notahomer wrote:sj-roc wrote:I don't see election system flaws from my analysis; rather, I think it just shows the NDP simply failed to get their vote out (assuming it was there at all for them to be had) in the swing ridings where it was most crucial. I mentioned earlier in this thread that they only needed about 6,500 extra votes in the 10 most critical swing ridings to earn their majority. ...
So, you recognize I am not questioning your anaysis? I think its bang on and I guess thats why our opinions differ on the electoral system (you say no flaws, I see flaws). I was even more disgusted at the 1996 NDP win where the Clark government got elected even though its opponents, a Gordon Campbell led BC Liberals party, got more votes. I think there are lots of reasons why this FPTP system has outlived its usefullness, including voter apathy. Why vote if you live in one of the 'stronghold' seats of a party you can not support?
Anyway, I'll have to let you have the last word because you actually take the time to build the numerical models and do the math. The math part is what trips me up. I truly do appreciate the work you put in. It is interesting stuff to me. I could have voted for ANY of the parties depending on which riding I lived in. I will vote in every single election I am entitled to vote in for lots of reasons, the biggest one being I think I deserve a say if I made the effort to vote.
Well, I won't consider this post the last word; I'm quite open to hear a response to it if you (or anyone) care to offer one. Yes, it was clear to me from your earlier post that you weren't criticising my analysis. We just disagree on where to go from the conclusions and I can certainly live with that.
You kind of answered your own question of why vote in a safe riding: so you can legitimately complain after the fact when the elected member doesn't act in your interest.
I should also mention you're giving me far too much credit on the models/math I've worked out. I haven't even done any modelling per se, just some very basic arithmetic of actual vote data from this 2013 election. I can assure you the math involved in some of the electoral systems proposed to replace FPTP is far more tedious to follow and less transparent. Pretty much every voting system will have its pitfalls and using one system for long enough does makes them more obvious over time. If we make a change I think you'll eventually hear the same chorus of calls for reform because the flaws in the new system will have also become exposed.
One thing I would prefer is re: voters who genuinely either don't care for any candidate, or the electoral process as it is currently structured; they should vote anyway by submitting a ballot that is either unmarked or perhaps marked in such a way that makes their position clear. If large percentages of voters were doing so, this would send a greater message of dissatisfaction with the process. If they're not voting at all then we don't really know why this is the case. It doesn't necessarily signal voter dissatisfaction.
It's also worth noting that so-called safe ridings can and do change over time. A good example is in Newfoundland, where the two St. John's ridings were both once solidly Conservative territory in the 70s and 80s (or PC I guess in those days) when they were represented by James McGrath and John Crosbie. McGrath's riding is now considered an NDP stronghold under current MP Jack Harris; his numbers rival those of Libby Davies. This was unthinkable for this riding 30 years ago. And if anything, Crosbie's seat was even safer in those days, but even that one now also has an NDP MP. That's only two examples; there are probably others where change in every conceivable direction has occurred. Perhaps ironically, in the SJ examples at least, the change has come in the face of lower turnouts.
Sports can be a peculiar thing. When partaking in fiction, like a book or movie, we adopt a "Willing Suspension of Disbelief" for enjoyment's sake. There's a similar force at work in sports: "Willing Suspension of Rationality". If you doubt this, listen to any conversation between rival team fans. You even see it among fans of the same team. Fans argue over who's the better QB or goalie, and selectively cite stats that support their views while ignoring those that don't.