Buckdog

I am not a Green Party supporter but a Green blogger, meaning I care about the environment. Big differences.

And the comment was made more in jest than anything - our democratic system is corrupt and excluding May shows how corrupt it is. Why support the system if it has no intention of supporting the desire's of the people?

Well let me prove my firm belief in DEMOCRACY ......

Those voters who want to vote Green or who even remotely support the polices of the Green Party should listen carefully to what I am about to say ...

VOTE GREEN! PLEASE! GET OUT ON OCTOBER 14TH AND VOTE FOR THE GREEN PARTY OF CANADA! SUPPORT THEM! PUT UP A GREEN PARTY SIGN! GET OUT YOUR CHEQUE BOOK AND WRITE A DONATION CHEQUE FOR THE GREEN PARTY OF CANADA!

Ballot spoiling is a ridiculous waste, and I can't believe people would actually believe this is a valid way of protesting or showing support.

AGREED!!!! This is how it was historically possible for someone like Adolph Hitler to actually win an election as he did in Germany in the early 1930's! A vote is almost sacred as far as I'm concerned. I won't vote for May but I encourage ALL of her supporters to get out and vote for her!!

Ballot spoiling is a legitimate way to protest the fact that you support none of the parties, or the system itself. The alternative is, of course, not to vote at all, but by doing that you end up not having anyone recognize your protest.

This is how it was historically possible for someone like Adolph Hitler to actually win an election as he did in Germany in the early 1930's!

Um, what?

As for me, I fully intend to vote and support the Green party. The post was the result of frustration over a broken system.

What? Participate in the democratic process? How preposterous!!

What a bunch of whiners! If the Greens don't get their way, it's because democracy is broken. Yeah, right.

Peter, I have to disagree. Ballot spoiling is a waste - period. If you want to protest, put up a sign.

Peter, I did not intend to attack you ... I realize from what you said in your comments on my blog that you were merely frustrated. Fair ball.

I am a democrat. To me, a vote is almost sacred.

My reference to Hitler relates to the fact that early in the 1930's, voter turnout was so low in Germany as a result of people's frustration that he actually had some success at the ballot box.

VOTE!!!

"Why support the system if it has no intention of supporting the desire's of the people?"
==================
If the Greens represent the desire's of "The People", why aren't there massive numbers of Green Party MPs in Ottawa. 90% of the "The People" apparently do not desire the Greens. Get over it.

What a bunch of whiners! If the Greens don't get their way, it's because democracy is broken. Yeah, right.

Well Louise, what do you call it when a party that has an MP and received 5% of the vote in the last election and is garnering near 10% of the vote this time around is not allowed in the debates? I call it a broken system.

Peter, I have to disagree. Ballot spoiling is a waste - period. If you want to protest, put up a sign.

OK, so I put up a sign. Now what? Ballot spoiling gets tallied and registered. If enough people do it, it sends a sign to Ottawa that people are fed up with the partisan and broken system.

I am a democrat. To me, a vote is almost sacred.

As it is to me. But if the system is broken, why vote for anybody? Why not exercise your right to vote by spoiling the ballot? It's better than say, not voting at all, isn't it?

If the Greens represent the desire's of "The People", why aren't there massive numbers of Green Party MPs in Ottawa. 90% of the "The People" apparently do not desire the Greens. Get over it.

Louise. The Reform Party was allowed in the debates with 1 MP, while running less than a full slate of candidates back in '93. Me thinks you probably supported that.

Plus, most polls shows that Canadians, on average, want the Green's in the debates. It is only the anti-democracy partisans who want them excluded.

Saying that, what is the bar for you Louise to have the Green's in the debates?

Yeah, it is rather silly to spoil your ballot to show your support for the Green Party. If you want to show support for the Green Party, you can actually, you know, vote for it? :-)

James ... again, forgive me for confusing you with another blogger with a similar name.

Yeah, it is rather silly to spoil your ballot to show your support for the Green Party.

James, if you read the post you would see that the post wasn't about spoiling the ballot to support the Green Party, but to spoil the ballot to protest the lack of democracy in this country. Huge difference.

Actually spoiling your ballot is not the correct way to show protest as they do not count. Refusing your ballot is counted however. If you find that nobody is worthwhile to vote for, but still want to vote, you can Refuse you ballot. Go in pass the ballot back and say you refuse it.

The greater argument in this matter is about how proportional representation would ensure at least some representation of Greens in Ottawa--and elsewhere--if other jurisdictions had the courage to lead--for a change.

In the last federal by-election,, I voted Green even though I know the Liberal candidate.

Voting Green reduced Bob Rae's plurality by one but if more of us did it then he'd have won only a squeaker.

Sometimes clipping the wings--even a little--puts the putative victor on notice and the proportional rep. system does just that.

The Green Party started out as a fringe party in Germany and today it's a significant element of the Bundestag.

First-past-the-post belongs in the museum.

PR would also ensure that no party would win in a walkover. Granted, nobody likes a continuous succession of minority parliaments but they gave us Medicare and other benefits like Canada Pension Plan--both thanks to Tommy Douglas.

The crux of minority parliaments is the calibre of the person in the PM's chair and office.

Harper has proven he's not the person to lead in a minority situation and he'd be even more tyrannical in a majority government. Shades of Mike Harris.

Democracy? My dear leftdog, what possibly leads you to believe that we live in a democracy?

Canada has a form of democracy known as "representative democracy" where those elected are supposed to represent those in their constituency.

As we all know this is a good theory, but it has become steadily more flawed as the power of the parties has grown.

At this point Canada is governed by the greatest minority, and MPs represent their party, and not the electorate, in the House.

It used to be that people could officially refuse their ballot, if they didn't think any of the candidates in their riding was worthy of being put into parliament. Such refusals had to be tallied, and if there were more refusals than votes in a riding, the election would have to be re-run in that riding, with all different candidates.

We can't do that now. So we're either stuck with voting for a fool, if all the candidates are fools, or not voting. But "not voting" could also be from laziness, so there's no tally of how many citizens actually said to these candidates, "You're all fools, and I will not be responsible for putting a fool in parliament."

So I think that spoiling a ballot is the only option they've left us, since we can't officially refuse our ballot. It's definitely unpalatable - and I haven't done it so far - but if the choice of candidates was truly horrific, I would have to consider it as my only option, the only remaining democratic way of expressing my opinion of the candidates.

So while I think it should be discouraged except as an extreme last resort, I think it's as valid a democratic expression as marking an "X" beside a single name.

wgayleard: Spoiling your ballot is not an option in federal elections - it's a recommendation that's been on the books for a while now but no party that holds power will pass the legislation..... why do you think that may be?

Spoiling your ballot is one of those things that sounds like a good idea in theory but in practice is useless because nobody knows how to interpret the action. Now if they had a "none of the above" option on the ballot paper I wonder how many votes that would get?