This is actually quite disappointing PP has a legitimate independent opponent that is center right and doesn’t adhere to CPC politics.
The Longest Ballot Committee has lost the plot on this one. I never supported them but if this is their level of political acumen than I would argue they do more harm than good.
I said legitimate opponent. Meaning she seems like a good person for the job. Not that she was a serious contender with a chance to win.
She’s an independent not an LPC or CPC member so you’re comparing apples to oranges.
Name recognition is the single most important factor in being elected. It’s factually incorrect to suggest that there would be no difference between a few independent candidates and over 100.
At the end of the day what does LBC stand for if they’re undermining legitimate independent candidates?
This guy seriously imagines that there is a significant population who just show up to vote and figure out who to vote for after.
People go in knowing who they’re going to vote for. The LBC only affects throw away votes. Fundamentally it’s HILARIOUS, those ballots are absurd, and it gets everyone talking about electoral reform. It works exactly as intended.
If you spent more than one second thinking about it you would have realized your fear is baseless.
This is actually quite disappointing PP has a legitimate independent opponent that is center right and doesn’t adhere to CPC politics.
The Longest Ballot Committee has lost the plot on this one. I never supported them but if this is their level of political acumen than I would argue they do more harm than good.
If they’re a serious contender, then it shouldn’t matter how many people are on the ballot; their supporters will be voting for them by name.
Just like the LBC didn’t affect the end result in Carlton, it won’t make a huge difference here either.
I said legitimate opponent. Meaning she seems like a good person for the job. Not that she was a serious contender with a chance to win.
She’s an independent not an LPC or CPC member so you’re comparing apples to oranges.
Name recognition is the single most important factor in being elected. It’s factually incorrect to suggest that there would be no difference between a few independent candidates and over 100.
At the end of the day what does LBC stand for if they’re undermining legitimate independent candidates?
If you don’t think she has a serious chance to win, then I’m not sure I understand what the complaint is here. What “harm” are they causing?
The stand for electoral reform (and against the first-past-the-post voting system).
This guy seriously imagines that there is a significant population who just show up to vote and figure out who to vote for after.
People go in knowing who they’re going to vote for. The LBC only affects throw away votes. Fundamentally it’s HILARIOUS, those ballots are absurd, and it gets everyone talking about electoral reform. It works exactly as intended.
If you spent more than one second thinking about it you would have realized your fear is baseless.