Liberals abandon electoral reform

I don't the think the electorate really cares and the Liberals would have won even without this "promise". I don't see any long term damage from dropping it.

More importantly this country better get its best minds focused on post-Trump issues, and for that I am glad this academic exercise is now off the table and not wasting time and energy.

*edit - not that I am suggesting that Trudeau is one of the "best minds".

Careful what you wish for! Down south people are getting exactly what they voted for and then some.

True, although I don't need them to do it by decree. The questionnaire thing was never going to get true answers. It should have simply shown us the different systems, how they work, and ask would we prefer any of the options over FPTP. If people don't want it he could demonstrate that, but saying it now makes it all look like the Liberals accepting the system that got them in office.

Same goes with senate reform. Harper didn't even try and fool us that he was looking into it.

I've said this several times. Why not leave the house as is, and reform the senate to be elected my some different system?

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

Canadian politics used to be more open where MPs voted based on what their constituents wanted, not always by party line. It made politics interesting up here. We lost all that in the last 20 years or so, unfortunately.

And don't worry about those destructive forces down south, those Liberals will stop rioting, whining, creating fake news, and eventually have to get jobs. :lol:

Yeah, cause when Obama was elected there weren't any "tea party" protests, or made up stuff about him not being born in the US (admittedly, that one was likely started by hillary) and whining about his commie healthcare plan.

I've said this several times. Why not leave the house as is, and reform the senate to be elected my some different system?

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

I am with you Farmer. Elect non-partisan experts in a variety of fields as an expertise representation, instead of the bullshit area representation that we have now.

I am with you Farmer. Elect non-partisan experts in a variety of fields as an expertise representation, instead of the bullshit area representation that we have now.

If it's one thing the electorate is good at, it's identifying and then rallying behind people that are true subject matter experts.

I am with you Farmer. Elect non-partisan experts in a variety of fields as an expertise representation, instead of the bullshit area representation that we have now.

Anyone qualified will never take the job when they could work for a lot more money in the private sector.

Apparently there are people more cynical than I am.

If it's one thing the electorate is good at, it's identifying and then rallying behind people that are true subject matter experts.

My hope would be that if those running were forbidden to be a party member, then they would run on their record as an expert instead of a known party platform.

Anyone qualified will never take the job when they could work for a lot more money in the private sector.

And therein lies the rub for all elected officials. The public wants them paid no more than they are, but also want them to be the best and brightest. Ideally, you would get people that do not need the money and already have had a successful career.

Question period today was one of the best I've seen for a while (it's usually on over lunch here). Nathan Cullen basically asked the PM why he doesn't have the courtesy to at least blush when he lies to the Canadian people, and another French MP mumbled something about the smell of smoke and the PM's pants being on fire.

Trudeau's response was pretty asinine but predictable.

Question period today was one of the best I've seen for a while (it's usually on over lunch here). Nathan Cullen basically asked the PM why he doesn't have the courtesy to at least blush when he lies to the Canadian people, and another French MP mumbled something about the smell of smoke and the PM's pants being on fire.

Trudeau's response was pretty asinine but predictable.

:lol: :lol: :lol:

I would like to see that. I'm sure it'll get online soon enough.

The public wants them paid no more than they are, but also want them to be the best and brightest. Ideally, you would get people that do not need the money and already have had a successful career.

Yeah. Like Trump, or O'Leary, or Leitch.

:lol: :lol: :lol:

I would like to see that. I'm sure it'll get online soon enough.

Looks like it takes a few days to come online, but they replay them on CPAC. Should be the 6 Feb edition.

So check out the following video, starting at 5:45. Good parts at 6:50, and 9:18.

http://www.cpac.ca/en/programs/question-period/episodes/50234383

Trudeau cites Leitch, fringe voices when questioned on electoral reform

So now he's blaming people with opposing politics on the LPC abandoning their pledge of electoral reform? WTF.

“Proportional representation in any form would be bad for Canada,” he said.

The woman said she respectfully disagreed and that is when he brought up Leitch.

Trudeau said it is important to listen to all voices, rather than amplifying small ones.

Amplifying small voices? Um, wouldn't proportional representation give all Canadians, you know, a _proportional _amount of voice to the Government?

All Canadians deserve an equal say in the governance of the country. If I don't agree with someone, that doesn't make them wrong.