Re:In a related story... (Score 2, Interesting)

Yup, the folks above are 100% correct. Introducing some form of proportional representation to replace the antiquated and inherently distorted "first past the post" system, as has been done in pretty much every other significant democratic nation (i.e. where democracy is not a total charade) except the US, UK, and Canada where I'm from, is the *only* way a new party can have a shred of a chance at real electoral success and maybe even form the government one day. Our major third party in Canada, the NDP, is trapped under a ceiling of about 20% of the vote and has been for years, because of the strategic voting the "first past the post" winner takes all electoral system imposes. I've always been a supporter of the NDP (New Democratic Party), a mildly left-of-centre party, roughly analogous to social democrats in Europe, or the progressive component of the US Democratic party. But at least half the time in federal elections I've had to hold my nose and vote for the Liberal party (centre-right, analogous to the conservative elements of the US Democrats) to ensure that the Conservative right-wing candidate doesn't take the riding. This dynamic keeps the NDP's share of the popular vote artificially low and is inevitable in our system. In fact, in Canada the presence of more than two parties in parliament obscures the fact federal elections are actually a set of regionally defined two-party contests, with a scattering of exceptions. The NDP wins much fewer seats relative to their overall share of the popular vote because their support is spread out and only in a few places do they get a majority in a riding. This and many other distortions of the popular vote relative to the parties' share of seats are all due to the "first past the post" electoral system.