OT: Ontario election

Mike23

Mike23

CAGiversary!
Hey guys, not technically a video game topic, but I hope all of you based in Ontario of voting age get out to vote tomorrow and be a part of the system.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
oooh politics. i'm voting. the candidates in my riding aren't very interesting. i might just spoil my ballot. but i want to vote on the referendum. seems like a pretty significant question, and i want to get my vote in.
 
I'm probably misinterpreting that referendum thing, but it sure looks to me like an excuse to hire more politicians if we switch the system.
 
from what i gather it is to ba able to choose different parties for different positions. like i dont neccesarily want to vote (whatever party) for Provincial and federal. with this new system i could vothe party a for provincial and pary b for federal...

so its not adding polititians its just letting us decide which ones are better for which job.
 
[quote name='darkandlong']I'm probably misinterpreting that referendum thing, but it sure looks to me like an excuse to hire more politicians if we switch the system.[/quote]

Not at all. This would just give minority parties a voice in the house. The popular vote would actually amount to something (which it should in my opinion). If the green party gets 10% of the popular vote, this means the green party will get 10% of those "extra" 25 seats.

This will not change the local results of an election... you would only be voting twice: once for your local representative and once for a party. This system does have disadvantages in the short term, but it's alot closer to democracy than what we have now.

I'm voting yes to referendum. Hopefully it goes through, but it will be tough because many old-school politician and analysts only see the bad side of change.
 
[quote name='nonrandomhero']from what i gather it is to ba able to choose different parties for different positions. like i dont neccesarily want to vote (whatever party) for Provincial and federal. with this new system i could vothe party a for provincial and pary b for federal...

so its not adding polititians its just letting us decide which ones are better for which job.[/quote]

This is a provincial election dude. You're voting for your local crook then you vote for which party of crooks you want to have power. Local dude wins, then provincial parties receive seats proportional to the second vote.

[quote name='wingy17']Not at all. This would just give minority parties a voice in the house. The popular vote would actually amount to something (which it should in my opinion). If the green party gets 10% of the popular vote, this means the green party will get 10% of those "extra" 25 seats.

This will not change the local results of an election... you would only be voting twice: once for your local representative and once for a party. This system does have disadvantages in the short term, but it's alot closer to democracy than what we have now.

I'm voting yes to referendum. Hopefully it goes through, but it will be tough because many old-school politician and analysts only see the bad side of change.[/quote]

Extra seats = extra crooks. So I'm paying more people to do nothing? No for me. Its not like reinventing the vote is going to fix the broken state of our government.

We get taxed to death, scare off doctors, blah blah blah. I don't think I need more yahoos to mismanage our province. PC/Liberal/NDP/Green they're all the same. Promises, promises then they do nothing or make things worse.

Heck, I'm tempted to vote liberals simply because I'll supposedly get an extra day off work.
 
The total number of seats will not raise by much. Instead of 107 total electoral districts (what we have now) there will be 90 electoral districts and 39 "list members".

Okay, sure, there's going to be more polititians - but wouldn't it be nice if they were from the Green Party or Family Coalition Party who may actually influence things because they believe it's the right thing to do instead of just trying to retain power?
 
What I don't like is the extra MPP's are from a list that the Party's make up themselves. We the people don't vote in the extra MPP's the Party choses them :evil:
I can't see how that's not going to get serverly messed up. It reminds me of the senate appointments.

"Before an election, parties would publicly nominate candidates as "List Members" and describe how they were chosen. If a political party is entitled to more seats then it won locally. "List Members" are elected to make up the difference."

I'm a realist. Just like in business Competition makes the Politicians work harder. When the vote is close and the party's are swap out every 4 to 8 years things get done.
 
Right, but it's not like a party will get some list seats in the election and then the next day say "Surprise! We've appointed John Q. Satan here to one of our seats! Enjoy the next four years of Hell!" We get to make a party voting decision knowing who all the potential candidates are for list seats. It's not like the appointments are permanent or anything - they're only there until the next election.

Also, this can help balance out a party. For example, if the Liberals top foreign policy guy loses his riding in an upset they can appoint their "almost as good" foreign policy guy who they've nominated for a list seat (but wouldn't have really needed if foreign policy expert #1 had won).
 
I read all their pamphlets and crazily enough they will all provide the same things! better education, more safety, something about taxes, healthcare. I just dont know who to vote for!

I know very little about politics, but I just never bother voting because it seems to matter very little whether part a, b or c wins. either way I still get better education, safety, taxes, healthcare, or at least I am told lol.
 
[quote name='unfinity']The total number of seats will not raise by much. Instead of 107 total electoral districts (what we have now) there will be 90 electoral districts and 39 "list members".

Okay, sure, there's going to be more polititians - but wouldn't it be nice if they were from the Green Party or Family Coalition Party who may actually influence things because they believe it's the right thing to do instead of just trying to retain power?[/quote]

22 extra politicians + their staff equals how many millions a year?

Do you really think that if the Green party gets 10% of the popular vote the 3-4 spots they get of the 39 are really going to carry any sort of weight in the legislature?

And, as previously mentioned, we don't even pick who the "elected" official is. They're from a list. BS.

What a joke. The whole thing is just another excuse to waste more taxpayers money.
 
[quote name='unfinity']Right, but it's not like a party will get some list seats in the election and then the next day say "Surprise! We've appointed John Q. Satan here to one of our seats! Enjoy the next four years of Hell!" We get to make a party voting decision knowing who all the potential candidates are for list seats. It's not like the appointments are permanent or anything - they're only there until the next election.

Also, this can help balance out a party. For example, if the Liberals top foreign policy guy loses his riding in an upset they can appoint their "almost as good" foreign policy guy who they've nominated for a list seat (but wouldn't have really needed if foreign policy expert #1 had won).[/QUOTE]

I believe the MPP's should be chosen by the people not the party's it's that simple. The political appointments that happen in the senate, the heads of Crown Corporations and Government Boards from what I've seen have been a thank you gesture or a popular appointment to get votes from the people. Not picking a leader.
 
[quote name='nonrandomhero']crap i didnt get my voting package thing wtf.....[/quote]

I think all you need to have is a drivers license and (to be of age, duh) they will put you on the voters list, and come next election time you should have a voter's package already mailed to you.
 
Just want to point out that the Conservatives and the Liberals are against the new system while the NDP and Greens are for it. You guys can decide which ones you feel are the most corrupt.
 
Of course the Green party and NDP are for it that means more MPP's for their party which they would not get under the current system. Why wouldn't they be for it.

The Green has 0 MPPs and had 2.8% of the popular vote last election in Ontario. They need .2% more to qualify under the proposed system. They are a new party it takes time for them to get awareness out of their platform and to attract candidates people will vote for.

The party's choose the leaders for each party, they choose the candidates for each for each riding for the election. From the candidates we vote who becomes an MPP. Taking away the voting process from the people in any seat in the legislator does not sound right.
 
[quote name='unfinity']Just want to point out that the Conservatives and the Liberals are against the new system while the NDP and Greens are for it. You guys can decide which ones you feel are the most corrupt.[/quote]

Using the term "most corrupt" is like using the term "most dead". Either you're corrupt and you're not. All politicians suck.
 
[quote name='Princess Zelda']I believe the MPP's should be chosen by the people not the party's it's that simple. The political appointments that happen in the senate, the heads of Crown Corporations and Government Boards from what I've seen have been a thank you gesture or a popular appointment to get votes from the people. Not picking a leader.[/quote]

i agree with this statement 100%. there has to be accountability, and the MPP have to answer directly to its constituients. list members will just hold the party line to keep their jobs.
 
It makes sense that parties with lower poll numbers would want such a system; it increases their representation.

Personally, I'm not comfortable with the MMP legislation. It leads to a spike in politicians unaccountable to voters.

The polls suggest a Liberal majority, albeit a bare one. While I don't like Dalton, their promises, if even half are kept, will increase funding across the board.
 
I vote in 4 years (well technically 3) but my family is conservative.
I'm Conservative.
Conservative=WIN
For those in the Ancaster-Dundas-Flamborough etc. riding, who'd you vote for?
 
[quote name='Azumangaman']I vote in 4 years (well technically 3) but my family is conservative.
I'm Conservative.
Conservative=WIN
For those in the Ancaster-Dundas-Flamborough etc. riding, who'd you vote for?[/QUOTE]

Looks like Ted McMeekin. :lol:
 
Well, it looks like you guys were right. McGuinty was held responsible for his lies by getting 4 more seats than last time despite 3% less people voting Liberal.

The system works!
 
[quote name='unfinity']Well, it looks like you guys were right. McGuinty was held responsible for his lies by getting 4 more seats than last time despite 3% less people voting Liberal.

The system works![/quote]

At least you aren't bitter.

Thankfully No pwned the referendum vote. Last thing we needed was more politicians and their salaries.
 
[quote name='Princess Zelda']Unfinity they lost 1 seat.
2003 election results Lib. 72 seats 46.45% pop.
2007 election results Lib. 71 Seats 42% pop.[/quote]

The system works!
 
I'm sad but not surprised that the new voting system wasn't passed through the referendum. Green party got 8% of the popular vote... and not one seat. The proportional system would have given them 2 seats, that would have been real democracy to me.
 
[quote name='Princess Zelda']Unfinity they lost 1 seat.
2003 election results Lib. 72 seats 46.45% pop.
2007 election results Lib. 71 Seats 42% pop.[/quote]
My mistake - it seems they had 67 going into the election though, so that's where the confusion was.

And no, I'm not bitter (though I guess it reads that way), I was just hoping that we could use this opportunity to help create a system that better represents the way people are voting. A friend of mine worked at a polling station and she said that many people seemed surprised when given the referendum ballot - they had never even heard about it. She said that it seemed like those people were voting to keep the system the same just because they didn't understand what the choices were and didn't want to choose the new system not knowing what it was.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top