Wednesday, October 03, 2007

My own personal flip flop of sort....

I am back to being undecided on the MMP front. I was against it at first, but I am having second thoughts. ...

Now I am just undecided, so yeah.

I might vote in an advanced poll later this week, I do know that I am voting for Wayne Arthurs to represent the riding of Pickering Scarborough-east. MMP, no-MMP, I'm not really in a state of mind to particularly worry in that regard.

I am more worried about the impending start to the hockey season, as a Leaf fan, its very important.


Mark Greenan said...

It's always good to hear of people that are warming up to MMP.

If you get a second, I'd be interested in what's made you more sympathetic to MMP.

Lord Kitchener's Own said...

One thing on the Referendum I'm trying to remind people of is to look at the choices actually presented. The ballot will have two options. You can say you think Ontario should use MMP in elections, or you can say you want Ontario to use FPTP. That's it. The question you need to ask (IMHO) is do I think MMP is better, or do I think FPTP is better. If you think FPTP is better, you should vote for it. But MMP shouldn't need to be PERFECT to get your vote. As long as it's better than FPTP, I think it deserves your support. 'Cause your other option is to vote FOR FPTP. To say that given those two choices, you'll take FPTP.

If a beautiful woman offers me the choice of a handshake or a kick in the groin, those are my choices. I may prefer a hug. I may prefer a kiss. I may prefer hours of passionate love-making. But if I'm just given the two choices?

There's no way I'm voting for the kick in the groin!

Thor said...

This might be of use to you - the Referendum Picker Quiz.

Thor said...

Re: the Referendum Picker Quiz.
oops. Well, anyway, go to my blog,
and scroll down to the quiz.

JimBobby said...

Whooee!I was drawn to yer boog story on accounta I was against proportional representation when I first started lookin' at it. I felt it was unsuited to our geo-demographics and better suited to countries with more compact, dense populations. After some discussions with various PR supporters, I saw that I was looking at "pure" PR. That pure form of PR doesn't exist and nobody is advocating it.

Fer yer sake, I hope Wayne Arthurs wins. If he don't, you may as well not vote. Under FPTP, votes fer losers don't count.

Consider this typical scenario. A riding has 3 big contenders: PCO, OLP and NDP. The results are something like this: Lib = 40%, Con = 39%, NDP = 21%. Lib wins. 60% of the voters voted against him but he won anyways. Once elected, he owes absolutely nothing to the 60% who voted against him.

Does this sound like democracy when 60% voted against the winner and those 60% end up with no representation?

Under MMP, no party could ever form a "majority" government without getting a majority of the popular vote. Bob Rae formed a majority government with 47% of the popular vote, btw. Chretien had 41% popular vote in his "majority" government.

Under MMP as proposed, fully 70% of the legislature will be made up of regional reps, just like we have now. The other 30% will be elected as party reps. There will be more MPP's. More representatives means better representation, sez I.


Lord Kitchener's Own said...

Just to correct a typo from jimbobby's comment above.

Bob Rae's "majority" government actually only got 37% of the vote. Not 47%. Which, of course, is even worse.

JimBobby said...

Thanks for the correction, LKO. Yes. Definitely worse. 63% voted against that "majority".