one vote seldom makes any difference by itself. that is, one vote seldom changes who is elected. in fact if one vote meant the count was tied, the returning officer would cast his vote and say who wins. In the election, the least number to make any discernible effect were 76 votes determined that the district's one seat would go to a Liberal instead of the NDP candidate. meanwhile if a small portion of the 1100 Green party votes - but containing at least 76 votes - had gone to the NDP candidate, she would have won, not the Liberal or if some of the 30,000 - yes, 30,000 - voters who stayed home had voted, the result could have been very different. These stay-homes were 10,000 more than the number of votes that even the Liberal received. of the district's 77,000 eligible voters, the winning received less than 20,000 - 42 percent of the valid votes cast. In the Nunavut where the winner won with 3400 votes, the power of a single vote is a little clearer - but in the "lower 10" where most of us live in mass society, one vote seems to have little power. Even though one vote seems to have little power, I suggest that we need to stress to voters / potential fellow reformers/people who may be convinced to get out of the way of those who want change - that groups should have proper proportional representation. It's only fair. groups not a single voter - a subtle difference.
==================================
Comments