GT: Federal Election

[calf]

Originally Posted by Armchair Quarterback

Electoral change can happen, the question is: if we switch to proportional representation, who is then in charge of representing local people? First past the post is a flawed system but at least it gives members of Parliament clearly defined constituencies to represent. Who do you speak with when you have a local problem in a proportional representation system?

My completely non-thought out idea is it's PR by province. Cons get 50% of the vote in Alberta, they get 50% of the seats, and must select from a list of Alberta candidates. Not sure how you would ensure specific constituencies are represented though, but at least someone from New Brunswick wouldn't be representing our interests (or vice versa for them).

[opendoor]

My guess is they'd go for something like a preferential ballot or instant runoff as opposed to the more dramatic changes of Single Transferable Vote or Mixed Member Proportional. That'd allow the will of voters to be expressed a little more than the current system without dooming the country to eternal minority governments.

And more cynically, it'd probably suit the Liberals quite well given how they were clearly the 2nd choice for a lot of voters who voted for other parties based on the polls.

[Armchair Quarterback]

Originally Posted by calf

My completely non-thought out idea is it's PR by province. Cons get 50% of the vote in Alberta, they get 50% of the seats, and must select from a list of Alberta candidates. Not sure how you would ensure specific constituencies are represented though, but at least someone from New Brunswick wouldn't be representing our interests (or vice versa for them).

The Australian system could provide an interesting alternative, although they have an elected Senate. For their lower house, the Aussies keep individual Members of Parliament in constituencies, but have a preferential and runoff model for it. That way each MP is elected by an absolute majority of constituents.

[opendoor]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

Nanos was once again pretty spot on with his final numbers.

Projected: LPC 39.1%; CPC 30.5%; NDP 19.7%.
Actual: LPC 39.5%; CPC 31.9%; NDP 19.7%.

Yeah definitely a good showing for some of the pollsters. EKOS though was pretty far off for the 2nd election in a row. They had the Conservatives and Liberals essentially tied 3 days before the election.

[DiracSpike]

You'll all be in your cold, cold graves before we see proportional representation. It would take a complete overhall of our monarchy/Westminster style to a full republic.

Look how difficult it is to get rid of the Senate, something that I would say the overwhelming majority of Canadians would support. Anyone who falls for Trudeau saying he'll enact proportional rep, just as anyone who seriously thought Harper would get rid of the Senate, is pretty naive.

[billybob123]

Conservative, Liberal, NDP, or other supporters. Can we come together to celebrate the fact that Rob Anders is now officially done as an MP?

[Bend it like Bourgeois]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

For those who think they will lack representation now, if you live in Calgary you will benefit from the new government because the Liberals consider urban Canadians to be their core supporters. I've always been puzzled by the reluctance of Calgarians to think of themselves as urbanites first (rather than Westerners), but this election might change that. And with Calgary definitely in play in federal elections now, expect the city to get a lot of attention from all the parties. That's a good thing.

I dunno. I am city hear me roar? You think anyone in Toronto or Montreal considers Calgarians family? I am not sure about that. To many in the rest of the country we're still the bumpkin cousins. Transit funding is nice, but if the country is making choices about things like resource industries vs carbon goals the colours on the political map are going to matter a lot. When Europe demands Trudeau puts the oil industry's head on a stick in Paris, I'm not convinced he's going to hold off for fear of risking our 5 seats in the next election. We've hopped in our Delorian and gone back to 1979 I think.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by billybob123

Conservative, Liberal, NDP, or other supporters. Can we come together to celebrate the fact that Rob Anders is now officially done as an MP?

Always the silver lining with you!

[Armchair Quarterback]

Originally Posted by DiracSpike

You'll all be in your cold, cold graves before we see proportional representation. It would take a complete overhall of our monarchy/Westminster style to a full republic.

Look how difficult it is to get rid of the Senate, something that I would say the overwhelming majority of Canadians would support. Anyone who falls for Trudeau saying he'll enact proportional rep, just as anyone who seriously thought Harper would get rid of the Senate, is pretty naive.

I disagree. Constitutional reform is possible in Canada, just not under a Prime Minister that a strong majority of Canadians hate. It would not be easy, but it is possible under a consensus-building PM. Trudeau Sr. did it (patriation, 1982); Mulroney almost succeeded as well (Meech Lake).

The Western provinces and Conservative party would likely resist any electoral reforms however as they stand to lose the most from them. The Conservatives consistently win almost every urban riding in the region, for example, because Libs/NDP split the vote.

[Ironhorse]

For the discussion of instituting Proportional Representation, a good case study involves Dutch politics, where they've had PR for a good length of time. This system tends to favour the center parties the most, as coalitions are a necessity and the right wing rarely agrees with the left.

A good primer here: http://www.quirksmode.org/politics/

[DiracSpike]

Originally Posted by Armchair Quarterback

I disagree. Constitutional reform is possible in Canada, just not under a Prime Minister that a strong majority of Canadians hate. It would not be easy, but it is possible under a consensus-building PM. Trudeau Sr. did it (patriation, 1982); Mulroney almost succeeded as well (Meech Lake).

The Western provinces and Conservative party would likely resist any electoral reforms however as they stand to lose the most from them. The Conservatives consistently win almost every urban riding in the region, for example, because Libs/NDP split the vote.

Good examples, I just can't see it happening though.

I kind of like the system we have now, it makes it possible to have strong governments without needing a majority vote, which would never happen. I say this also as someone who is hesitant about the new Liberal majority and extremely dissatisfied with our Provincial majority. I would expect the groundswell of support for proportional rep was mostly people unhappy with the Conservatives. It'll rise again once the Liberal majority government has irked enough people.

[EldrickOnIce]

Originally Posted by Armchair Quarterback

I disagree. Constitutional reform is possible in Canada, just not under a Prime Minister that a strong majority of Canadians hate. It would not be easy, but it is possible under a consensus-building PM. Trudeau Sr. did it (patriation, 1982); Mulroney almost succeeded as well (Meech Lake).

The Western provinces and Conservative party would likely resist any electoral reforms however as they stand to lose the most from them. The Conservatives consistently win almost every urban riding in the region, for example, because Libs/NDP split the vote.

Not so sure you figure that.
Since the end of Alliance/Conservative (last 5 elections - since 2000), average of popular vote:
CPC 35.02%
LPC 30.32%
NDP 20.34%
The NDP/Green stand to gain the most

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Bend it like Bourgeois

I dunno. I am city hear me roar? You think anyone in Toronto or Montreal considers Calgarians family? I am not sure about that. To many in the rest of the country we're still the bumpkin cousins. Transit funding is nice, but if the country is making choices about things like resource industries vs carbon goals the colours on the political map are going to matter a lot. When Europe demands Trudeau puts the oil industry's head on a stick in Paris, I'm not convinced he's going to hold off for fear of risking our 5 seats in the next election. We've hopped in our Delorian and gone back to 1979 I think.

This is my fear as well. Plus yes Calgary might be urban, but we're Albertan's with a energy sector, and usually pasted as the villains by everyone else.

[Armchair Quarterback]

Originally Posted by DiracSpike

Good examples, I just can't see it happening though.

I kind of like the system we have now, it makes it possible to have strong governments without needing a majority vote, which would never happen. I say this also as someone who is hesitant about the new Liberal majority and extremely dissatisfied with our Provincial majority. I would expect the groundswell of support for proportional rep was mostly people unhappy with the Conservatives. It'll rise again once the Liberal majority government has irked enough people.

That's very true. However, with more seats added to the Commons (and given the number of minority governments we have seen in the past 15 years), you can expect that under the current electoral model minority governments will become more and more common. This is due to the regionalism and regional nature of Canadian politics. So, either way the parties are going to have to work together.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by DiracSpike

You'll all be in your cold, cold graves before we see proportional representation. It would take a complete overhall of our monarchy/Westminster style to a full republic.

Proportional representation is unlikely - we would doom ourselves to complete instability where small, agenda-driven parties would wield far too much control.

But other options do have solid history in Canada. Historically, both Calgary and Edmonton sent members to the Legislature using variations of STV or other forms of plurality voting. We mostly didn't actually have separated ridings inside the cities until the 1960s.

Look how difficult it is to get rid of the Senate, something that I would say the overwhelming majority of Canadians would support. Anyone who falls for Trudeau saying he'll enact proportional rep, just as anyone who seriously thought Harper would get rid of the Senate, is pretty naive.

I think a majority would support modifying the Senate, but I wouldn't be so sure about support for eliminating it. Also, Harper never proposed getting rid of the Senate. That was an NDP plank. He wanted to reform it, but when balked, decided to effectively choke it to death instead.

[Senator Clay Davis]

Proof electing Trudeau is bringing the apocalypse? A decent Calgary Sun headline

[Armchair Quarterback]

Originally Posted by EldrickOnIce

Not so sure you figure that.
Since the end of Alliance/Conservative (last 5 elections - since 2000), average of popular vote:
CPC 35.02%
LPC 30.32%
NDP 20.34%
The NDP/Green stand to gain the most

Would depend on the type of ballot used. If transferable, preferential ballots were implemented for example (as in Australia), you would indicate in numerical order your 1st, 2nd, 3rd, etc. If we assume that Liberal or NDP voters would both place CPC third in a preferential ballot, then the Conservatives would have a great deal to lose.

[Drak]

Finally we have a Leadership couple good looking enough to hob knob with Prince William and Kate.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

And when push comes to shove, the one province most likely to support change voted against STV in a referrendum.

Yeah, but B.C. voters are a prime example of why direct democracy isn't a great idea.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by Armchair Quarterback

Would depend on the type of ballot used. If transferable, preferential ballots were implemented for example (as in Australia), you would indicate in numerical order your 1st, 2nd, 3rd, etc. If we assume that Liberal or NDP voters would both place CPC third in a preferential ballot, then the Conservatives would have a great deal to lose.

I wouldn't be so quick to make that assumption under normal circumstances. Traditionally the Conservatives would be much more likely to be the second choice of Liberal voters than the NDP.