if we did get rid of fptp we’d never have to worry
Then after the election, you better be fighting your hardest to get proportional representation 😁.
Get started with this link: Simple things you can do right now, to grow the proportional representation movement—so we never have to vote for the lesser of the evils, have a two party system, "split the vote", or strategic vote.
I don't know the particular solution to the housing crisis (nor did I insinuate I have one).
But the solution to the millions of perfectly valid ballots being tossed out every single Canadian election, is proportional representation.
I've been repeating this: Simple things you can do to grow the proportional representation movement.
Perhaps after we get PR, we can get actually effective governments, that respond even more deeply to the people's needs.
This isn't just about a party not following "promises exactly" - it's about a fundamental democratic reform promised and then deliberately abandoned. The electoral reform promise wasn't a minor policy detail; it was presented as a pillar of their platform with Trudeau stating it over 1,800 times.
When a government makes a major promise about democratic reform and then breaks it, it directly undermines their democratic legitimacy to make all other promises. This pattern goes back a century - Liberals have campaigned on proportional representation since 1919, starting with Mackenzie King.
In 2024, Trudeau even admitted they were "deliberately vague" about electoral reform to appeal to advocates while never intending to implement proportional representation.
Housing promises matter deeply, but they're built on the same democratic foundation that was undermined by this broken commitment. A government elected through a system where millions of votes don't count is structurally limited in its ability to represent Canadians' actual preferences on any issue, housing included.
Just a Canadian concerned about democracy!
Here are some more links: Simple things you can do to grow the proportional representation movement.
I understand the commendable instinct to give another chance, but this isn't about a one-time broken promise - it's about a century-long pattern. Liberals have promised proportional representation since 1919, starting with Mackenzie King.
The 2015 promise wasn't just casually broken - Trudeau literally admitted last year that Liberals were "deliberately vague" to appeal to electoral reform advocates while never intending to implement proportional representation.
Just last year, 107 Liberal MPs (68.6% of their caucus) voted against even creating a Citizens' Assembly to study electoral reform, despite 76% of Canadians supporting it.
This isn't about partisan politics - it's about our declining democracy. Canada's effective number of parties is down to 2.76, showing we're sliding toward an American-style two-party system under Duverger's Law.
In a democracy, citizens deserve representation. Every election under FPTP means millions of perfectly valid votes are discarded. How many more decades should we wait?
I appreciate your perspective, but there are several points worth clarifying.
First, the Liberals did have specific plans for electoral reform. The entire Electoral Reform Committee process produced clear recommendations for proportional representation after extensive consultation. The problem wasn't a lack of plan—it was that the plan (proportional representation) didn't align with Trudeau's preference for Alternative Vote, a system that would have benefited the Liberal Party.
Regarding Carney's accountability: while he wasn't personally involved, he's now leading a party with an established pattern of promising electoral reform without delivering. Since Mackenzie King in 1919, Liberals have campaigned on PR during multiple elections. Carney has been notably vague when asked about his position, despite being an economist who should understand the mathematics of fair representation. When an intelligent person is "uncertain" about ensuring every vote counts, it suggests political calculation rather than genuine indecision.
As for the NDP's provincial record, this "whataboutism" doesn't address the fundamental issue: our electoral system systematically discards millions of valid votes. At the federal level, 87% of NDP, Green, and Bloc MPs supported a Citizens' Assembly on Electoral Reform in 2024, while 68.6% of Liberal MPs opposed it. Actions speak louder than words.
The housing policy comparison misses the point. Electoral reform isn't just another policy—it's the foundation that determines how all other policies are made. The mathematical reality remains: in our democracy, citizens are deserving of and entitled to representation in government, and only proportional representation can dependably deliver that.
Democracy requires that every vote counts and affects outcomes. This isn't a partisan position—it's a democratic principle.
Remember when the Liberals also unveiled their plan to make the 2015 election be the last under FPTP?
Your continued cherry-picking of specific countries while ignoring the fundamental issue of democratic representation is telling.
First, electoral reform isn't just "my" pressing issue - 76% of Canadians support electoral reform. This overwhelming support exists because millions of citizens recognize their votes are systematically discarded under our current system.
As for Germany and Italy, you're mischaracterizing how PR functions in these countries. In Germany, the AfD has representation proportional to their actual support, while coalition dynamics have successfully kept them from power. Their support would exist under any electoral system - PR simply makes it visible rather than hidden within a mainstream party.
Meanwhile, PR countries like New Zealand, the Nordic nations, and many others consistently outperform FPTP countries on measures of economic equality, social welfare, and policy stability. Your selective examples ignore this broader evidence.
The core issue remains: in Ontario's last election, the PCs formed a "majority" government with just 43% of the vote. Under FPTP, 57% of voters who explicitly rejected them have no meaningful representation. How is this democratic?
What you call "dodging a bullet" is actually dodging democracy itself. A system where every vote contributes meaningfully to representation isn't a radical idea - it's a fundamental democratic principle. When you oppose this principle, what you're really saying is that some citizens deserve representation while others don't, based solely on where they live or who they support.
The mathematical reality is undeniable: PR produces governments that more accurately reflect how people actually vote. This isn't a minor technical detail - it's the entire purpose of representative democracy.
Thanks! I truly believe proportional representation is critical for Canadian democracy. I voluntarily do this advocacy!