samedi, décembre 03, 2005
Christmas is bedtime, where no one wants to go
I've been pondering who I should vote for in the upcoming election, and it's a frustrating process. Here in the Canadian sector of Jesusland (i.e. southern Alberta), the seats in Federal elections go to the Conservatives, and the one party I'm not voting for is the Conservatives, so I'm forced to contemplate the meaning of my vote - a wasted one, really.
That's the problem with our electoral system, the "first past the post" one. If you do not vote for the winner, your vote matters not one bit. Last year in politics classes, cute Bill used to point out that in cases like this, voters resort to variations of "strategic voting". Maybe you vote for a party / candidate that you do not actually want to in an attempt to make your vote count for something. For instance, the second-place finisher in most Alberta ridings is likely a Liberal candidate, so if you think your guy / girl has any chance of beating the Conservative incumbent, you want to add your vote to the Liberal pile, EVEN IF you'd rather be voting NDP or Green Party. Then again, your vote will probably not actually result in a Liberal win, so you question whether it's worth it to even bother.
Then you get situations like this happening:
We really do need a system where votes are meaningful, minority governments are not a bad thing, and there is more integrity and cooperation at the federal level. | ¶ 6:51 p.m.
That's the problem with our electoral system, the "first past the post" one. If you do not vote for the winner, your vote matters not one bit. Last year in politics classes, cute Bill used to point out that in cases like this, voters resort to variations of "strategic voting". Maybe you vote for a party / candidate that you do not actually want to in an attempt to make your vote count for something. For instance, the second-place finisher in most Alberta ridings is likely a Liberal candidate, so if you think your guy / girl has any chance of beating the Conservative incumbent, you want to add your vote to the Liberal pile, EVEN IF you'd rather be voting NDP or Green Party. Then again, your vote will probably not actually result in a Liberal win, so you question whether it's worth it to even bother.
Then you get situations like this happening:
CAW boss Buzz Hargrove gave Martin a qualified endorsement, saying the minority Liberal government "deserves to go back to Ottawa with even bigger numbers."I was discussing this whole thing with froo the other day. We like the Green Party, and in the last election there was a lot of buzz about them reaching a certain threshold to be entitled to funding, so it was valuable to add one's support at that time. Now that they've reached the target, do they need our vote, given that they don't reasonably stand a chance of winning seats in Alberta...? Do they constantly need to meet that threshold to continue receiving financial recognition...?
Hargrove said there should be a strong NDP opposition, but urged members to vote Liberal in ridings in which the NDP has no chance of winning.
"Whether you elect a Liberal or an NDP, the overall numbers don't change in terms of the ability to form a coalition government," he said. "We're out to stop the Tories."
"We're saying to people don't waste your vote. Make sure we don't send any more Tories to Ottawa. We don't need them."
We really do need a system where votes are meaningful, minority governments are not a bad thing, and there is more integrity and cooperation at the federal level. | ¶ 6:51 p.m.
