Only 99 days

The primary goal of this site is to provide mature, meaningful discussion about the Vancouver Canucks. However, we all need a break some time so this forum is basically for anything off-topic, off the wall, or to just get something off your chest! This forum is named after poster Creeper, who passed away in July of 2011 and was a long time member of the Canucks message board community.

Moderator: Referees

User avatar
Topper
CC Legend
Posts: 9916
Joined: Wed Sep 15, 2004 8:11 pm
Location: Earth, most days.

Re: Only 99 days

Post by Topper » Tue Oct 23, 2018 10:14 pm

Per wrote:
Tue Oct 23, 2018 9:56 pm
Topper wrote:
Tue Oct 23, 2018 2:53 pm
First Past the Post or Proportional Representation

I believe in being an informed voter and making an informed choice so I have looked at both side of the debate, but the most telling info comes the official Elections BC publication explaining the systems.

Here is where my mind was made up.

"If a proportional representation voting system is adopted, the government has said that after the referendum:
* a legislative committee will determine how some aspects of the new system will work

* an independent electoral boundary commission will determine the number and boundaries of electoral districts and regions represented in the legislature.

* the total number of Members of the Legislative Assembly in the legislature will be between 87 and 95 (currently there are 87)
"

In other words, if you vote for proportional representation, you have no idea what you are voting for. The system will be altered as none of the three choices have been finalized. The size, shape and makeup of ridings will change. The number of representatives will change.

You have no idea what you are voting for if you vote for Proportional Representation.
Not taking sides; there are pros and cons with both systems, but it is only logical that ridings must change if you switch to a proportional system. In a first past the post system, each riding elects one representative. In a proportional system each riding elects several representatives. Thus the ridings in the proportional system must be much larger, unless you want to increase the number of representatives.
But leave the mysterious gerrymandering til after the vote?
Over the Internet, you can pretend to be anyone or anything.

I'm amazed that so many people choose to be complete twats.

User avatar
5thhorseman
CC Hall of Fan Member
Posts: 1111
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:04 pm

Re: Only 99 days

Post by 5thhorseman » Tue Oct 23, 2018 10:55 pm

Topper wrote:
Tue Oct 23, 2018 10:14 pm
Per wrote:
Tue Oct 23, 2018 9:56 pm
Topper wrote:
Tue Oct 23, 2018 2:53 pm
First Past the Post or Proportional Representation

I believe in being an informed voter and making an informed choice so I have looked at both side of the debate, but the most telling info comes the official Elections BC publication explaining the systems.

Here is where my mind was made up.

"If a proportional representation voting system is adopted, the government has said that after the referendum:
* a legislative committee will determine how some aspects of the new system will work

* an independent electoral boundary commission will determine the number and boundaries of electoral districts and regions represented in the legislature.

* the total number of Members of the Legislative Assembly in the legislature will be between 87 and 95 (currently there are 87)
"

In other words, if you vote for proportional representation, you have no idea what you are voting for. The system will be altered as none of the three choices have been finalized. The size, shape and makeup of ridings will change. The number of representatives will change.

You have no idea what you are voting for if you vote for Proportional Representation.
Not taking sides; there are pros and cons with both systems, but it is only logical that ridings must change if you switch to a proportional system. In a first past the post system, each riding elects one representative. In a proportional system each riding elects several representatives. Thus the ridings in the proportional system must be much larger, unless you want to increase the number of representatives.
But leave the mysterious gerrymandering til after the vote?
Gerrymandering is not unique to proportional representation. But thanks for the distraction.

User avatar
Topper
CC Legend
Posts: 9916
Joined: Wed Sep 15, 2004 8:11 pm
Location: Earth, most days.

Re: Only 99 days

Post by Topper » Sun Oct 28, 2018 3:57 pm

LOL

NDP Ministers can not even explain PR.

https://globalnews.ca/news/4603711/im-n ... NKvWkkk5ls
Over the Internet, you can pretend to be anyone or anything.

I'm amazed that so many people choose to be complete twats.

User avatar
Per
CC Legend
Posts: 3678
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 7:45 am

Re: Only 99 days

Post by Per » Tue Oct 30, 2018 3:33 am

Topper wrote:
Tue Oct 23, 2018 10:14 pm
Per wrote:
Tue Oct 23, 2018 9:56 pm
Topper wrote:
Tue Oct 23, 2018 2:53 pm
First Past the Post or Proportional Representation

I believe in being an informed voter and making an informed choice so I have looked at both side of the debate, but the most telling info comes the official Elections BC publication explaining the systems.

Here is where my mind was made up.

"If a proportional representation voting system is adopted, the government has said that after the referendum:
* a legislative committee will determine how some aspects of the new system will work

* an independent electoral boundary commission will determine the number and boundaries of electoral districts and regions represented in the legislature.

* the total number of Members of the Legislative Assembly in the legislature will be between 87 and 95 (currently there are 87)
"

In other words, if you vote for proportional representation, you have no idea what you are voting for. The system will be altered as none of the three choices have been finalized. The size, shape and makeup of ridings will change. The number of representatives will change.

You have no idea what you are voting for if you vote for Proportional Representation.
Not taking sides; there are pros and cons with both systems, but it is only logical that ridings must change if you switch to a proportional system. In a first past the post system, each riding elects one representative. In a proportional system each riding elects several representatives. Thus the ridings in the proportional system must be much larger, unless you want to increase the number of representatives.
But leave the mysterious gerrymandering til after the vote?
Gerrymandering doesn't really matter in a proportional system, as it is meant to create a number of representatives as close to the percentage of votes as possible. Here's how we do it in Sweden:
How the seats are distributed in the Riksdag
The Swedish electoral system is a proportional one. This means that the number of seats any one party obtains in the Riksdag is proportional to the number of votes the party received in the election. There are 349 seats in the Riksdag altogether. Once the county administrative boards have counted the votes, the seats should be distributed as fairly as possible among the parties.

Threshold rule for small parties

Any one particular party must receive at least 4 per cent of the votes to be assigned a seat. This results in there being fewer small parties in the Riksdag. Any party receiving at least 12 per cent of the votes in any one constituency can participate in the allocation of seats in that particular constituency.

Seats are distributed in several steps

The 349 seats consist of 310 fixed constituency seats and 39 adjustment seats. The number of fixed constituency seats in every constituency is based on the number of people eligible to vote in the constituency. The distribution of these seats reflects the election results in each constituency.

The Election Authority allocates the fixed seats among the parties using a method known as the adjusted odd numbers method. In broad terms, the method allows the number of votes for each party to be divided by a series of numbers until all of the 310 seats are allocated.

The purpose of the 39 adjustment seats is to make sure that the distribution of seats between the parties over the whole country should be as proportional in relation to the number of votes as possible. The whole country is viewed as it were a single constituency and is then compared with the distribution of votes in the 29 constituencies. The adjustment seats are allocated first according to party and then according to constituency.
http://www.riksdagen.se/en/how-the-riks ... e-riksdag/

The adjustment seats are there to offset any effects of gerrymandering.

Thus gerrymandering is a problem unique to FPTP systems, and one of the strongest arguments for proportional systems is exactly that, that it renders gerrymandering obsolete.

The drawback is that it makes the direct connection to the voters weaker than in a FPTP system, as there are larger districts/ridings and multiple representatives from each riding/district, and that it creates weaker governments.

The latter can be discussed though, if it is a pro or a con... if you do not want your government to be too strong, and if you prefer things to evolve slowly through compromises rather than rock back and forth as two opposing parties take turns having abolute power, the weaker coalition governments might be tempting. :look:
Whatever you do, always give 100 %!
Except when donating blood.

User avatar
Topper
CC Legend
Posts: 9916
Joined: Wed Sep 15, 2004 8:11 pm
Location: Earth, most days.

Re: Only 99 days

Post by Topper » Tue Oct 30, 2018 8:14 am

BC is voting on two questions.
1 - PR of FPTP
2 - Rank the three proposed methods of PR

2 of the 3 are not used anywhere in the world.

The electoral maps for any of the PR options have not been drawn, nor has the number of ridings been determined. Those are to be decided after the vote.
Over the Internet, you can pretend to be anyone or anything.

I'm amazed that so many people choose to be complete twats.

User avatar
Blob Mckenzie
CC Legend
Posts: 11540
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2004 12:34 pm
Location: Oakalla

Re: Only 99 days

Post by Blob Mckenzie » Tue Oct 30, 2018 6:34 pm

Do the Liberals have a chance in that Nanaimo byelction?
TRY TO FOCUS ON HOW MY ASS TASTES IN ONE YEAR

User avatar
Reefer2
MVP
MVP
Posts: 3992
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2012 8:47 am

Re: Only 99 days

Post by Reefer2 » Tue Oct 30, 2018 7:20 pm

Blob Mckenzie wrote:
Tue Oct 30, 2018 6:34 pm
Do the Liberals have a chance in that Nanaimo byelction?
Been NDP strong hold for years so probably not.

User avatar
Reefer2
MVP
MVP
Posts: 3992
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2012 8:47 am

Re: Only 99 days

Post by Reefer2 » Mon Nov 05, 2018 5:06 pm


User avatar
5thhorseman
CC Hall of Fan Member
Posts: 1111
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:04 pm

Re: Only 99 days

Post by 5thhorseman » Mon Nov 05, 2018 7:00 pm

Reefer2 wrote:
Mon Nov 05, 2018 5:06 pm
Good reason to vote NO

https://vancouversun.com/opinion/op-ed/ ... t-the-post
Really Reef? It's just a fluffy opinion piece. If they really wanted to make a point about stability of governments under different electoral systems, the writers should have presented something more unbiased, such as stats that compared all countries in a PR system vs. those in FPTP, instead of just cherry-picking the Italians.

Not saying this is the final word on the matter, but even a simple google search finds different opinion in Wikepedia:
The opponents of PR also contend that coalition governments created under PR are less stable, and elections are more frequent. Italy is an often-cited example with many governments composed of many different coalition partners. However, Italy has had an unusual and complicated mix of FPTP and PR since 1993, so it is not an appropriate candidate for measuring the stability of PR.

User avatar
Topper
CC Legend
Posts: 9916
Joined: Wed Sep 15, 2004 8:11 pm
Location: Earth, most days.

Re: Only 99 days

Post by Topper » Mon Nov 05, 2018 7:23 pm

How about comparing a system of PR that we are being asked to vote on vs FPTP.

Oh yeah, they can't. Two of the ideas we are being asked to vote on are not used anywhere.

Then there are the minor details and fine print still to be made up. You know, just little things like how many MLA's there will be and what the electoral map will look like. Maybe even definitions of Rural and Urban.
Over the Internet, you can pretend to be anyone or anything.

I'm amazed that so many people choose to be complete twats.

User avatar
Aaronp18
MVP
MVP
Posts: 2910
Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2011 10:36 pm

Re: Only 99 days

Post by Aaronp18 » Mon Nov 05, 2018 9:54 pm

5thhorseman wrote:
Mon Nov 05, 2018 7:00 pm
Reefer2 wrote:
Mon Nov 05, 2018 5:06 pm
Good reason to vote NO

https://vancouversun.com/opinion/op-ed/ ... t-the-post
Really Reef? It's just a fluffy opinion piece. If they really wanted to make a point about stability of governments under different electoral systems, the writers should have presented something more unbiased, such as stats that compared all countries in a PR system vs. those in FPTP, instead of just cherry-picking the Italians.

Not saying this is the final word on the matter, but even a simple google search finds different opinion in Wikepedia:
The opponents of PR also contend that coalition governments created under PR are less stable, and elections are more frequent. Italy is an often-cited example with many governments composed of many different coalition partners. However, Italy has had an unusual and complicated mix of FPTP and PR since 1993, so it is not an appropriate candidate for measuring the stability of PR.
Wasn't Reef implying its a good reason to vote NO on Proportional Representation?

User avatar
Reefer2
MVP
MVP
Posts: 3992
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2012 8:47 am

Re: Only 99 days

Post by Reefer2 » Mon Nov 05, 2018 10:21 pm

Aaronp18 wrote:
Mon Nov 05, 2018 9:54 pm
5thhorseman wrote:
Mon Nov 05, 2018 7:00 pm
Reefer2 wrote:
Mon Nov 05, 2018 5:06 pm
Good reason to vote NO

https://vancouversun.com/opinion/op-ed/ ... t-the-post
Really Reef? It's just a fluffy opinion piece. If they really wanted to make a point about stability of governments under different electoral systems, the writers should have presented something more unbiased, such as stats that compared all countries in a PR system vs. those in FPTP, instead of just cherry-picking the Italians.

Not saying this is the final word on the matter, but even a simple google search finds different opinion in Wikepedia:
The opponents of PR also contend that coalition governments created under PR are less stable, and elections are more frequent. Italy is an often-cited example with many governments composed of many different coalition partners. However, Italy has had an unusual and complicated mix of FPTP and PR since 1993, so it is not an appropriate candidate for measuring the stability of PR.
Wasn't Reef implying its a good reason to vote NO on Proportional Representation?
Yes, should of been clearer.

Don’t like fringe groups holding any power.

User avatar
Per
CC Legend
Posts: 3678
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 7:45 am

Re: Only 99 days

Post by Per » Mon Nov 05, 2018 10:53 pm

Aaronp18 wrote:
Mon Nov 05, 2018 9:54 pm
5thhorseman wrote:
Mon Nov 05, 2018 7:00 pm
Reefer2 wrote:
Mon Nov 05, 2018 5:06 pm
Good reason to vote NO

https://vancouversun.com/opinion/op-ed/ ... t-the-post
Really Reef? It's just a fluffy opinion piece. If they really wanted to make a point about stability of governments under different electoral systems, the writers should have presented something more unbiased, such as stats that compared all countries in a PR system vs. those in FPTP, instead of just cherry-picking the Italians.

Not saying this is the final word on the matter, but even a simple google search finds different opinion in Wikepedia:
The opponents of PR also contend that coalition governments created under PR are less stable, and elections are more frequent. Italy is an often-cited example with many governments composed of many different coalition partners. However, Italy has had an unusual and complicated mix of FPTP and PR since 1993, so it is not an appropriate candidate for measuring the stability of PR.
Wasn't Reef implying its a good reason to vote NO on Proportional Representation?
Yes, he was. And then 5th pointed out the article was crap.

5th did not offer up an opinion on the vote itself, but went on to explain that the article was heavily biased, cherry picking examples, and no good basis for how you should decide to vote.
Whatever you do, always give 100 %!
Except when donating blood.

User avatar
5thhorseman
CC Hall of Fan Member
Posts: 1111
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:04 pm

Re: Only 99 days

Post by 5thhorseman » Tue Nov 06, 2018 7:52 am

Per wrote:
Mon Nov 05, 2018 10:53 pm
Aaronp18 wrote:
Mon Nov 05, 2018 9:54 pm
5thhorseman wrote:
Mon Nov 05, 2018 7:00 pm
Reefer2 wrote:
Mon Nov 05, 2018 5:06 pm
Good reason to vote NO

https://vancouversun.com/opinion/op-ed/ ... t-the-post
Really Reef? It's just a fluffy opinion piece. If they really wanted to make a point about stability of governments under different electoral systems, the writers should have presented something more unbiased, such as stats that compared all countries in a PR system vs. those in FPTP, instead of just cherry-picking the Italians.

Not saying this is the final word on the matter, but even a simple google search finds different opinion in Wikepedia:
The opponents of PR also contend that coalition governments created under PR are less stable, and elections are more frequent. Italy is an often-cited example with many governments composed of many different coalition partners. However, Italy has had an unusual and complicated mix of FPTP and PR since 1993, so it is not an appropriate candidate for measuring the stability of PR.
Wasn't Reef implying its a good reason to vote NO on Proportional Representation?
Yes, he was. And then 5th pointed out the article was crap.

5th did not offer up an opinion on the vote itself, but went on to explain that the article was heavily biased, cherry picking examples, and no good basis for how you should decide to vote.
Exactly. The article basically argues "the Italians tried PR and it didn't work, so it's no good". It's such a lame-ass argument that even Wikepedia has it documented as a lame-ass argument!

User avatar
Topper
CC Legend
Posts: 9916
Joined: Wed Sep 15, 2004 8:11 pm
Location: Earth, most days.

Re: Only 99 days

Post by Topper » Wed Nov 07, 2018 1:14 pm

Proportional Representation is the participation trophy of Democracy.
Over the Internet, you can pretend to be anyone or anything.

I'm amazed that so many people choose to be complete twats.

Post Reply