Wow.

[Lady tehMa]

Although what you say is correct to a degree you disregard the fact that ALL eligible voters are represented. They did not vote but that does not mean they are not to be included in any other considerations going forward. Basran et al don't just represent those who voted.

Furthermore, many people are disenfranchised by the outlandish and obvious subversion of the process that's allowed and even encouraged by current voting laws. Why vote when a half dozen business men who do not represent my best interest or values can so easily affect the outcome of an entire election?

So perhaps you'd do well to stop discounting the rights of the taxpayers who did not show up at the polls and instead acknowledge that they still have as much at stake as everyone else.

If they have as much at stake, then why don't they show up? Or create a platform of their own? They are well within their rights to do so if they feel they are "disenfranchised" as you put it.

"I don't think I like the way this is played so I'll sit in my room and sulk" is the way you come across. Don't whine - DO something about it. Perhaps if someone else have run, I'd have had better options than the ones I chose. It wasn't the best of choices I had, but I'm not invested enough to run myself. I AM invested enough to research, get out and vote though. Which is miles ahead of the apathy represented by the ones who simply ignored the election.

[JayByrd]

I am confused as to the topic of this thread. Is it a lack of support from other posters for your position? Did you ever consider that perhaps people do not agree with your view and your position/view....on these threads anyway.....and that would put you in the minority?

I don't have a position, at least not one that I've dared to express. And don't come here looking for support, I seek information and discussion. What's occuring is quite a lot of insults disguised as opinion. If I wanted to join in, I'd post something like this:

"Well, I see the have-not, not-in-my-back-yard, anti-progress crowd were crushed at the polls again. I guess those without the intelligence to vote for Colin Basran, along with the council candidates who earned the ForKelowna endorsement, were also too self-interested to make it to the polls and elect someone else. Now they'll direct their energies where they belong, which is griping on these forums, and trying to bring down those who are actually doing something."

It might seem like just an opinion, but I'm also taking a shot at anyone who disagrees with me. They've been insulted before they even post. If I wanted to really have fun with it, I'd say anyone who didn't vote for the ForKelowna candidates must be AntiKelowna. A civilized exchange is bound to ensue! Now, the above isn't actually how I feel, and even if I did I wouldn't post it on a forum. But that's the kind of thing I'm seeing here, and that's why I started this thread.

[Panzer130]

Although what you say is correct to a degree you disregard the fact that ALL eligible voters are represented. They did not vote but that does not mean they are not to be included in any other considerations going forward. Basran et al don't just represent those who voted.

Furthermore, many people are disenfranchised by the outlandish and obvious subversion of the process that's allowed and even encouraged by current voting laws. Why vote when a half dozen business men who do not represent my best interest or values can so easily affect the outcome of an entire election?

So perhaps you'd do well to stop discounting the rights of the taxpayers who did not show up at the polls and instead acknowledge that they still have as much at stake as everyone else.

Riiiiggghhhhtttt..................

So if Shepard had one, you would not say the majority have clearly spoken and the majority were too smart to have the wool pulled over their eyes by the "forgreed" campaign? If Shepard had won you would be on here complaining the system is flawed?

Right, I am sure.