Dear fellow Canadians, - Page 2 - ZEFRANK.COM

Madmack · 01-25-2006, 11:53 AM

25 October 1993 - 69.6
2 June 1997 - 67.0
27 November 2000 - 64.1
28 June 2004 - 60.9

Historical voter turnout

Klynne · 01-27-2006, 01:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Madmack

25 October 1993 - 69.6
2 June 1997 - 67.0
27 November 2000 - 64.1
28 June 2004 - 60.9

Historical voter turnout

Does Canada use an electoral college for President as we do?

Jack Flanders · 01-27-2006, 02:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Klynne

Does Canada use an electoral college for President as we do?

Check out my previous question on this thread. No one really answered it , so I'm thinking, no.

trisherina · 01-27-2006, 03:28 AM

People vote for local MPs, or Members of Parliament, to represent them federally (you would have to be Canadian to appreciate the hilarity of federal representation as a notion). The MPs belong to parties, like Liberals, Conservatives, New Democrats. So by voting for your representative you are making a federal vote, in a general election, through deciding which MP "seats" go where. Often when it gets hard to decide, people will vote locally, but it will still have an effect federally.

In order to have a majority government, a party must hold 155 seats. This doesn't happen as often as one might like; when a party wins more seats than any other party but not enough for a majority, that constitutes a minority government. Minority governments can be easily forced to another general election by a vote of non-confidence in the House of Commons, which happens when enough of the opposing parties' members disagree with some notion of the party in power -- enough that the opposing parties' members will band together and force this issue of non-confidence, and hence a general election. More on minority vs. majority governments on MapleLeafweb.

All this means that we have governments who don't get much chance to govern, because they are awfully freaking busy trying not to piss off the other parties too much. Sometimes this can be bad; for instance, when the party in power has a useful or interesting agenda but is afraid to implement it. Sometimes this can be good; for instance, when the party in power has let its ideology go too far in a certain direction and the other parties can provide checks and balances.

sparticle · 01-28-2006, 12:54 AM

How very different from here.

Here, the biggest liar with the most money and the greatest amount of corporate influence gets to rule absolutely and uncontested, and gets to choose the state religion.

We call it "democracy".

Jack Flanders · 01-28-2006, 02:08 AM

DITTO

DITTO!!!!

DAMN IT!!

trisherina · 01-28-2006, 03:24 AM

You're welcome.

01-25-2006, 11:53 AM	#16
Madmack ..it just started... Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: About where I need to be... Posts: 1,022	25 October 1993 - 69.6 2 June 1997 - 67.0 27 November 2000 - 64.1 28 June 2004 - 60.9 Historical voter turnout __________________ 'I feel sorry for people who don't drink. They wake up in the morning and that's the best they're going to feel all day.' Dean Martin World Travel Tips

01-27-2006, 03:28 AM	#19
trisherina meretricious dilettante Join Date: Jan 2003 Posts: 11,068	People vote for local MPs, or Members of Parliament, to represent them federally (you would have to be Canadian to appreciate the hilarity of federal representation as a notion). The MPs belong to parties, like Liberals, Conservatives, New Democrats. So by voting for your representative you are making a federal vote, in a general election, through deciding which MP "seats" go where. Often when it gets hard to decide, people will vote locally, but it will still have an effect federally. In order to have a majority government, a party must hold 155 seats. This doesn't happen as often as one might like; when a party wins more seats than any other party but not enough for a majority, that constitutes a minority government. Minority governments can be easily forced to another general election by a vote of non-confidence in the House of Commons, which happens when enough of the opposing parties' members disagree with some notion of the party in power -- enough that the opposing parties' members will band together and force this issue of non-confidence, and hence a general election. More on minority vs. majority governments on MapleLeafweb. All this means that we have governments who don't get much chance to govern, because they are awfully freaking busy trying not to piss off the other parties too much. Sometimes this can be bad; for instance, when the party in power has a useful or interesting agenda but is afraid to implement it. Sometimes this can be good; for instance, when the party in power has let its ideology go too far in a certain direction and the other parties can provide checks and balances. __________________ Because how we spend our days is, of course, how we spend our lives. -- Annie Dillard

01-28-2006, 12:54 AM	#20
sparticle Conspiracy Theorist Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: cleveland, oh Posts: 4,702	How very different from here. Here, the biggest liar with the most money and the greatest amount of corporate influence gets to rule absolutely and uncontested, and gets to choose the state religion. We call it "democracy". __________________ There are few situations in life which wind up with you saying to yourself: "Gee, I wish I'd had worse manners there." -- trisherina

01-28-2006, 02:08 AM	#21
Jack Flanders landscaping is fun Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: up river and down river Posts: 4,815	DITTO DITTO DITTO!!!! DAMN IT!!

01-28-2006, 03:24 AM	#22
trisherina meretricious dilettante Join Date: Jan 2003 Posts: 11,068	You're welcome. __________________ Because how we spend our days is, of course, how we spend our lives. -- Annie Dillard

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes	Rate This Thread
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode	Rate This Thread: