Wow. I’m speechless.
Didn’t expect the NDP to take the Skeena riding.
Neither did I 
I personally dislike Robin Austin for the kind of person he is and his past. Not to mention in running all he did was bash the other candidates.
[quote=“SteveDVS”]
Not to mention in running all he did was bash the other candidates.[/quote]
Wasn’t that the norm in this campaign from both major parties?
The NDP guy won in my riding too 
Bulkley/Stikine is close too! NDP leading by a little bit.
What riding is that?
Malahat-Juan de Fuca
My riding is still way too close to call (Burnaby North). The Liberal candidate is leading right now, but only by about 200 votes.
From the looks of things, STV isn’t going to pass, as of yet. Thankfully.
Took skeena, took north coast and alot more.
Why are you against STV?
As of now, its 56% yes for STV… I have a hunch it will pass.
Edit: Forgot they needed 60% to pass.
Well that tells you something though… Most people in BC support it.
I think the #1 reason I like STV: the big parties (the Liberals and NDP) both hate it.
[quote=“MiG”]
Why are you against STV?[/quote]
I voted ‘yes’ to BC-STV, but the only thing I can see being the big draw back is there will probably cause there to be more frequent minority governments.
Why is that a drawback? Why has this become some sort of a bad thing?
It’s the point.
Government by consensus (ie: you have to agree with other parties, or you don’t stay in power), instead of government by “do whatever we feel like doing”.
Think of all the good things that have happened in Canada during minority governments: Universal Health care, Employment Insurance, our flag, our peacekeeping role, our old age pension system. All those things during minority governments, when politicians had to get along instead of constantly bashing each other.
A lot of the people I talked to today about voting had no idea what BC-STV was. Frankly, neither did I until I got the scoop from here.
[quote=“MiG”]
Why are you against STV?[/quote]
Well, I messed up and lost my big long rant on why I’m against STV, so here’s a very brief version of what was previously said. If any more elaboration is needed, I’ll do it tommorow or something, as I have to get up for school tommorow.
-
I could be wrong on this, but it seems that a vote for your party of choice is not necessarily a vote for your party of choice. Basically, surplus votes are spread equally to all candidates for the next round of vote counting. Some articles are vague on this, but one in particular said this very clearly.
-
STV is not truly proportional.
-
Different percentages are needed for a victory, depending on your area.
-
STV wouldn’t help a rural area such as Prince Rupert.
There was a few other points I had, but I can’t seem to remember them off the top of my head.
Last post of the night… NDP won one seat by a single vote: http://www.elections.bc.ca/elections/ge2005/results/cbs.htm.
That’s an offical result, but obviously there’ll be a recount on that.
That’s wrong. If you vote for a party, your vote is for that party.
If you just want to vote like normal, go for it. Vote for one person. It works too.
And our current system is? STV is much more proportional than ours.
No, that’s not right. Different percentages depend on number of voters and candidates.
Sure it would. You could elect a “prince rupert party” candidate.
Also, MLAs would be more accountable to the public instead of accountable to the party.
Belsey is a great example of how the current system encourages MLAs to not represent their riding.
STV?
In the 2001 BC election, the NDP had 22% of the popular vote, but only won 2.5% of the seats in the legislature. The BCLiberals had 57% of the popular vote, but held 97.5% of the seats.
yeah but most of the ridings also had MORE THAN 50% of the vote for liberal and that is why they won. If NDP only had 20% in each of these ridings than it makes sense that they wouldnt be elected.