FVM is non-partisan. We advocate for #ProportionalRepresentation in Manitoba. Honor Treaties 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 10; Metis homeland. Join us: [email protected]
Winnipeg, Manitoba
Joined July 2019
- Tweets20.2K
- Following1.5K
- Followers712
- Likes2.2K
Parties treat voters like a lifelong obligation and turn their back.
Elections are decided by swing voters. It’s time to practice partisan infidelity.
Be a defiant swing voter—if a party takes you for granted, you become a swinger.
#abpoli
🤖 Made with AI
Fair Vote Manitoba retweeted
It’s awesome to see Mike Morrice advocating for Proportional Representation and making it clear to Canadians that it is one of his top priorities!
Mike Morrice, Green Party of Canada leadership candidate and former GPC MP for Kitchener Centre: “My commitment is when Greens next have the balance of power in parliament, our only demand will be Proportional Representation. […] I’m actually encouraged that the NDP have made the same commitment. […] the Greens and NDP together have the balance of power, we’re either getting Proportional Representation”
Fair Vote Manitoba retweeted
What Speer calls regional alienation may be ideological isolation reinforced by First Past the Post.
Neither Alberta nor Toronto is politically homogeneous. FPTP turns political diversity into partisan monopolies, then mistakes those monopolies for the true will of the people.
In the last federal election, Alberta gave the Conservatives a 32-seat edge. The City of Toronto alone gave the Liberals a 22-seat edge.
“One city, in other words, offset nearly 70 percent of an entire province’s net Conservative advantage.”
thehub.ca/2026/10/30/what-ch…
Fair Vote Manitoba retweeted
The composition of Parliament under FPTP does not, by and large, accurately reflect the will of the electorate. For example, in Ontario’s most recent provincial election, the Progressive Conservatives received approximately 43% of the popular vote. Yet, under First-Past-the-Post, they secured a majority of the seats and were able to form a majority government, despite the fact that most Ontarians did not vote for the PCs.
Implementing a PR system would not necessarily mean that the PPC would receive 5% of the seats in Parliament or hold the balance of power.
In fact, based on the election results we currently have, the PPC would likely have only secured approximately 5% of the seats in 2021 under a PR system. Moreover, they would not have held the balance of power in any of the last three federal elections had they been conducted under PR.
There is also no evidence to suggest that, under a PR system, support for the LPC, NDP, and GPC would suddenly be capped at around 45% (which would be a combined approximate % that these parties would need to receive under a PR system for your scenario of the PPC holding the balance of power with 5% of the seats to potentially happen), particularly when their combined support is currently approximately 60%. Nor is there any reason to assume that the CPC’s support, either on its own or combined with the BQ, would necessarily be sufficient to make the PPC the balance of power in Parliament with 5% of the seats. Your scenario about the PPC under a PR system does not reflect the current reality, or our last election results.
Under a PR system, if the electorate’s collective preferences do not translate into the PPC receiving 5% of the seats or holding the balance of power, then that is what the parliamentary seat distribution and subsequent negotiations would likely reflect (based on parliamentary democracy, that is). And if other politicians did decide to allow the PPC to be part of government (an unrealistic outcome since we’re currently far from being in a place where the PPC would hold the balance of power to begin with) even though a majority of the electorate may understandably not want that (me neither), these parties could end up being punished in the next election accordingly.
Vote-splitting is an issue with our current electoral system too. Under FPTP, a candidate can win a riding despite being opposed by a majority of voters in that riding. This means that a candidate can take office without having received the support of most of their constituents.
PR offers a way to address this problem without forcing parties to merge or voters to abandon the parties they actually support. Different parties can continue to run independently, giving voters a wider range of choices at the ballot box, while the resulting distribution of seats can more accurately reflect those choices. In this way, PR can preserve political diversity while significantly reducing the distortions and vote-splitting associated with FPTP.
Fair Vote Manitoba retweeted
Why do we elect representatives ?
Why should representatives be elected proportionally ?
prsa.org.au/pr.html
Fair Vote Manitoba retweeted
FPTP elections fan the flames of rural urban divide.
Albertans would be less divided with a proportional voting system.
cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/d…
From Mess to Manufactured Majority: How the Conservatives caught FPTP's blessing in the form of unearned seats.
Now that's a truthful headline. Where is the recognition of the seat distortions here? Did it get lost in the propaganda of victory? Where is speaking up on behalf of voters instead of parties?
@andreawoo
@MikePHager
@Ianbailey
I was pleased to contribute to this inside look at our winning Conservative campaign 👇
theglobeandmail.com/canada/b…
Fair Vote Manitoba retweeted
I don’t think our choice of voting system should be driven by ideological considerations. The purpose of an electoral system should be to ensure that Parliament accurately reflects the will of the electorate, rather than unfairly advantaging or disadvantaging particular ideologies, as our current FPTP system does. Under FPTP, politicians from across the ideological spectrum have still been able to get elected by running within one of the major big-tent parties.
Furthermore, there is no evidence that Elizabeth May is a “grifter,” and I don’t think it’s fair to oppose proportional representation simply because you personally dislike the PPC, GPC, or NDP.
The claim that our voting system works “great as it is” is simply not supported by reality. FPTP is a highly disproportional system that has repeatedly produced Parliaments that fail to accurately reflect how Canadians voted. It encourages vote-splitting and strategic voting, prevents the diversity of political perspectives across different regions of the country from being adequately represented, and allows parties to form majority governments without receiving a majority of the popular vote. FPTP is a bad voting system.
Fair Vote Manitoba retweeted
Offsetting another region's political preference is not the same as denying that region democratic representation.
Alberta's problem isn't simply that Toronto votes differently. It's that Alberta's own political diversity is poorly represented, just as Toronto's is.
In the last federal election, Alberta gave the Conservatives a 32-seat edge. The City of Toronto alone gave the Liberals a 22-seat edge.
“One city, in other words, offset nearly 70 percent of an entire province’s net Conservative advantage.”
thehub.ca/2026/10/30/what-ch…
Fair Vote Manitoba retweeted
Alberta Chief Electoral Officer offers Smith an off ramp.
I think we should fix the voting system not “fix” the map.
Proportional representation please.
albertapolitics.ca/2026/11/c…
The premier may be handing you a lifeline to elect MLAs of your liking in the new ridings in Lethbridge and Calgary which tilt in favor of the UCP base. You can urge voters to elect your new party there without splitting the vote which the premier is using as a cudgel to guarantee your loyalty to her party.
In Quebec, voters don't let themselves get captured by one party, they are non-monogamous.
A sovereign people need a vote that counts. Support a sovereign vote where vote splits don't exist. Support proportional representation. Voters rule.
Promises Made, Promises Not Kept
In June 2022, in a kickoff to her election campaign for the leadership of the United Conservative Party, Danielle Smith spoke to Cory Morgan with the Western Standard.
While she spent considerable time talking about a Sovereignty Act, which she said would be her first Act if elected Premier, the conversation turned to “what else are you offering…What else can Albertans expect from you?”.
Here she rolled out a list of things that “should be” done to “assert ourselves in Confederation”:
“We should be collecting our own personal income taxes.”
“We should be enforcing our own laws with our own Alberta provincial police.”
“We should be providing for our seniors with our own Alberta pension.”
“We should be providing for our workers with our own employment insurance.”
Overall, she described her campaign as “Simply put, we need less Ottawa in our lives”.
Of interest, both her election campaigns were based upon a policy paper, “Free Alberta Strategy”, co-authored by her current chief of staff and fellow floor-crosser, Rob Anderson, which was released in September 2021. Although she had promised a “Sovereignty Act”, upon becoming Premier, she delivered, instead, a “Sovereign Alberta within a united Canada Act” and nothing else of the “should be’s”, key reforms, that “must be implemented” were implemented. Basically, Albertans were sold a bill of goods.
In a video introducing the “Free Alberta Strategy” in October 2021, Rob Anderson talked a good talk and declared that there was an urgency to implement these reforms, saying that “We need to act right now, if we want our province’s story to be a successful one”. Interestingly, he added in that video that, “If Canada failed to address our grievances, we need to form an independent nation”.
With Smith’s recent revelation that her “actions” have been guided by a “Loyalty to a united Canada”, a non-existent ‘founding principle’ of the UCP party, her failure to deliver on her promises, begins to make a lot of sense.
Even more bizarre, in an article, “How Alberta can stop acting as Canada’s doormat”, that Danielle Smith penned for the Edmonton Journal seven years ago in 2019, she had advised then Premier Jason Kenney to “act quickly” to “resurrect the ‘firewall’ proposals’”, akin to what was in the Free Alberta Strategy document that Smith used for her election campaigns, in order “to stem the tide of Alberta separation”. Her failure to act on her promised reforms reveals nothing less than her being satisfied with having Alberta remain as Canada’s doormat.
youtube.com/watch?v=uivVd-SW…
When a winner-take-all voting system guarantees a single party an absolute monopoly on power for decades, political arrogance, impunity and entitlement take over.
This was wrapped up in the concept of a "friendly dictator"— Jean Chretien, a leader who like Danielle Smith held concurrent command over the party, the cabinet, and the legislature. The electoral system rubber-stamps their sense of entitlement.
Proportional Representation unbraids this concentration of power. By forcing coalitions and generating multi-party consensus, PR replaces majoritarian arrogance with actual democratic and domestic negotiation. No more false majorities, no more friendly dictators, no gerrymandering. Voters rule. 🗳️ #ableg #cdnpoli #abpoli
Now that you're on to electoral injustices, Manitoba needs proportional representation.
Our winner-takes-all way of voting elected the NDP, not voters.
Voters gave the NDP 45% of all votes cast.
The system gave the NDP 6 in 10 seats on Broadway.
More voted against the NDP, but the system gave the NDP majority government.
The system electing the government has yet to garner one story from Manitoba's mainstream press.
The press is failing Manitobans and so is the electoral system.
#mbpoli @mbndp @wabkinew @winnipegnews @winnipegsun @PC_Manitoba @MBLiberal @kevinkleinwpg @MFLabour @cupe500
Manitoba needs limits on union spending on elections
winnipegsun.com/news/manitob…
Fair Vote Manitoba retweeted
First-past-the-post fuels this imbalance.
Over 600,000 Albertans voted Liberal for just two seats, while 400,000 Torontonians voted Conservative for one, exacerbating regional differences.
Proportional representation would end this flattening of our political diversity.
In the last federal election, Alberta gave the Conservatives a 32-seat edge. The City of Toronto alone gave the Liberals a 22-seat edge.
“One city, in other words, offset nearly 70 percent of an entire province’s net Conservative advantage.”
thehub.ca/2026/10/30/what-ch…
So FPTP give the NDP a windfall, 75% of seats.
That's 3 in 4 seats.
Save not 3 in 4 Manitobans plan to vote NDP.
FPTP is only giving the Liberals 1 seat.
The Liberals should get 4 seats based on their vote share.
Really wish voters elected the government, not FPTP.
#mbpoli
Fair Vote Manitoba retweeted
Danielle Smith acolyte confirms that First Past The Post does not evenly match seats to popular vote, but thinks answer is to dilute troublesome progressive ridings.
Peter, give your old boss Preston Manning a call. His Premier Daddy gave Alberta this system. #ableg
Again:
In 2023, the UCP won 53% to 44%.
But had it been just 1% different (UCP 52% to NDP 45%), the NDP would have won.
So under the current boundaries, the NDP can win with just 45% of the vote!
This is because drawing ridings along municipal boundaries packs conservatives into fewer rural ridings and artificially makes the NDP more competitive in the cities.
Removing an existing gerrymander is not gerrymandering.
Now, if the UCP went far further, and made it so that the UCP would win even if they only got 45% while the NDP got 52%, then yes that absolutely would be gerrymandering.
But that’s not what’s happening here.
Now your party will split the vote and elect the federal NDP or a Liberal.
Vote splitting doesn't do the electing with proportional representation, voters elect.
A sovereign people must cast a sovereign vote. A sovereign vote is cast without fear or favor, does not contribute to a vote split and counts the way the voter wants it to count.
A lot of the comments are disappointing, but not surprising.
I clearly stated "....new Alberta-based federal party", but a lot of people still made comments about splitting the UCP vote, and electing the NDP.
Sorry, but if you're going to criticize a political strategy, make sure you know how to read, and that you understand the difference between federal and provincial governments.