Pierre Poilievre

Serryah

Hall of Fame Member
Dec 3, 2008
10,847
2,731
113
New Brunswick
This is why our electoral system must be changed. That a tiny region of one province can determine the future of the whole country is just wrong.

And what would be fair?

Sure we could try Rep by Pop, but sometimes that's not exactly fair either because higher populations would have more representations. Which then leaves 'a tiny region of one province' at the mercy of larger places all because people don't want a "city life".

I agree the system overall needs to be changed, but the how is the issue.
 

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
117,239
14,256
113
Low Earth Orbit
Seems like all the good things are found in low density population areas. Farms, mineral resources, hydro power among them. The head office in a higher density population area is a convenience thing and would never go on it's own if it didn't have the other.

Unfortunately those in the low density population areas rely on the high density population area to represent them in parliament where the gap continues to grow in the wrong direction.

I would definitely be pounding the highways of Western Canada if I were the Green Party given the area is so misrepresented. The only reason I say Green is because the party is already there (for the taking) and know of no other that could ramp up in time. Change the name to Western Bloc as soon as possible.
 

Taxslave2

Senate Member
Aug 13, 2022
5,057
2,842
113
And what would be fair?

Sure we could try Rep by Pop, but sometimes that's not exactly fair either because higher populations would have more representations. Which then leaves 'a tiny region of one province' at the mercy of larger places all because people don't want a "city life".

I agree the system overall needs to be changed, but the how is the issue.
Rep by Pop is what we have now. It doesn't work with the huge disparity in the size of electoral areas. There are rural ridings larger than entire cities. I have been watching what Fair Vote Canada is pushing as well, which is a transferable ballot. It also has problems, like giving seats to The Party for gaining a certain percentage of the vote. The idea is that every party has seats representative of their number of the total votes. Which completely bypasses the whole idea of voting for the best local rep, which makes it even harder for independents. I am tired of MPs and MLAs that bring the party line to the riding, instead of taking our concerns to the rulers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bob the dog

Taxslave2

Senate Member
Aug 13, 2022
5,057
2,842
113
Would you prefer that each person in the GTA & GVA each got two votes to your one? Something like that?
It is more like 10 or better to our 1 vote when size of the riding is compared. There are ridings bigger than the whole GTA, but they only get 1 vote in the house.
 

Taxslave2

Senate Member
Aug 13, 2022
5,057
2,842
113
The Liberals have stopped (within the last two weeks?) trying to out-Left the NDP, & are now trying to pretend they’re conservative for the next five weeks? Then what? What do they turn into April 29th?
Exactly what they are now. Corrupt, lying, crooks.
 

IdRatherBeSkiing

Satelitte Radio Addict
May 28, 2007
15,250
2,881
113
Toronto, ON
Rep by Pop is what we have now. It doesn't work with the huge disparity in the size of electoral areas. There are rural ridings larger than entire cities. I have been watching what Fair Vote Canada is pushing as well, which is a transferable ballot. It also has problems, like giving seats to The Party for gaining a certain percentage of the vote. The idea is that every party has seats representative of their number of the total votes. Which completely bypasses the whole idea of voting for the best local rep, which makes it even harder for independents. I am tired of MPs and MLAs that bring the party line to the riding, instead of taking our concerns to the rulers.
There is no way it is fair for one riding having 100,000 people having the same number of seats as a riding with 1 million people if you base it on geographical areas. I think a proportional representation system might be fairer. It was what TrueDope ran on in 2015 but he backed off when he found he would lose with it. But you would lose your local MP and it would be harder for parties to campaign because all the stuff that is done by the candidates now would need to be done by the party as a whole.
 

Serryah

Hall of Fame Member
Dec 3, 2008
10,847
2,731
113
New Brunswick
There is no way it is fair for one riding having 100,000 people having the same number of seats as a riding with 1 million people if you base it on geographical areas. I think a proportional representation system might be fairer. It was what TrueDope ran on in 2015 but he backed off when he found he would lose with it. But you would lose your local MP and it would be harder for parties to campaign because all the stuff that is done by the candidates now would need to be done by the party as a whole.

To clarify, I meant Proportional Rep, not Rep By Pop in my last post. Sorry 'bout that.

Back to the point - I think any system we would look at needs to consider that currently, regions of the country elect their MP not necessarily because it's the best person, but because of the party.

My region, for example, NEVER votes Blue in Federal elections, because of the huge French population we have and they will NOT vote Conservative unless the liberal MP really fucks up. And since the current one is Dominic LeBlanc, it's pretty guaranteed we'll go Liberal next election (his reputation but moreso his FAMILY having the history they do, and of course, he's French). Making any inroads in this riding is next to impossible for anyone but Liberals. We've had CLOSE races, but only once have we ever had someone not Liberal.



And we're not the only riding like this.

So when there's situations like this, you are pretty fucked with how to make voting 'fair'.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Taxslave2

IdRatherBeSkiing

Satelitte Radio Addict
May 28, 2007
15,250
2,881
113
Toronto, ON
To clarify, I meant Proportional Rep, not Rep By Pop in my last post. Sorry 'bout that.

Back to the point - I think any system we would look at needs to consider that currently, regions of the country elect their MP not necessarily because it's the best person, but because of the party.

My region, for example, NEVER votes Blue in Federal elections, because of the huge French population we have and they will NOT vote Conservative unless the liberal MP really fucks up. And since the current one is Dominic LeBlanc, it's pretty guaranteed we'll go Liberal next election (his reputation but moreso his FAMILY having the history they do, and of course, he's French). Making any inroads in this riding is next to impossible for anyone but Liberals. We've had CLOSE races, but only once have we ever had someone not Liberal.



And we're not the only riding like this.

So when there's situations like this, you are pretty fucked with how to make voting 'fair'.
I was responding to tax. But point taken. My riding is always Liberal. The MP is a bit of an ass probably because he knows that even with TrueDope in charge, he would be re-elected. The only thing that may change this is the ridings are being re-distributed in Toronto. We are going from 25 to 24 so I will be in a new riding this time. Not sure where in the old riding was the Liberal bastion but maybe I will be rid of it now and my vote will count.

I do vote for the local MP as well. I have not voted for my primary party because of their candidate before. I always have.a second choice.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Taxslave2

Serryah

Hall of Fame Member
Dec 3, 2008
10,847
2,731
113
New Brunswick
I was responding to tax. But point taken. My riding is always Liberal. The MP is a bit of an ass probably because he knows that even with TrueDope in charge, he would be re-elected. The only thing that may change this is the ridings are being re-distributed in Toronto. We are going from 25 to 24 so I will be in a new riding this time. Not sure where in the old riding was the Liberal bastion but maybe I will be rid of it now and my vote will count.

I do vote for the local MP as well. I have not voted for my primary party because of their candidate before. I always have.a second choice.

I was correcting myself for the initial post I made/comment to Tax where I brought up rep by pop. Since you used the right term, that's why I replied quoting you. Sorry if it got confusing.

Sadly even if they changed the ridings in NB, unless the one I live in is split between French and English, there's likely no chance of anyone but a Liberal being elected (maybe NDP or Green if they put up a good candidate, though I doubt even then).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Taxslave2

Taxslave2

Senate Member
Aug 13, 2022
5,057
2,842
113
There is no way it is fair for one riding having 100,000 people having the same number of seats as a riding with 1 million people if you base it on geographical areas.
Wouldn't need more seats, just a weighted vote, like they do in Regional district votes.
You won't find a riding with 1 million people anyway. All ridings have roughly the same number of people. It is the regional thing that fucks large rural ridings.When an area the size of Greater Toronto has 1 seat and GTA has 20? decisions get made by people uneffected by them.
The same thing happens provincially, on a smaller scale. The North half of Vancouver Island has 1 MLA. Victoria has 11 all by itself.
 

Taxslave2

Senate Member
Aug 13, 2022
5,057
2,842
113
To clarify, I meant Proportional Rep, not Rep By Pop in my last post. Sorry 'bout that.

Back to the point - I think any system we would look at needs to consider that currently, regions of the country elect their MP not necessarily because it's the best person, but because of the party.

My region, for example, NEVER votes Blue in Federal elections, because of the huge French population we have and they will NOT vote Conservative unless the liberal MP really fucks up. And since the current one is Dominic LeBlanc, it's pretty guaranteed we'll go Liberal next election (his reputation but moreso his FAMILY having the history they do, and of course, he's French). Making any inroads in this riding is next to impossible for anyone but Liberals. We've had CLOSE races, but only once have we ever had someone not Liberal.



And we're not the only riding like this.

So when there's situations like this, you are pretty fucked with how to make voting 'fair'.
This is where the Pro Rep people make their point. Sort of. The problem is, they relate it to "The Party", as if we are voting for a party, not the individual candidate. I would like to see more independents win, but the system is rigged against them. And naturally, all the parties work together to keep it this way.
I have voted independent before, because I that that was the best person to represent our area. Also voted for the Pirate party one time, because their candidate was the only one that told the truth at the all candidates meeting. When asked what they would do if elected, he said " We are going to lie, cheat, and steal from you, just like all the other parties".
 

IdRatherBeSkiing

Satelitte Radio Addict
May 28, 2007
15,250
2,881
113
Toronto, ON
Wouldn't need more seats, just a weighted vote, like they do in Regional district votes.
You won't find a riding with 1 million people anyway. All ridings have roughly the same number of people. It is the regional thing that fucks large rural ridings.When an area the size of Greater Toronto has 1 seat and GTA has 20? decisions get made by people uneffected by them.
The same thing happens provincially, on a smaller scale. The North half of Vancouver Island has 1 MLA. Victoria has 11 all by itself.
The reason Toronto has 24 seats (this election) is because it has more people. They should have more MPs than rural Alberta with only 1 riding with 1/24 of the population density. Otherwise too much will be decided by the rural people. They would get more vote.

This is why a proportional system may be an answer. Or a balanced EEE senate may alleviate the regional concerns.
 

pgs

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 29, 2008
28,512
8,118
113
B.C.
Tax Slave has a point , the wealth is often created in the less populated areas , fishing , mining , logging agriculture. The people in those remote areas live in a different reality from the heavily populated urban areas . To often those with no skin in the game are deciding on things they have little understanding of .
 
  • Like
Reactions: Taxslave2

IdRatherBeSkiing

Satelitte Radio Addict
May 28, 2007
15,250
2,881
113
Toronto, ON
Tax Slave has a point , the wealth is often created in the less populated areas , fishing , mining , logging agriculture. The people in those remote areas live in a different reality from the heavily populated urban areas . To often those with no skin in the game are deciding on things they have little understanding of .
By the same token, if you did give a more weighted vote to the remote area, why would people with no skin in the game be deciding on things they also have little understanding of? You can't move away from 1 person, 1 vote. But you can change how the vote is counted. Proportional representation is one solution. EEE senate is another. Moving some decisions to the provincial level is another.
 

Ron in Regina

"Voice of the West" Party
Apr 9, 2008
29,043
10,985
113
Regina, Saskatchewan
(YouTube & Pierre Poilievre 200 IQ Climate Change Solution)

It’s only day 3 or so of this campaign, so it’s not too late for Carney to jump on this as part of “his” policy platform. Meanwhile, the best indicator of future performance is past practice, it’s absurd to argue that our current Liberal government is in the best position to take on U.S. President Donald Trump in a tariff war…but look at the scoreboard?
1742962022456.jpeg
In reality, the Liberals in power pursued reckless policies they were warned would undermine our economy, yet they implemented them anyway.

That led directly to our current predicament of trying to counter Trump on tariffs while our economy is damaged and weak.

But don’t take our word for it — that’s what their current leader, Mark Carney, said.

During the English language Liberal leadership debate on Feb. 25, Carney explained Canada’s predicament in dealing with Trump today.

“I want to be clear about the quote ‘strength’ of our economy,” he said.

“Our economy over the last five years has been driven by a big increase in the labour force, which was largely because of a surge in immigration that is now trying to be controlled, and by government spending that grew over 9% year after year after year — twice the rate of growth of our economy.

Was Carney economically advising Trudeau over this period? Well…apparently, you bet your arse he was!! “So our economy was weak before we got to the point of these threats from President Trump.”
1742961707171.jpeg
Dramatically increasing immigration levels weakened Canada because it increased faster than economic growth, resulting in a decrease in inflation-adjusted gross domestic product (GDP) per person, a widely accepted measurement of a nation’s prosperity.

What happened was what the Liberal government was warned would happen in advance by its public servants. The cost of living spiked as did the price of housing and already beleaguered public services like health care became even worse, to the point where even then-prime minister Justin Trudeau had to admit his blunder.

Meanwhile, reckless government spending, far outpacing the growth rate of the Canadian economy during the Liberals’ years in power, further weakened our ability to take on Trump now.

It’s true that Carney correctly diagnosed the problem in hindsight, Monday morning quarterback style. Most people here on this thread right now could’ve told you this though, years ago, with the time and date stamped posts in these threads to back up what they’re saying. Seriously!!

But the idea that as a neophyte politician and prime minister, he’s going to fix this — while being led around by the nose by the same advisers to Trudeau who helped to create this mess, along with the same cabinet ministers who implemented it — is absurd.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Taxslave2

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
117,239
14,256
113
Low Earth Orbit
(YouTube & Pierre Poilievre 200 IQ Climate Change Solution)

It’s only day 3 or so of this campaign, so it’s not too late for Carney to jump on this as part of “his” policy platform. Meanwhile, the best indicator of future performance is past practice, it’s absurd to argue that our current Liberal government is in the best position to take on U.S. President Donald Trump in a tariff war…but look at the scoreboard?
View attachment 28332
In reality, the Liberals in power pursued reckless policies they were warned would undermine our economy, yet they implemented them anyway.

That led directly to our current predicament of trying to counter Trump on tariffs while our economy is damaged and weak.

But don’t take our word for it — that’s what their current leader, Mark Carney, said.

During the English language Liberal leadership debate on Feb. 25, Carney explained Canada’s predicament in dealing with Trump today.

“I want to be clear about the quote ‘strength’ of our economy,” he said.

“Our economy over the last five years has been driven by a big increase in the labour force, which was largely because of a surge in immigration that is now trying to be controlled, and by government spending that grew over 9% year after year after year — twice the rate of growth of our economy.

Was Carney economically advising Trudeau over this period? Well…apparently, you bet your arse he was!! “So our economy was weak before we got to the point of these threats from President Trump.”
View attachment 28331
Dramatically increasing immigration levels weakened Canada because it increased faster than economic growth, resulting in a decrease in inflation-adjusted gross domestic product (GDP) per person, a widely accepted measurement of a nation’s prosperity.

What happened was what the Liberal government was warned would happen in advance by its public servants. The cost of living spiked as did the price of housing and already beleaguered public services like health care became even worse, to the point where even then-prime minister Justin Trudeau had to admit his blunder.

Meanwhile, reckless government spending, far outpacing the growth rate of the Canadian economy during the Liberals’ years in power, further weakened our ability to take on Trump now.

It’s true that Carney correctly diagnosed the problem in hindsight, Monday morning quarterback style. Most people here on this thread right now could’ve told you this though, years ago, with the time and date stamped posts in these threads to back up what they’re saying. Seriously!!

But the idea that as a neophyte politician and prime minister, he’s going to fix this — while being led around by the nose by the same advisers to Trudeau who helped to create this mess, along with the same cabinet ministers who implemented it — is absurd.
Polls are weighted. There was no magic turn of fortune for the Liberals.
 

bob the dog

Council Member
Aug 14, 2020
1,770
1,254
113
It's more about attitude than policy imo. The whole laissez-faire thing has to go.

The only plan is to win the election