babble home
rabble.ca - news for the rest of us
today's active topics


Post New Topic  Post A Reply
FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » current events   » international news and politics   » TEN LOWEST POINTS IN CANADIAN FEDERAL ELECTIONS

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: TEN LOWEST POINTS IN CANADIAN FEDERAL ELECTIONS
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594

posted 23 June 2006 11:16 PM      Profile for Fidel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
TEN LOWEST POINTS IN CANADIAN FEDERAL ELECTIONS 1980-2004

Fair Vote Canada presents this David Letterman-style list of electoral low points in recent decades. We begin with number ten and work our way down to number one.

10) In the 1990s, Canada ranks 109th among 163 nations in voter turnout, slightly behind Lebanon, in a dead heat with Benin, and just ahead of Fiji.

9) In 1984, the Progressive Conservatives win 50% of the votes but gain nearly 75% of the seats, close to an all-time record for the largest percentage of unearned seats in any federal election.


8) In 2004, more than 500,000 Green voters fail to elect a single MP anywhere, while fewer than 500,000 Liberal voters in Atlantic Canada alone elect 22 Liberal MPs.

7) In 2000, twenty-two candidates become MPs despite winning less than 40% of the votes in their ridings.

6) The 2004 election produces a House with only 21% women MPs, with Canada now ranking 36th among nations in percentage of women MPs, well behind most Western European countries.

5) In 1993, the newly formed Bloc Quebecois comes in fourth in the popular vote, but forms the Official Opposition by gaining more seats than the second place Reform Party and third place Tories.

4) In 2000, 2.3 million Liberal voters in Ontario elect 100 Liberal MPs while the other 2.2 million Ontario voters elect only 3 MPs from other parties.

3) In 1993, more than two million votes for Kim Campbell's Progressive Conservatives translate into two seats – or one seat for every 1,000,000 votes. Meanwhile, the voting system gives the Liberal Party one seat for every 32,000 votes.


And finally, the two chart toppers…

2) In 1984, when competing for the Liberal leadership, Jean Chretien tells reporters in Brandon, Manitoba, he would introduce proportional representation "right after the next election" if he became prime minister.

1) In 1993, Jean Chretien wins the election and begins his ten-year reign as prime minister. In three elections, he never wins more than 42% of the popular vote, but still forms "majority" governments thanks to the current voting system. He never gets around to introducing proportional representation


From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
a lonely worker
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 9893

posted 23 June 2006 11:22 PM      Profile for a lonely worker     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Fidel:

quote:
2) In 1984, when competing for the Liberal leadership, Jean Chretien tells reporters in Brandon, Manitoba, he would introduce proportional representation "right after the next election" if he became prime minister.

... and to think less than 10 years later he promised to scrap NAFTA. Someone's nose is growing!


From: Anywhere that annoys neo-lib tools | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged
Sean Tisdall
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3465

posted 24 June 2006 02:39 AM      Profile for Sean Tisdall   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Move it to Canadian politics please. But of course, I cannot disagree with the sentiment. I would prefer to see STV introduces, because it will allow independent candidates to continue to enjoy legal status on an equal footing with party candidates.
From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada, Dimension XY | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594

posted 24 June 2006 09:00 AM      Profile for Fidel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Yeah, now that I think of it, this thread doesn't belong here. But isn't it infuriating just the same ?. Wilf and rici have already nailed it

[ 24 June 2006: Message edited by: Fidel ]


From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
Islander
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3450

posted 24 June 2006 06:15 PM      Profile for Islander     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Proportional representation is about choosing fairness over effectiveness. It is the best solution when times are good, but ultimately works against a society when tough choices must be made. Governments made up of unstable coalitions, ones that must constantly be appeasing interest groups, and ones unable to say the toughest word in politics: No, doom countries to constant, ineffective compromise. I fail to see why we should trade in our imperfect but functional system for one similar to Italy, Isreal or Japan.
From: Vancouver | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged
Wilf Day
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3276

posted 24 June 2006 07:18 PM      Profile for Wilf Day     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Fidel:
TEN LOWEST POINTS IN CANADIAN FEDERAL ELECTIONS 1980-2004

5) In 1993, the newly formed Bloc Quebecois comes in fourth in the popular vote, but forms the Official Opposition by gaining more seats than the second place Reform Party and third place Tories.



And again this year 1,553,201 Bloc voters elect 51 MPs (30,455 voters per MP) while 907,972 Quebec Conservative voters elect 10 MPs (90,797 voters per MP) and 766,228 Quebec Liberal voters elect 13 MPs (58,941 voters per MP).

And 219,214 Liberal voters in Alberta elect no one while 226,563 Conservative voters in Saskatchewan elect 12 MPs.

quote:
Originally posted by Islander:
Proportional representation is about choosing fairness over effectiveness.

Our skewed system is effective in giving weird bonuses to regional parties like the Bloc, while giving us parliaments that are ineffective in representing voters.

Lots of PR countries have effective governments, but some of them have presidential systems like Brazil, Mexico, and so on.

But South Africa, Spain, Poland, Argentina, Netherlands, Greece, Portugal, Belgium, Sweden, Austria, Switzerland, Denmark, Finland, Norway, New Zealand, Ireland, and many others have very effective governments under PR systems.


From: Port Hope, Ontario | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594

posted 24 June 2006 07:51 PM      Profile for Fidel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Wilf Day:

And again this year 1,553,201 Bloc voters elect 51 MPs (30,455 voters per MP) while 907,972 Quebec Conservative voters elect 10 MPs (90,797 voters per MP) and 766,228 Quebec Liberal voters elect 13 MPs (58,941 voters per MP).

And 219,214 Liberal voters in Alberta elect no one while 226,563 Conservative voters in Saskatchewan elect 12 MPs.


A gale wind just blew through my hair. A child could tell us that this is bad arithmetic.


From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
rici
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2710

posted 24 June 2006 07:52 PM      Profile for rici     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Wilf Day:

Our skewed system is effective in giving weird bonuses to regional parties like the Bloc, while giving us parliaments that are ineffective in representing voters.

It hasn't been that effective in giving us majority parliaments either And I haven't been very fond of many of the majority parliaments it has produced.


From: Lima, Perú | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594

posted 24 June 2006 08:02 PM      Profile for Fidel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
If I were a political conservative, I'd be pushing like hell for electoral reform and toward List P.R.
From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca