tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post7601948119444132410..comments2024-03-27T14:50:47.345-04:00Comments on <center>Sandwalk</center>: The Toronto Star Endorses First-Pass-the-PostLarry Moranhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05756598746605455848noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-73396285306688441772007-09-30T16:48:00.000-04:002007-09-30T16:48:00.000-04:00Scott says,On the other hand, I find this to be ju...Scott says,<BR/><BR/><I>On the other hand, I find this to be just silly. "The people" don't vote on whether they want a majority government. Some undoubtedly do ... some undoubtedly don't ... some don't care. This sort of armchair second-guessing is as bad an argument for MMP as any of the ones you've been criticizing in favour of FPTP.</I><BR/><BR/>When I used "will of the people" I meant the collective will, not the individual will of a single person. I didn't think this would be difficult to understand.<BR/><BR/><I>Oh, for goodness' sake. Don't you tink you're overusing the silly strikethrough snottiness? I'm almost tempted to point out the many examples of framing in your various posts in favour of MMP ...</I><BR/><BR/>As far as I can tell, "framing" is something you have to do deliberately in order to achieve a desired result. It's very much like sticking to the talking points during a political campaign or not going "off message." That's why it seems so closely related to "spin" in my books.<BR/><BR/>When someone speaks or writes what they honestly believe to be true then it isn't "framing." They may be wrong but that's something else entirely. I do not deliberately hide or distort my true beliefs in order to make a point. <BR/><BR/>You can't accuse someone of "framing" whenever they speak their mind just because you don't agree with them. Choose another word, otherwise you're accusing me of lying.Larry Moranhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05756598746605455848noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-64923441816341394782007-09-30T13:16:00.000-04:002007-09-30T13:16:00.000-04:00I think this argument against MMP is almost comple...<I>I think this argument against MMP is almost completely bogus. It's scaremongering and nothing more. One of the advantages of the MMP system, in my opinion, is the opportunity to get people into the legislature who might otherwise have little chance of getting elected.</I><BR/><BR/>Agree completely.<BR/><BR/><I>Ever since then it's been the will of the people to cast their votes for a number of different parties such that no one party gets 50% of the votes. In other words, the people don't want majority governments.</I><BR/><BR/>On the other hand, I find this to be just silly. "The people" don't vote on whether they want a majority government. Some undoubtedly do ... some undoubtedly don't ... some don't care. This sort of armchair second-guessing is as bad an argument for MMP as any of the ones you've been criticizing in favour of FPTP.<BR/><BR/><I>(Scientists, who aren't good at spinning framing sticking to the party line?)</I><BR/><BR/>Oh, for goodness' sake. Don't you tink you're overusing the silly strikethrough snottiness? I'm almost tempted to point out the many examples of framing in your various posts in favour of MMP ...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com