ontario provincial electioN?

[RopeyLopey]

Originally Posted by pale_princess

also i changed my mind. i'm voting against mmp just to piss sleeper off.

or that you're voting for me, since I care but can't vote.

[Ugly]

why in the everlovin' hell has "money for faith-based schools" suddenly become a dynamite issue in this election?

"Hey, I want to give money to children for their education."
"BOOOOOOOOOOO!!!"

Its like that Simpsons bit:

Dole: Abortions for all!
[crowd boos]
Dole: Very well, no abortions for anyone!
[crowd boos]
Dole: Hmm... Abortions for some, miniature American flags for others!
[crowd cheers and waves miniature flags]

[pale_princess]

so i guess today's election day...
anyone live in hamilton-stoney creek? vote jodie from today's special.
http://www.dlisted.com/node/16261

[MrPantyFAce]

does it look like mmp is going to go through? find out soon enough, i guess... i hope it does, it would set a good precedent in canada

[sleeper]

it wont go through. polls were released a few days ago and it looked grim. the threshold is too high as well.

people are just too uninformed overall. polls a few weeks ago showed a pretty scary percent of people who didnt even know there was a referendum. and there are also all these people just locked on idiot talking points ("we dont need MORE politicians on the pay roll!!") and misconceptions about what its about. so many of the arguments against it are directly contradicted by the actual practical experience of the countries that have implemented it, but nobody cares to look.

this whole thing is a good example of how not to roll out a referendum. i read somewhere that it wont pass simply because there wasnt some big false majority recently for people to focus on. you need some giant bogey man to make anything happen, its true

[RopeyLopey]

MMF not making it through - thank God.

It's true that the system needs an overhaul so that GTA is better (or better reflect the actual amount of people living there!) represented than now. It makes no sense a vote of some hillbilly is more relevant than if I live in the city - no wonder both Liberals and Conservatives don't care about Toronto in their programs.

[sleeper]

thank god it wont make it through, and curses that ontarians arent more fairly represented? bit of a contradiction there, friend, unless your gripe isnt with PR but MMP in particular. the arguments you brought up before seem to apply to PR in general

[pale_princess]

there's an hour left and i haven't voted yet. and it's raining. meh.

[RopeyLopey]

Originally Posted by sleeper

thank god it wont make it through, and curses that ontarians arent more fairly represented? bit of a contradiction there, friend, unless your gripe isnt with PR but MMP in particular. the arguments you brought up before seem to apply to PR in general

not Ontarians, Torontians.
Toronto should be more of a concern for Liberals and Cons. We don't need more parties making it into the parliament - that's something MMP system would achieve.

[spring]

damnit when netphoria was down this morning i found a great link on CBC with pro/con MMP arguments. no i don't remember where it was for the life of me.

[sleeper]

Originally Posted by RopeyLopey

not Ontarians, Torontians.
Toronto should be more of a concern for Liberals and Cons. We don't need more parties making it into the parliament - that's something MMP system would achieve.

well i dont want to vote for a system that affects a province based on whether or not it benefits my city, thats not very ethical or wise. i just want a fair system for all

i agree that toronto is getting shafted every which way though, yeah. i also think that MMP will do more to rectify that than FPP will

we do indeed need more parties in parliment. if the US has taught us anything, its that a two party state is wholly ineffective. more parties is definitely a good thing. i ll say again that you need to understand that, if theyre there, they should be there. they have popular support. thats what democracy is about.

[pale_princess]

isn't it cute that everyone who's pro-mmp assumes that everyone who's pro fptp is just uneducated?!?!?!

[sleeper]

frankly, youre not the best person to be presenting that argument

[pale_princess]

you're right, sleeper! because my opinions and beliefs, and hell, even my interests are different than yours, i have no idea what i really should believe in!

[RopeyLopey]

Originally Posted by sleeper

we do indeed need more parties in parliment. if the US has taught us anything, its that a two party state is wholly ineffective. more parties is definitely a good thing. i ll say again that you need to understand that, if theyre there, they should be there. they have popular support. thats what democracy is about.

how is US system not effective? Or better said, how is it worse than what you get to see in Europe?

The PR and two party system (or the Canadian version with NDP and BQ thrown into the mix) is alright, since it enables both A) the winning party going ahead with whatever their program is and B) the formation of strong opposition. This is the best thing you can get, since the winner party is supposed to deliver what they have promised in the campaigns and you can held them accountable by the next elections.

MMF is a fucked up thing. Yeah, democracy, right on - democracy is nice, but if you take it down like MMF it's just notthat very practical. As I said already in the email, it's nice that more parties can make it into the parliament, but the real problem is these parties don't help anything, they only make things worse. These little parties are usually crucial for one of the big parties getting the majority, so although that little party obtains only like 5-9% of votes, its impact is way bigger since the little party pretty much helds the 'winner' as a hostage. This whole situation then results in a corrupted agenda of the coming government, where sometimes the electors of the big ass party have a problem to identify/find the issues they were really voting for, since everything gets watered down/changed in order to please the little party to support the program.
Another question is how are these coalitions stable - well are they? Of course they are fragile like shit, because the little guy doesn't care that much - if this government falls down, well what, it can easily change colors and provide again a crucial vote for another government.
Liberals and Conservatives could also get tired of these games and form a coalition between them. Is this a good thing? Of course not, since this would only stir the differences between the two as they realize they are in it together - the lines will get blurred. Your vote wouldn't matter that much anymore, because if you vote this or that guy, they will all make it there, anyways.

PR is not perfect, but surely it's a better way to do things, since the winning party can go ahead and bring into the reality the things you were voting for. With MMF you don't know what you're really voting for at the end, since everything depends on the after election arrangements.

[spring]

Originally Posted by RopeyLopey

These little parties are usually crucial for one of the big parties getting the majority, so although that little party obtains only like 5-9% of votes, its impact is way bigger since the little party pretty much helds the 'winner' as a hostage. This whole situation then results in a corrupted agenda of the coming government, where sometimes the electors of the big ass party have a problem to identify/find the issues they were really voting for, since everything gets watered down/changed in order to please the little party to support the program.

from what i've read, i think this would be the biggest problem with MMF as well, but I think that for the second part of the argument you're taking it a bit too far.

in other news, back to back liberal majority gov't for mcguinty. i just saw on cbc they got 71 seats. conservatives 25, and the ndp 11. and tory lost in his own riding.

[pale_princess]

no surprise on all counts