McGuinty Majority
McGuinty cruises to an easy majority win - kudos to his team on a well run campaign. As for John Tory...well, it was better than '93 if nothing else...
More interestingly, MMP is getting crushed and the Greens appear to be doing fairly good (but no seats).
UPDATE: Tory loses his seat but vows to stay on. Final results:
Liberals 71
PCs 26
NDP 10
Greens get a moral victory, but there's very little for the PCs or NDP to be happy about in these results.
More interestingly, MMP is getting crushed and the Greens appear to be doing fairly good (but no seats).
UPDATE: Tory loses his seat but vows to stay on. Final results:
Liberals 71
PCs 26
NDP 10
Greens get a moral victory, but there's very little for the PCs or NDP to be happy about in these results.
Labels: Ontario Election
posted by calgarygrit at
9:40 p.m.
17 Comments:
Regarding MMP (and in light of its supporting vote share), I'd offer René Levesque's words:
À la prochaine fois...
By
JG, at 10:14 p.m.
Let's not count the chickens before they are hatched. All the individual ridings seem to either be for MMP or uncounted. I still have hope.
http://www.thestar.com/ontarioelection
By
leonsp, at 10:29 p.m.
Oh, I'd say the possibility of a "clear majority" still exists.
By
JG, at 10:50 p.m.
Kathleen Wynne - not so much giant-slayer as gnome-kicker.
By
IslandLiberal, at 10:57 p.m.
Tonight's results are proof that electoral reform is badly needed in this country. The Liberals increased their "majority" with a decrease in their popular vote and almost 10% of the electorate have absolutely no representation at Queen's Park.
By
Sean S., at 11:42 p.m.
Bravo Ontario. !! Bravo true believer McGuinty.. Take that Outremont /I hope I spelled it right./
now will the media buzz over this half as much then about Outremont??? /as the sign of the future? hah !.
marta from vancouver
By
Dame, at 11:47 p.m.
As I recall, Rene Levesque's side lost the next time as well.
That's three provinces that have voted against electoral reform, though I'll grant that in a fair world BC probably ought to be counted as a win for the PR side. Where next, and what will be the excuse for the defeat there?
By
Ian Gray, at 12:30 a.m.
My God! John Tory lost his seat.
Ooops! Forget that I ever used the G word.
By
JimTan, at 12:55 a.m.
As I recall, Rene Levesque's side lost the next time as well.
All the better for us.
That's three provinces that have voted against electoral reform, though I'll grant that in a fair world BC probably ought to be counted as a win for the PR side. Where next, and what will be the excuse for the defeat there?
If there is another vote in Ontario, and I figure that there will be eventually, whatever proposal is on offer will (or at least should) do away with closed lists, and could easily move to regional districts.
Of course, had there been a decent unbiased public education campaign (no TV spots at all???) and less partial media coverage (i.e. with an emphasis on informing rather than parroting an editorial line), I think things would've gone differently today.
Oh, and the ridiculous 60% supermajority requirement needs to go. Now. If a simple majority in 7 of 10 provinces representing 50% of the population would've been enough to pass the Charlottetown Accord, there is no rational reason to hold electoral reform to a higher standard.
By
JG, at 1:35 a.m.
Oh, expletive deleted. No MMP.
By
leonsp, at 9:30 a.m.
Aw, I only voted for MMP because I like to back a loser.
I don't believe for a second there'll be another opportunity for electoral reform in Ontario -- it's over for several decades.
By
Jacques Beau Vert, at 9:51 a.m.
What I can't fathom are all the headlines "Tory vows to stay on"
Yeah - for about a week. When someone says they're going to consult with others about the future that's as good as saying their letter of resignation is written, signed, stamped but not mailed yet.
Hard to imagine anyone resigning their seat to let him get in.
By
Reality Bites, at 11:12 a.m.
Stop blaming the god damn education campaign! If the system were broken, people would flock to fair vote. The fact is that very few people think the system is broken.
Also, I don't see the connection with Outremont. Provincial politics, if anything, correlates negatively with federal politics in Ontario (a strong Ontario Liberal party sucks up resources and good candidates that might otherwise aid Dion).
By
french wedding cat, at 1:16 a.m.
I predict two things. First, voter turnout in Ontario will be below 50% in the next election. Second, the defenders of the status quo will blame the people for their laziness and call for mandatory voting (without any of this referendum nonsense).
By
Greg, at 7:55 a.m.
Oh, and the ridiculous 60% supermajority requirement needs to go.
I don't agree. Super majorities have traditionally been the requirement when a basic change in the way we're doing things is proposed.
By
Brian in Calgary, at 11:56 a.m.
I don't agree. Super majorities have traditionally been the requirement when a basic change in the way we're doing things is proposed.
Traditionally, as in the other two referenda on electoral reform? If 50 percent plus one was good enough for constitutional change in 1992, it's good enough for making a non-constitutional change now.
By
JG, at 11:49 a.m.
Not true. Charlottetown arguably required an even tougher super-majority: although it only needed 50% plus one overall, it also need a majority in every single province, not just 60% of them.
By
The Invisible Hand, at 6:24 p.m.
Post a Comment
<< Home