feelgood

After taking a closer look at the results of the election, I realized that the percentage of votes for each parties doesn't match with the number of seats elected.

I know its really based on each riding and the whole concpt of first past post, etc etc.

There are some questionable method used by democracy. Here's some examples

1. In case of tie, the riding's returning elector is the deciding vote. Now, I don't know how that works but assuming that the returning officer is from the same riding area, wouldn't he have already voted? Or if he's from another riding, what rights does he have in being the deciding vote? Couldn't this be done on a coin? Or dice in case more than 2 parties are tied?

2. Say in one riding, 18000 people voted for the Liberals and 15000 voted CPC and another 7000 voted NDP. Now, if you add up 15000 and 7000, obviously, that number is greater than those who voted for liberals. How does that accurately represent the interest of the people in that area?

3. The percentage of voters in all of Canada doesn't match with the percentage of seats elected. Now according to Globe and mail (G&M Election Results)
The Liberals have 37% (I'm rounding them up mind you) of total votes in Canada and that represents 114 seats and yet they get 135?
The CPC have 30% of total votes and that represents 93 and yet they get 99?
The Blocs have 13% and that represents 40 and ends up with 54?
The NDP have 16% and that represents 50 and ends up with 19?
The Greens have 5% which represents 12 and ends up with none?

Now honestly, I don't think alot of people's voice aren't getting through at all. The Greens and NDP have acquired a large number of votes throughout Canada that aren't getting heard.

Now comes in the classic issues of West vs East. Once again, The East are dominated by the Liberals, naming Ontario while the Tories, especially in Alberta, continues to grip the Western provinces.

Now why the hell are Quebeckers voting BQ? Just because the party's Quebeckish doesn't make it the right choice. Isn't the BQ advocating for separtatism? (sp)

I'm not pissed at the turnout of the election, rather I am kinda relieved that we ended up with a minority government that will allow all the parties to work with each other with alot of issues. But I am concerned at the number of votes that are insignificant, especially NDP and Green supporters.

Btw, I voted Liberals in the heart of CPC country in Crowfoot riding. I have my reason Although, my Dad threaten to throw me out :P

__________________
Looking out the window, that's an act of war. Staring at my shoes, that's an act of war. Committing an act of war? Oh you better believe that's an act of war

tokaok

i think we should reform the senate to be based on proportinal representation.

this we we kill two birds with one stone, we get proportional representation and hopefully a senate that actually works to make our lives better.

Daval

Thats probably the best thing that Jack Layton will try and do if he has to deal with Paul Martin.

Proportional Representation.

__________________
"It is impossible to obtain a conviction for sodomy from an English jury. Half of them don't believe that it can physically be done, and the other half are doing it."
Winston Churchill

Yakk

I can think of a few things.
First, it is possible that the returning officer doesn't vote.
Second, the coin has issues. People would complain the flip might have cheated: in the case of a person, he can do whatever he wants. I'd assume most people would actually flip a coin given that situation (so as not to appear biased).

It doesn't do it perfectly. Like most things in the real world, it is an approximation, or "good enough", that is the goal.

More complex systems are, well, more complex. Naive purportional rep systems result in monolithic parties and no local representation.

Which is simply an artifact of the other systems.

First Past the Post encourages 2 parties per region (or post) to be strong, and discourages weak parties. Other systems work differently.

They are being heard, they are just being muted. For example, the Green voters now mean that the Green party will have 1 million dollars/year to keep their party going.

Regionalist parties are encouraged by regional first-past-the-post representation. The Reform party and it's decendants and the Bloc are the result of this encouragement.

Because they think the BQ will work towards their interests, and they don't trust the other federal parties (or are upset with them).

Quebec was more angry about the sponsorship scandal than the rest of the country. They view the new Conservative party as just another bunch of Western Quebec-haters. This leaves the NDP and the Bloc.

I'd be in favour of a modified regional/purportional system.

Triple the size of ridings, and give each riding 30 points.

The vote %s are turned into points, with leftover points randomly lottaried.

You need 10 points to sit in Parliament.

If you have less or more than 10 points, you can transfer your points to another Candidate with less than 10 points.

The end result is roughly the same number of people in parliament, with regional representatives, the possibility of independant Candidates and MPs who are not purely selected by their party.

Possibly you'd throw in a running-mate system, who could absorb leftover points, so one party could have more than 1/3 the seats in parliament without running against themselves. =)

__________________
Last edited by JHVH : 10-29-4004 BC at 09:00 PM. Reason: Time for a rest.

Charlatan

I really don't think first past the post is making many all that happy about our system.

One way of fixing this would be to have a multiple vote system. On the ballot you would indicate your first second and third choice on the ballot.

If after the first ballot there is no clear winner (i.e. greater than 50% of the ballots) then it goes to a second ballot. The candidate or candidates with the lowest numbers are dropped from the second ballot. Those who voted for the dropped candidates would then have their second choice counted.

This would continue until there is a clear winner.

It would make voting night a lot more exciting to be sure...


Proportionally speaking I would like to see some combination of actual elected representatives and seats granted based on share of the popular vote. This way you have fewer ridings and candidates but then get representation on a proportional basis...

Not sure how it would work, but I think this is how Germany works.



One additional note... Yakk you suggest that first past the post creates Regional parties... I would argue that Proportional Representation will only underscore that... If Ontario, BC, Quebec, and the Maritimes all started fielding regionally based parties they could take advantage of proportional numbers to build so-called King-maker parties.

Proportional representation, untempered could just end up with a bunch of regionally based parties vying for power in the Parliament rather that strengthening Federalist voices with different visions for Federation.

__________________
"My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars."
- Old Man Luedecke

Yakk

There would be regionalist parties, but their power wouldn't be magnified like it is under the current system.

BQ got fewer votes than the PC party did in every election in which both ran. Yet the BQ had far far more seats. The same was true of the Reform and PC parties.

It wouldn't do away with regionalist parties, it would simply give them the power they "deserve" (ie, reduce the magnification).

A first past many posts systems (priorities etc) are less different than first past the post systems.

__________________
Last edited by JHVH : 10-29-4004 BC at 09:00 PM. Reason: Time for a rest.