I've been generally amused this week to watch Dwain Lingenfelter beat his chest and proclaim his outrage that the NDP were unable to secure even one seat in Saskatchewan despite having roughly 32% of the popular vote. As per usual, Link's faithful flock of sheep have been taking up the cause as well. What I guess I am wondering is, if Link believes the NDP got a raw deal in Saskatchewan is he also upset that the same electoral system saw the NDP obtain 79% of the seats in Quebec while only garnering 42% of the popular vote?
You would think when your party is the primary beneficiary of the system you'd be slightly more humble. Furthermore, why is he even upset isn't the % of seats won the NDP higher than their % of popular vote?
It seems to me this is simply another empty cause (see royalty review rates, rent control) which Link is attempting to spin an issue out of. It's too baaaaaah-d the faithful flock don't, or won't, see the larger picture.
Signed,
Thursday's Guest Blogger
(please be aware that the views expressed in this post are those of the author and do not, or perhaps may not, represent those of the Mistress)
Posts
So someone let Link out of the box they had him in during the Federal election.
ReplyDeleteIf Link had participated on behalf of the federal NDP maybe they would have picked up the small number of votes needed for Nettie Wiebe to win SRB.
That would assume that he actually has some influence with voters and that he would be able to play second banana to Jack for a few weeks.
Maybe Link took his cue from Jack's Quebec contingent and took a holiday.
Link did the right thing by staying out of the Fed election. Had he jumped in Netty would have been toast right off the bat.
ReplyDeleteAs for today's blogger, well said. This % of pop vote is always brought forward by those that don't understand our electoral system. We don't have a two party system here and I think it would hurt Canada in the long run if we did. The problem is right now there wasn't anyone running in the middle. The Libs are so red they make NDP look pink. The reason the Libs are the NGP was because the majority (center) thinking people voted for them. Now they stand for almost all the same things as the NDP as far as positioning goes. That leaves the Conservatives with a wide open center to right side of the political spectrum. For me that's ok
I believe the beef is with the riding boundaries and not rep by pop...but I could be mistaken....
ReplyDeleteWould be nice if the guest bloggers would identify themselves??? Mistress perhaps you might give that consideration for next time you are away ...
ReplyDeleteThere is something wrong with the boundaries when you secure over 30% of the provinces support but elect zero Members of Parliament.
ReplyDeleteHow about only getting 20% of the vote in the rest of the country without Quebec and become the opposition leader. Not saying it shouldn't happen but it does tell you the NDP don't really have national support.
ReplyDeletethat would be like saying that the CPC having 15% support in Quebec means they don't have national support.
ReplyDeleteWTF All I was indicating is that our system of voting is based on a riding by riding basis and the % of pop vote across the nation is irrelevant as we don't vote for the leader but for the person and party in our area. Pop vote is only something losers bring up because they couldn't garner enough support to win. Suck it up Princess. And with MP's like Vegas the NDP will be on the bottom again soon.
ReplyDeleteThe claim that the NDP received only 20% of the popular vote outside of Quebec is complete fiction. In every province except PEI and Alberta their vote was well above 20%. http://www.sfu.ca/~aheard/elections/results.html
ReplyDeleteWhy is it so difficult for this blog and its posters to at least put forth facts?
so who cares anon 12:30 it was not enough to win, over 7 out of 10 voters did not buy jackies pie in the sky promises, maybe he should have offered us all a rub n tug.
ReplyDeleteThe point of the original post is still dead on. People are complaining that the NDP should've had at more than 0 seats with 30% of the vote.
ReplyDeleteSimilarly, all those NDP complainers must also admit that the NDP should not have received almost 80% of Quebec seats with only about 54% of the vote. It is a catch 22, you can't complain that you got ripped off in one province and then pretend that the whole Quebec discrepancy doesn't matter.
Has anyone noticed that this isn't an issue that is gaining much national attention, why? Because the NDP in Saskatchewan still think the residents (ahem Anon 12:30) are dumb enough that they can continue to funnel this garbage around Sask and rile up the socialists. Too bad for the NDP the electorate in the province is becoming smarter and smarter.
I have yet to hear one person complaining about 30% and 0 seats in Sask say anything to defend the 80% of seats/50% of vote in Quebec. I guess it is only democracy when it works for you.
Anon @7:54
ReplyDeleteYour post is completely absent of fact.
The NDP reinforced their support of proportional representation after the election results in Quebec. It was well reported CBC's Power and Politics last week.
Just because you have a perception of something, it does not mean that your perception should be put forth as truth.
I guess it is only fact when it works for you.
Anon 10:09,
ReplyDeleteLink to that article?
Funny that the NDP is so concerned about proportional representation that they'd return some of their new found seats.
Quebec has many more seats than Saskatchewan and the proportional corrections would leave the NDP in a tough spot.
I at least can respect the Dippers who try to frame this as an urban-rural issue, which is asinine I at least respect they are trying.
PR would leave the NDP with 93 seats, the Conservatives with 121. Seems to me the Conservatives have the most to lose.
ReplyDeleteTo suggest proportional "corrections" would leave the NDP in a tough spot is, again, complete fiction.
http://www.cbc.ca/video/#/News/Politics/Power_&_Politics/1305400780/ID=1907810892
NDP PR policy discussed @ 5:38