You don’t actually know how many people support these parties since everyone is forced to strategically vote and its to harder to run motivated candidates when they don’t get properly rewarded for their efforts since most of the votes do not actually determine the winner just the one with the most votes. So a person could win a seat only securing 10% of the vote if all the rest of votes went to the 20 other candidates. How is that fair when the other candidates did a better job appealing to the 90% majority?

Also NDP rn has a minority gov anyway so they might be forced by the Greens to try something.

They actually have a razor thin majority.

What really pisses me off is that we had a referendum on this in 2018 and 61% voted for the current FPP system.

Referendums are designed to fail as fearmongering is very powerful especially when the rich can afford all the political advertisements.

95% of countries that got proportional representation did so through multiparty agreements.

[–] khar21@lemmy.ca 0 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (4 children)

You don’t actually know how many people support these parties since everyone

Sure, but I know my friend, the only thing he's not is a communist or fascist that leaves him open to center-right, center, center-left, and left. Almost non of those meet that description.

They actually have a razor thin majority.

Yeah I forgot, but after giving one to speaker position, they need a green party vote.

95% of countries that got proportional representation did so through multiparty agreements.

I agree, and I support it, but if it does happen, the opposition is going to go crazy because even though we pretend to be better, we're really about as stupid as the US. We just have better systems.

[–] Sunshine@piefed.social 0 points 1 month ago (3 children)

Sure, but I know my friend, the only thing he's not is a communist or fascist that leaves him open to center-right, center, center-left, and left. Almost non of those meet that description.

There are literally six choices apart from the big 2 that meet that description that’s 54% of them, you didn’t actually look at the choices.

Yeah I forgot, but after giving one to speaker position, they need a green party vote.

They do not since the speaker can use their vote to break a tie.

[–] khar21@lemmy.ca 0 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

There are literally six choices apart from the big 2 that meet that description that’s 54% of them, you didn’t actually look at the choices.

Afaik only 5 of them are non-extremist, BC Strong is extremist, "Freedom Party of British Columbia" is also extremist, "Party of Citizens Who Have Decided To Think For Ourselves & Be Our Own Politicians" also sounds extremist af.
I said our districts didn't have any of those.

You don’t actually know how many people support these parties since everyone is forced to strategically vote

That was mainly countering this, my point was that I know his views and positions on individual issues.

Also, sure the NDP has a one seat majority, but they still signed a cooporation agreement with the greens because a 1 seat majority leaves them vulnerable af.

[–] Sunshine@piefed.social 0 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

That was mainly countering this, my point was that I know his views and positions on individual issues.

2 people are hardly indicative of the province and the 2 big political parties have wealthy donors who can afford to donate consistently and the media outlets have popularity thresholds for debate eligibility.

Ask yourself why the debates often only have 3 contestants in attendance.

It’s much harder for everyday people to hear about the smaller parties in general as they do not have the donations or candidates to be visible enough.

At least we have vote subsidies to even the playing field a bit.

[–] khar21@lemmy.ca 0 points 1 month ago

I never pretended 2 people represented the province, I only gave an anecdote.

Stop trying lecture every time you reply.

load more comments (1 replies)