Why is Maryam Monsef wasting our time and money on town hall meetings on Electoral Reform when it is clear that the Liberal party doesn’t give a damn about our opinion on the matter. They intend to ram this through no matter what Canadians think about it. They also don’t give a damn about fair representation. This whole process is just to make sure that no right leaning party will ever form a government again. In short, this is not a reform of the electoral process, it is a hijacking of the electoral process.
Lets have a look at the survey they have been using. http://www1.canada.ca/en/contact/survey.html
Notice the wording. They want us to believe that the electoral system we have been using in Canada for 150 years is somehow broken. (A system used world-wide since the days of ancient Greece.)
The 5 guiding principles
Listed below are the five guiding principles which make up the foundation of our Canadian electoral reform process. When evaluating potential changes to our electoral system, how would you rank each principle? Where one (1) is most important and five (5) is least important.
Effectiveness and legitimacy
Restore it to what? We have ALWAYS used the first-past-the-post method. Effectiveness and legitimacy? Are you saying that no government since confederation has been legitimate?
Voting in our county is voluntary and always should be. If your sheeple wont get off the couch to vote, then you have not done your job as a potential member of our government. It is YOU who must engage. YOU who must give people a reason to go out and vote.
Accessibility and inclusiveness
I really don’t know how you could possibly make voting more accessible. There are always volunteers driving people to the polls, polls set up in hospitals and senior residences, mail in polls, advance polls. Elections Canada does a very good job of making elections accessible. As for inclusiveness, I have yet to see any exclusions based on race, gender, religion, or disability. Undue complexity? Really, what the hell??? If putting an X beside the candidate of your choice is too complex, then maybe you shouldn’t be voting.
I like this one. They want to safeguard the integrity of our voting system by changing it to one they like better. Priceless…
By installing someone that the majority of the electorate in the riding did not vote for I assume.
I would predict than very few under 30 or over 50 will be filling this in. The younger crowd cant be bothered and the older likely couldn’t even find this form to fill it in…
Which group(s) do you most identify with?
I know men are evil and should not have a voice here, but really, can’t I at least have to option to identify as one? I mean, I am older, and suffer from asthma and arthritis, but I am too young to be a senior and not ready to identify as disabled. I haven’t spoken French since 1978… Well, I guess I will have to choose Person from humble socio-economic backgrounds…
Select your response
1 X The gathering, by using this form, is worthless. Where is my choice to vote no? Is this not a democracy?
They like the word democracy but seem to have no understanding of the meaning. It means basically, rule of the majority. Those who want to reform our electoral system do not believe in the rule of the majority. They also have severe math related problems when faced with more than two choices, so if one party gets 34% of the vote and wins, they claim that 66% of Canadians did not vote for that party. While that may be true, 66% did not vote for either of the other major parties or they would have won.
Perhaps they would like us to have endless coalition governments where bribery and graft will be the only way to get anything done.
Maybe the Liberals are just afraid that after their term is up, and they have not delivered all the solid gold goodies they promised, that the people will come to their senses and vote them out.