Canada's voting system (and how changing it would affect this election)
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 30 июл 2024
- Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau has promised, if elected, to review Canada’s voting system. So, what is our current system? And how might another voting system affect the outcome of our current election?
I voted for Trudeau ONLY BECAUSE he said he eould change the way we would vote!!!!!...
HE DID'NT!!...
Sucker... why would you ever vote liberal
@Trollmaster69 anyone is better than liberal. Anyone... except Islamic Party
Now its time for the PPC this 2019 election!
Of course he didn't. FPP works For the liberals! Ha, ha, ha.
Elected officials are sometimes good at first or fresh mandate
Aaaannnnddddd he lied.
Lol its trudeau what do you except
Lol😂😂😂😂😂
Aaaannnnddddd Scheer may have forgotten to let Canada know he is American.
I hate you Blue time
NBA FAN and he won wreckeddddd
Proportional systems are more meaningful. They truly reflect the mindset of all the country's voters. Right now it is almost pointless to vote for a fringe party because their candidates have practically zero chance of being elected in any single riding.
Proportional representation is not the way to go. Think about it. If one party wins 36% of the popular vote, and another with 32% of the popular vote and the other parties win a smaller, yet considerable amount of votes, what do you think would happen? There would be endless amounts of deadlock, parliament would be at a standstill. Nothing would get accomplished since you have multiple opposing parties voting against each other on every bill. Look at Italy, they use proportional representation and have tons of parties, absolutely nothing gets done and their country is still in decay, and shows little sign of improvement. Maybe it is pointless to vote for a fringe party because they have nothing very good to offer. I'm not in favour of giving the Marxist-Leninist part of the Christian Heritage party any more power than they already have. First past the post, no changes!
In Italy, both the upper and the lower house can remove the government on its own, this is probably the biggest contributor to its instability. It also had almost no thresholds for smaller parties, so that fringe parties could in fact disturb functional policy making. None of these are being proposed anywhere.
Deadlock isn't a bad thing. In fact, it's the entire point of democracy, to stop "leaders" getting carried away with their owns grand designs. It forces each and every decision to be accountable, instead of 4 years later asking if we want to ride the pain train again.
If you prefer an imperfect FPTP system to a much worse PR system, visit and join the Facebook Group: FPTP ... It Works for Canada ... Ca Marche pour Moi. facebook.com/groups/1577709182538721/
They have zero chance of winning because their ideas don't represent the riding and because we don't have enough open votes in parliament because of authoritarian leaders like Trudeau.
No actually proportional voting systems are a tarnish on democracy because all the big cities with mass mindset voting blocks would choose the majority government every time
CGP Grey does a great indepth look at both fptp and prop voting, as well as a few not mentioned here.
The thing that no one seems to realize about first-past-the-post is that ensures that the government must govern for the whole country. Canada is a federation with many different regional cultures, issues, and values, these regions also have very different populations. For instance in 2011 New Brunswick's population was 751,171, meanwhile the population of urban Toronto was 5,132,794. Toronto can out vote New Brunswick more than 6 times over under proportional representation. However, under first-past -the-post there are 23 ridings in Toronto and 10 ridings in New Brunswick. This system forces politicians to appeal to all Canadians and not just the ones who live in large cities in Ontario and Quebec. This is important because why would someone from Montreal, Toronto, or Ottawa care about stopping job loss in Alberta, fishing rights in Newfoundland, or building highways in Nunavut. The only thing that that proportional representation will do is create more resentment of Ontario and Quebec (which exists everywhere else in the country by the way) and driven to an extreme that can lead to separatism. Canada is not Central Canada.
TheGregory Colin Germany is also very Urban and the regional cultures are more similar.
TheGregory Colin Its not just the fact of urban vs country. How politically diverse is Germany? The issues that concern someone from Toronto and from Nunavut are completly different. I doubt there are many differences between the politics of a Prussian and a Bavarian.
proportional representation!
+vuaducrdreams Ranked ballot is even more disproportional than FPTP as even small party voters have big parties as 2nd choice. There has been research done on this. Just google it. PR is the only way.
Single transferable vote is better.
It doesn't work in the liberals favour.
On a proportional system, everything would of been different! There would of been less votes "by strategy! Everyone would of vote for who they wanted to! I am pretty sure that everything would of been different! I hope that one day, the voting system will be proportional! Justin Trudeau said he would make that change happen… I HOPE SO!!!
I'm pretty sure it will never happen!
+Commeca Guizmono Why did you add an exclamation mark at the end of every sentence!
B Hinz I don't know… Why wouldn't I?
Please tell me why there would be less strategic voting under MMP?! People could and would still vote to "stop" the Conservatives or Stop the Liberals or "Stop" who ever under MMP why dose MMP stop that?!
-Would of-
Would have -> would've
@@Ninja1live no, that's not how vote spoiling happens
How would citizens vote for a new voting system ?
Its called a "referendum"
It still didn't explain how it exactly works
Joe Wilman yeah shoud have been longer
Heres some more helpful ones: ruclips.net/video/QT0I-sdoSXU/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/Au_94POF87k/видео.html
Centralizes power to the parties, removes power and citizen accountability from local MLA's. Easier to centrally control politics if your an oligarch. Does give new little parties better toe-holds to amp up the political chaos.
@@tatechristensen2182 thank youuuuu
@@penstemona9933 That's why we need ranked choice voting, aka preferencial voting with the ability to both vote for local and federal representation
Here in the UK a lot of parties were negatively impacted by FPTP The SNP now have 56 MPs to about 1.4 million votes The Lib Dems- 8 MPs to 2.6 million! Anyway, for better or worse looks like PM Trudeau
+Nathan Hazlett what is FPTP? I just saw a documentary that the super rich are thriving in the UK while the regular people cant' afford to buy a house & the cost of living has increased. maybe you need someone like Trudeau.
First Past the Post (same as Canada I think)
Nathan Hazlett ok. does democracy work in the UK, considering you have this rich elite & the royals?
+Centrist Philosopher how would you suggest the UK votes? I feel as though an extended version (more seats) of our system used to elect MEP's would be more representative. using the 11 voting regions to vote using the d'hondt system. This would allow gains for the conservatives in the north of England and Scotland and gains for Labour in the south.. It would also allow the Greens to gain seats and all the while keeping places like Scotland fairly represented by reducing the number of seats given to the SNP to a number more in keeping with their votes. It would also allow parties to equalise seats, for example, the DUP and Sinn Fein were only 8000 votes apart but the DUP won twice as many seats or Labour equalising their seats in Scotland and the South East to something more akin to their vote share
+Nurit L Democracy in the UK is a non existant thing.. there are four nations in the UK, England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, only one of these nations has a majority of seats for the current ruling party.the seats are divided up as follows;England - 533Scotland - 59Wales - 40Northern Ireland -18The conservatives won a majority in England but did rather disastrously in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.In addition first past the post only really serves the largest parties, Labour and the Conservatives while crippling other parties because people tend to vote based on which party they disagree with least due to the fact that there is only one winner per constituency and the two biggest parties tend to be the only ones that will form the government.
I am Chinese Canadian 🇨🇳🇨🇦
*Trudeau must go!!*
I agree
Proportional representation
Blows.
Proportional representation is tarnish on democracy because all the big cities with mass mindset voting blocks would choose and win the majority government every time
@@flyingsourdough1619 Translation: I don't like PR because the party I like would lose power under it.
@@LPyourplay No, I don't like mob rule/PR because it doesn't equally represent everyone
@@flyingsourdough1619 The entire point of PR is that it equally represents everyone by not giving some people more than one vote.
Tyranny of the minority is not a good solution to tyranny of the majority.
Conservatives in the Atlantic provinces and Ontario, as well as Liberal/NDP voters in Alberta and Saskatchewan deserve to be represented. I would gladly have my party lose an election in a proportional voting system than win in unfairly in a first past the post system if it means my vote might count. *cough* *cough* liberals
Lol it's the opposite in the US
@@bruhbutwhytho2301 And it's intentional
Without asking Canadians, the government signed Trans-Pacific Partnership. and guess what? Canadians won't be able to see the text of this deal before they vote. In other words, when you see the text, you'll regret voting Conservative. www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canada-election-2015-tpp-text-release-delay-1.3270806
+Poseidon Cichlidon I didn't see a Neo-Nazi comment.
Poseidon Cichlidon ok, thanks. I didn't see that comment.
Peoples Party of Canada has Canada's support!!! Join the trend of vacuuming votes from determined Canadians!
One little issue with the example; sure 62% did not want candidate B, however; 85% did not want A, 75% did not want C, and 75% did not want D. I believe FPTP should remain for the HoC.... But the senate should use the PR based on the federal election.
Well you idiot.
Let's say Candidates C and D are close ideologically while Candidate A is ideologically between B and C
In instant-runoff system D's votes would be send to C, and A's votes would be split roughly evenly between C and B
C would get 54% and B would get 46%.
Anyone know the name of this song?
0:24 is that Emily Davidson getting hit by the King's Horse? Weird footage to use
I'm in the USA, and while I have always respected parliamentary democracy, I think the primary system, as we have here, may also be more representative. In this videos four candidate example, the race between the four of them would be the primary. Then a few weeks or months later, The second round would be held between the top two vote getters. If one of the four achieved 51% in the first round, that person would be elected without the need for a second round. There are pluses and minuses to the primary versus parliamentary systems, but in many ways, the primary system seems more balanced and fair.
Proportional systems and primaries aren't opposites. Let's say the US adopted the single transferable vote using a blanket primary. Let's say an electoral district had 4 members of congress. It takes 20%+1 to win, because if 4 candidates each get that many, it's impossible for a 5th to also get that many. Each party can nominate up to 4 candidates. If there are 4 or fewer candidates from a party, they all go onto the general election. If there are 5 or more, during the primary each voter ranks the members from one party and there will be 4 winners.
During the general election, the top 4 from each party will compete against each other. Let's assume the electoral districts are not gerrymandered. It's likely that you will get one from both of the two biggest parties, a possible second from both parties, and a third party or independent may get a seat. Because of the ranking, it's pretty safe for parties to put up more than one candidate.
Also, proportionality and parliamentarianism are not opposites. Parliaments can have proportional representation but they also might not. The only thing a parliamentary system means is that the main executive officer who leads and usually nominates the cabinet is chosen by the legislative assembly and may be dismissed by that assembly at any time, either by removing them from office or in some places also simultaneously picking a successor. The US independently elects executive officers, they would be chosen by a ranked ballot, except for multi member commissions and boards, and chances are they may be required to be independent, in which case, probably the N (which I define to be the number of commission/board members) times two candidates in the primaries becomes a candidate in the general election.
Single transferable vote is also very localized. Let's take the state of Washington for instance. Let's assume it did what national legislatures did and have a number of legislators in the lower house as the cube root of the population, which is 7.4 million, and there would be about 195 members of the legislative assembly, or one for every 38 thousand people (rounding to the nearest thousand), much better than today where there is one for every 75 thousand people. And to win in a 4 member district assuming about 65% of the population turns out to vote, you would need 19,760 votes.
This also means that localities are likely to be a lot more productive and less corrupt than today. People will likely trust more local areas to come up with ideas and most of the governing, putting a vast amount of power away from the much more centralized congress and even state legislatures.
Another benefit of proportional systems that are individualized like single transferable vote (STV) is that the legislatures themselves can become a lot more self managing without so much of the influence of the speaker and majority leader or minority whip or committee chairs. The legislature as a whole can elect speakers, they can elect members to committees, committees can elect their members to subcommittees as they need to, the committees and subcommittees can elect their own leaders, and there wouldn't even be a need for party whips or majority or minority leaders anymore. It would allow members of the assembly to require that a vote on the plenary floor or the committee is held with a minority of the members, overruling the powerful speaker and chairs (and in many states, powerful lieutenant governors).
Provided that campaign finance laws are changed, electoral money can't come from outside their districts, you can only spend or raise a certain amount of money and depend on small donations from ordinary people, probably even with a subsidy for any candidate who gets a decent number of votes (say 1/4 of the electoral quota, which for a 4 member race is 5%), political parties could disintegrate and let a much wider variety of viewpoints flourish.
this music makes me feel like i'm in a mall elevator
Great video!!!
Ok but you did not point out the problem with porportional representation. Namely that each place needs representation so where would the green party candidates come from if there are no places that vote for the green party? Will they all come from downtown Vancouver? How does that represent northern Alberta?
Mixed member proportional makes most sense.
First Past The Post is the best system. However, one way of making it work better is "Rank Choice Voting" (aka Instant Runoff). You can still have regular electoral districts, yet in "Rank Choice Voting" if no one gets 50% + 1, then you go through rankings until you have a candidate reach a majority of such votes in that District. The State of Maine started using Rank Choice Voting in 2018, and it so far it is working well.
Proportion Representation has problems. Germany, Austria have had it for a long time, and they both have had trouble trying to form stable Governments. New Zealand instituted it in 1993, and are starting to regret it too. Believe me, if you have a country that has FPTP, stick with it! You can always modify it, but it's a system that works the best.
can anyone provide me with at least an educated guess as to why round robin is not an option?
first election eliminates two parties that fell behind second one determines the two leading parties the third one decides who gets to be PM and the runner up holds just enough seats to create the checks and balances to make sure no one party has full Controll of parliament. maybe I'm fuzzy on the details but anything to that effect seems plausible enough no? then you set up the number of seats permanent depending on what's position you finished the race? go ahead comment and tell me why that seems like a bad idea (despite the large overhead cost, with modern technology I don't see why it still costs so much)
The PPC won 1.6% of the vote last election, that would be 5 or 6 seats instead of none.
Sure unless we set the bar that you have to get something like 5% or 10%
@@SuperKing604 Well, in 2021 they won 5%
I'd say the threshold should be 3% because it would still be over a million people. I feel that if a million people want a party to win, that party should at least have some say.
The percentage could be lower, but I'd say that whatever 1 million out of the population of Canada is, should be the threshold.
A 10% threshold would kill any chance of new parties to emerge since voter turnout was only 62%
5% is a bit high, but less than 2% doesn't seem worth it.
Downsides to proportional representation that are here ignored are that PR eliminates any relationship between candidate and local riding and makes the candidate most loyal to the party brass that determines their place on the candidate list. Over time, this leads to fragmentation within parties and the multiplication of new parties making political stability harder to attain. It also means that when larger parties seek to form a coalition that would allow them to govern, they often grant an outsized influence to small fringe parties whose support they need to get over the top.
Brian Irwin thats why most PR proposals for Canada Propose Open List Proportional, as in, voters pick the order of the lists.
I CAN'T HEAR YOUR EXPLAINATIONS BECAUSE OF THE DRUMER SOUND. IF I WANT TO LESTEN TO MUSIC I WILL DO SO!!!!!!!
.
.
That's how it should be!!!
"Experts believe First-past-the-post offers more stability." I co-founded the US non-profit Center for Election Science and appeared in William Poundstone's book "Gaming the Vote", and I would challenge you to find an "expert" who can offer any evidence for this. On the contrary, Plurality Voting (the more proper/correct name for FPTP) tends toward two-party domination, and violent sways from one pole to the opposite pole every election. By contrast, a system like Score Voting or Approval Voting would tend toward consensus winners and only gently sway a bit to the left or right of center in a given election. Many proportional representation systems also create a moderating influence, as does the parliamentary system (legislature rather than the general public elects the executive aka "prime minister").
YES!!! VOTING FOR ANDREW SCHEER AS PM NOW!!!
in the times we live in now I would have to say almoust conservative lol thanks for sharing
We need to end first past the post! Give representation to the rest of the country. Either that or risk separation. Alberta is ready to leave now. That would be a disaster for the country. Quebec would leave shortly after then Ontario. The country would be shattered and it would cause chaos. The people of Canada should demand that Trudeau's Liberals fulfill their election promise and end first past the post!
MMP/Proportional Rep... FTW!
4 years later and now there are talks about this again
and wexit?
What happens to local MP's in proportional then? Sure in a practical sense there votes are whipped anyway but essentially you're removing the insensitive to represent your constituents because that seat is decided by the rest of Canada as well not just your district.
A) under pr people would vote differently greater choice of parties with more room for extremes left and right.
Even if you do vote for a losing candidate though, whoever wins is supposed to represent all of his or her constituents equally, no matter who you voted for. I know that may not be the way things really work but that's what's supposed to happen in our present system. Are you saying that we would choose a national leader from the total votes cast for each party?
Have main issues included in the vote that way we vote on the issue and not the person.
Another promise broken.
Who did you vote for in 2019 and 2021?
Definitely, the proportional voting system works better but how would everything else good to be shifted to facilitate this going forward ..?
First Past the Post is a misnomer/bad analogy. In horse racing, the purse is generally divided between the top three finishers. The winner of the race gets the most, obviously, but the horses that place second and third also get some prize money -- and not a negligible amount, either.
I prefer single transferable vote so we could still have local representation, but I'd be willing to try proportional representation.
Looking for advice - I don’t pro or against vaccine, but I am against discrimination against non-vexers, so which party is liberal in this? I know Liberal and NDP are out for me. Thanks 🙏🏻
Vote PPC
Funny that the name comes from horse racing.
Even in horse racing you can bet for a horse to place or show.
Horse racing has a way of rewarding 2nd and 3rd.
I think STV or MMP would be etter than both of them.
What about a 'Preferential' voting system like Australia?
The concern I have with the preferential ballot is that it is NOT proportional, does NOT mitigate the democratic deficit, and still fosters false majorities and strategic voting. A preferential ballot could be seen as a lateral move.
As an Australian I can say Preferential voting is better than FPTP, because FPTP is a completely broken system. But Preferential still causes seriously wacky distortions and prevents millions from getting the representation they asked for and deserve.
I wish my country would move to proportional representation, and I am sure we will at some point.
First one is very plain and simple but the current going based on points prevents any rigging.
Proportional representations system is way better
I think we should be able to vote for seats and then vote for prime minister separately that would make it fair majority of votes wins the prime minister seat not the other way around
Like what we doing in the US
Over 210 federal seats, in two provinces, means that the other 8 provinces amd 3 territories, have zero voice.
I don't know what party is right for Canada but one thing is for sure the Liberals they are absolutely not right for Canada I think conservatives or the green party would be the best parties
Another option is preferential (Instant-Runoff) voting where a candidate has to get an absolute majority to win.
To many parties, it's nearly improbable to get more then 50% of the vote because 13 will vote here, 33 here, 15 here 19 here...... but they all hate each other and would never vote anything different.
The Australian one
Yes its time to remind Mr. Trudeau that he promised to fix the voting system and bring in proportional representation, he should be reminded he won in part on this promise, he should be reminded that the NDP and Green voters also favoured this change and that that in fact some 70% of Canadians feel this was a major plank that had to be achieved. We are tired of electing False Majority governments in this country, do the right thing Justin and pass Proportional representation now, in time for the next election!
Who did you vote for in 2019 and 2021?
I support open list proportional representation only with an electoral threshold of 5% and majority bonus system. The party that wins a plurality should be awarded extra seats in order for political stability.
allow Max to debate the other 5 n we will see
Germany has the best system! ✊🏼
We have a 5 % "Sperrklausel" that prohibits small Parties from gaining seats. Also the way the parties select their people in the first place is heavily undemocratic. You can't pretend to have a great democracy if the internal party politics is just fucked up.
perpotional
The 'first past the post" gives a minority Party a majority government and 4 year dictatorship. In my opinion this worked well enough in the past, but not now. The Trudeau mindset is a radical leftist religion that ignores the wishes of the Canadian majority. My wife and I used to work on behalf of the Liberal Party - that Party no longer exists under far left Trudeau. The closest Party to the centre and most Canadians is the Conservatives under Scheer. Advice: vote strategically in your riding to get rid of the postmodernist anti-Western civilisation and clueless Trudeau.
representational is obviously better, preferential voting could also be a good alternative
#FLUSHTHETURD get Turdeau out of Canada.
proportional system would make your vote count for something and would stop people from voting strategically giving you the opportunity to vote for the party that you actually want. I find it crazy that 15.7% of canadians voted for the NDP and they got 24 seats, the green party netted 6.5% and they got 3 seat, The Bloc gets 7.8% of the vote and they get 32 seats. Not sure how people think that is a fair voting system.
I like the rating system
This video misrepresents the reality of a proportional representation system. The popular vote in 2011 for other was just under 1% representing over 3 seats, but has been as close to 5% in previous years. A proportional representation system would fragment the main party popular vote and give position and seats to the Communist party or Christian Heritage party or does anyone remember the Rhinoceros party? Minority governments represented by special interest groups are dangerous. Does anyone remember when the Liberals tried to put separatists in government and Harper add to prorogue government to stop it?
+Lasse Riise Of coarse special interests are represented in the main line parties. Proportional representation would change this fact. If Canada adopted proportional representation it would rip this country apart. Support for the main line parties would fragment along regional lines, religious line, racial lines, cultural lines and into any one issues party that anyone would want to start. We never elect a majority let alone a minority with any strength. You think that politicians can't get any thing done now. In this multicultural and fiercely regional country parliament would never get anything done. We be like Italy and dissolve parliament every year. You must want to vote often?
Proportional representation voting has the issue of how do you pick who has a seat? Like if Halifax votes for an ndp candidate but the conservative party takes there candidate instead, most of people of Halifax would be pissed.
I better system would be ranked bailot voting which we keep the zones but instead fptp we would rank each candidate 1 to whatever and the goal is that a candidate get 50% of the votes. So once you count everyone's first choice and there isnt someone at 50 you get rid of the lowest candidate and redistribute the votes they gotten by using there second choice, and you repeat the process until 50% is achieved by someone.
This system has the benefit of people dont have to strategically vote and you get the candidate most people are okay with.
I think it’s good the way it is it’s better than the USA as a Canadian I don’t think it needs any change
well this didnt happen....
American system. Race to the finish!
Where is the ppc
didn't exist at this time
Direct Party and Representative Voting at least Plz!
Good video, but didn't explain how all votes count in Proportional Representation
Curtis Walz proportional Representation isn’t a specific System, its a principle that the % of the vote you get is the % of seats you get. Actual specific systems like MMP and others do exist though
Did they?
RCV is everywhere
Trudeau has to Go!
I’m not a Canadian but I am interested idk why
range voting with proportinal representation ftw!
The conservatives, GDC and Bloc parties always lose it's either liberals or NDP so I don't know why the others still even try anymore.
Narrow it down to two parties on Election day.
As long as the gov decides who gets on the ballot the vote is meaningless. You get to elect whichever one of their guys you want to. We need a 20 year prison sentence for any politition that does not tell the truth ,the hole truth ,and nothing but the truth.
Just looking at all the party banner on the opening page brings home the fact that Canada has degenerated into one of those countries in which no single party can govern without forming a coalition with at least one other. We have been a country with two main parties, just like the UK and USA. Power alternated between the two. It seemed to work before.
Much rather compromising than extremes like in the US
@@Themapleleaforever Think about that. An evil politician like Trudeau can form coalitions without winning an election and cling to power. This is what happened when he teamed up with the gullible Singh, and you can be sure he is working on coalitions to cling to power in future elections. Only a Tory majority will ensure we have seen the last of him. Do you recall how one of Trudeau earliest orders of business was to change the voting system. He hired the wrong person to do it and thank goodness she failed. Canada dodged a bullet that time.
should be a riding vote on the tag and a additional vote for the prime minister only.
blkrubber1 Canada is a Parliamentary Democracy, so unless you want to change that
I'm just going to say, Israel has a proportional system that really represents the people(especially in an inhomogeneous country).also Israel went to 4 rounds of elections in 2 years and its not even over yet(sure it not all about the system but it plays a big rule).
The country is split about its PM and both sides find it difficult to form an alliance between parties that will form a majority of 61 seats out of the 120
Every persons' vote in Canada should count.
Not just some ,but every single Canadian who is of age to vote and does vote.
Every vote does count except for soiled ballots. If you've ever scrutineered each vote is counted and the person with the most votes wins. Are you advocating a system where everyone who runs wins?
+ Barney Bowler if instead of making a silly comment, you did research, things would have been better.
Please... Don't let Harper win again... He's done enough.
Yep I voted for liberals
+Pastel Heart Just the other side of the same coin.
+Pastel Heart regretting that decision, yet
I voted for the bloq party
no regrets?
Well if you want a government that can get nothing done because it is made from a coalition of 2 or 3 parties or even more which is generally not what people voted for in the first place, then by all means vote for this nonsense. Look at Germany as a wonderful example on proportional representation. Constant deadlock, constant coalitions, no majorities at all that would allow the government to move forward on their promises. The majority of the people are being ignored here. How many people who protest voted in the ndp here are happy that they made a coalition with the greens? How many think hey, that's not what I voted for? The party with the most votes gets to decide who they work with to form a majority... depending on who they like, not anything like who came second or third. No, it's all about preferences. You'll get something like the liberals working with the greens to shut out the conservatives and ndp. Meaning your vote is worth pretty much nothing at the end. Nevermind that there is nothing proportional about cities and rural areas. City dwellers are so disconnected from rural life, it is a terrifying thought to have these people control politics. Also consider that the parties pushing for this are the parties who struggle to get enough votes in the first place except maybe as a protest choice like Quebec did when they voted in the ndp. Basically if you can't win the old way, you create a new way... like we are seeing here, again.
OMG you're the goddamn Globe and Mail. CAPTION YOUR VIDEOS. #NoMoreCraptions #CaptionsMatter
Have you read the auto-captions? They're never good enough. Even if the words are accurate there is no punctuation, no clarity on who is speaking or when they are speaking. It's not that hard.
Please don't make the mistake of switching to proportional representation, nothing will get done if it is implemented. There isn't anything wrong with our first past the post system, and used with our multi-party majority/minority system of government it is fine as is.
It wastes and excludes votes from the process, leading to millions of people never being represented and glitches in the process that force MPs on communities who don't want them and never asked for them. FPTP is completely broken for any election with more than 2 candidates.
Vital Mark Germany's system is actually good, because it's actually multi party and it serves them better. the entirety pure PR systems in Italy for example, are completely unstable. they've had 60 governments since WW2, where Canada has had comparatively much fewer since Confederation. Germany's system won't work in Canada because there isn't anything beyond Conservative, Liberal and NDP. we have a stringent "Two party plus" system, and changing the electoral method won't help make it multiparty, it'll just frustrate the voting process. it might've worked in the 1990's where you had 5 major parties, 6 if you count the Greens, but now that the electorate is firmly concentrated in 3 parties, the NDP, Liberal and Conservatives, it'll just cause more deadlock and instances where it's difficult to make an executive decision.
They missed the PPC.
That party wasn't formed back then
compulsory voting is a good idea to
From a voter point of view Proportional systems would seem the more fair representation .once the voter did his civic duty and felt satisfied that he or she voted to the Parliament a member that represent their views it ends there, and that true politics begins .with so many political parties in parliament it’s going to take a lot of negotiation lot of concession a lot of broken promises just in order to form a coalition to govern and there’s no guarantees that coalition wouldn’t collapse and there’s another call for another election which would cost the taxpayer hundreds of millions of dollars and how hard it’s going to be passing laws balancing budgets yes there is lots of faults in the system we have but at least there is stability and if you don’t like the government you have you could vote it it out in four years instead of having an election every 12 or 14 months and nothing gets done by way of legislation and long-term policy making
God bless Canada thank God
PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION!!
Sucks
No
What would that look like? Can you please link to an explaination?
Proportional system is fair and more up to date with what ppl want. FPTP is an old inadequate system. Too bad that Trudeau did not keep his word to change the system!
I really don’t get what your system is it really doesn’t make any sense
Proportional Representation of course.
Could someone explain what Trudeau has done since he took office. Preferably one less passionate but factual, I know zero about politics but day by day I gain interest lol
proportional system is the one got better representing the population
Proportional Representation!