daf5a9)

Welcome! | Fair Vote Canada / Représentation équitable au Canada (http://www.fairvotecanada.org) has all the pros and cons. Only the U.S, Canada, and Britain (not the entire U.K) are the primary countries of the G8 still using "first-past-the-post" representation. Who knew?

Thanks GA, it would be nice to at least feel my vote wasn't pitched into "file 13" every time!

Good article from the Calgary Herald, Rhino... just about sums it up I'd say.

Well, off to bed... seems I'm working on some kind of flu here and the late news tonight has confirmed that the "feces slinging" fest is truly on so... XX)

Seems I remember something in the back of my foggy memory about the possibilities of a coalition government, at this point I am so fed up with both major players I'd love to see them both tossed out for a 4 yr. breather...

I want true proportional representation: just let me vote on each government bill as it comes up.

GA, I just connected the dots and remembered who Briony Penn was. I am shocked that the Liberal Party would pick such a radical. :eek: :eek:

When I said my second choice would be Liberal, I was clearly wrong. I think I would rather vote for the NDP than for her.

Electors should be able to vote a Parliamentarian off the island on a weekly basis...

"I want true proportional representation: just let me vote on each government bill as it comes up." Macfury, sounds like ancient Greek direct democracy. A fine idea. Count me in.

"I want true proportional representation: just let me vote on each government bill as it comes up." Macfury, sounds like ancient Greek direct democracy. A fine idea. Count me in.
Good idea when Pericles is running the joint - but a less good idea once Cleon grabs office...

GA, I just connected the dots and remembered who Briony Penn was. I am shocked that the Liberal Party would pick such a radical. :eek: :eek:

When I said my second choice would be Liberal, I was clearly wrong. I think I would rather vote for the NDP than for her.

Radical? As far as I know she has had a long career of being a committed environmentalist, amongst other things (I gather she's also a university prof and an artist). I don't see much that would be considered radical, unless you call being involved in logging protests "radical". That's pretty run-of-the-mill in BC.

One less radical for GA to choose from:

NDP candidate quits after nudity disclosure (http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/story.html?id=aa9bdf6a-341d-4b8e-b701-bc794755fa56)

VICTORIA - The NDP candidate in Saanich-Gulf Islands has dropped out of the federal election after receiving some unwanted exposure over a nude encounter with teens at an environmental retreat on Vancouver Island more than a decade ago.

You know what's radical? Demonizing the word "radical." Amazing. Much like the words "liberal" and "conservative" have been sabotaged by ideological zealots running around pell-mell on the intertubes, alerting everyone to the new dangers of this great and terrible society we find ourselves in.

One thing's for certain: the rise of the net ensures that all politicians and pol-wannabes can be scrutinized to the nth degree with astounding ferocity and anal-attentiveness. We seem to be a people content ever more so to judge these individuals - political candidates and leaders, their spokespeople, their lovers and families alike - with a harshness we would never reserve for ourselves or our loved ones. The hypocrisy of it all is breathtaking.

You know what's radical? Demonizing the word "radical." Amazing. Much like the words "liberal" and "conservative" have been sabotaged by ideological zealots running around pell-mell on the intertubes, alerting everyone to the new dangers of this great and terrible society we find ourselves in.

One thing's for certain: the rise of the net ensures that all politicians and pol-wannabes can be scrutinized to the nth degree with astounding ferocity and anal-attentiveness. We seem to be a people content ever more so to judge these individuals - political candidates and leaders, their spokespeople, their lovers and families alike - with a harshness we would never reserve for ourselves or our loved ones. The hypocrisy of it all is breathtaking.

I tend to agree, but this type of scrutiny always happened, it now just happens a million times faster as well as the internet leap-frogging over a lot of the media gate-keeping. Can you imagine what would happen to the politicos of yesteryear in today's world?

That said, it looks like in this case that scrutiny is justified. I haven't checked this afternoon's info, but it seems like West misrepresented the incident to the NDP. He said that he told them about it, at least the skinnydipping, but he didn't mention the bodypainting request to teenagers. Everything I've heard about West has been positive until this, but this is pretty bad.

The nomination deadline has passed so there will be no NDP candidate in my riding. Strangely enough that might mean that Gary Lunn stands a chance of losing his job, because the vote won't be as split. If the Green vote and the Con vote don't benefit from West dropping out then there's a reasonable chance that Liberal Briony Penn could take it. On the other hand, the Green vote could surge and still spit the 60% that won't vote for Lunn.

Vandave characterized Penn as a radical, and no doubt he thinks the Green is a radical too, (he's not, he's just a middle-aged guy from Salt Spring with a landscaping business) so I still have 2 radicals to vote for. I'll vote for whichever radical I think will get Gary Lunn's ass fired. So far I would say the money is on the Liberal, but voting for them would be a first for me.

Anyway, ABC.

You know what's radical? Demonizing the word "radical." Amazing.

Bravo!

Hey, GA - I wasn't saying VanDave is wrong or that poor West was being picked on - I was merely making a more general observation about the times we live in. If anything, I'm a believer that today's politicians best go into the public realm with a level of alertness that's bordering on fanaticism... because if you run for office your stink will be dug up and exposed by your enemies. You had best be prepared to go to terrific lengths to be able to withstand withering scrutiny. And it'll be all very much youtube-able, too! Heck, it already is.

MF: why, thank you.

Vandave characterized Penn as a radical, and no doubt he thinks the Green is a radical too, (he's not, he's just a middle-aged guy from Salt Spring with a landscaping business) so I still have 2 radicals to vote for. I'll vote for whichever radical I think will get Gary Lunn's ass fired. So far I would say the money is on the Liberal, but voting for them would be a first for me.

Strangely she has a lot in common with West. Both are NDPers and both like to get naked in public.

I would suggest that banning oil tankers from the West Coast of BC qualifies her as a radical.

Strangely she has a lot in common with West. Both are NDPers and both like to get naked in public.

Both were originally Green Party members. West quit the party in 2000 and joined the NDP, Penn after being recruited by the Greens, NDP and Liberals, picked the Liberals and quit the federal Green Party. I understand she still retains membership in the provincial Green Party.

As far as getting naked, what Julian West did, if the report is credible, is potentially illegal and would qualify as far more serious than skinny-dipping. Penn, in going to a logging protest as Lady Godiva (with a bikini bottom and a massive strategically place blond wig) did nothing illegal, nor anything that would particularly shock Vancouverites who see annual nude bike rallies and running events. She was clear that she did it to get the media attention for their protest, against a large company that was determined to clearcut Salt Spring Island watershed and it worked quite well.

I would suggest that banning oil tankers from the West Coast of BC qualifies her as a radical.

If that's your standard for a "radical" then 3 out of 4 BC citizens are also dreaded radicals because polling shows they agree with her. Maybe you're the "radical" here?

Ipsos Reid Poll: 3 out of 4 British Columbians Support Oil Tanker Ban (http://www.sierraclub.bc.ca/quick-links/media-centre/media-releases/ipsos-reid-poll-3-out-of-4-british-columbians-support-oil-tanker-ban)

I would guess 3 out of 4 BCer's have been to a nude beach too, but I don't have any polling on that. ;)

When respondents were told that the recent BC ferry sinking occurred on the same route tankers would use to carry oil and gas to and from US and Asian markets, support for the ban increased significantly.

A little prompting doesn't hurt to get the results you want, eh 'Sauce

A little prompting doesn't hurt to get the results you want, eh 'Sauce

It would be fun to do a poll with the opposite bias. For example... 50% of the BC provincial surplus has been due to oil and gas royalties, which have allowed increased funding to health care and education. Would you support a ban of shipping oil out of BC?

Nice catch BTW, regardless of the Sierra Club being a dead giveaway. ;)

I agree GA. It probably isn't appropriate for me to joke about what West did. As a minimum it was indecent exposure and probably qualifies as sexual harassment. He could very well get charged for it.

I'm not shocked by nudity. I would be in the 3 in 4 who have gone to a nude beach in Vancouver, albeit clothed. I am not the fuddy duddy conservative that you mind may stereotype me as. I am probably a little too comfy in my own skin if anything.

I have no problem with what Penn did, but at the same time, I have no problem calling her a little 'radical' for doing it.

Something in the water on your little island GA?

Former CBC host charged with drinking and driving
Published: Wednesday, September 24, 2008
Canadian humourist and former CBC host Arthur Black has been charged with operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol.

Former CBC host charged with drinking and driving (http://www.canada.com/victoriatimescolonist/news/story.html?id=98b03b11-3afb-4fc4-be64-1d2e1f684a3c)

Something in the water on your little island GA?

Former CBC host charged with drinking and driving
Published: Wednesday, September 24, 2008
Canadian humourist and former CBC host Arthur Black has been charged with operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol.

Former CBC host charged with drinking and driving (http://www.canada.com/victoriatimescolonist/news/story.html?id=98b03b11-3afb-4fc4-be64-1d2e1f684a3c)

MacNutt would have had something funny to say about that. ;)

Drinking and driving is a problem in the Gulf Islands and other areas like this. Not to make excuses for Black or anyone else, but there is no transit and in some cases no taxis available. I've been tempted myself when out, I'm looking at a 5 or 10 minute drive on roads where I may not even encounter another vehicle. But I don't do it, so unless there's another driver I limit myself to a couple of beers or glasses of wine max. Parties here, at least amongst our group, tend to end earlyish, because nobody wants to crack too many beers.

I wish they would step up enforcement on our island, because there are some serious drunks here who run their vehicles off the road on a regular basis. I don't want to be on the road one night knowing one of these losers is weaving around somewhere.

It would be fun to do a poll with the opposite bias. For example... 50% of the BC provincial surplus has been due to oil and gas royalties, which have allowed increased funding to health care and education. Would you support a ban of shipping oil out of BC?

Nice catch BTW, regardless of the Sierra Club being a dead giveaway. ;)

You're assuming the poll was conducted with a bias. The supplementary question that MF highlights was asked after the initial response. I don't think Ipsos Reid would be in business too long if they were to allow their polling to be biased as you suggest. I believe what you're referring to is called "push polling".

Anyway, I'm willing to give that poll a huge margin of error, and it still makes my point earlier, that those who don't want to see the inside waters oil tanker ban removed are in the majority, unlike Harper's boy and my MP Gary Lunn.

The Cons are attempting to skirt the tanker ban to allow a new pipeline carrying tar sands oil bound for Asia to be shipped from a new port in the dangerous inner waters near where the Queen of the North went down.

By the way, the poll also showed that 8 of 10 were against removing the tanker ban in the rural areas of the coast and Vancouver Island. Unfortunately many of those same people will vote Conservative.

I have never voted Liberal but I almost did when I read a quote taken out of context that claimed Elizabeth May had "endorsed" the Liberal party. Then I saw a press release that she made yesterday, and I feel so bad for almost falling for that strategic voting B.S.- especially when we need the Greens so much now!
If the Liberals are so concerned about the environment then why aren't they urging people to vote Green instead of ripping off Elizabeth May's ideas and trying to underhandedly deceive her constituents!

This was posted on the Green party website yesterday:

Strategic voting makes no sense, says May

On Tuesday, Canada needs to elect Green Party MPs, leader Elizabeth May said today.

“Media reports and suggestions from other parties that I am urging strategic voting across the country or that backroom deals are being made are complete nonsense,” Ms. May said. “As I have said over and over, strategic voting is generally not a sound strategy at all and I do not support it. Canada needs to elect Green MPs.“

Ms. May was responding in particular to the headline and opening of a Globe and Mail story that directly contradicts what she said to the reporter.

“I clearly said that voting strategically as advice is pretty useless. I also said: ‘Suggesting one should jump away from the Green Party is very bad advice indeed.’

“We have a strong team of candidates across Canada. Every one of them is working hard to win and this much we know for sure: Canada needs Green MPs. I intend to win in my riding of Central Nova and I want to be joined by a strong caucus of MPs, like Adriane Carr in Vancouver Centre, Blair Wilson, Mike Nagy, Dick Hibma, John Fryer, Huguette Allen and others. We are running strong campaigns across this country.

“The best outcome of the election will be the defeat of the Harper government and the election of as many Green MPs as possible.”

Ms. May noted that support for her leadership, and the Green Party and its forward-looking policies continue to rise.

“Perhaps what is worrying the other parties is the strong support the Green Party has received from Canadians in this election. In this election we will elect our first MPs.

“I want to do politics in a much different way, with collaboration, civility and respect. But I am not making deals with other parties, and the Greens are not in discussions with other parties.

“I will say it once again so absolutely no one can be confused or misled: I want Canadians to elect Green MPs.”

How convenient that a newcomer with a new handle about spin docs chooses to spin his own spin in post one.

That must be some kind of new record.

It's likely we'll never hear from you again after the election, which incidentally will likely not elect a single Green.

I don't think anyone was endorsing anything anyways. There has been a lot of talk about "strategic voting", but I think it will be ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court - at least when people are using web sites and "swapping" votes.

I think it is best if people vote for the best candidate possible - or in some cases, vote for the one that is the least worst. Remember, they are in Ottawa to represent a given constituency, so they should be able to accomplish that job effectively. Too many MPs just sit on the backbench and do literally nothing at all. They should at least get up and ask questions, or participate in things that are key for a local riding.

I was disgusted when Sheila Copps refused to join the "industry council" in Parliament - and it shows, since her former riding was pretty much flushed down the toilet when industry went Hecho In Mexico. Vote for someone who cares about something - and stop voting in highly paid decorations...

Apropo for THIS election

http://multimedia.thestar.com/images/50/6a/b5eef3d94ef2895719087cf79129.jpeg

As usual, I'm wondering which Apple computer is favoured by Down With The Spin Docs!

I recall welcoming an indignant Apple booster who had dropped in to share his knowledge of postage meters. He promised he would be excited to post in the future regarding computers--I should check up on that.

Edit: Member tverhoven has left the building.