Free is indeed a relative term. But even if such a vote was passed, I think it would fail. But I don't even see it getting called. I think Harper is too pragmatic rather than dogmatic.
Let the Americanization begin.
- Thread starter CapitalGuy
- Start date
Free is indeed a relative term. But even if such a vote was passed, I think it would fail. But I don't even see it getting called. I think Harper is too pragmatic rather than dogmatic.
lmao @ Harper being pragmatic.
What is that, Sesame Street's word of the day today? Used it twice in two different threads. lol
Metamorphosis when?I think Harper is too pragmatic rather than dogmatic.
Well it appears he was pragmatic enough to win a majority.lmao @ Harper being pragmatic.
What is that, Sesame Street's word of the day today? Used it twice in two different threads. lol
PEOPLE!!! Harper WON a majority.
We have representative voting hear in Canada.Each riding represents a set number of people. (For argument sakes...lets say 100,000)
If Riding A was won by the Conservatives.....with a vote of 15,000 (Con) to 11,000 (NDP) and 4,000 (Lib)....THE CONSERVATIVES REPRESENT THAT SEAT!!!...They represent 100,000 people as the vote in THAT RIDING WANTED A CONSERVATIVE IN PLAY!!!
If Riding B was won by the NDP ....with a vote of 60,000 (NDP) 12,000 ( Cons) 3,000 (Lib)....that SEAT GOES TO NDP.
It means each riding had a vote and the winner will represent that seat.
So in the above Scenario.... NDP had 71,000 VOTES Cons had 27,000 and Libs had 7,000
It does not mean the NDP wins....it means in the one riding a bigger voter turnout came to the polls......Yes NDP had more votes....but in the run for Prime Minister.....in my example the parties are tied after Polls A and B.
We have representative voting hear in Canada.Each riding represents a set number of people. (For argument sakes...lets say 100,000)
If Riding A was won by the Conservatives.....with a vote of 15,000 (Con) to 11,000 (NDP) and 4,000 (Lib)....THE CONSERVATIVES REPRESENT THAT SEAT!!!...They represent 100,000 people as the vote in THAT RIDING WANTED A CONSERVATIVE IN PLAY!!!
If Riding B was won by the NDP ....with a vote of 60,000 (NDP) 12,000 ( Cons) 3,000 (Lib)....that SEAT GOES TO NDP.
It means each riding had a vote and the winner will represent that seat.
So in the above Scenario.... NDP had 71,000 VOTES Cons had 27,000 and Libs had 7,000
It does not mean the NDP wins....it means in the one riding a bigger voter turnout came to the polls......Yes NDP had more votes....but in the run for Prime Minister.....in my example the parties are tied after Polls A and B.
Yes, Harper won fairly according to the rules. The fault lies with the left for running two parties and splitting the vote. Harper took advantage of that to win, the same way the Liberals took advantage of the Reform/PC split to win back in Chretien days. The right resolved their problem by merging. The left now needs to do the same.
For the record FM nobody has a problem with the cases you described. It's the case where the C's win with say 7000 votes while the Liberals get 6500 and the NDP get 6000. Again, that's not Harper's fault. That's the fault of the Liberals and the NDP for not getting together and either merging, or forming a coalition that runs only one candidate.
For the record FM nobody has a problem with the cases you described. It's the case where the C's win with say 7000 votes while the Liberals get 6500 and the NDP get 6000. Again, that's not Harper's fault. That's the fault of the Liberals and the NDP for not getting together and either merging, or forming a coalition that runs only one candidate.
