The real majority

The forum's Skid Road. DO NOT ENTER unless you're ready for a squabble.
User avatar
A_Britishcolumbian
Grand Pooh-bah
Posts: 2672
Joined: Jul 30th, 2010, 11:39 pm

The real majority

Post by A_Britishcolumbian »

well, even if voter turnout was 52% that means not even a quarter of eligible british columbians chose the liberals. some victory.
the true majority voice in this election again was the non-voter, will this group be properly represented in legislature?
User avatar
Urbane
Buddha of the Board
Posts: 22742
Joined: Jul 8th, 2007, 7:41 pm

Re: the real majority

Post by Urbane »

    A_Britishcolumbian wrote:well, even if voter turnout was 52% that means not even a quarter of eligible british columbians chose the liberals. some victory.
    the true majority voice in this election again was the non-voter, will this group be properly represented in legislature?
How about some empty chairs to represent the non-voters?
GordonH
Grumpy Old Bleep
Posts: 33780
Joined: Oct 4th, 2008, 7:21 pm

Re: the real majority

Post by GordonH »

For Tuesday election their was 3,116,626 registered voters and 1,629,422 cast a ballot.
I don't give a damn whether people/posters like me or dislike me, I'm not on earth to win any popularity contests.
birdsarentreal.com
User avatar
Captain Awesome
Buddha of the Board
Posts: 24998
Joined: Jul 22nd, 2008, 5:06 pm

Re: the real majority

Post by Captain Awesome »

A_Britishcolumbian wrote:the true majority voice in this election again was the non-voter, will this group be properly represented in legislature?


You want to be represented - get out and vote.
Sarcasm is like a good game of chess. Most people don't know how to play chess.
User avatar
A_Britishcolumbian
Grand Pooh-bah
Posts: 2672
Joined: Jul 30th, 2010, 11:39 pm

Re: the real majority

Post by A_Britishcolumbian »

so captain awesome is one of those!
i suspect then that you believe christy and the liberals should ignore the 'wants' of everyone that did not vote liberal? they make up 55% of voters.
the largest group represented in the polls was that of those that chose not to vote, they outnumber the liberals and the ndp combined. non-voters are the clear majority. their concerns should be paramount for the new 'government'.
User avatar
Captain Awesome
Buddha of the Board
Posts: 24998
Joined: Jul 22nd, 2008, 5:06 pm

Re: the real majority

Post by Captain Awesome »

A_Britishcolumbian wrote:their concerns should be paramount for the new 'government'.


You can't represent somebody who is too lazy to voice their opinion.

PS: I didn't vote. But I'm not demanding to be represented. If I wanted to be represented, I'd vote.
Sarcasm is like a good game of chess. Most people don't know how to play chess.
User avatar
A_Britishcolumbian
Grand Pooh-bah
Posts: 2672
Joined: Jul 30th, 2010, 11:39 pm

Re: the real majority

Post by A_Britishcolumbian »

captain awesome, so very prejudiced of you.
i myself was not "too lazy" to vote. my majority are not all "too lazy".
the role of 'government' and elected members is to represent the constituents of their respective ridings, and some would argue, the needs and concerns of all british columbians.
i do not feel that past 'governments' have represented the clear majority to any significant degree, and further have taken their, for instance, paltry 22% support and called it a 'mandate'! ludicrous!
User avatar
Captain Awesome
Buddha of the Board
Posts: 24998
Joined: Jul 22nd, 2008, 5:06 pm

Re: the real majority

Post by Captain Awesome »

A_Britishcolumbian wrote:the role of 'government' and elected members is to represent the constituents of their respective ridings, and some would argue, the needs and concerns of all british columbians.


They can only represents those who wish to be represented.
Sarcasm is like a good game of chess. Most people don't know how to play chess.
User avatar
Glacier
The Pilgrim
Posts: 35873
Joined: Jul 6th, 2008, 10:41 pm

Re: the real majority

Post by Glacier »

It's actually impossible to represent the majority. Take any issue. eg. Should we continue to increase healthcare funding by 6% a year?
21% say, yes; 28% say it should be less, 17% say it should be more, and the rest (34%) have no opinion. The government has to pick what to do even though a majority of the population will not support the government's position - no matter which path they choose.
"No one has the right to apologize for something they did not do, and no one has the right to accept an apology if the wrong was not done to them."
- Douglas Murray
User avatar
A_Britishcolumbian
Grand Pooh-bah
Posts: 2672
Joined: Jul 30th, 2010, 11:39 pm

Re: the real majority

Post by A_Britishcolumbian »

CA, really!
you have already brought up "want", and now you claim people need to "wish" to be represented.
your prejudiced views i am guessing came from your education by Disney.
you are being so totally disrespectful of so many people right now.
wishing and wanting is so very opposite to the buddhist mindset, and voting at all is contrary to jehovah's witness' constitution.
much like the way of the guru granth, the majority has spoken in this election once again. will we be represented in legislature this time around?
User avatar
Urbane
Buddha of the Board
Posts: 22742
Joined: Jul 8th, 2007, 7:41 pm

Re: the real majority

Post by Urbane »

    Glacier wrote:It's actually impossible to represent the majority. Take any issue. eg. Should we continue to increase healthcare funding by 6% a year?
    21% say, yes; 28% say it should be less, 17% say it should be more, and the rest (34%) have no opinion. The government has to pick what to do even though a majority of the population will not support the government's position - no matter which path they choose.
Very good point. Also, given the level of accuracy we're seeing in various polls it's difficult to accurately determine public sentiment sometimes. By the way, I would say that those who didn't vote simply allowed those of us who did vote the say in who represents all of us. If you want a say in who represents you then you vote. If you don't want a say then don't. You can still go to your MLA with an issue or contact the government in some other way. It's not as if an MLA would ask if you voted before deciding to help you with an issue.
User avatar
Captain Awesome
Buddha of the Board
Posts: 24998
Joined: Jul 22nd, 2008, 5:06 pm

Re: the real majority

Post by Captain Awesome »

A_Britishcolumbian wrote:wishing and wanting is so very opposite to the buddhist mindset, and voting at all is contrary to jehovah's witness' constitution.


That explains why we don't have a Jehovah's Buddhists party.

A_Britishcolumbian wrote:the majority has spoken in this election once again. will we be represented in legislature this time around?


Chances are - no. Those who want representation voice their opinions.
Sarcasm is like a good game of chess. Most people don't know how to play chess.
Donald G
Buddha of the Board
Posts: 20156
Joined: Jan 29th, 2008, 8:42 pm

Re: the real majority

Post by Donald G »

One way of interpreting the voter turnout is that those who DID turn out to vote represented two votes; one actual vote and one vote by default. Since those who did vote showed the interest (and likely knowledge) to do so, perhaps one could draw the conclusion that the province is best represented if those with inadequate interest do NOT vote.
User avatar
fluffy
Admiral HMS Castanet
Posts: 25093
Joined: Jun 1st, 2006, 5:42 pm

Re: the real majority

Post by fluffy »

By choosing not to vote, non-voters are represented. Are they not in effect giving implied permission to those who do vote to act as their proxy?
Heal the sick, feed the hungry, care for the weakest among us, and always pray in private.
User avatar
A_Britishcolumbian
Grand Pooh-bah
Posts: 2672
Joined: Jul 30th, 2010, 11:39 pm

Re: the real majority

Post by A_Britishcolumbian »

i just returned from an unsuccessful search of bcliberals.com looking for their constitution.
funny people would even consider voting for a party that doesn't make their constitution readily available.

i had thought i would find a line in it somewhere stating that the libs would look out for the interests of all british coloumbians regardless of who they did or did not support in the election.

please post a link to the libs constitution if one exists.

CA, 'want' should have no part in any process.
Donald, suggesting JWs are ignorant is not very nice.
the Christian Heritage Party got a few votes, i suspect they will do much better next time.

Return to “Bickering Room”