News   May 01, 2024
Four-Tower Complex North of Finch Station Grows in Resubmission
 629     0 
News   May 01, 2024
TMU Urban and Regional Planning Alumni Celebrate 25th Annual Spring Reception at Little Canada
 242     0 
News   May 01, 2024
Ballin' Out for Charity: Toronto's Real Estate Basketball Event Scores Big for Youth Empowerment
 322     0 

MMP: How do you intend to vote?

How are you planning to vote?

  • Total voters
    56
Mixed Member for me. I see no reason why 40% of Conservative or Liberal voters should dictate the formation of a government.
 
Supermajority followed with 50% in 64 out of 103 ridings coupled with the fact that very little media attention is paid to it so far makes it highly unlikely. I wish I could be more positive about it.
 
I was seriously considering voting for MMP when I thought that it was simply a completely separate process for riding MPPs and the list MPPs. I had no idea that those 39 list MPPs would be used to approximate the proportional vote as much as possible. I certainly don't think that perpetual minority government with the power held by a handful of small parties is a good thing, and such a system wouldn't even allow a certain number of seats to be guaranteed by each of the parties to star candidates. I'll definitely be voting no.
 
^Agree, not thrilled with the present system, but this version of MMP does not impress me at all. Voting against.
 
perpetual minority government
Click to expand...
Correction: perpetual coalition governments where the small parties actually have some say. Which is what almost every democracy in the world has, BTW. A system where the popular vote is reflected accurately in the legislature is a huge improvement over the archaic system we have now, IMO. I'm voting for MMP.
 
If parties have members in the House or in Queens Park, they "have a say."
 
MisterF said:
Correction: perpetual coalition governments where the small parties actually have some say. Which is what almost every democracy in the world has, BTW. A system where the popular vote is reflected accurately in the legislature is a huge improvement over the archaic system we have now, IMO. I'm voting for MMP.
Click to expand...

Where parties who get 3% of the vote can hold the whole government of the province hostage? That's what happens in Israel and Italy, and it's a disaster. I don't want my government having to make deals with the Christian Heritage party to get its legislation through.
 
unimaginative2 said:
Where parties who get 3% of the vote can hold the whole government of the province hostage? That's what happens in Israel and Italy, and it's a disaster. I don't want my government having to make deals with the Christian Heritage party to get its legislation through.
Click to expand...

it can realistically get that bad?

i thought MMP had an upside in that you can vote for your local guy without worrying about voting in his leader.

wouldn't the MMP system also take away the fear mongering - forcing you to vote for a local guy you don't like in order to vote in power the lesser of two evils?


i'm having a confusing time understanding the downside. can someone create a scenario with examples demonstrating the CON of MMP?
 
i don't fringing commies and bible lovers in the house of commons to be represented.
 
Prometheus: Let's say the Liberals and NDP together get 48% of the vote, the Tories get 49%, and Christian Heritage gets the minimum 3%. If the Tories wanted to implement something, it could well be the Christian Heritage party that puts it over the top. That's just one of many possible and in fact quite probable scenarios, when you consider that 48% is exactly the percentage of the vote that the Liberals got last time. Just one looney party to put them over the top! You can imagine what such a party would ask for in return.

That's been the situation for years in Israel, for example, where the tiny settler and religious parties are needed to put the major parties over the top into majority territory.
 
unimaginative2 said:
Prometheus: Let's say the Liberals and NDP together get 48% of the vote, the Tories get 49%, and Christian Heritage gets the minimum 3%. If the Tories wanted to implement something, it could well be the Christian Heritage party that puts it over the top. That's just one of many possible and in fact quite probable scenarios, when you consider that 48% is exactly the percentage of the vote that the Liberals got last time. Just one looney party to put them over the top! You can imagine what such a party would ask for in return.

That's been the situation for years in Israel, for example, where the tiny settler and religious parties are needed to put the major parties over the top into majority territory.
Click to expand...


when you talk about percentage, are you talking about percentage of seats or the vote?

i assume you're talking about the vote percentage. i was under the impression that the only change would be a vote for premier & a vote for local mpp. so this is not the case? there's more to it?
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top