The real majority

[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?

[Urbane]

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]

For Tuesday election their was 3,116,626 registered voters and 1,629,422 cast a ballot.

[Captain Awesome]

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.

[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'.

[Captain Awesome]

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.

[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!

[Captain Awesome]

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.

[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.

[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?

[Urbane]

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.

[Captain Awesome]

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.

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.

[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.

[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?

[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.