this post was submitted on 16 Mar 2025
14 points (93.8% liked)

Fairvote Canada

478 readers
213 users here now

Matrix Chat

What is This Group is About?

De Quoi Parle ce Groupe?

The unofficial non-partisan Lemmy movement to bring proportional representation to all levels of government in Canada.

🗳️Voters deserve more choice and accountability from all politicians.

Le mouvement non officiel et non partisan de Lemmy visant à introduire la représentation proportionnelle à tous les niveaux de gouvernement au Canada.

🗳️Les électeurs méritent davantage de choix et de responsabilité de la part de tous les politiciens.

Related Communities/Communautés Associées

Resources/Ressources

Official Organizations/Organisations Officielles

We're looking for more moderators, especially those who are of French and indigenous identities.

Nous recherchons davantage de modérateurs, notamment ceux qui sont d'identité française et autochtone.

founded 9 months ago
MODERATORS
PuddingFeeling907@lemmy.ca
Sunshine@lemmy.ca
AlolanVulpix@lemmy.ca
14
Single Transferrable Vote (STV) (lemmy.ca)
submitted 4 days ago by scott_anon_21@lemmy.ca to c/fairvote@lemmy.ca
14 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

I am going to preface this by saying that this was shared with me by a friend and I am still trying to get my head wrapped around it. I am not an expert or even well read on the subject but do believe that the voting systems in Canada need to change. I post in the interest of building the discussion in this community.

I like single transferrable vote (STV), but it’s unlikely to catch on because it needs number crunching in the backend to apportion the excess votes to (hopefully) improve proportionality. I can see it being accused of corruption by the fact and critical-thinking challenged demographic.

Baden-Württemberg solves that by saying that every riding has two members, one who wins the popular vote, and one who is selected from the runners-up in a manner that best enhances proportionality, but still focuses on the high vote earners.

Mixed member proportional representation (MMR) is too easily gamed by parties to embed unelectable party hacks/loyalists (as experienced in NZ).

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] StoneyPicton@lemmy.ca 1 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

I didn't mean to emphasize stupid in any way. I think rejection of the current system was inevitable but they fall for lies that are allowed to go unchallenged in a meaningful way. I don't have a problem with optimism but I think ignoring the realities of the end game do us no favours. I would prefer a mix of the two with proper representation of a plan to survive what will come. Lets hope electoral reform actually happens in a way that truly serves the people and not the party. Thanks for your thoughts on all this.

[–] AlolanVulpix@lemmy.ca 1 points 17 hours ago

I share your hope that electoral reform serves people rather than parties - that's exactly why proportional representation matters.

Our current system lets parties govern with minority support (like the Ontario PCs with just 43% of votes). Under PR, this couldn't happen - governments would need to build genuine consensus, creating more stable policies rather than the constant lurching we see now.

The "plan to survive what will come" should include electoral systems that force cooperation and long-term thinking, rather than empowering parties to implement policies most voters oppose.

A better democracy isn't just possible - it's already working in democracies around the world.