[Curtman]

Akhenaten Akhenaten:

I'm not explaining the math to you again.

You aren't able to explain the math it seems. Do you not agree that LIB+NDP > PC ? LIB+NDP+BLOC > PC ? Where is the error?

Akhenaten Akhenaten:

The conservatives gained like 30+ seats and the Liberals lost 20+ last election. Only a spinmiester of the highest grade falls for this "more people voted against them than for them".

As I said: using the exact same logic WAY more people 'voted against' the Liberals than the conservatives.

Awww.. Now your trying to explain math again like you said you wouldn't do, but failing.

Akhenaten Akhenaten:

You called anyone voting conservative a redneck. Childish and sticking your head in the sand.

I notice you didn't quote me there. I think you'll find I said no such thing.

[Akhenaten]

$1:

wrote:
Funny how this was never a flaw in the system until the Conservatives won.


Its not a flaw that works for the Conservatives. Nobody wants to get in bed with them.

Not surprising that you can't answer you can only joke and run off some BS.

[Akhenaten]

$1:

Do you not agree that LIB+NDP > PC ? LIB+NDP+BLOC > PC ? Where is the error?

DUDE. Quit being stupid. Try this: PC+NDP > LIB.
PC+NDP+BLOC > LIB.
NDP+BLOC > LIB

No matter how much you try and pound the square peg into the round hole it's not going to work genius.

VERY SAME LOGIC. YOU ARE WRONG. The error is assuming anyone who didn't vote conservative voted against the conservatives but FOR the liberals. Duh.

[Curtman]

Akhenaten Akhenaten:

Not surprising that you can't answer you can only joke and run off some BS.

But it's true! That's why it hurts you so much.

Akhenaten Akhenaten:

DUDE. Quit being stupid. Try this: PC+NDP > LIB.
VERY SAME LOGIC. YOU ARE WRONG.

Right. The NDP is going to form a coalition and agree with what Stephen Harper wants to do. Hahahahahahahahha..

Oh man.. That's rich.

[Akhenaten]

The ndp doesn't have to. The Bloc can and they'll deal with anyone. Again: your error is in assuming a vote for the NDP is a vote against the Conservative and not a vote against the Liberals. You really have no way of determining that. Truth is we vote for who we vote for and there's no such thing as 'voting against'. Period.

No matter how much you try and pound the square peg into the round hole it's not going to work. Logic like this I'm starting to think you're the redneck.

$1:

But it's true! That's why it hurts you so much.

More inability to address the subject. Sounds just like high school.

[Curtman]

Akhenaten Akhenaten:

The Bloc can and they'll deal with anyone.

I would love that. After the Cons accused the Libs of colluding with seperatists, when they did no such thing, and in reality they wanted anyting-but-harper as well, and chose to give support even though they had no real part in the coalition. Again it all seems very far fetched.

Akhenaten Akhenaten:

Again: your error is in assuming a vote for the NDP is a vote against the Conservative and not a vote against the Liberals. You really have no way of determining that. Truth is we vote for who we vote for and there's no such thing as 'voting against'. Period.

No matter how much you try and pound the square peg into the round hole it's not going to work.

So you figure there is quite a big portion of swing votes between PC -> NDP do you? The average NDP voter would rather have Harper than Iggy? You're getting pretty desperate now.

I walk into a ballot box, and I have one choice. I can't vote for somebody and against somebody else. I think it's a good idea, but we can't do that apparently, not even provincially in B.C. So we have what we have.. Coalitions are legal, but they require the coalition members to cooperate.

[Akhenaten]

$1:

So you figure there is quite a big portion of swing votes between PC -> NDP do you?

Doesn't matter what "I figure", that's my point. We vote *for* parties not against them and the fact is you can't tell me why someone who voted NDP did it or if they voted *against* another party and if so which one. It's a dumb talking point and you know it.

$1:

The average NDP voter would rather have Harper than Iggy?

Considering they had no notion who Iggy was when they voted the question is moot.

$1:

Coalitions are legal, but they require the coalition members to cooperate.

....and they couldn't even do that for long.

Bottom line:
Liberals after 2006 election: 103 seats.
Liberals after 2008 election: 77 seats.

Seems pretty obvious who Canadians are 'voting against'. lol.

[Curtman]

Akhenaten Akhenaten:

Doesn't matter what "I figure", that's my point. We vote *for* parties not against them and the fact is you can't tell me why someone who voted NDP did it or if they voted *against* another party and if so which one. It's a dumb talking point and you know it.

You've already lost in math, spelled stupid incorrectly, accused me of saying things I didn't say, and now you're saying it's a dumb talking point. Well sir, I'm glad I've reached your level and you can start enjoying the conversation too.

Someone votes for the NDP or any party because they believe that party will best represent them. If that party then decides that the current government is unworkable, and they would rather another party was in charge so they could better represent their voters, then why do you conclude that party has no such right?

Akhenaten Akhenaten:

Considering they had no notion who Iggy was when they voted the question is moot.

That's even better, they chose Stephane over Harper.

Sorry, I meant to address this one as well:

Akhenaten Akhenaten:

More inability to address the subject. Sounds just like high school.

You might notice that we are addressing the subject right now.

[2Cdo]

Using Curtmans logic, I would bet he had no problems with our system when Chretein was winning majorities with approximately 40% of the popular vote. That indicates almost 60% voted against the Liberals, so should the Conservatives, NDP and Bloc have formed a government? After all more people voted "not Liberal" than voted Liberal.

BTW Curtman have you met your best buddy Kenmore yet?

[Curtman]

2Cdo 2Cdo:

Using Curtmans logic, I would bet he had no problems with our system when Chretein was winning majorities with approximately 40% of the popular vote. That indicates almost 60% voted against the Liberals, so should the Conservatives, NDP and Bloc have formed a government? After all more people voted "not Liberal" than voted Liberal.

But who had the seats to form a coalition with the cons? Everyone else + PC still didn't equal the Libs. That's the heart of the problem. BTW, I'm fully in support of changing the system for better representation. I'd vote for anyone who was able to accomplish that.

2Cdo 2Cdo:

BTW Curtman have you met your best buddy Kenmore yet?

No I haven't.. ridenrain raved on and on last night about how wonderful he is, and how he would be my best buddy.. Now you've confirmed it. I can't wait to meet the best buddy I never met.

[2Cdo]

Curtman Curtman:

2Cdo 2Cdo:

Using Curtmans logic, I would bet he had no problems with our system when Chretein was winning majorities with approximately 40% of the popular vote. That indicates almost 60% voted against the Liberals, so should the Conservatives, NDP and Bloc have formed a government? After all more people voted "not Liberal" than voted Liberal.

But who had the seats to form a coalition with the cons? Everyone else + PC still didn't equal the Libs. That's the heart of the problem. BTW, I'm fully in support of changing the system for better representation. I'd vote for anyone who was able to accomplish that.

2Cdo 2Cdo:

BTW Curtman have you met your best buddy Kenmore yet?

No I haven't.. ridenrain raved on and on last night about how wonderful he is, and how he would be my best buddy.. Now you've confirmed it. I can't wait to meet the best buddy I never met.

Even with all it's faults I still prefer our system (even when the Libs win majorities with less than 50% of the popular vote) than any of the options that are often touted by the professional losers, the NDP.

[Curtman]

2Cdo 2Cdo:

Even with all it's faults I still prefer our system (even when the Libs win majorities with less than 50% of the popular vote) than any of the options that are often touted by the professional losers, the NDP.

We should be given more of an option than which one of the 3 or 4 is less likely to screw you over. A system where we rank them from 'This guy looks alright' right down to 'I hope she gets hit by a bus'. This black or white stuff doesn't work. It's what is keeping the conservatives out of power provincially in Manitoba. Just for the record, I loathe the Liberal party of Manitoba.

[OnTheIce]

Akhenaten Akhenaten:

$1:

Do you not agree that LIB+NDP > PC ? LIB+NDP+BLOC > PC ? Where is the error?

DUDE. Quit being stupid. Try this: PC+NDP > LIB.
PC+NDP+BLOC > LIB.
NDP+BLOC > LIB

No matter how much you try and pound the square peg into the round hole it's not going to work genius.

VERY SAME LOGIC. YOU ARE WRONG. The error is assuming anyone who didn't vote conservative voted against the conservatives but FOR the liberals. Duh.

Need flash cards. Words don't work it seems.

[Curtman]

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

Need flash cards. Words don't work it seems.

I suppose so.. The man can't add. Nothing we can do about that.

[OnTheIce]

Curtman Curtman:

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

Need flash cards. Words don't work it seems.

I suppose so.. The man can't add. Nothing we can do about that.

It was more for you, than it was the other user.

You're debating in circles. Using the equation you used, you are correct. Regardless of how you spin the equation, the combination of parties always works out as the winner.

Looking at pure numbers, more people voted for someone else other than the Liberal Party compared to that of the Conservatives.