How will you vote in BC Electoral Reform Referendum?

[flamingfingers]

'Research' in a partisan vein is counter to intelligent decision making. You are what you choose to accept.

[burnedatstake]

I've always found it safer to do research in advance to avoid disaster. This BS should be halted, and a proper public consultation and referendum held (as Horgan promised). There are still a couple of years left in the NDPGLeap mandate. It would be in everyone's interest if the government didn't blow this one out their collective sphincters. Ooops, my mistake, it would not be in Weaver's interest to miss his date of reckoning. (I can just imagine his electric car backfiring)

yawn. this sanctimonious crap is old. the liberals never listened to anyone for 20 years. now all the sudden the ndp suddenly has to?

[Urbane]

We also get a chance down the road to reject PR.

Who says? Oh yeah, the same guy who promised that we would have a simple two-part question . . . the status quo vs one other option. He lied. Why should I believe him now?

[rustled]

'Research' in a partisan vein is counter to intelligent decision making. You are what you choose to accept.

Indeed, as is discussing in a partisan vein, as is voting in a partisan vein.

“If there is a vote in the end to adopt PR, I think this poll is telling us that A, it’s going to be by a narrow margin, and B, that it’s going to be highly partisan, which I think calls into question the legitimacy of the overall result,” he said.

“That, I think, is problematic when we’re talking about a change to our political system of this magnitude.”

And yes, you are what you choose to accept, which is why so many of us are not accepting this process as presented. It is not a legitimate, non-partisan referendum.

[2x4eyes]

Proportional Representation Guest Speaker :)

When? Thursday, October 18th
What time? 7pm (Approximately - immediately following the October Rutland Residents Association General Meeting)
Where? Rutland Centennial Hall (180 Rutland Road North)

* Parking available on Roxby Road and access to the hall will also be from Roxby Road.

Everyone is Welcome

[hobbyguy]

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/article-tribal-solitudes-increasingly-dominate-the-public-square/

“If you are someone who believes that you deserve to rule, then your motivation to attack the elite, pack the courts, and warp the press to achieve your ambitions is strong,” wrote journalist and author Anne Applebaum in The Atlantic magazine. She described how this phenomenon happened exactly to her adopted homeland of Poland, whose autocratic government has been praised by Mr. Trump.

“Given the right conditions, any society can turn against democracy,” Ms. Applebaum believes. “Indeed, if history is anything to go by, all societies eventually will.”

As I have said before, STV as a form of proportional representation is one that I find as of interest and worth considering voting for. None of the systems with party lists hold any interest because they perpetuate the and increase the power of party insiders while shutting out independents entirely and removing the direct accountability to the voters of "representatives" who represent nobody but themselves and their party tribe.

Why did Eby fail to make to make the PR question simple? and why did he exclude STV? The obvious answer is that BC NDP and noisy little fringe Green* party are outside of the mainstream and want to stack the system to their advantage - because both believe somehow that they are right and everybody else is wrong (which is a hallmark of ideologues).

Systems with party lists ensure that the noisy little Green* fringe will always be an annoyance. Systems with party lists would ensure that there would never be a repeat of the 77-2 drubbing the NDP suffered after totally fluffing up governance in the 1990s. The NDP party insiders would always have a comfy spot on the party list.

All of the systems that Eby and the NDP put on the ballot are party list systems designed to virtually guarantee party insider status as MLAs. In the 2001 election there are and were very few that felt that the NDP deserved any status in government - and so they went down 77-2. BUT - under PR as proposed by Eby, an additional 15 party insiders would have survived by hiding on a party list - immune from the wrath of the voters. PR advocates tout "fairness" - but how would that have been "fair" by any stretch of the imagination? What is "fair" is to stand before the voters and win a constituency - and lose it if it turns out that you are a fluff up.

The systems that Eby has proposed all promote tribalism, not weaken it. The examples in US, Brexit, Poland etc. should instruct us NOT to promote tribalism, but to seek consensus. The PR folks make the false argument that coalition governments - an ongoing feature of party list systems - promote consensus. That simply is not true if you examine the empirical results. The only consensus achieved is a consensus among political insiders that hide on party lists and can not be gotten rid of, and that "consensus" is skewed far away from what people voted for and most often even further from what needs to be done to achieve good governance.

Should we have another look at STV as the right kind of PR? Probably - it is the only PR that weakens the power of party insider politicians and at the same time gives independents a better shot. Certainly it is the only truly "fair" system, and one that promotes the fortunes of consensus politicians, not tribal party insiders. But it isn't on the ballot, and worse yet, even if it was, the NDP have reserved the right for their cabinet to actually choose what system suits them - and shove it down our throats.

There is no choice but to vote for the existing FPTP system given the dog's breakfast that the NDP and Eby have served up.

[Smurf]

Reading the pamphlet they sent out is just a joke. None of the PR "made up" systems they have are any good. Talk about buying a pig in a poke, this is a perfect example, to the extreme.

[Carrs Landing Viking]

Canada post getting set to strike on Monday. How is everyone supposed to vote in this case.

To bad the incompetent NDP never thought of this.

[Carrs Landing Viking]

Reading the pamphlet they sent out is just a joke. None of the PR "made up" systems they have are any good. Talk about buying a pig in a poke, this is a perfect example, to the extreme.

I have yet to receive any info for this referendum. No pamphlet, no nothing.

[Carrs Landing Viking]

Canada Post strike notice link.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/canada-p ... -1.4865660

[hobbyguy]

Canada post getting set to strike on Monday. How is everyone supposed to vote in this case.

To bad the incompetent NDP never thought of this.

Unions never go on strike, do they? The mail in nature of this "vote" is also a travesty. The last one was held as part of a provincial election to ensure a decent and representative vote.

As far as I know, there is no minimum "turnout" for this bogus referendum.

[flamingfingers]

What's all the fuss about? You guys want FPTP? Vote for it and ignore the rest of the ballot. Mail it in. Pretty simple, I would say.

You want PR? Vote for all or any of three options, ignoring the vote for FPTP. Mail it in. Pretty simple, I would say

[Veovis]

Canada post getting set to strike on Monday. How is everyone supposed to vote in this case.

To bad the incompetent NDP never thought of this.

Almost feels like mail will get partially delivered and the results accepted....from certain areas....you know where the strike didn't affect as much...like NDP ridings.

I think the NDP thought of this carefully Carrs, hopefully most people are already making legal challenge plans, I know I'm doing a bit of research as Canada is supposed to be a democracy.

[burnedatstake]

I think the NDP thought of this carefully Carrs, hopefully most people are already making legal challenge plans, I know I'm doing a bit of research as Canada is supposed to be a democracy.

righjt wingers clogging up courts whining? inconceivable!

[Btfsplck]

No doubt. It's usually the left wingers that clog up the courts.