Your opinion - Federal Election...

[Satin 1237]

At the end we are both entitled to our opinions, but at the time (and likely for decades to come) your preferred way is the way our system works.

 

You are correct and it seem no matter which party gets in there are always cries of one thing or another. Be it demands for proportional representation, or some other election reform.

 

To those who are upset that the Cons have a majority, then first, I hoped you voted then I hope you realize in the end this IS our system. I too feel we will likely see a more middle-of-the-road Conservative government. To quote Harper's comments, "Voters don't like surprises".

 

So hopefully we'll see the end of the very flawed long-gun registry and maybe even some attempt a senate reform, because we should all believe that is necessary. I don't believe you'll see the end of universal health care, because as late as tonight I heard Harper state that is something "we all believe in".

 

In the end, only time will tell. In four years or so, probably around October of 2015, we'll get an opportunity to do this all over again.

[d*mm*y 887]

Thought while we were nattering on about popular vote we could have a look at history funny thing is that Pierre Treudeau's majorities hovered around the 38=42% range as well hmmmm.

 

http://www.electionalmanac.com/canada/popularvote.php

 

And if we take the actual voters then 88,5% of Canadians did not vote for the liberals hmmmm again.

 

Its funny how we can twist and wiggle the numbers, at the end of the day it changes nothing the conservatives have a majority vote.

 

My grievance with the system are the disproportionate number of votes some provinces get to others.

[toine 30556]

Thought while we were nattering on about popular vote we could have a look at history funny thing is that Pierre Treudeau's majorities hovered around the 38=42% range as well hmmmm.

 

http://www.electionalmanac.com/canada/popularvote.php

 

And if we take the actual voters then 88,5% of Canadians did not vote for the liberals hmmmm again.

 

Thanks for the long-term perspective, dummpy. Two points I'd note. Both in 1972 and in 1979, there were minority governments, Liberal-Trudeau led in 1972, and PC-Joe-Clark led in 1979. That is when the Liberal's share of the vote was smallest. In other years, they actually got 45.5% (68, trudeaumania), 43.2% (1974) and 44.5% (1980).

SEE http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_federal_election,_1972

and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_federal_election,_1979

and http://www.electionalmanac.com/canada/popularvote.php

 

Second, the turnout rate was higher in those years, in the 70 to 75% range. Turnout was actually a touch higher in both 1972 and 1979, possibly because many wished to be rid of Liberals, and succeeded only in 1979. It actually dipped in 1980, when people may have got annoyed by the short-lasting minority parliament.

See: http://www.elections.ca/content.aspx?section=ele&dir=turn&document=index&lang=e

Thus, at the end of the day, a quick computation suggests that the 1980 election saw about 30% of the adult citizens voting a Liberal majority in Parliament. In other elections when they got a majority, Trudeau-led Liberals got a larger basis of support among citizens.

 

At the end of the day, though, for better or worse, Canada has a first-past-the-post voting system, and as soon as there are more than two parties, the best we can hope is likely a majority government with 45% of the vote. The key is to find way to get citizens interested and get out the vote.

[toine 30556]

I found it interesting, in this context of minority governments as well as majority of seats being gained with much less than 50% of votes, that GB citizens decided in a referendum against alternative vote.

See this BBC story, for example: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-13297573

[Guest s******ecan****]

I found it interesting, in this context of minority governments as well as majority of seats being gained with much less than 50% of votes, that GB citizens decided in a referendum against alternative vote.

See this BBC story, for example: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-13297573

 

 

Yes and whats noteworthy is the over 60% voted to keep things the same, so it was a fairly decisive result as far as plebicites go.

[Suzirider 737]

So , what did Harper say about senate reform...something about being elected !

http://www.torontosun.com/2011/05/20/editorial-stephen-harpers-senate-follies

I'm not surprised. Anything else we gonna get that he promised ? Hmmmmm

Did I mention that I did Not vote Cons ! (Cons, plural of Con)

And who said "Voters don't like surprises"? hmmmmmmmmmm

More to come, I'll bet on it.

[mrrnice2 157005]

There is often truth behind an adage, with one being that a leopard does not change its spots.

 

P.M. Harper is the leopard, and its only been a matter of days since he reached his majority that the abuse of power has begun. The patronage appointments to the senate flies in the face of his professed intentions.

 

Two Supreme Court justices are to be appointed. The religious right is waiting for their patronage appointments to be made.

 

Cutting the deficit is a goal. He is now saying that he will accomplish that even one year earlier than forecast. The Liberals did that a few years back with Paul Martin as finance minister, and did it on the backs of the provinces, health care, social services, government programs and civil service cuts

 

What social programs will be lost this time? Which groups will lose their funding? What middle and low income families will have their benefits clawed back?

 

As he does this he will continually say that he is not doing it, and it seems as if when he repeats the mistruths over and over, both the people and the media forget, and let him do it.

 

Well, he has his majority. It will be an interesting (and scary) four years.

 

And yes, I am nervous of what will happen legally to this business/hobby that I have become involved in.

[drlove 37202]

...I am nervous of what will happen legally to this business/hobby that I have become involved in.

 

This is what worries me the most, also.

[Capital Hunter 18263]

There is often truth behind an adage, with one being that a leopard does not change its spots.

 

P.M. Harper is the leopard, and its only been a matter of days since he reached his majority that the abuse of power has begun. The patronage appointments to the senate flies in the face of his professed intentions.

 

Two Supreme Court justices are to be appointed. The religious right is waiting for their patronage appointments to be made.

 

Cutting the deficit is a goal. He is now saying that he will accomplish that even one year earlier than forecast. The Liberals did that a few years back with Paul Martin as finance minister, and did it on the backs of the provinces, health care, social services, government programs and civil service cuts

 

What social programs will be lost this time? Which groups will lose their funding? What middle and low income families will have their benefits clawed back?

 

As he does this he will continually say that he is not doing it, and it seems as if when he repeats the mistruths over and over, both the people and the media forget, and let him do it.

 

Well, he has his majority. It will be an interesting (and scary) four years.

 

And yes, I am nervous of what will happen legally to this business/hobby that I have become involved in.

 

I hate to say this but I told you so...

 

 

 

This is what worries me the most, also.

 

I share your concerns also......

[drlove 37202]

I was surprised to hear some posters on this board advocated voting Conservative before the election. That makes no sense whatsoever, IMO.

 

Additional Comments:

If only the Liberals would have had a more charismatic and capable leader, things may have turned out a lot differently.