Our system is fundamentally different than the presidential republic that the yanks have, you do not vote for the PM, you vote for your rep. The PM is the person with confidence of the house, which often is the plurality party leader, but there’s no requirement of this at all, there’s history of the PM not even being an MP in Canada, two of them were senators who took office after the PM died.
Your MP is your voice, tell them to vote non confidence if you truly feel that an election should be called, I feel fairly safe to say however that once parliament resumes we’re going to see that happen anyhow and the writ dropped shortly thereafter or the PM asking to GC to dissolve parliament.
While I can get your intent in that you feel that the PM should have a mandate (again, arguably that mandate is fulfilled if they are capable of maintaining confidence of the house), Canadians are ignorant about our system of government (anecdotally, I know Canadians who consume more American news media and pay attention to their elections, but don’t do the same domestically, likely contributing) which is a problem (and a point of irritation for me).
I understand how the system works which is why I disagree with it. I am also against FPTP, for Mandatory voting, and against the party system in general. Doesn’t mean that is “how the system works”, and that doesn’t mean I am an “Ignorant Canadian” for stating something is wrong when it is.
The fact of the matter is right now only members of the Liberal Party of Canada get to decide on who the next Prime Minister is without that person being required to run an election campaign. All you need is a Liberal membership, $350,000, and a few hundred Liberal signatures for the top job. Which is wrong.
Electoral reform means electoral reform, and unelected people allowed a chance at becoming the Prime Minister is one of the things we should reform. Especially when internal party leadership elections are one of the big targets for election interference.
Funny enough, the only precedents for a Prime Minister not winning an election are Liberals. I assume this is because Canadians would lose their collective minds if Conservatives pulled the same thing.
First off, on reading, yeah sorry. I meant no offense, was the headline on the article I chose and I said, it really bothers me how disengaged Canadians are from our political system to the detriment of us all.
To be pedantic, Arthur Meighen was a Tory PM appointed after Borden resigned, and again after the Byng-King affair. More recently, Kim Campbell was appointed after the resignation of Mulroney
I do agree with you wrt our system needing changing, I’m vehemently in favour of literally anything but fptp but prefer something like stv. Personally, I’d also be in favour of rescinding the mandatory election dates put in place in what, 2007-2008 and really would like to return to the per-vote subsidies (just get money out of politics period).
Our system is fundamentally different than the presidential republic that the yanks have, you do not vote for the PM, you vote for your rep. The PM is the person with confidence of the house, which often is the plurality party leader, but there’s no requirement of this at all, there’s history of the PM not even being an MP in Canada, two of them were senators who took office after the PM died.
Your MP is your voice, tell them to vote non confidence if you truly feel that an election should be called, I feel fairly safe to say however that once parliament resumes we’re going to see that happen anyhow and the writ dropped shortly thereafter or the PM asking to GC to dissolve parliament.
Feel free to read the rest of the thread.
I have already addressed this, and won’t repeat myself.
While I can get your intent in that you feel that the PM should have a mandate (again, arguably that mandate is fulfilled if they are capable of maintaining confidence of the house), Canadians are ignorant about our system of government (anecdotally, I know Canadians who consume more American news media and pay attention to their elections, but don’t do the same domestically, likely contributing) which is a problem (and a point of irritation for me).
I understand how the system works which is why I disagree with it. I am also against FPTP, for Mandatory voting, and against the party system in general. Doesn’t mean that is “how the system works”, and that doesn’t mean I am an “Ignorant Canadian” for stating something is wrong when it is.
The fact of the matter is right now only members of the Liberal Party of Canada get to decide on who the next Prime Minister is without that person being required to run an election campaign. All you need is a Liberal membership, $350,000, and a few hundred Liberal signatures for the top job. Which is wrong.
Electoral reform means electoral reform, and unelected people allowed a chance at becoming the Prime Minister is one of the things we should reform. Especially when internal party leadership elections are one of the big targets for election interference.
Funny enough, the only precedents for a Prime Minister not winning an election are Liberals. I assume this is because Canadians would lose their collective minds if Conservatives pulled the same thing.
First off, on reading, yeah sorry. I meant no offense, was the headline on the article I chose and I said, it really bothers me how disengaged Canadians are from our political system to the detriment of us all.
To be pedantic, Arthur Meighen was a Tory PM appointed after Borden resigned, and again after the Byng-King affair. More recently, Kim Campbell was appointed after the resignation of Mulroney
I do agree with you wrt our system needing changing, I’m vehemently in favour of literally anything but fptp but prefer something like stv. Personally, I’d also be in favour of rescinding the mandatory election dates put in place in what, 2007-2008 and really would like to return to the per-vote subsidies (just get money out of politics period).