tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12426618.post8273564870679490601..comments2023-08-03T07:33:41.442-07:00Comments on Idealistic Pragmatist: Why the status quo is REALLY scared of MMPIdealistic Pragmatisthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18296481430598981678noreply@blogger.comBlogger13125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12426618.post-63275761956487602442007-10-10T08:56:00.000-07:002007-10-10T08:56:00.000-07:00MSS,I wish I could vote today, too! Alas, I'm in ...MSS,<BR/><BR/>I wish I could vote today, too! Alas, I'm in Edmonton--about as close to them as I am to you.<BR/><BR/>Thanks for the corrections, by the way. They are always welcome!Idealistic Pragmatisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18296481430598981678noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12426618.post-80790911360510510502007-10-09T14:27:00.000-07:002007-10-09T14:27:00.000-07:00This is a very fine post. Wish I could vote in you...This is a very fine post. Wish I could vote in your referendum! (I plan to put up one or more posts on Ontario at Fruits & Votes later.)<BR/><BR/>One small addendum: Most governments in New Zealand since MMP have been minority coalition governments, not majority coalitions. And they have actually been far more stable than the majority coalition that was in power after the first MMP election.<BR/><BR/>There is a very important difference between minority governments in NZ under MMP and most minority governments in Canada (including the current federal government): The largest party and its various "support parties" in parliament have formal, public, written agreements, spelling out what they agree on and what they "agree to disagree" on. <BR/><BR/>Such agreements make things a lot clearer for voters than the situation you have in Canada, where Harper (or before him, Martin) makes ad-hoc deals throughout the parliamentary term with smaller parties or independents to try to stay in power, but has no ongoing commitments to keep the PM accountable.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12426618.post-74927820919040481842007-10-01T16:23:00.000-07:002007-10-01T16:23:00.000-07:00Thanks for this! Great stuff. I will link to it to...Thanks for this! Great stuff. I will link to it tomorrow.laura khttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05524593142290489958noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12426618.post-61534834125749405892007-09-30T09:46:00.000-07:002007-09-30T09:46:00.000-07:00Matthew,I usually ignore comments that have little...Matthew,<BR/><BR/>I usually ignore comments that have little to nothing to do with my post, but I'm going to make an exception for this one.<BR/><BR/>First, your statement that under MMP, "the emphasis on voting for a party rather than an individual." I don't really understand why you'd see it that way, honestly. The fact is that every political science study I've looked at about this suggests that Canadians <I>currently</I> cast their single available vote almost <I>exclusively</I> based on party. This is unfortunate, but the current system forces it on us. MMP, on the other hand, teases apart the duelling forces of voting for a local representative and voting for a party, and allows us to do <I>both</I>. This by no means moves us <I>closer</I> to voting <I>only</I> for a party--in fact, it would do the opposite by forcing us to think NOT just about the party (as the studies indicate that we currently tend to do), but also and <I>separately</I> about the individual. This, frankly, is the main reason why I like some variant of MMP better than even the other proportional options--it not only makes the result proportional, it simply reflects the way Canadians think about their vote better than either the current system or STV.<BR/><BR/>And second, I don't quite get your comment on how votes aren't "wasted" under FPTP, either. Fine, you don't like that word; don't use it. But all it really means is that the votes of most people in most ridings don't have their votes count toward electing anyone. Unless you're voting for the winner in your riding, it doesn't matter to the outcome whether you stay at home or go to vote. In the last federal election in my riding, for example, <A HREF="http://www.cbc.ca/canadavotes/riding/258/" REL="nofollow">almost 60% of the votes didn't count</A>. Now, you can call that what you want, but I don't think calling those votes "wasted" is too farfetched. And I would prefer a system like MMP in which almost all votes count toward electing someone.Idealistic Pragmatisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18296481430598981678noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12426618.post-46363843892348661422007-09-30T09:29:00.000-07:002007-09-30T09:29:00.000-07:00I'm pretty tired of supporters of MMP trying to ar...I'm pretty tired of supporters of MMP trying to argue that under the current voting system votes for a losing party are "wasted" or "worthless" or some variation. <BR/><BR/>Every vote gets counted just the same. Everyone gets one vote. Every vote is equal to every other vote. Any candidate is electable if he/she convinces enough voters to vote for him/her.<BR/><BR/>Just because in any given riding the 150 Green votes are drowned out by 15,000 Liberal or Conservative votes doesn't make the Green votes worthless - it just indicates the opinions of the Green voters are unpopular. If the Conservative candidate can convince 15,000 people to voter for her, why can't the Green candidate?<BR/><BR/>Let me clear. I'm not a member of any party and I don't fear giving the Greens or anyone else they're two or three pity seats.<BR/><BR/>What I don't like about MMP and any proportional representation system is the emphasis on voting for a party rather than an individual.<BR/><BR/>Our system is designed for individual citizens to elect individual representatives not party monkeys. The problem with FPTP is that MPP go to the legislature and are beholden to their parties. MMP is only going to exacerbate this problem.<BR/><BR/>The reform that is needed is reform in the culture of the legislature to give the individual MPP more power and individual freedom, regardless of the party they are elected from. Voting for MMP is a move toward further voting on the basis of party rather than for an individual.Matthewhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07862383134027791438noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12426618.post-7083041187208039532007-09-28T13:53:00.000-07:002007-09-28T13:53:00.000-07:00Excellent post. I think they fear this more than a...Excellent post. I think they fear this more than anything. The scare tactics about extremists, and minority governments, and too many elections and blahdditty blah revolve around this fear of having to (gulp) cooperate. Perhaps the politicians could be sent to remedial kindergarten?Red Jennyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07720489192755635941noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12426618.post-71464052487858674052007-09-28T05:22:00.000-07:002007-09-28T05:22:00.000-07:00Mark,Okay, I'll have a look over there and figure ...Mark,<BR/><BR/>Okay, I'll have a look over there and figure out how to do it. Do you have any other suggestions for posts you'd like me to crosspost over there?<BR/><BR/>Erik,<BR/><BR/><I>I start to see why the upper echelons of the major parties are keeping so quiet on the issue; they've probably been told to do so by the same, paid, "political strategists".</I><BR/><BR/>Oh, I think they're plenty scared enough on their own. Their jobs probably wouldn't change quite as much as the jobs of the backroom people, but if Ontario had MMP, the system would reward and punish different kinds of rhetoric, and different kinds of people skills. I actually feel for them--it's not often that someone's entire job could get changed out from under them overnight, and they have almost no input into whether or not it happens.Idealistic Pragmatisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18296481430598981678noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12426618.post-37827431973252130882007-09-27T23:14:00.000-07:002007-09-27T23:14:00.000-07:00Excellent post! Here are my favourites:"The party ...Excellent post! Here are my favourites:<BR/><BR/><I>"The party in government has to spend all its time trying to make the other guys look so bad" </I><BR/><BR/>Indeed, that's the ONLY kind of politics most Canadians know. If Canadians knew the possibilities of a cooperative type of government (multi-party), I'm convinced that most people would vote for this improvement without hesitating.<BR/><BR/><I>"The result of this process is not only a stable governing body that was chosen by a majority of the voters, but a <B>creative</B> governing body that <B>by necessity </B>has to take ideas from a number of different viewpoints instead of refusing to look outside of their narrow box."</I><BR/><BR/>Precisely, necessity is the mother of invention. <BR/><BR/><I>"If Ontario were to switch to MMP, [...] then political leaders would have to start concentrating more on policy rather than simply on good rhetoric and showmanship."</I><BR/><BR/>You're right again. I start to see why the upper echelons of the major parties are keeping so quiet on the issue; they've probably been told to do so by the same, paid, "political strategists". <BR/><BR/><I>"I have always said that [.. ]a voting system that makes every vote count in a fair and straightforward way simply makes more sense than the one we have right now."</I><BR/><BR/>Bravo!Erikhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15012567844101960274noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12426618.post-84547183397890731582007-09-27T22:10:00.000-07:002007-09-27T22:10:00.000-07:00Great post, IP. You should cross-post this to the ...Great post, IP. You should cross-post this to the Vote for MMP site, we need posts to slide the No MMP trolls' posts down the blogroll on the front page.<BR/><BR/>And on Tory, I only hope the media will give the same play to his latest comments as they had to his previous ones about "appointed" list members.Mark Greenanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03937027367953070283noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12426618.post-22047429501241398432007-09-27T21:54:00.000-07:002007-09-27T21:54:00.000-07:00To be honest, my main motivation for wanting it to...To be honest, my main motivation for wanting it to pass is the hope that it will percolate up to the federal level. I'm not persuaded that MMP (or any other PR system) is ideal, but it would help to reduce the corrosive regional blocs that are a blight on Canadian politics. Right now, our political system is actively contributing to the possible breakup of our country and that needs to stop.Kevin Brennanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05436497363925902795noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12426618.post-7024650670739228392007-09-27T20:24:00.000-07:002007-09-27T20:24:00.000-07:00Thanks for the correction! It's not really an ans...Thanks for the correction! It's not <I>really</I> an answer to the question, though I suppose it does deprive him of that talking point.Idealistic Pragmatisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18296481430598981678noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12426618.post-62888565144558826742007-09-27T17:56:00.000-07:002007-09-27T17:56:00.000-07:00Scott beat me to it, but I wanted a plug too. :DJ...Scott beat me to it, but I wanted a plug too. :D<BR/><BR/><A HREF="http://conservativesformmp.blogspot.com/2007/09/john-tory-comments-on-developing-list.html" REL="nofollow">John Tory : Comments on Developing List Candidates</A>Jim (Progressive Right)https://www.blogger.com/profile/02023879211848227007noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12426618.post-3182835937023561392007-09-27T16:19:00.000-07:002007-09-27T16:19:00.000-07:00Actually, John Tory has responded today... as I sa...Actually, John Tory has responded today... as I said, <A HREF="http://scottdiatribe.gluemeat.com/2007/09/27/its-a-start/" REL="nofollow">it's a start</A>.Oxford County Liberalshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12181314055142726735noreply@blogger.com