[Northern Light]

How did the Australians manage to switch from their FPTP system to ranked ballots? Can we learn and apply anything from Oz?

You ask, I answer; from Wikipedia:

Also, from the Australian Electoral Commission:

 

[txlseries4]

Leadership races are done using ranked ballots. Would be nice if someone pointed out that hypocrisy when MPs opposed to ditching FPTP cry out

 

[wopchop]

I don't think we need to look abroad. A law - any law - is passed by a majority of the members. That's how our system of representative democracy works. To demand some kind of super majority or some kind of plebiscite or referendum is not part of our system except in Constitutional matters.

Supposedly the polls indicate that on this issue, the vast majority of Canadians want to see consensus or super majority, rather than passing the law regularly.

Regardless of public opinion, It seems likely that the majority of the party apparatus itself doesn't support it.

 

[DSCToronto]

I don't think we need to look abroad. A law - any law - is passed by a majority of the members. That's how our system of representative democracy works. To demand some kind of super majority or some kind of plebiscite or referendum is not part of our system except in Constitutional matters.

Yes, that is obvious but I think the point here is/was that for ONE PARTY to vote to change the electoral system is not going to 'look good' as the other parties will simply say it is being done so they get elected more easily. To attempt significant electoral reform without a consensus would be VERY foolish and any change (no matter how good it was) would likely be reversed when another party took over. Trudeau never managed to get any buy-in from other parties, maybe he did not try hard enough or campaign strongly enough to get so much public opinion in favour so that other parties would come on board.

 

[Admiral Beez]

Yes, that is obvious but I think the point here is/was that for ONE PARTY to vote to change the electoral system is not going to 'look good' as the other parties will simply say it is being done so they get elected more easily. To attempt significant electoral reform without a consensus would be VERY foolish and any change (no matter how good it was) would likely be reversed when another party took over. Trudeau never managed to get any buy-in from other parties, maybe he did not try hard enough or campaign strongly enough to get so much public opinion in favour so that other parties would come on board.

But ranked ballots would have helped the other parties.

 

[DSCToronto]

But ranked ballots would have helped the other parties.

There are several possible improvements in voting - some are, of course, 'better ' for some groups (at least today) but none of them had anything near consensus. Change will only come if we have a PM who really expends political capital to find a consensus and if all parties work hard to achieve one. Then, the leaders of, at least, the main Parties, need to sell it to the voters.

 

[Towered]

Trudeau to make a press announcement at 10:45 am. It is expected he will ask the Governor General to prorogue parliament until March 24.

Justin Trudeau to announce he’s stepping down as Liberal leader: senior source

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has called a news conference this morning at Rideau Cottage, and there it is expected he will tell the country he’s resigning as Liberal leader, according to a senior government source.

www.cp24.com

Jagmeet can breathe a sigh of relief now that his pension is secured.

 

[kEiThZ]

But ranked ballots would have helped the other parties.

Ranked ballots tend to favour centrist parties a lot more. Which is why the Liberals like it. And if the Conservatives ever move beyond FPTP, it would probably be their choice too. On the other hand, the NDP wanted proportional representation like STV and/or MMP which would increase their seat count and get it much closer to vote share. But, this would probably come at the expense of a centrist party (like the Liberals).

Personally, I like ranked choice because that's how I think of politics, in terms of preferences. But I understand why others might not share that viewpoint.

Looking at Australian history, it seems they only got ranked choice because of a split on the right. We don't have that here. We'll probably never see electoral reform.

 

[lenaitch]

Yes, that is obvious but I think the point here is/was that for ONE PARTY to vote to change the electoral system is not going to 'look good' as the other parties will simply say it is being done so they get elected more easily. To attempt significant electoral reform without a consensus would be VERY foolish and any change (no matter how good it was) would likely be reversed when another party took over. Trudeau never managed to get any buy-in from other parties, maybe he did not try hard enough or campaign strongly enough to get so much public opinion in favour so that other parties would come on board.

They didn't even try. Once they achieved a majority (which FPTP is really good at providing) they abandoned the plank. They could have ran on it during the next election. They could have attached a referendum question in the next election (unusual in our system and would have cost a few bucks). They could have conducted a broad-based poll. They could have tried and lost then said 'see, nobody wants it'. Instead, they walked away.

Any party in power has had the ability to propose a change in the voting method but none have because why roll the dice with the system that got you there?

One advantage of FPTP is it very simple for the mostly not engaged voter to understand. Granted, ranked ballot is pretty simple but it would still take a lot of 'spailin' to do to remind people to mark the ballot in a way that, previously, would have spoiled it.

I'm a fan of ranked ballots. Beyond the method of voting, it is relatively straight forward. Intentions are fairly straight forward and results should be only slightly delayed (no a fan of US-style voting machines). Unlike other proposed methods that sound like I must vote with my left hand while swinging a chicken over my head by the light of a full moon.

 

[picard102]

Jagmeet can breathe a sigh of relief now that his pension is secured.

Which he never needed in the first place. Whoever came up with this disinfo surely got a pay raise.

 

[Northern Light]

The Toronto Star lists many potential Liberal candidates:

• Chrystia Freeland

Interested. (making calls)

To me, not a winning choice.

• Mark Carney

Interested (making calls)

To me, not a winning choice.

• Dominic LeBlanc

Don't know if he's interested.

• Mélanie Joly

Not sure whether she'll try. I don't like her chances.

• Christy Clark

Definitely kicking tires..........

Has potential, media savvy, telegenic......

But...lots of baggage from her BC days.

Also, two names mentioned that I hadn't heard until now:

• Karina Gould, MP for Burlington and cabinet minister
• Steven MacKinnon, MP for Gatineau and cabinet minister

Haven't heard anything about those two running yet; Karina has a lot to recommend her, but I can't see her winning.....

Not mentioned, but two names that have been widely discussed:

• Anita Anand, MP for Oakville and cabinet minister
• François-Philippe Champagne, MP for Saint-Maurice-Champlain and cabinet minister

More Liberal MPs eyeing Justin Trudeau’s job as party prepares to set contest rules

Liberals MPs will debate Wednesday what rules they want to see in a coming leadership race as the field to replace Prime Minister Justin Trudeau sees more expressions of interest

www.thestar.com

Well known as potential candidates.

*****

You left out...........

Jane Philpott is apparently thinking about it........... (former Trudeau minister, quit on principle, in support of Minister Wilson Reybould, current Dean of Medicine at Queens, and Premier Ford just appointed her as his Primary Care czar.) I like Jane. I'm surprised to see her mulling it over.

Judy Wilson-Reybould is also apparently musing...... she has the credentials of clearly not liking the current PM, despite checking some boxes, I'd broadly consider her more centre-right within the party, she reads as tough minded. But she burned a few bridges on the way out the door.

 

[evandyk]

Definitely kicking tires..........

Has potential, media savvy, telegenic......

But...lots of baggage from her BC days.

Christie Clark has her BC baggage, but I think anyone serving in the current government (and probably Philpott and JWR too) has the baggage of being closely associated with a government that many Canadians seem tired of. I think a true outsider from federal government gives the Liberals the best shot at a credible showing in the election (though I think they will still lose bigly).

Carney is an "outsider" vis-a-vis this government, but the prevailing winds are very anti-elitist right now, and he's about as elite as they come. So I don't see him as a winning choice either, even if I personally think he would be very well-suited for the job.

 

[lenaitch]

Christie Clark has her BC baggage, but I think anyone serving in the current government (and probably Philpott and JWR too) has the baggage of being closely associated with a government that many Canadians seem tired of. I think a true outsider from federal government gives the Liberals the best shot at a credible showing in the election (though I think they will still lose bigly).

Carney is an "outsider" vis-a-vis this government, but the prevailing winds are very anti-elitist right now, and he's about as elite as they come. So I don't see him as a winning choice either, even if I personally think he would be very well-suited for the job.

I don't know a lot about her politics but I like Clark. There might be a lot of 'who?' from the rest of Canada. Wilson-Raybold and Philpott might carry some baggage but it is old in political terms. Freeland, and the others from the current government not so much.

Carney might be smart but, like it or not, political leadership involves a lot of rah-rah, rally the troops and excite the public. I'm not sure he brings that. Campaigning and political rallies shouldn't come off like a university lecture.

 

[afransen]

I don't know a lot about her politics but I like Clark. There might be a lot of 'who?' from the rest of Canada. Wilson-Raybold and Philpott might carry some baggage but it is old in political terms. Freeland, and the others from the current government not so much.

Carney might be smart but, like it or not, political leadership involves a lot of rah-rah, rally the troops and excite the public. I'm not sure he brings that. Campaigning and political rallies shouldn't come off like a university lecture.

I don't think the candidates other than Freeland and Carney and too some extent Clark have much name recognition. Clark, as I understand it, doesn't speak French.

 

[lenaitch]

I don't think the candidates other than Freeland and Carney and too some extent Clark have much name recognition. Clark, as I understand it, doesn't speak French.

For voters completely unaware it probably doesn't really matter. For casual followers, like me, I think LeBlanc, Anand and Joli would rings some bells.

Frank Baylis rang no bells with me.

What is important is swaying the party members they have or can buy between now and the vote. In this country or elsewhere.

Apparently Clark has been taking French lessons. How well they are going IDK. We've had some who were less than stellar (I'm told) and Chretien who was marginal the other way (or both according to some.