Don't forget- that piece of "arctic tundra" may comprise 300,000 square miles and is sitting on more resources than the entire city of Toronto. While it's important to tie electoral strength to population, population shouldn't be the sole factor. NU, N.W.T. and Yukon comprise half the area of Canada but account for less than 1% of the seats! I don't think that's right. Our entire frontier with Russia is located there, not to mention an entire ocean.
So land should be voting rather than voters? How will this 300,000 square miles vote? And if you say the people on this land vote that means people who live there have a more valuable vote than people who live elsewhere. 1 person, 1 vote. Any non-stupid voting system will start with that premise.
Born ain't got nothing to do with it.
When asked whether he thought Canada was "better served when there are more Quebecers in charge than Albertans," Trudeau replied, "I'm a Liberal, so of course I think so, yes. Certainly when we look at the great prime ministers of the 20th century, those that really stood the test of time, they were MPs from Quebec. There was Trudeau, there was Mulroney, there was Chrétien, there was Paul Martin. We have a role. This country, Canada, it belongs to us."
"Start" could be an operative word. Would a combination of population and land area work? I would guess the reverse of that is the formula in P.E.I.
So land should be voting rather than voters? How will this 300,000 square miles vote? And if you say the people on this land vote that means people who live there have a more valuable vote than people who live elsewhere. 1 person, 1 vote. Any non-stupid voting system will start with that premise.
Most people look at the leader and vote for the local candidate based on the platform that the leader communicates.
That's why we need to move to proportional representation.
The hell with voting, lets go with something reliable
like coin tosses
RIGHT 50% of the time!!!
Oh Joy!...can you imagine!
Land area is irrelevant. Land does not vote.
Dunno, is Brazeau available ?
Maybe you should lay off the crack, Bubbles.
Except when it's Hillary v Bernie.
Then you win 100% of the time.![]()
That only works when the population is more or less equal. Also we are not talking about changing how our representatives get elected, only how their power in the commons is applied. WE have a big divide between city and rural areas and rural areas do not have the representation required to have their needs delt with.
Many regional districts have weighted votes to cut down on the number of people at the table so it is not much different.
..and there is Mental Floss batting (and PUBLISHED forever on the internets!) ZERO
how does that feel?
That's when you utilize the "toss" part of "coin toss"
and then you get to keep the coin.
ArtHILLARY, lol
get it?
(bern is what you do to the match that lights the fuse)
Does the land produce more wealth then fields, farms, villages, towns, suburbs, or downtowns?
Not having the vote power allows corporations to rule as special interests in those far (from Ottawa) lands...where there is no one to hear you scream...a lot of people suffer because of that.
The five worst in history.