(08-07-2020, 03:47 PM)hollodero Wrote: The determination of leadership imho is not similar to the US. If I'm not mistaken, you do not vote for a president like the US does in the first place. I tried to read up a bit, and to me it seems the party with the most seats is asked to form a government, but that prime minister person always has to maintain confidence in the house... meaning, there will be a partner in a coalition, right, so there's a secure majority in the house?
And if so, regarding those four parties, are there traditional pairings or is it more like an all limits off coupling?
I have to ask for just found out is that you obviously also have one seat per electoral district, and yet more than two parties. As does GB, which I should have thought of as well.
I'll answer your points in numbered fashion :)
1. We do, trust me lol. If you asked any voter about our election last year, not a single person could tell you the person in their riding, but they could absolutely tell you who was the head of the party (Trudeau- Liberal, Scheer- Conservative, Singh- New Democrat, May- Green Party, Bernier, People's Party, Blanchet- Bloq Quebecois). Same with our Premiers (equivalent to American Governors); you vote for the Member of Parliament officially, but that vote is REALLY a vote for the leader or, plainly put, the Prime Minister. Basically, same as the US, the leader of the party is appointed by the rest of the party and should they win the HoC seats (in ridings or, in the US, Electoral College votes) during the election, the person who is the leader, becomes Prime Minister.
2. Coalitions can exist, but they are not common at all (the last one we had was back at Confederation and even then, it ended once Canada was officially a country, as MacDonald was a Conservative. Confederation was in 1867). Specifically, your question seems aimed at what potentially could've happened in 2009, with Harper's bumbling idiocy getting him tossed via the vote of non-confidence (in a way, like Impeachment in the US; just not as convoluted and long a process, as well this would happen soon after an election and not well into a term)... but that never happened (and truthfully, it never well lol). What could've happened last year, was what I wrote above; if the Conservatives won a minority government in the election, but the rest of the parties in the HoC didn't feel Scheer was up to the task, via the vote of non-confidence, Scheer would be removed and there would've been a coalition... but the Liberals won a minority government and there's no way in hell the New Democrats and the Conservatives would join up in government lol (basically, if the Reps. and Dems. were to form a coalition, literally).
3. Should there be a minority government (of which, many of our governments are and what our current one is), very little gets done in terms of bills, laws, etc. lol. Coalitions can be formed by like-minded parties (IE: the Liberals and the New Democrats) in order to get things done but, again, that never happens.
Every electoral system has its own nuances and quirks, but when you get down to it, the process and methodology on Election day, is almost the same between our two countries; one makes sense for the country it's in, the other doesn't.
(08-07-2020, 04:53 PM)Nately120 Wrote: I hear ya, it's just interesting how voting 3rd party is both a waste and yet critical to "the other guy winning" at the same time.
It's like a tug of war. Of course you can just stand by, not help either side and then claim how is it on me how this thing ended?
Well, you didn't influence the outcome as you could have, that's how.
It's also similar to these chicken or fish questions, as in what you'd prefer as dinner at a wedding or whatever. You might find chicken just meh and fish disgusting, you might actually want a tasty steak. But if you don't choose because steak is what you wanted, you dtill end up with fish or chicken and someone else made the decision for you. If it's the fish, it is on you, you knew the rules.
-- Of course, it really is not on you, for millions of people decided about one option anyway and it wasn't that close and whatever you did didn't change a thing either way. I get the futility argument blowing up all other analogies, but as I said, that's not the way a citizen should think.
(08-07-2020, 04:53 PM)Nately120 Wrote: Even I can't tell how important I am. Also im in western PA so any non Trump vote is extra useless.
? You're in Pennsylvania if I got that correct, and then your vote is one of the important ones. As far as I know this is a close state and it was in 2016.
(08-07-2020, 05:34 PM)hollodero Wrote: It's like a tug of war. Of course you can just stand by, not help either side and then claim how is it on me how this thing ended?
Well, you didn't influence the outcome as you could have, that's how.
It's similar to these chicken or fish questions, as in what you'd prefer as dinner at a wedding or whatever. You might find chicken just meh and fish disgusting, you might actually want a tasty steak. But if you don't choose because steak is what you wanted, you dtill end up with fish or chicken and someone else made the decision for you. If it's the fish, it is on you, you knew the rules.
-- Of course, it really is not on you, for millions of people decided about one option anyway and it wasn't that close and whatever you did didn't change a thing either way. I get the futility argument blowing up all other analogies, but as I said, that's not the way a citizen should think.
? You're in Pennsylvania if I got that correct, and then your vote is one of the important ones. As far as I know this is a close state and it was in 2016.
How about if everyone who wasted a losing vote on Hillary in 2016 despite not liking her voted for Gary Johnson and Trump would have won but we'd actually be going into the 2020 election with that viable 3rd party candidate practically everyone I talk to thinks would be a good idea to have? But nooooooooooooooooo everyone just HAD to vote for that democrat who could win despite being part of the political party that can win the popular vote and still get rolled in the electoral college. So I guess they just voted for someone who had less of an unfair road to the White House so it's all good. Meh.
I suppose one of my main positives of voting for a 3rd party candidate I like is that everyone I've spoken to about politics, whether they are all about Trump or Bush or Obama or Clinton or even Jimmy Carter (my mom is his biggest fan, I swear) have been able to see the wisdom in having options outside of the 2 party system. Add in the fact that Trump's election indicates that at least one of the major parties is open to becoming an easy road to the White House for dangerously unqualified candidates and the need for a 3rd option and more accountability is more important than ever.
At least that's how I see it. I ain't so swift. I will say the whole thread about how anyone can be crazy enough to vote for Biden has provided me with a lot of logical, yet even-handed and critical positives of that mindset.
(08-07-2020, 05:45 PM)Nately120 Wrote: How about if everyone who wasted a losing vote on Hillary in 2016 despite not liking her voted for Gary Johnson and Trump would have won but we'd actually be going into the 2020 election with that viable 3rd party candidate practically everyone I talk to thinks would be a good idea to have? But nooooooooooooooooo everyone just HAD to vote for that democrat who could win despite being part of the political party that can win the popular vote and still get rolled in the electoral college. So I guess they just voted for someone who had less of an unfair road to the White House so it's all good. Meh.
I get it.
I really do.
Here's something nice about my country. When I vote, I can choose between 4-6 viable parties. My vote is always placed in their column. And if they gain as much as 4% nationally (or a bigger percentage regionally), they get seats in the parliament, their voices are heard, they can actually gain influence and grow.
At times I feel this has to sound like paradise for an US voter. Of course it's not, we still end up with shitty governments and chancellors and all that, but the feeling alone that if I vote a violet party, my vote actually is counted towards the violet party, is something deeply satisfying.
(08-07-2020, 05:45 PM)Nately120 Wrote: I suppose one of my main positives of voting for a 3rd party candidate I like is that everyone I've spoken to about politics, whether they are all about Trump or Bush or Obama or Clinton or even Jimmy Carter (my mom is his biggest fan, I swear) have been able to see the wisdom in having options outside of the 2 party system. Add in the fact that Trump's election indicates that at least one of the major parties is open to becoming an easy road to the White House for dangerously unqualified candidates and the need for a 3rd option and more accountability is more important than ever.
Oh, I do get why a third party would be great in many ways. It's just not in the cards.
(08-07-2020, 06:18 PM)Nately120 Wrote: Not if you keep trying to talk people like me out of voting 3rd party!
Hehe, well the last guy I tried that with not only still voted, but apparently now is also running for the libertarians, so I wouldn't deem myself too persuasive.
I actually just share my perspective, I don't claim my perspective is the right one and I don't aim for convincing you. That, after all, might be seen as a foreign actor influencing your election.
I will not be able to attend the campaign rally tomorrow morning. I will be getting a rabies vaccine as a precaution after having been bitten by a bat near the start of this campaign tour! I have every intention of participating in the FLAME march and I will deliver remarks at...
I will not be able to attend the campaign rally tomorrow morning. I will be getting a rabies vaccine as a precaution after having been bitten by a bat near the start of this campaign tour! I have every intention of participating in the FLAME march and I will deliver remarks at...
"A great democracy has got to be progressive, or it will soon cease to be either great or a democracy..." - TR
"The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little." - FDR
(08-11-2020, 05:16 PM)Nately120 Wrote: Figures the Trump campaign would focus on these guys and their palsy murder sum when the flu kills like half a million Americans per year. Sad.
We don't wear masks when obesity and tobacco kill hundreds of thousands of Americans each year. A lot of people are saying Joe and Hunter Biden are going to make you smoke cigarettes.
I'm gonna break every record they've got. I'm tellin' you right now. I don't know how I'm gonna do it, but it's goin' to get done.
Trump is tweeting this morning with a campaign ad pinned to the top of his page accusing Biden of having a "racism problem" and then posting this dog whistle comment.
The “suburban housewife” will be voting for me. They want safety & are thrilled that I ended the long running program where low income housing would invade their neighborhood. Biden would reinstall it, in a bigger form, with Corey Booker in charge! @foxandfriends@MariaBartiromo
(08-12-2020, 09:03 AM)GMDino Wrote: Trump is tweeting this morning with a campaign ad pinned to the top of his page accusing Biden of having a "racism problem" and then posting this dog whistle comment.
The “suburban housewife” will be voting for me. They want safety & are thrilled that I ended the long running program where low income housing would invade their neighborhood. Biden would reinstall it, in a bigger form, with Corey Booker in charge! @foxandfriends@MariaBartiromo
I feel like Trump overestimates how many American homes have the financial luxury to go single income/housewife. I haven't checked the numbers on that, but I'd wager he hasn't either.
(08-12-2020, 09:03 AM)GMDino Wrote: Trump is tweeting this morning with a campaign ad pinned to the top of his page accusing Biden of having a "racism problem" and then posting this dog whistle comment.
The “suburban housewife” will be voting for me. They want safety & are thrilled that I ended the long running program where low income housing would invade their neighborhood. Biden would reinstall it, in a bigger form, with Corey Booker in charge! @foxandfriends@MariaBartiromo
![[Image: 4CV0TeR.png]](https://i.imgur.com/4CV0TeR.png)
![[Image: Truck_1_0_1_.png]](https://card.psnprofiles.com/2/Truck_1_0_1_.png)
![[Image: giphy.gif]](https://media0.giphy.com/media/1kwsTjL8BNqlszNtnCE/giphy.gif)
