Also see: We must keep advocating for proportional representation. If PR dies, so does Canadian democracy as we know it. FPTP is already pushing us toward a two-party system, just like the USA

Also see: We must keep advocating for proportional representation. If PR dies, so does Canadian democracy as we know it. FPTP is already pushing us toward a two-party system, just like the USA

Also see: We must keep advocating for proportional representation. If PR dies, so does Canadian democracy as we know it. FPTP is already pushing us toward a two-party system, just like the USA

Also see: We must keep advocating for proportional representation. If PR dies, so does Canadian democracy as we know it. FPTP is already pushing us toward a two-party system, just like the USA

Also see: We must keep advocating for proportional representation. If PR dies, so does Canadian democracy as we know it. FPTP is already pushing us toward a two-party system, just like the USA

Also see: Poilievre’s ‘anti-elite’ Tories stack top council with corporate lobbyists. Nearly half of the Conservatives’ governing body are lobbyists for oil, pharma, real estate and anti-union companies | The Breach

I appreciate your perspective. While "critical" might sound strong, I'd argue that proportional representation isn't just an improvement but a democratic necessity, especially looking at our trajectory.

Duverger's Law shows that winner-take-all systems inevitably push toward two-party dominance over time. Canada's effective number of parties has been declining (2.76 in 2021), suggesting we're slowly following America's path toward polarized two-party politics.

Our democracy may seem stronger than America's today, but the same structural flaw exists in our electoral system. The difference is largely one of timing, not fundamentals.

The consequences of inaction are significant. Without PR, we're seeing:

• Millions of votes that have zero effect on election outcomes
• Policy lurch where each government undoes the work of the previous one
• Regional polarization as parties focus only on competitive ridings
• Declining trust in democratic institutions

You're right to worry. The safeguards we need require actual structural reform, not just hoping our political culture stays healthier than America's. That's why I see PR as fundamental rather than just beneficial - it addresses the root cause rather than symptoms.

We may disagree on policy here

No, we actually do agree on policy: that proportional representation is critical to Canadian democracy.

Your experience mirrors that of many Canadians. That betrayal on electoral reform was particularly painful because it wasn't just a typical policy promise - it was about fixing the very foundation of our democracy.

What's frustrating is that this wasn't the first time Liberals promised and failed to deliver electoral reform. As far back as 1919, Liberal leaders from Mackenzie King to Pierre Trudeau have campaigned on PR during elections, only to abandon it once in power.

The 2015 broken promise was especially egregious because Trudeau later admitted he "should have immediately shut down talk about proportional representation" and that Liberals were "deliberately vague" to appeal to reform advocates. All while knowing he only wanted Instant runoff voting (a non-proportional system that would benefit the Liberal Party).

Both major parties have calculated that maintaining the broken system serves their interests. When 68.6% of Liberal MPs voted against even creating a Citizens' Assembly on Electoral Reform in 2024, it revealed their true priorities.

I've concluded that supporting parties with consistent records on PR (like the Greens and NDP) is the only viable path forward. Looking at Carney's responses on electoral reform so far, it appears the Liberal calculation hasn't changed. They're hoping we'll forget again.

The hard truth is that parties benefiting from a broken system rarely fix it voluntarily. Until we make proportional representation a ballot box issue that costs them elections, the cycle will continue.

I understand your skepticism about parties following through on proportional representation once in power. It's a legitimate concern given how the Liberals famously promised electoral reform in 2015 then abandoned it after winning.

That said, it's still clearly better to vote for parties that promise proportional representation (Green🟢/NDP🟧/Bloc⚜️) than those that don't support it at all (LPC/CPC). The Conservatives and Liberals have repeatedly demonstrated they benefit from keeping the system broken, and their corporate donors don't want the strong democracy we would have under PR.

The NDP's position is definitely stronger than the Liberals on this issue - they've consistently supported PR and 107 Liberal MPs voted against even creating a Citizens' Assembly on Electoral Reform last year. But you're right that we haven't seen it implemented when provincial NDP governments have had the chance.

I think the problem is deeper than any single leader or party. Our winner-take-all system creates perverse incentives where parties benefit from maintaining a broken system once they're in power. This is precisely why electoral reform needs to be a primary voting issue for more Canadians.

Regarding Jagmeet specifically - I appreciate when politicians try to connect authentically, but I'm also wary of style over substance. The test isn't TikTok skills but whether they'll actually champion democratic principles when given power.

The Green situation with Annamie Paul was truly unfortunate. It's hard to watch parties that support good policies implode through internal conflicts.

I respect your honest take. Singh's creative approach to connecting with younger voters shows a willingness to meet people where they are, which is commendable.

While the presentation matters, what ultimately counts more is policy substance. One reason I've consistently respected the NDP, despite disagreeing with them on various issues, is their unwavering support for proportional representation.

Along with the Greens and Bloc, they're among the only parties that consistently advocate for an electoral system where every vote actually counts. Under our current system, millions of perfectly valid ballots have zero effect on election outcomes.

TikTok trends come and go, but structural democratic reform would transform how our politics functions. I wish more candidates—regardless of party—would highlight these fundamental issues rather than just finding new platforms to deliver the same old messages.

I understand your concern. This situation highlights how our national relationship with the US is hostage to the personal whims of whoever holds power there - a direct consequence of our diplomatic asymmetry with a much larger neighbour.

What's particularly troubling is that the Liberal party's refusal to support proportional representation weakens Canada's democratic legitimacy during precisely these kinds of international confrontations. A government elected with a true majority of votes would have much stronger standing when defending Canadian interests against foreign pressure.

In 1998, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that "a state whose government represents the whole of the people... on a basis of equality and without discrimination... is entitled to the protection under international law of its territorial integrity." Our winner-take-all system fundamentally undermines this principle.

You're right to be skeptical about negotiating with someone who consistently acts in bad faith. Unfortunately, Canada's position is made even weaker when our government typically represents a minority of voters while governing for the majority - exactly the democratic deficit our electoral system creates.

If Carney were truly concerned about strengthening Canada against external threats, he'd be advocating for the electoral reform that would give our government the democratic legitimacy it deserves when standing up to bullies.