Yeah, I've noticed some talking point themes (propaganda themes) that you referred to.
Anyway, if the NDP, Greens, and Bloc were firm on having replacement to FPTP be a form of PR and not RBV (or at least not solely RBV), and the Cons firm in wanting FPTP, what do you think the Libs would do?
That's how I feel it should be played by the NDP, Greens and Bloc. There should be no settling for solely RBV on their part. If the Libs wanna push it through on their own, then fine. But the others should insist on PR.
There's a significant danger that this approach could cement FPTP in place forever.
First, let's break down support by parties in the last election:
PR supporters: NPD + Bloc + Green = 19.7% + 4.7% + 3.5% = 27.9%
FPTP supporters: Con = 31.9%
Liberal supporters: split 3 ways between PR, Ranked Ballot Voting, and FPTP (let's assume evenly.)
That means:
PR support: 27.9% + 13.2% = 41.1%
FPTP support: 31.9% + 13.2% = 45.1%
RBV support: 13.2%.
Now since Trudeau's initiative is a half-way process (a full process would be entirely technocratic which would guarantee some form of PR, but it's not,) he's attempting to come up with some kind of apparent majority consensus (where compromise is not off the table.)
But what if the politicking by the media makes it appear full PR is too radical a choice? If PR supporters believe that any kind of compromise is unacceptable, they walk away from the table with nothing. That leaves:
RBV support: 13.2% / (45.1% +13.2%) = 22.6% (of 100% still left in the process)
FPTP support: 45.1% / (45.1% + 13.2%) = 77.4%
So there are 3 reasons why the status quo wins out:
1) Numerical superiority in both steps of a polarized process.
2) If Trudeau's committee can't find a majority consensus, the default option is the status quo. ("The ER issue is too divisive.")
3) Even if Trudeau wanted to get something done, he would be attacked from all quarters for acting in illusory partisan self-interest by legislating RBV as a last-ditch compromise.
Conclusion:
This is the very reason why FPTP supporters are pushing MMP or nothing, borrowing this strategy from the FVC-type PR supporters.
If anyone can find fault with this reasoning, please chime in. But my analyses have been pretty good in the past. I predicted a Trudeau majority when the NDP was leading in the polls (on this board.) I predicted a Harper majority in 2011 (I figured this out the night before. I knew the Red Tories would bolt to the Cons to stop an NDP minority: 10% Red Tory + 30% radical con = 40% Harper majority: "last minute Blue counter wave to the Orange wave.")
I was wrong thinking that Trudeau would find some way to weasel out of his promise of ER (he made when down in the polls,) like Liberals did in BC and ON with corrupt designed-to-fail referendums. But even if he's not putting on a big show in a rigged process and has honest intentions, he may be forced to back out.