🚀 go-pugleaf

joogle@netcom.com (James Ogle) wrote:

>: I think we should vote for the LEADER.  The one with the most votes must
>: therefore have the confidence of the majority of the population.  Votes
>: can then be divided regionally, and if the people of Brampton South were
>: more inclined to vote NDP (for example) then that area would have an NDP
>: MPP and that would count toward that party's pecentage of seats.
>

Come on:  What kind of a process would this be.  

As I understand you you are proposing:
a) that each individual would cast a vote for a leader.
b) that each party would get to appoint a number of representatives to 
the house in proportion to their percentage of the popular vote gained.

So who gets to choose those representatives.
The leader of the party I suppose.

Can you see where that approach would lead.  A massive advertising media 
campaign directed at selling the leader.  (Look south perhaps for an 
example perhaps.  Content if laughably unimportant.  Image is everything. 
 Image and aura and spiritual connotations.

All that would be followed by some back room political sleaze of the 
worst degree to fill the 41% of seats with representatives.  
Image being a hard party worker trying to crawl your way 
upwards to a position as representative.

Me I prefer to think that there is still time to turn it around the other 
way.  It would be great if we could start voting for the man or woman in 
your riding without worrying about who's paying their advertising costs. 
 It would be great if the people who chose politics as they're career 
were not quite so willing to trade their independence for membership in 
the yes sir clubs.

But there's not much hope of that in any urban ridings these days.  Too 
many people.  Not much chance of getting to know anybody well enough to 
know whether they can be trusted or not.  And the track record aint too 
good.