Just for the rabbits... no humans allowed. :D

[Feathers McGraw]

As for proportional representation, you're right. But would J. Random American understand it?

It's not difficult really, in fact it should be easier... the % of seats allocated to parties matches the % the parties got overall.

No tactical voting, no confusion about boundaries... you can vote for the candidate you actually like the most and your vote is never wasted because if your party can't win those votes are allocated to peoples' second choices (if people can't understand that, make a Game of Thrones analogy for choosing the commander of the night's watch - plenty of candidates who couldn't win folded and the people who had backed them chose again until someone had a majority ).

Simon, I'm sure you can agree it wouldn't be a proper KFN thread if it didn't end up massively off-topic!

[SteveRiley]

But this is 'Merica. We don't give even one shopt about second place losers. Winner takes all, biatches! **sound of gunfire**

[Simon]

Well I for one being a Canadian... I am still trying my best to understand how Gore lost to Bush in that the majority of the votes went to Gore and Bush got the electoral colleges? I am lost on the idea that voting actually has any effect in 'Merica. Of course I vote the Pirate party, just because I like the underdog.

Now for something completely different...

[oshunluvr]

I for one understand the Electoral College this way: It's original intention (I believe so anyway - or maybe that's just one intention) was to protect States rights and prevent the Legislative branch from have power over the Executive branch.. Balance of power (State vs. Federal and between the three branches) was a very large, if not the largest, issue on the framers' minds. With a pure popular vote, only the largest states would have any say in national elections. With the Electoral College, a collection of small states can more strongly influence the elections - which is why we occasionally end up with a total moron like Bush in office. For the record - Obama has been an awful president but at least he's not a moron. but I digress. A State can control it's own electoral process within certain guidelines thus they retain some power over the election outcome.

In today's world the Representative form of government and it's tools like the E.C. might be an anachronism. A pure Democracy (proportional or otherwise) it logistically possible these days - ballets don't have to be moved via horseback anymore. However, American's in general don't vote so that could also be a total disaster.

I would like to point out that the whole reason America exists at all is the form of government that existed across the pond. Although I know things have changed some what, I'm not sure we want to go that way - no offence intended Feather's, of course.

I see our problems as simpler than restructuring our government. I think it would be a mistake to shift the government with the tides. I think we need:

1. More voters: Voter turnout hovers around 50%. A near majority of people are in the center on most topics. That would mean common sense might rule rather than extremism.
2. Less government: The government grows and grows in places and ways it shouldn't. Both parties do this (one likes to lie about it). Government needs to go back to focusing on serving the nation rather than lining it's own pockets and expanding it's internal influence.
3. Total transparency: Too much goes on behind our backs and too many lies are told under the veil of "national security."
4. Fix the election process: I've never seen a time in my life where the minorities and poor have been under such open attack by the government. It's shameful. They're trying to take away the voting rights of the under privileged. Also, too much secret money influences elections.
5. A viable third party: The two party system is a huge problem. I, like many, don't agree with either party on most topics. A web based group called "American's Elect" (double entendre - "American Select") tried a popular candidacy selection process but got too little participation and funding. Maybe someday, hopefully.

[Feathers McGraw]

I would like to point out that the whole reason America exists at all is the form of government that existed across the pond. Although I know things have changed some what, I'm not sure we want to go that way - no offence intended Feather's, of course.

None taken. In fact, I'm arguing for a form of government that we don't have in the UK!

I'm a replublican in the sense that I think it's beyond belief that we have a hereditary monarchy in 2015. The UK is not some dark age kingdom and deserves a better form of government.

I think it's equally ridiculous that our head of state is also the head of the church and our armed forces - you goys got it right when you realised that church/state separation is important (for religious people too, since it provides both freedom of and freedom from religion).

We don't have PR here either, but we should. We actually had a referendum on it recently and people voted againstl

So I guess what i'm arguing for is something closer to what you have, but with PR. Maybe you'll beat us to it

[jlittle]

...I'm a republican in the sense that I think it's beyond belief that we have a hereditary monarchy in 2015...

So glad to hear it from a Brit. If it's beyond belief for you, think about a country on the opposite end of the world. Us republicans are having to wait for the previous generation to die off, and they're taking their time over it. As well as age, there's a huge gender skew as well, my number 2 argument for the superiority of men over women. (Number one has two words, "women's magazines".)

Of course, I have an unusual perspective, a Scottish father with strong seaman's union influence ("if the queen came down our street, I might look out the window"), and a mother from south Armagh in Northern Ireland.

We have adopted proportional representation here, and it's been good for broadening the representation and the voices heard, but it's no substitute for an informed and engaged electorate; things have not improved there, we're led by a "nice man" pursuing policies that are not nice and serve the interests of the privileged, and discredited populists thrive.

[vinnywright]

my number 2 argument for the superiority of men over women. (Number one has two words, "women's magazines".)

LOL ,,,,,,,,,,,,, I find that hilarious ,,,,,,,,and sad at the same time ..........................................you jest of course ,,,,,rite

VINNY

[Simon]

Now Frank is here reading what you wrote, and wants to know the point of having states. LoL I told him it is like how Canada is divided into ten provinces and three territories. So his reply to me was, "Ah! So it to give the useless politicians something to do eh? Also makes sure those peppers and frogs stay on their side of that line.".

Parliament of Canada is composed of three parts: the monarch, the Senate, and the House of Commons. I am not that deep into politics, did poorly at school on that subject. I am told it is nearly identical to the parliament in the UK. But I don't hear anything about the Queen or the monarchy making decisions for Canada. Stephen Harper is the one I see calling all the shots at the moment. I mean to say, while Queen Elizabeth II is head of state, I tend to believe she isn't making the meaty decisions these days at the age of 88. Now that all could change once a prince is crowned. But I really don't see anything radical as a revolution in either country's future.

Republican Feathers? I assumed republican party was just like the Conservative party and the Democratic was the same as our New Democratic Party. We also have Liberal Party of Canada, Bloc Québécois, and Green. There are others like the Pirates (I mentioned wanting open government) who keep trying but never get the vote. One of the funniest parties here in Canada is the Rhinoceros Party. They are a legally listed party and state following changes:

1. Repeal the law of gravity
2. Promote higher education by building taller schools
3. Develop sex as a natural resource.
4. Count the Thousand Islands to make sure the Americans did not steal any of them.
5. Reform the retail lottery scheme by replacing cash prizes with Senate appointments
6. Seat the Queen of Canada in Buckingham, Quebec.

[Feathers McGraw]

Republican Feathers? I assumed republican party was just like the Conservative party and the Democratic was the same as our New Democratic Party.

There's no Republican party in the UK either, I used the word in its true sense I.e. "I want to live in a republic"...

The main parties here are Labour, Conservative and the Liberal Democrats (center left, center right and center left again), current government is Con/LibDem coalition. There are a few more parties trying to break in (UK Independence Party/UKIP = the kneejerk right party - " they took our jobs, close the gates! ", green = a poorly organised left party - their leader recently had a terrible radio interview, apparently she was ill and shouldn't have been allowed to do it but they have no support structure/spin doctors to stop members doing stupid things like that).

[phonic-otg]

What an interesting (derailed) topic. For me I think the old establishment have hijacked humanity and the political party system is still generally the Aristocracy, just well hidden.
The separation of church and state is Illusionary only. One may choose not to consent to any level of law (if no harm has occurred) as the Strawman Birth/Death certificate is attached to a trust account, for the purpose of paying ones fines from Statute and Legislative Acts of Admiralty Law. The trust created within Cannon Law by the Catholic Church in response to the Protestant reformation that stole Catholic (peoples trust) wealth. The British Queen may sit as leader of the Protestant Church but has lost lawful title to the "Crown" many generations ago.
Most of the American wealthy families are somewhat related to the royal families and all but two presidents are all related and related to King John (I smell a rigged system) so it seems.
I for one would rather see either an Independent win a seat in a PR area and some sort of party (If we must use them) made-up of independents. But at the end of the day total reformation is paramount.

[Feathers McGraw]

phonic-otg... at the risk of completely derailing the thread (again) can I ask your opinion of the East West Link project, i believe it's in your neck of the woods? I was actually working on it a couple of months ago until it seems one of your politicians stood for election on the grounds that they would cancel it if they got in (and pay the huge cancellation fees) so that they could spend the remaining money on other things.

Not bothered by the cancellation personally, but would be interested in a local view of what happened, it seems like an absurd waste of money from an outside perpective!

[phonic-otg]

phonic-otg... at the risk of completely derailing the thread (again) can I ask your opinion of the East West Link project, i believe it's in your neck of the woods? I was actually working on it a couple of months ago until it seems one of your politicians stood for election on the grounds that they would cancel it if they got in (and pay the huge cancellation fees) so that they could spend the remaining money on other things.

Not bothered by the cancellation personally, but would be interested in a local view of what happened, it seems like an absurd waste of money from an outside perpective!

Indeed it is in my neck of the woods. Our esteemed Premier Mr Andrew' did indeed make the election promise of scrapping the east west link in favour of more Public Transport (still as yet undecided as to what PT gets funding). The tunnel is needed. In fact there could be a few tunnels built through out Melbourne to ease congestion. I'd start with a Nth/Sth tunnel under Punt Rd/Hoddle St from Brighton Rd to St-Georges Rd. Then Build the East West link later or incorporate it into the Nth/Sth tunnel i suggested. Also if the trucking companies want east west they can pay for it themselves and toll it without state money. Any toll road should be built without state money. PT is a whole other proverbial kettle of fish, for funding. The 3billion for the project is being quibbled over by our Prime Minister Mr Tony Abbot(whom I agree on the carbon tax stance{Lord Mockton} but naught else) who wants to withdraw the funds federally if we don't build east west. Premier Andrew' states that the 3 billion could go to other infrastructure projects to which I agree. I also don't agree with the compensation if nothing other than preliminary planning was achieved by the winning tenders.

[Feathers McGraw]

Interesting, thanks!

I also don't agree with the compensation if nothing other than preliminary planning was achieved by the winning tenders.

The cancellation costs are higher than you might think, a significant amount of design work was done before it got cancelled, and all of the design engineers who were supposed to be busy for months were suddenly kicking their heels without projects to work on. On the contracting side, i'm sure a huge amount had been spent on planning, plant hire ec.

Anyway, the actual costs are beside the point really, since the cancellation fees are always written into the contract, it's not like he didn't know what it would cost before he did it!

[NickStone]

I'm a republican in the sense that I think it's beyond belief that we have a hereditary monarchy in 2015. The UK is not some dark age kingdom and deserves a better form of government.

Why do people here in the UK who want it to be a republic always claim that having a King/Queen such a bad idea, it's as if they think that the UK is still governed by them. It is not, it is governed by Parliament of elected politicians. The King/Queen of today has no say on what laws are created. They are just a figure head.

We don't have PR here either, but we should. We actually had a referendum on it recently and people voted againstl

We did not have a referendum on Proportional Representation but on an "alternative vote" system which was not the same. The details of it were made so complicated that the majority who voted rejected it.

[phonic-otg]

Anyway, the actual costs are beside the point really, since the cancellation fees are always written into the contract, it's not like he didn't know what it would cost before he did it!

Feathers, I am aware there are costs associated, even with just planning, but, as Premier Andrew' party (Labour) did not write the contract and the contract was rushed through by the Incumbent Napthine Administration (Liberal) in order to enact the contract, especially the pull-out compensation clause, prior to the known upcoming election to make sure the next party continued with the project. That behaviour is some serious messing with the wealth of all Victorians perpetrated by the Victorian Liberal Party. It needs to be them(Liberal party) who pay the compensation not the State.