She’s Styling And Smiling!
6 hours ago
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Visitors
Blogs I Follow
-
-
-
-
Once more unto the breach4 days ago
-
Well into Autumn4 days ago
-
Stephen Miller Exposed1 week ago
-
-
On the Road Again2 weeks ago
-
-
-
-
The Day the Music Died6 months ago
-
-
-
In Honor of March 148 months ago
-
Remembering George10 months ago
-
Happy New Year10 months ago
-
New Chapter Begins1 year ago
-
It's about TIME!1 year ago
-
to bee -- or not to bee1 year ago
-
-
-
MAJOR changes2 years ago
-
-
Arti Simbol Remote Ac Daikin2 years ago
It doesn't look like his prediction is that accurate, at least early in the results.
ReplyDeleteStill early. NDP vote always comes in later. Not panicking yet
DeleteHow about now? Politics in BC has Allways been strange, but this is shaping up to be bizarre. I think there's only 2 people in BC who thought there would be a Liberal Majority, Christy Clark and Sylvia.
DeleteI'm moving to Cuba.
DeleteWould you settle for a good stiff drink of Cuban Rum? You wouldn't be drinking by yourself tonight.
DeleteLooks like he didn't have a clue. I love it when the polls are so totally wrong!
ReplyDeleteIf this election ends up the way it looks, BC will have gone from leaky condos to leaky pipelines. Get out your rubber boots!
ReplyDelete48% voter turnout! People said they wanted change but did not get off their asses to vote.
ReplyDeleteThat's sad, isn't it.
DeleteThat might be the lowest provincial turnout we have ever had in BC. Was it overconfidence ("We will win anyway, they don't need my vote")?
DeleteThe biggest disappointment was the low turnout of young people. Maybe it is time for online voting in BC.
It's definitely time for proportional voting! After 17 years of it here in NZ, it amazes me that other countries don't have it. I guess it favours the dominant parties, so they have an incentive to keep the first past the post systems.
ReplyDeleteAbout 10 years ago there was a referendum here on a prop vote proposal. It was so convoluted and difficult to understand and was defeated. Maybe it's time to try again. In NZ as it led to coalition governments?
DeleteIt was a Single Transferable Vote (STV not STD). Like Rod says, it was so confusing that even those of us deeply involved in the political process did not understand it.
DeleteI cannot understand how anyone could have a second choice. What, my first choice is Socialist and my second choice Capitalist?
Ah yes....proof, once again, that polls can be so far off the charts. Pollsters should be banned from the political process.
ReplyDeleteThere is a lot of head scratching going on right now Rene'. The huge factor was that the young people did not vote. 51% turnout (up from the 48% reported last night). That is a disgrace.
ReplyDeleteNZ uses another type of proportional vote, called MMP. Germany uses it too. You get two votes - one for the person you want to represent your electorate/riding/state/whatever, and one for the party you want to be the government. The second vote determines the proportionality of parliament. If a party gets 51% of the votes, they become the government. If not, they need to find a smaller party to make up over 50% of the vote.
ReplyDeleteInitially, parties formed coalitions, but this didn't work overly well because, well, parties don't like each other that much. Now, the major party signs a "confidence and supply" agreement with one or more small parties, meaning the small party will support the government in any challenge to their status as government, and any budgets. Beyond that it's up to the merit of the legislation they want to pass whether they support it or not.
Aside from the fact that a party must either get over 5% of the national vote (2nd vote) or an electorate seat (1st vote) to be in parliament, there are no wasted votes. It has meant parliament has become more representative too - more women, more minorities.
MMP was put up to the nation at the last general election to decide whether to keep it or change it to another system. MMP won by about 56% of the vote.
Hope that makes sense to the North Americans out there.
Andrew
Thanks for the explanation Andrew. I suppose most people would stay with the same party on both their ballots but the possibility remains of having the majority of elected members belonging to one party and the Governing Party elected with your second ballot being a different party. How could this be resolved without denying some elected members a seat in Government?
DeleteIn other words, the majority of ridings (51%) want a Labour representative but the Conservative Party wins 51% on the second (Government) ballot. What would happen in this scenario?
Actually, a considerable minority vote "strategically" and split their alliance between the party and the riding vote. They vote for the party they want to be in government, and for a person from a different party to represent their riding. This may be because they know or like the representative personally, or because they prefer a 'left wing' or 'right wing' person to win and their preferred party isn't standing a viable candidate.
ReplyDeleteIt's the party vote that is all powerful, and the one that really counts. Proportionality is maintained by having a 'party list'. Each party has a 'list' of people it wants in government, numbered 1 (the leader) to whatever. People vote for a party knowing the sort of people it has on its list. If a party wins 12 ridings out of 40, but gets 40% of the national vote, the representatives get their seats in government (regardless of their position on the list), then they add an extra 10 seats from the 'list' - with the highest ranked first in.
In NZ's parliament, there are 70 riding seats, and 50 'list' seats. Some people complain there are too many list seats, and want them cut back to 30, but that doesn't change how the system works much. These 50 seats are allocated to 'top up' parties that got lots of party votes (i.e. people wanted them to be in government) but for whatever reason didn't have many riding representatives.
Back to your scenario - applying the NZ 120 seat layout to BC (and assuming an election with only 2 parties: Labour and Conservative), the Labour Party would take 36 seats in parliament by winning the ridings. They have 49% of the party vote, so have 59 seats total: 34 riding + 25 list. The Conservative Party wins 34 ridings but have 61 seats total because of the party vote: 34 + 27. The Conservative Party has a majority and so becomes government. The party vote rules - which is why some smaller parties do not campaign at all for riding seats which can be hard to win from the big boys (but not always) but instead ask only for your 'party vote'.