Comments on: Sign Of Desperation – Vote Swapping http://thesecretsofvancouver.com/wordpress/sign-of-desperation-vote-swapping/canada-election “Where Just Being 'Right' Is Wrong" Thu, 24 May 2012 06:53:42 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 By: ekspres http://thesecretsofvancouver.com/wordpress/sign-of-desperation-vote-swapping/canada-election/comment-page-1#comment-21982 ekspres Mon, 21 May 2012 13:06:12 +0000 http://thesecretsofvancouver.com/wordpress/?p=421#comment-21982 I just could not leave your site before suggesting that I really enjoyed the standard information a person supply to your visitors? Is gonna be back often to investigate cross-check new posts. I just could not leave your site before suggesting that I really enjoyed the standard information a person supply to your visitors? Is gonna be back often to investigate cross-check new posts.

]]> By: rabbit http://thesecretsofvancouver.com/wordpress/sign-of-desperation-vote-swapping/canada-election/comment-page-1#comment-144 rabbit Mon, 15 Sep 2008 02:38:28 +0000 http://thesecretsofvancouver.com/wordpress/?p=421#comment-144 Harper originally objected to May being in the leader's debate because he accused her of being a surrogate for Dion. There were at least two pieces of evidence for this: First, a written agreement of cooperation between the Liberals and Greens, and second, the fact that the one Green member of parliament (and the reason May got into the debate) was a converted Liberal. Harper had a good point. When different parties cooperate too much during an election, one has to question the fairness of a leader's debate where one leader has to - alone - face multiple debaters who are in collusion and may have a tacit agreement not to criticize each other. A system of vote swapping will give credibility to Harper's charges of parties in collusion. This sort of thing might backfire, as voters sympathize with a party seen as a victim of a rigged leader's debate. The public might also view vote swapping as a corruption of the democratic processing, even if perfectly legal. Harper originally objected to May being in the leader’s debate because he accused her of being a surrogate for Dion. There were at least two pieces of evidence for this: First, a written agreement of cooperation between the Liberals and Greens, and second, the fact that the one Green member of parliament (and the reason May got into the debate) was a converted Liberal.

Harper had a good point. When different parties cooperate too much during an election, one has to question the fairness of a leader’s debate where one leader has to – alone – face multiple debaters who are in collusion and may have a tacit agreement not to criticize each other.

A system of vote swapping will give credibility to Harper’s charges of parties in collusion.

This sort of thing might backfire, as voters sympathize with a party seen as a victim of a rigged leader’s debate. The public might also view vote swapping as a corruption of the democratic processing, even if perfectly legal.

]]> By: Hoarfrost http://thesecretsofvancouver.com/wordpress/sign-of-desperation-vote-swapping/canada-election/comment-page-1#comment-143 Hoarfrost Mon, 15 Sep 2008 02:14:38 +0000 http://thesecretsofvancouver.com/wordpress/?p=421#comment-143 I have always been a supporter of "first past the post" elections. In my opinion the senior party with the most votes gets to run the executive of our government. We have the equivalent of the proportionate vote in a minority parliament. In a minority, the smaller parties can form a coalition with the larger party if they wish. This vote swapping seems to be a a populist but leftist answer to our system. We have no laws to prevent it so if it catches on it could subvert our current system. Even so it will only catch on slightly since most people are not strategic but emotional or traditional in their voting preferences. They have only rudimentary knowledge of the issues. That may be a good thing since it brings parties down to the basics and keeps out maliciously doctrinaire parties like the Greens and the NDP. I have always been a supporter of “first past the post” elections. In my opinion the senior party with the most votes gets to run the executive of our government. We have the equivalent of the proportionate vote in a minority parliament. In a minority, the smaller parties can form a coalition with the larger party if they wish.

This vote swapping seems to be a a populist but leftist answer to our system. We have no laws to prevent it so if it catches on it could subvert our current system.

Even so it will only catch on slightly since most people are not strategic but emotional or traditional in their voting preferences. They have only rudimentary knowledge of the issues.

That may be a good thing since it brings parties down to the basics and keeps out maliciously doctrinaire parties like the Greens and the NDP.

]]>