Carman Fox

first past the post vs. proportional representation

licks2nite

Active member
Nov 30, 2006
657
79
28
A referendum is coming in British Columbia over "first past the post vs. proportional representation". A proportional representation is an appointment for political party cronies. Tried in Italy where the same effete representatives are sent back after every election. No voter choice of candidate. Green Party favours proportional representation. Green Party is an international party bent on central control that inherently lacks transparency and therefore thought to be inherently corrupt. Green Party thinks that a centralized government run by academics is better than the free market of all voters privy to what's happening in smaller transparent processes. In Canada you already know about party appointments in the un-elected Canadian Senate.
 

clu

Active member
Oct 3, 2010
1,282
14
38
Vancouver
The Canadian Senate is analogous in a way to the US Supreme Court: they carry their leanings but with a secure lifetime appointment they are not beholden to court the fringe to win a marginal vote and are thus more free to vote their conscience. They get there by being elevated by elected officials, so they do represent the will of the people to the extent the people truly support the ruling party's platform. And by virtue of slow turnover the body of the Senate averages out the extreme swings of the political pendulum that change the elected body, as driven by fashionable political hot button topics. The Senate is a moderating force that has blocked some more extreme acts that the government might otherwise take and is a more genuine representation of the diverse opinions of Canadians than FPTP allows. In short, the Senate has value in a FPTP model.

In proportional representation, candidates and especially parties would no longer benefit from courting the fringe. Their mandate, to get the greatest foothold in the government, would be to appeal to the greatest number of voters. And more fringe people (be it Green or more extreme right wing counterparts) would be represented in the discussion in proportion to the portion of Canadians who share that view, which seems appropriate. There would be no numbers game equivalent to US gerrymandering where a party that does not represent the views of the majority of Canadians nonetheless gets unilateral say in all matters.

Cooperation between diverse interests becomes the rule of the game, and we could definitely use more cooperation in today's political climate.

Granted we're talking about provincial proportional representation not federal, but perhaps it's a stepping stone. There is an appetite for this. I strongly believe the main reason we have a Liberal Federal majority is because the NDP and Green threw their endorsements behind the Liberals on their (false) promise of enacting proportional representation. A lot of Canadians, myself included, are fed up with partisanship and majority governments that don't represent the majority. I'm game for proportional representation. I don't see local representatives representing their constituencies as much as they just follow the party whip anyway.

(Side note: if we had federal proportional representation, I could then see a stronger argument for abolishing the Senate as being redundant.)
 

DangerousDan

Member
Dec 6, 2016
87
56
18
I think it's a terrible idea to throw away a stable system, especially when the government has rigged every aspect of this process.
 

overdone

Well-known member
Apr 26, 2007
1,457
154
63
There is an appetite for this.
no, there isn't

as usual, about 60% of the people vote, which ends up getting about 25% support

in other words, about 25% usually vote against it

and around 40-50% aren't interested at all

just go look at the results from BC's 2005 vote on it, 58% yes, but only around 60% of eligible voters voted, as usual


it's the politicians who can't win more than mild support across the whole voting area who care

Trudeau brought it up, no one in the public was clamoring for it, then or now

it isn't an issue with the public

it's not any better system than first past the post

just look at what you're getting now, 3 nut job greens able to extort far more influence than their votes should allow

look at what happens when we have minorities, they are useless, they accomplish even less than majorities

cause they will do anything to hold on to power for as long as they can, which is what rep by pop will deliver, constant minorities

you're just deluding yourself that it would garner better results, it won't
 

storm rider

Banned
Dec 6, 2008
2,545
6
0
Calgary
no, there isn't

as usual, about 60% of the people vote, which ends up getting about 25% support

in other words, about 25% usually vote against it

and around 40-50% aren't interested at all

just go look at the results from BC's 2005 vote on it, 58% yes, but only around 60% of eligible voters voted, as usual


it's the politicians who can't win more than mild support across the whole voting area who care

Trudeau brought it up, no one in the public was clamoring for it, then or now

it isn't an issue with the public

it's not any better system than first past the post

just look at what you're getting now, 3 nut job greens able to extort far more influence than their votes should allow

look at what happens when we have minorities, they are useless, they accomplish even less than majorities

cause they will do anything to hold on to power for as long as they can, which is what rep by pop will deliver, constant minorities

you're just deluding yourself that it would garner better results, it won't
I concur and will add that proportional representation is participation trophy politics.If say in a Federal election the Green party got 8% of the popular vote they would get 8% of the seats in Parliament and yet in 99% of the ridings that they contested with candidates none of those candidates would actually get enough votes to WIN the seats so they would be just arbirtrarily appointed randomly which is a slap in the face of voters.

Proportional representation is how they do it in Europe and just look how fucked up Europe is these days.If it is a fucked up system there it will be a fucked up system here.The Green party is pushing for Proportional Representation
as it will give them more power.

SR
 

clu

Active member
Oct 3, 2010
1,282
14
38
Vancouver
Overdone: your argument isn't logical. You are lumping all the non-voters into the "don't want it" category. "Don't care" can be as easily lumped into a "sure, why not" category. I could flip your argument and say that 40% who didn't vote had no objection to proportional representation.

Storm rider: why is it so hard to accept that if 8% of the population are aligned with Green's platform (side note: I am not) then 8% of the representatives in the government should be? Sounds like democracy to me.

The Greens (again not a supporter but I acknowledge not everyone thinks like me and so they need a voice too) benefit only to the extent FPTP eliminates an unfair advantage. Just like equality measures benefit minorities at the "expense" of the majority's unfair privilege. So I argue that people who are against it, such as yourselves, are interested in not losing the unfair advantage that FPTP provides, just as the Liberals were when they flipped on their campaign promise. (Did you participate in the survey that they used to conclude there was no interest? I did. The questions were ridiculously vague and seemingly engineered to be ineffective at drawing a conclusion.)
 

apl16

Well-known member
Jul 26, 2011
1,271
299
83
Look left. Way left.
Keep the system we have....... there is nothing better than a 4 year dictatorship.
You gotta hate those minority governments that don't allow said government with 30%+ of public support to act like another Franco.
 

clu

Active member
Oct 3, 2010
1,282
14
38
Vancouver
Need some help. Assume 81 seats in the BC legislature. Are the ballots in all ridings marked only with Party names? So Liberals win 43 % of popular vote, NDP 41%, Green 11% and IND 5%.

Then Liberals get 43% x 81 seats, and so on. Who picks which humans will sit in the legislature for each party? Perhaps someone could attach a link to a source which would help me understand the process better.

Thanks in advance.
There are three possible systems on the ballot. Here's a good read about how they try to balance seats without sacrificing local representation:

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/pr-electoral-reform-questions-1.4688604
 

treveller

Member
Sep 22, 2008
627
7
18
A referendum is coming in British Columbia over "first past the post vs. proportional representation". A proportional representation is an appointment for political party cronies. Tried in Italy where the same effete representatives are sent back after every election. No voter choice of candidate. Green Party favours proportional representation. Green Party is an international party bent on central control that inherently lacks transparency and therefore thought to be inherently corrupt. Green Party thinks that a centralized government run by academics is better than the free market of all voters privy to what's happening in smaller transparent processes. In Canada you already know about party appointments in the un-elected Canadian Senate.
This is a repeat of the baseless rhetoric being promoted by the BC Liberal party that claims First Past the Post is the best thing for BC. Problem is, the BC liberals refused to use First Past the Post (FPTP) for their latest leadership race, or for a number of previous leadership races. If they had used FPTP, Dianne Watts would be leader now, Andrew Wilkinson didn't come up from behind until the 5th count. So, when Andrew Wilkinson says FPTP is a great system, he's lying. If he wasn't he would step aside for the FPTP winner.

FPTP only works when you are limited to two candidates. Any more candidates and it fails miserably.
 

treveller

Member
Sep 22, 2008
627
7
18
I think it's a terrible idea to throw away a stable system, especially when the government has rigged every aspect of this process.
Throwing away a stable system would be a terrible idea but First Past the Post is anything BUT a stable system. As for government rigging things, if the government had not been so profoundly rigging things for so long we would have moved on from First Past the Post many elections ago, just like the rest of the world. The only people using it now are England, The US and Canada. Hardly a glowing recommendation.
 

treveller

Member
Sep 22, 2008
627
7
18
Need some help. Assume 81 seats in the BC legislature. Are the ballots in all ridings marked only with Party names? So Liberals win 43 % of popular vote, NDP 41%, Green 11% and IND 5%.

Then Liberals get 43% x 81 seats, and so on. Who picks which humans will sit in the legislature for each party? Perhaps someone could attach a link to a source which would help me understand the process better.

Thanks in advance.
Try going to the Elections BC site where they explain that all three PR systems provide direct election by voters of a local representative. In fact Dual Member Proportional and Mixed Member Proportional make extensive use of First Past the Post, the present useless system. All three systems provide proportionality by providing extra seats for proportionality.
 

Bridge

Well-known member
Nov 11, 2014
754
611
93
I think it's a terrible idea to throw away a stable system, especially when the government has rigged every aspect of this process.
It may be stable but is it democratic when a party with only 40.49% of the votes cast in Ontario wins a majority (Elections Canada). Add to that the voter turnout of 58% and this is certainly not rule by the people for the people.
 

Bridge

Well-known member
Nov 11, 2014
754
611
93
Throwing away a stable system would be a terrible idea but First Past the Post is anything BUT a stable system. As for government rigging things, if the government had not been so profoundly rigging things for so long we would have moved on from First Past the Post many elections ago, just like the rest of the world. The only people using it now are England, The US and Canada. Hardly a glowing recommendation.
Especially with the rising tide of populism and the appeal of the charismatic.
 

Bridge

Well-known member
Nov 11, 2014
754
611
93
I concur and will add that proportional representation is participation trophy politics.If say in a Federal election the Green party got 8% of the popular vote they would get 8% of the seats in Parliament and yet in 99% of the ridings that they contested with candidates none of those candidates would actually get enough votes to WIN the seats so they would be just arbirtrarily appointed randomly which is a slap in the face of voters.

Proportional representation is how they do it in Europe and just look how fucked up Europe is these days.If it is a fucked up system there it will be a fucked up system here.The Green party is pushing for Proportional Representation
as it will give them more power.

SR
Shouldn't the essence of politics be participation? Could it be that first past the post is discouraging participation because people do not feel that their voice is being heard? Could you also say that UK is in a mess at the moment and it happens to have a first past the post system?
 

nightswhisper

Member
Feb 20, 2016
789
8
18
I only support Proportional insofar as it promotes technocrats rather than politicians.

Both are stupid to the extreme. A meritocracy would be far superior, but the average joe can't figure for whom to vote anyway.
 

Cock Throppled

Well-known member
Oct 1, 2003
4,712
572
113
Upstairs
Nothing stays the same. Why, in a modern era, not try something different to stop 40% "majorities?"

First past the post produced Christy Clark, Donald Trump, the mess in New Brunswick and a bigger mess in Brazil.

The biggest crooks around - the BC Liberal party are working overtime to defeat PR because they are afraid they'll never get another chance to loot the province and reign with no constraints.

The scare tactics (usually involving Nazis) are being promoted like if we change and people don't like it, we can't change our voting system ever again.

I say try if for a few election cycles and see if it works.

Dinosaurs and those with an agenda seem to be the ones in favour of keeping the status quo.
 

badbadboy

Well-known member
Nov 2, 2006
9,576
277
83
In Lust Mostly
The people who don't vote are usually the one's who feel their vote is unimportant and the candidate they would prefer doesn't have a chance. Proportional Representation is supposed to be inclusive of all voters in elections. With this new type of election process, it's possible more non voters will get out there to make theirs count. That is my biggest complaint that parties win elections with less than 50% voter turn out. People who don't vote under this system can only make change if they do vote.

If the system changes to this reformed election in 2021, the political landscape in Victoria will drastically change. It''s dependent upon which formula BC voters choose.

Going through the information available via BC Govt and various media sources it does require a bit of thought to figure out the different scenarios. It would be helpful to the uniformed to check out the different sites before making a decision.

BC has been approx 50% Liberal (Socred etc) and 50% NDP since the 1970's. If the first past the post stays in place, we will continue to be a two party system. Proportional representation allows for more of the minority parties like Greens etc get more seats in the legislature which scares the hell out of the Liberal/NDP. Although I don't care for our existing system, the thought of 20 or more parties is like Italy's government which changes hands many more times than other countries and it is dysfunctional.
 

Cock Throppled

Well-known member
Oct 1, 2003
4,712
572
113
Upstairs
The only reason to vote no is you're a BC Liberal scared of never holding another majority government with 40 percent of the vote. PR ensures the voters are represented fairly. It's not a perfect system mind you, but it sure is more democratic.

Why should only the one left or one right party get to rule without input from smaller parties that might have good ideas?
 

Bridge

Well-known member
Nov 11, 2014
754
611
93
The people who don't vote are usually the one's who feel their vote is unimportant and the candidate they would prefer doesn't have a chance. Proportional Representation is supposed to be inclusive of all voters in elections. With this new type of election process, it's possible more non voters will get out there to make theirs count. That is my biggest complaint that parties win elections with less than 50% voter turn out. People who don't vote under this system can only make change if they do vote.

If the system changes to this reformed election in 2021, the political landscape in Victoria will drastically change. It''s dependent upon which formula BC voters choose.

Going through the information available via BC Govt and various media sources it does require a bit of thought to figure out the different scenarios. It would be helpful to the uniformed to check out the different sites before making a decision.

BC has been approx 50% Liberal (Socred etc) and 50% NDP since the 1970's. If the first past the post stays in place, we will continue to be a two party system. Proportional representation allows for more of the minority parties like Greens etc get more seats in the legislature which scares the hell out of the Liberal/NDP. Although I don't care for our existing system, the thought of 20 or more parties is like Italy's government which changes hands many more times than other countries and it is dysfunctional.
For every Italy there is a New Zealand though. Would the number of parties represented in the legislature not depend on the relative percentages gained?
 

nightswhisper

Member
Feb 20, 2016
789
8
18
For every Italy there is a New Zealand though. Would the number of parties represented in the legislature not depend on the relative percentages gained?
60 Million vs 5 million population.

Also, Protestant culture is very different from Catholic culture.
 
Ashley Madison
Vancouver Escorts