Quote Originally Posted by Hanna View Post
I am sure you are well aware that 500 million people in the EU have roughly the same views on representative democracy as I have (the UK is the exception). Again, it's a subjective topic. I think I am right and I have explained why. I am not going to write an essay about it - it's simple enough to understand the benefits of letting the smaller parties be better represented. Anyone is entitled to agree with me, or disagree, as they please.
Yes, I got that, you mention the same thing the third time already. But, have you addressed what I said? I'm telling you what had happened in reality. Overall, the less specific your small party goals are, the better. And the environmentalist parties are the worst in this respect. The vital decisions for the country are made depending on the current market price of the small parties. But, you still repeat on and on that "fair representation" mantra. Some other cons of that system is that sometimes the presently unpopular parties gain more seats in the parliament than they are normally use to. That brings into the parliament all kinds of "marginal" people who are in the list just because nobody cared that much. Read the following article when you have a chance: NDP candidate Ruth Ellen Brosseau wins Quebec riding despite trip to Las Vegas and weak French | Canada Politics - Yahoo! News

In a nutshell, in 2011 elections in Canada a 27 year old assistant manager at a pub who, by the way, speaks very bad French SUDDENLY won the Quebec riding of Berthier - Maskinongé by virtue of her being on a vacation to Las Vegas during the campaign! She would now participate in making vital decisions for the province. Would you still repeat in a zombie-like way that 500 million people cannot go wrong? Would you care to look at the facts and address my points instead? Some time earlier you insisted you're not brain-washed, so let's see that in action, shall we?