Well done Canada

[KaskadskyjKozak]

Perhaps you should get back to the Bin Laden thread then

 

hey adultfriendfinder avatar - maybe you should get back to the Stephen Harper pedophile lounge?

 

[murraysovereign]

Perhaps you should get back to the Bin Laden thread then

 

hey adultfriendfinder avatar - maybe you should get back to the Stephen Harper pedophile lounge?

 

Harper's a pedophile? Damn - good thing that news didn't leak before the polls closed or it would have further galvanized his base and given him a bigger majority.

[j_b]

a list of electoral systems per country: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Table_of_voting_systems_by_nation

 

It looks like most countries have some form of proportional representation in parliament.

[j_b]

In Australia they have preferential ballots where you number the names in the order of your preferences. In counting they look at the first preferences first and if anyone has 50% they win if not they go to the 2nd etc.

 

There was a referendum a few years ago regarding implementing a version of that for BC provincial elections (Single Transferable Vote) but it failed to reach the threshold for approval. There was some talk of trying again, but I haven't heard of any plans.

 

It's also called Instant runoff voting, which seems a lot fairer than fptp: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instant-runoff_voting

[Peter_Puget]

As for why it hasn't been fixed... well... how often do you guys try to amend your constitution, and how successful have you been? For instance, clarifying that business about the right to bear arms - I mean, c'mon, how hard could it be?

 

You must be one of the shit flowers!

 

 

There are twenty seven amendments (changes) to the US Constitution.

 

Amendment I [Religion, Speech, Press, Assembly, Petition (1791)]

 

Amendment II [Right to Bear Arms (1791)]

 

Amendment III [Quartering of Troops (1791)]

 

Amendment IV [search and Seizure (1791)]

 

Amendment V [Grand Jury, Double Jeopardy, Self-Incrimination, Due Process (1791)]

 

Amendment VI [Criminal Prosecutions - Jury Trial, Right to Confront and to Counsel (1791)]

 

Amendment VII [Common Law Suits - Jury Trial (1791)]

 

Amendment VIII [Excess Bail or Fines, Cruel and Unusual Punishment (1791)]

 

Amendment IX [Non-Enumerated Rights (1791)]

 

Amendment X [Rights Reserved to States (1791)]

 

Amendment XI [suits Against a State (1795)]

 

Amendment XII [Election of President and Vice-President (1804)]

 

Amendment XIII [Abolition of Slavery (1865)]

 

Amendment XIV [Privileges and Immunities, Due Process, Equal Protection, Apportionment of Representatives, Civil War Disqualification and Debt (1868)]

 

Amendment XV [Rights Not to Be Denied on Account of Race (1870)]

 

Amendment XVI [income Tax (1913)]

 

Amendment XVII [Election of Senators (1913)

 

Amendment XVIII [Prohibition (1919)]

 

Amendment XIX [Women's Right to Vote (1920)

 

Amendment XX [Presidential Term and Succession (1933)]

 

Amendment XXI [Repeal of Prohibition (1933)]

 

Amendment XXII [Two Term Limit on President (1951)]

 

Amendment XXIII [Presidential Vote in D.C. (1961)]

 

Amendment XXIV [Poll Tax (1964)]

 

Amendment XXV [Presidential Succession (1967)]

 

Amendment XXVI [Right to Vote at Age 18 (1971)]

 

Amendment XXVII [Compensation of Members of Congress (1992)]

 

 

 

 

[murraysovereign]

Looking over that list, there's an awful lot of what could be termed "routine maintenance" amendments. But major structural amendments - the original bill of rights, abolition of slavery, enfranchisement of women, term limits for presidents - are comparatively rare. How'd the ERA fare? Imagine how difficult it would be - in the context of the present discussion - to amend the constitution to abolish the electoral college, re-structure both houses of congress, and institute a system of proportional representation for all three elected branches. Simple, right? I mean, after your most recent amendment regarding "compensation of members of congress" it would be a cakewalk by comparison, wouldn't it?

 

My point was, and remains, that we haven't adapted our electoral system to better reflect the diversity of views in a multi-party environment because, well, because it's damned near impossible to do it.

[tvashtarkatena]

You even bother to argue with PP?

 

You'd have a tougher time with a chia pet.

[Hugh Conway]

You even bother to argue with PP?

 

You'd have a tougher time with a chia pet.

 

I thought PP was a chia pet. The more shit you feed it, the bigger it gets.

[prole]

I'm OK with the Conservatives, generally, but Stephen Harper is a petty, mean-spirited hypocrite.

 

That's just because the Canadian people (like America up to the late-70's) have never allowed the full flowering of the conservative fart-blossom like we've had here. Most Canadian liberals and progressives I talked to when I lived there took a "it couldn't happen here" approach when looking across the border at the American political and social scene. I hope that attitude changes a bit.

[G-spotter]

Percent of American population that is evangelical or "born again" - 35-45%

 

Same percentage of Canadian population: 7%

 

Percentage of US population that is agnostic or Atheist: ~10%

 

same percentage of Cdn population: >20%

[tvashtarkatena]

It's comforting to know, as I walk the streets of our fair cities, that fully a third of the folks around me are absolutely crackers.

[prole]

Percent of American population that is evangelical or "born again" - 35-45%

 

Same percentage of Canadian population: 7%

 

Percentage of US population that is agnostic or Atheist: ~10%

 

same percentage of Cdn population: >20%

 

As I've said here before, it's the economic whack-jobs and that have done the real lasting damage around here. Since Democrats and Republicans have been on the same page as far as economic policy is concerned, it's easier for establishment liberals to point fingers at bible-thumping opportunists than deal with the legacy of neoliberal restructuring.