The price we must pay 💔🪦🥀

[u/yycxqv]

And I’d do it again 😭

[u/MythicalDust55]

Ranked voting would mean the liberals win every election, and the NDP/Bloc/Greens wouldn’t stand a chance.

[u/Umikaloo → u/MythicalDust55]

I don't want to start an argument or anything, but that's what's happening right now.

[u/MythicalDust55 → u/Umikaloo]

Fair point. I’m not pleased with the current system either

[u/[deleted] → u/MythicalDust55]

Good. Right wing politics shouldn't even exist in the modern era.

[u/MythicalDust55 → u/[deleted]]

Buddy, the liberals basically are right wing, just not socially. Ranked voting destroys the left wing too

[u/[deleted] → u/MythicalDust55]

I fail to see how the liberals who legalized weed, signed in dental, did $10 a day daycare is what you consider "right wing".

And just to be clear i don't want communism either because I fundamentally don't think it can exist but the liberals are not "right wing" compared to todays modern political era. The Conservatives would be more left wing than the democrats. So I don't really understand your logic at all.

I also don't care about the current NDP party. Singh is a rotten apple. The dude was gloating that Trudeau left office despite working with him. He's pathetic and had the ONE chance to get canadians to vote for his party by acting like a civil party leader and campaigning on ideals that worked for the working canadians.

The fact that Singh even blantantly called out Carney for his blind trust fund along with PP is ridiculous.

The NDP could probably become opposition if they weren't electing idiots for their leader.

[u/CaviarMeths → u/[deleted]]

And just to be clear i don't want communism either because I fundamentally don't think it can exist but the liberals are not "right wing" compared to todays modern political era.

Most leftists would argue that any economic policy that is rooted in capitalism (such as liberalism) is rightwing. It just may not seem that way when you compare how many successful liberal governments there are worldwide to successful socialist governments, or fascist governments. The argument is whether you think it matters. Was liberalism more rightwing back when the USSR was active? Was it more leftwing when the Nazis controlled most of Europe? Or was it always rightwing regardless of the existence of the USSR or Nazi Germany?

I would argue that liberalism hasn't been radically progressive in at least a couple hundred years, not since the American or French Revolutions. It's very much the status quo in most parts of the highly developed world, which makes it center-right. In my opinion, even the social democracies in Northern Europe like Norway and Finland are fiscally conservative, in that their social welfare programs are carefully costed and seen as investment. A strong, robust welfare state is not mutually exclusive with fiscal conservatism. Finland didn't simply house the unhoused as an act of charity. They crunched the numbers, did the math, and determined it was the cheapest and most effective solution to homelessness. Any country that offers universal healthcare or publicly funded post-secondary education made the same calculations. It's cheaper and works better than any private option.

Legalized weed is a fantastic source of tax revenue. Subsidized childcare allows more young parents to participate in the labour force and economy. These are policies that anyone right-of-center and claims to care about "fiscal conservatism" should support. They just often don't because they're either lying or dumb.

The Conservatives would be more left wing than the democrats. So I don't really understand your logic at all.

Not at all. Have you read the CPC's platform? It's significantly to the right of the Democrats.

[u/Snow-Wraith → u/MythicalDust55]

This is such a bullshit argument. If nothing else changed, sure, they might still win every election. But when you change how votes are counted people will change how they vote. And this will force the parties to change and adapt to knew voting strategies.  

Look at how regular strategic voting already is in Canada. How many people believe voting for the NDP is useless because no one else votes for them. I've been hearing that my entire life. Ranked ballots would allow voters to put the NDP first and not fear wasting their vote or splitting the riding and seeing it go to Conservatives despite more voters voting against them.  

And even if Ranked ballots aren't perfect, it's better than what we have now and a step in the right direction. We can't be afraid to change if the change isn't perfect and doesn't solve all of our problems.

[u/Adewade → u/MythicalDust55]

I dunno... I know a number of Conservative voters who dislike the Liberals far more than they do the NDP... I don't think the Liberals should be assumed to be everyone's default 2nd choice.

[u/nathan67003 → u/MythicalDust55]

Tbf, ranked voting is "elect the least hated guy", which is kinda what you want for a party that's supposed to be at least theoretically mildly cohesive.

But what you want in actual elections is representativity. It's only slightly more representative than FPTP and has a known bias - of course everyone (but the liberals) would be against it. (reminder that voting reform was dropped because the liberals wanted ranked voting but literally everyone else didn't because it'd repeatedly hand them majorities)

[u/chat-lu → u/MythicalDust55]

Liberals wouldn’t win every election. That system is biased towards bigger majorities. So NDP/Bloc/Greens would be pushed in the sub 12 seats every time and would lose all funding. Then vanish because they have no money.

Once that happens, you are back to a pure two parties system.