FPTP is far more prone to policy whiplash than PR. Look at 1996 and 2001 elections: first NDP get 52% of seats w/ 39% of votes, then Liberals get 97% of seats w/ 58% of votes.
Successive #ProRep governments would have more overlap; BETTER stability.
FALSE. Current system has seen many changes (and arguably also a few problems?) over 145 years. Votes for women is a big one! Beyond that, see fascinating timeline of Canadian history of election reform at sightline.org/2018/10/02/bri…
Suprise, voting methods are not a perfect panacea against racism! But in Sweden, the two biggest parties have both pledged not to join a government with right wing—so RW doesn't get power.
Meanwhile, in the US, under FPTP...
Correctly describes a Fraser Institute study. But not unbiased: right-leaning FI hosted a pro-reform conference in BC back in the 90s, when #ProRep was good for right.
Italy, Norway, Germany= <20 elections since 1945. Canada, NZ, Aus= >22, mostly FPTP
Again with the scaremongering about far-right parties. This tweet doesn't even make any factual claims I can debunk, just foments a miasma of fear.
Ask yourself: who benefits from making you afraid like this? I'm pretty sure it's not you.
Trifecta of fearmongering:
Guilt by association (Weimar Republic had some proportional aspects!)? ✅
Ignoring problems with status quo system? ✅
Again: who benefits when you worry about Nazi Germany not current USA?
I agree, voting should be simple. More votes, more seats; what could be simpler?
Do you think it's "simple" that the federal NDP consistently gets more votes but fewer seats than the Bloc?
Once again, 180º backwards. #ProRep represents to all voters, including Liberal minority in lower mainland and NDP minority in north. Result: governing majority would be MORE likely to have MLAs from all regions.
So, I looked at the dozen latest tweets from @NoBCProRep. Every one of them was somewhere on the scale from misleading to outright lies. Despite repetition, over a dozen different misleading ideas.
Ask yourself: who benefits from this kind of fearmongering dishonesty?