Will BC voters make history adopting BC-STV

114 posts / 0 new

Topic locked

Mon, 2009-05-11 23:21

Assembly Talker

The forum debates look to be exhausted of new ideas and material.

Tomorrow will be an interesting day for sure.

As a former CA member I've done my last public speaking engagement, my last radio talk show, my last news paper article. No more letters to the editor, TV documentaries, or phone calls at home.

I went back to my notes from five years ago and it is interesting that I really couldn't predict support last time and it feels much the same this time.

The decision is in the hands of the voters, where it should be!

My prediction is that it is again going to be very close, if it is just short, it is going to create an interesting dilemma for the winner of the election.

Debating the power of democracy is always healthy for our society!

Mon, 2009-05-11 23:31

skeiseid

AT -- Good luck from Ontario.

Mon, 2009-05-11 23:40

Wilf Day

Assembly Talker wrote:
As a former CA member I've done my last public speaking engagement, my last radio talk show, my last news paper article. No more letters to the editor, TV documentaries, or phone calls at home.

When you won the lottery to be a CA member, I bet you never dreamt you'd be campaigning for approval of the outcome five and a half years later! What a marathon.

I just hope the result reflects your efforts. Thank you very, very, very much.

Mon, 2009-05-11 23:53

jfb

Ditto - I am not for STV but anything is better than FPTP. If it's a flop, we can move to MMP which to me is so much representative of the public's interests. thank you so much AT.

Tue, 2009-05-12 00:02

ReeferMadness

Assembly Talker:

Regardless of the outcome, you've done our province and our country a real service in advancing the debate. I hope you and others like you have managed to sufficiently cut through the noise so that voters can make an informed choice.

Wilf & skeiseid:

Thanks for dropping around to share your knowledge & wisdom. The debate has been much richer and better informed for it.

Waiting for tomorrow.................

Tue, 2009-05-12 00:04

Erik Redburn

Repeat from last:

Did Carole James ever make any statement about supporting a lower acceptence threshold, sez I knowing the answer? I did pass on the idea as I said, up to the last minute when it never seemed to appear on online, but haven't been watching the news. In answer to Reefer Madness on another thread, I can give you my reasons why I don't like STV later, including mistrusting the Green party so much would be riding on then, but for the momnent I'm supporting it. No time to go over it now. Instead, does anyone know if theres still any active a public forms on this online, any one with a broad based audience, where I can add my own two bits. Way late last minute, but being one of handful of independents who actively campaigned against it last time it could still be of some small service. I'll check back later in a bit.

Tue, 2009-05-12 01:01

Erik Redburn

Ah yes, the helpful atmosphere I remember so fondly. No matter, there's diddly running online so late anyhow, so I did my bit. I'll be voting yes this time too, but after it falls short again we'll see if we can give BCers the full range of choices they want next time.

Tue, 2009-05-12 01:14

ReeferMadness

Erik Redburn wrote:

Repeat from last:

Did Carole James ever make any statement about supporting a lower acceptence threshold, sez I knowing the answer? I did pass on the idea as I said, up to the last minute when it never seemed to appear on online, but haven't been watching the news. In answer to Reefer Madness on another thread, I can give you my reasons why I don't like STV later, including mistrusting the Green party so much would be riding on then, but for the momnent I'm supporting it. No time to go over it now. Instead, does anyone know if theres still any active a public forms on this online, any one with a broad based audience, where I can add my own two bits. Way late last minute, but being one of handful of independents who actively campaigned against it last time it could still be of some small service. I'll check back later in a bit.

Sounds mysterious.

In the final analysis, I doubt that online fora really make all that much difference. Most people will be making their decisions based on something they heard from somebody who read something somewhere. I think that most of the people who engage in online fora probably made up their minds a long time ago.

Anyway, we're glad to have your vote. I'll look forward to hearing why you don't trust the Greens.

Tue, 2009-05-12 01:25

Erik Redburn

We can go over that later too, way too late for anything now but the count down. I should have got into the game sooner, but reality interves on politics sometimes.

Youre probably right about online fora vs coffee shop talk -damn, is that allowed on Rabble.ca, agreeing with the theoretical opposition? lol.

But yes, you got it, the general principles override the particular differences here. If it fails again this time other options can be explored next.

Tue, 2009-05-12 02:06

#10

Brian White

I do not think any new voting system ever got over 60% approval. The provincial ndp and the provincial liberals are counting on that.

It is a shame that the partys are so crooked and people are so easy going.

It was never acceptable to give voters in favour of fptp 1.5 times the voting power of voters in favour of stv.

I include most of the yes supporters in this too. You supported this fraud by agreening to it.

Brian

Tue, 2009-05-12 08:03

#11

Skinny Dipper

All the best today for the BC-STV vote.

Tue, 2009-05-12 09:30

#12

no1important

No. I do not think it will garner enough support to pass again.

It is too bad we unlike when New Zealand changed we do not get to vote on more than one option of pro rep.

Tue, 2009-05-12 19:47

#13

Wilf Day

Assembly Talker wrote:
I went back to my notes from five years ago and it is interesting that I really couldn't predict support last time and it feels much the same this time.

My prediction is that it is again going to be very close, if it is just short, it is going to create an interesting dilemma for the winner of the election.

We'll know soon, eh?

Tue, 2009-05-12 21:21

#14

Brian White

no1important wrote:

No. I do not think it will garner enough support to pass again.

It is too bad we unlike when New Zealand changed we do not get to vote on more than one option of pro rep.

New Zealand used 50%+1 vote as a win. Politicians did their best to defeat pro rep by putting many options on the ballot. (in the hope that support would split between the competeing systems and no system would get the 50% needed to force a second referendum. MMP won the first referendum with stv second and fptp 3rd.

In the second referendum, mmp won a respectable 54% against fptp. That is the referendum that really counted. But it should really have been stv and mmp competeing, shouldn't it? Fptp came 3rd. New Zealand uses mmp for the country elections and stv and first past the post for the health boards and some other elections. Everything is probably still in play there. The good thing is that voters can learn the good and bad of the different systems. In the USA, STV and AV are making comebacks in cities for their elections. Canada could have led if they had fair referendum rules, but more likely we will be left behind.

Tue, 2009-05-12 22:23

#15

skarredmunkey

Brian White wrote:

Canada could have led if they had fair referendum rules, but more likely we will be left behind.

Does anyone know if any of the pro-STV or pro-electoral reform organizations in BC and Canada have attempted or considered attempting a court challenge of the supermajority (60%) requirement. It does not seem to have any real basis in constitutional law. The BC Referedum Act makes no mention of supermajorities, and most referenda in Canadian history have been on a 50%+1 basis.

Tue, 2009-05-12 23:07

#16

Brian White

They concidered one early on before the first referendum but the leaders of the yes campaign thought it would be a "distraction" and might piss off the partys.

They had this futille sense of 'we can beat the odds"

Like it was the great excape or rocky or something like that where the good guys win.

I am still a member of fair vote canada but that was when I ceased to be an active member.

I think some other organization began a court challenge too but i do not know what became of it. Perhaps they ran out of money?

Anyways, whatever.

We snooze we lose.

skarredmunkey wrote:

Brian White wrote:

Canada could have led if they had fair referendum rules, but more likely we will be left behind.

Does anyone know if any of the pro-STV or pro-electoral reform organizations in BC and Canada have attempted or considered attempting a court challenge of the supermajority (60%) requirement. It does not seem to have any real basis in constitutional law. The BC Referedum Act makes no mention of supermajorities, and most referenda in Canadian history have been on a 50%+1 basis.

Tue, 2009-05-12 23:20

#17

Michelle

Any results yet? When do the polls close out there?

I should be sleeping...sigh!

Tue, 2009-05-12 23:27

#18

Debater

They are just starting to come in now. There are a number of ridings reporting, with the NDP having a slight edge in most of them.

Obviously nobody can tell anything just yet since it's early.

Is there a thread for election results tonight? Where will they be posted?

Tue, 2009-05-12 23:34

#19

Pogo

I think the NDP is always the early leader. Maybe we have the fastest counters!

Tue, 2009-05-12 23:37

#20

kim elliott kim elliott's picture

Hey all, just fyi, rabble's editor will be will be tweeting live later from the Yes for STV party at the Brickyard (315 Carrall). You can follow at twitter.com/rabbleca

Tue, 2009-05-12 23:41

#21

Debater

The NDP was in the lead for the first half hour in the seat count, but now the Liberals have just pulled ahead

Tue, 2009-05-12 23:45

#22

Policywonk

Campbell is trailing in his riding so far. It also looks not bad for STV in the early going. I think it will at least reach a similar result to last time.

Tue, 2009-05-12 23:50

#23

Policywonk

He back on top but its a dead heat riding wise.

Tue, 2009-05-12 23:51

#24

Debater

Campbell is trailing slightly in his riding, but I just heard David Mitchell point out on CBC that that happened at the beginning of the results last time, and he pulled it out.

Wally Uppal has a small lead on Vicki Huntingdon so far.

Tue, 2009-05-12 23:54

#25

Pogo

I haven't seen any STV results yet. Has anyone else?

Tue, 2009-05-12 23:56

#26

Debater

Green Party leader defeated and finishes in 3rd place in NDP riding

Tue, 2009-05-12 23:58

#27

Policywonk

Oh well, at least STV is back above 60%.

Wed, 2009-05-13 00:12

#28

Debater

STV not doing too well according to CBC right now

Wed, 2009-05-13 00:17

#29

Policywonk

That just changed. It was above 60% for a long time. Given the riding result I think it is the opposite.

Wed, 2009-05-13 00:19

#30

Debater

CBC has just declared a Liberal Majority

Wed, 2009-05-13 00:21

#31

Policywonk

It was close for a while, but it seems they are correct. STV may yet pull through though, or at least reach the high 50s. The current infomation on CBC.ca has to be backwards.

Wed, 2009-05-13 00:22

#32

Policywonk

It looks like it just slipped below 60%.

Wed, 2009-05-13 00:23

#33

Debater

It seems STV has to win in 51 of the ridings in order to pass based on what I just heard on CBC

Wed, 2009-05-13 00:27

#34

Aristotleded24

Policywonk wrote:

It looks like it just slipped below 60%.

I think "plummetted" is a more accurate description. :(

Wed, 2009-05-13 00:34

#35

Fidel

Stupid, stupid voters

Wed, 2009-05-13 00:39

#36

remind

Yep! They will deserve what happens now!

Though I also place the blame at the feet of the anti-democratic media forces in this province.

Wed, 2009-05-13 00:40

#37

Policywonk

Elections BC has it 60-40 against and only 3 ridings for. The first results must have been backwards on CBC. It still seems ridiculously low, but I can see CBC making a mistake but not Elections BC.

Wed, 2009-05-13 00:50

#38

Debater

CBC has just declared STV Defeated

Wed, 2009-05-13 01:00

#39

Chester Drawers

You can not blame the voters. The messengers failed, the fault falls squarely in the laps of the the STV supporters. Insulting the voter does nothing to further your cause. It will only strengthen their resolve to reject stv in the future.

Wed, 2009-05-13 01:40

#40

Policywonk

Bitterness is to be expected. Perhaps the TV ads should have repudiated the specious arguments against STV better rather than merely promote STV. Of course the best argument against it now is that the voters have rejected it. Who would have thought both the NDP and the Liberals would get more votes than STV. Now all we can hope for in the near term is that Quebec will implement MMP.

Wed, 2009-05-13 01:45

#41

Fidel

I think BC Liberals were assigned the task of killing the idea for advanced democracy before it got a foothold in Canada. Boo Liberals! I hope the Liberals shit all over their own voters for another four years.

Wed, 2009-05-13 01:53

#42

Jamie Deith

Well I think voting system reform is off the table in Canada now for a long time.

Congratulations to Ranger and the No side - obviously their campaign strategy worked better than ours did.

Wed, 2009-05-13 02:10

#43

jozsef

too bad STV didn't pass.

results this election:

Liberals: 46% of vote, 56% of seats

NDP: 42% of vote, 44% of seats

Greens: 8% of vote, 0% of seats

If the results were proportional, it'd be:

Liberals - 39 seats

NDP - 36 seats

Greens - 7 seats

so the liberals would have to get the greens to vote with them or abstain for every measure, that is if the ndp and greens didn't just form their own coalition government from the get-go.

too bad we kept the system where 46% of the vote gives you %100 unchecked power.

Wed, 2009-05-13 02:15

#44

melovesproles

What it comes down to is a lot of NDPers would rather the BC Liberals got 56% of the seats with 46% of the votes than for the Greens to get a single seat with 8% of the votes. They've got their wish.

Wed, 2009-05-13 03:27

#45

ReeferMadness

STV is an incredibly elegant way of turning candidate support and voter wishes into representation. And it's not even that complicated. But it couldn't be explained in a sound bite and that made it easy meat for media pundits and spin doctors.

As long as we have a populace that is uninformed and has a short attention span, we should expect more of the same.

Wed, 2009-05-13 03:45

#46

NorthReport

I'm curious.

Why should the NDP give a tinker's damn about what a right-wing Green party says?

melovesproles wrote:

What it comes down to is a lot of NDPers would rather the BC Liberals got 56% of the seats with 46% of the votes than for the Greens to get a single seat with 8% of the votes. They've got their wish.

Wed, 2009-05-13 04:16

#47

Wilf Day

STV carried only Vancouver-Mount Pleasant, Vancouver-Point Grey, Vancouver-West End, Vancouver-Hastings, Vancouver-Fairview, Victoria-Beacon Hill and Victoria-Swan Lake.

Five NDP ridings and two Liberal.

Gordon Campbell's riding and Carole James' riding.

Is there a pattern?

Wed, 2009-05-13 05:00

#48

Catchfire

Very, very disappointing. Courage to everyone who fought for electoral reform in BC, and my admiration for your hard work in campaigning for it over the past months. Maybe one day BC and Canada will catch up with the rest of the world.

Wed, 2009-05-13 07:16

#49

Caissa

I think FPTP endures because individuals want an MLA to call their own.

Wed, 2009-05-13 11:49

#50

remind

Wilf Day wrote:
STV carried only Vancouver-Mount Pleasant, Vancouver-Point Grey, Vancouver-West End, Vancouver-Hastings, Vancouver-Fairview, Victoria-Beacon Hill and Victoria-Swan Lake.

Five NDP ridings and two Liberal.

Gordon Campbell's riding and Carole James' riding.

Is there a pattern?

So much for people trying to declare James and the NDP were against it! If James was actually working against it, we would not be seeing her riding vote over whelming Yes, and electing her while they were at it.

Wed, 2009-05-13 12:21

#51

Michelle

James voted NO last time, and she refused to allow the NDP to take a position on it this time.

So congratulations to James on her party's well-deserved electoral defeat! Here's hoping she and her party are rewarded for many elections to come for their cowardice!

Pages

Topic locked