FPTP vs MMP

Evan Leibovitch evan-ieNeDk6JonTYtjvyW6yDsg at public.gmane.org
Mon Oct 8 14:18:37 UTC 2007


Andrew Heagle wrote:
> Israel uses a Party List system, *NOT* MMP. They have NO ridings or regions in 
> their electoral system.
The mechanics are different but the core intended result is the same --
MKs in proportions similar to the popular vote.

> Also, I think comparing Israel and Ontario doesn't really apply as Israel has 2 (maybe more) very large groups of people that want to kill each other,
Really? I think that would be important news to most Israelis.

> as well, Israel is completely surrounded by 
> countries that want to destroy it. This is bound to create many people (and 
> politicians) that are going to be very right-wing/radical so that should not 
> be too much of a surprise.
The point is that the proportional system gives these radical fringe
politicians far more power than they deserve, because of the constant
difficulties in creating governing coalitions. While the nature and
level of the radicalism between here and there are obviously different,
the end result is the same; the inability to make courageous political
moves that are necessary and generally approved by the mainstream but
loudly opposed by small special interest groups.

> Anyway, why would groups like the anti-abortion group need to start a party when they can already "buy" candidates, even in the Liberal party? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Wappel
>   
What do you mean "why would they?" -- THEY ALREADY HAVE.
Please do your research before pretending to speak authoritatively about
the subject.
The Family Coalition Party is running candidates in 83 ridings this
election. This party, along with the Greens, stands to gain the most
from MMP -- and the only thing it really cares about is the banning of
abortion and same-sex unions.

In any case, the inference that Wappel's political actions have been a
result of financial gain rather than personal conviction is both
unfounded and potentially libelous.

> What purpose is there to grant a party of official party status if they have 
> no seats?
>   
Because it gives them research funding and other resources that makes it
easier for them to define policies and appeal to the public in future
elections.

- Evan

--
The Toronto Linux Users Group.      Meetings: http://gtalug.org/
TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns
How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://gtalug.org/wiki/Mailing_lists





More information about the Legacy mailing list