Quote:
Originally Posted by octothorp
Yeah, short-term, ranked ballots might favour the least offensive candidate. But I'm not convinced that this is how it plays out long-term on a national level. We're still doing about 338 mini-elections, likely with more parties than we have today. I think it could bring greater emphasis to actual MP candidates, as a lot of people will think "of course I'm going to vote for party X, just like I always have. But that guy from party Y seems really hard-working and honest, I'll give him my #2." No candidate can afford to ignore any parts of their constituency, because going into a neighbourhood that will never pick you as first choice, and earning a few #2s might be the difference in the election.
|
Stelmech and Redford were clearly 2's.
Non-offensive, non front runner. Those are who wins a ranked ballots. Being the least worst is not what I want in leadership. I would much rather have a leader with a plan then one who tried not to rock the boat even if I fundamentally agree with the plan.
The question I ask is what problem are we trying to fix when proposing to change FPTP?
The answer should be better governance in Canada. Noble ideas about democracy being more representive to me don't hold water. In practical terms what is the flaw in the way Canada is governed and how does the proposed solution fix it.
Things like better perception, higher voter turn out, less apathy are arguments that shouldn't be considered.
The current system of elected dictator leads to decisive leadership and easy to remove leaders. I think these two features are key in any electoral system.