To: Michael Watkins who wrote (4000 ) 4/20/2004 8:53:17 PM From: 49thMIMOMander Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 37247 <'ll answer that - at this point, no> Yes, that was true about 1760 to 1770. <as its not an option although is discussed with increasing frequency in certain circles.> Additionally implemented all over the globe except in some few left-overs. <PR would make it harder to obtain majorities> Yes, Scandinavia has never complained about that, except for those few funny swedish years in the late 1700s. (they too tried it, funny stuff these days) <which certainly is a disincentive to the Liberals to ever bring it in.> "Liberals" is obviously one of the funnies Orwellian things in this present time of history. < But Canada has a history of doing things differently, so I would not count out electoral reforms.> Differently from what?? those few non-PR systems left from theose late 1700s?? <Who knows what we might do as we move ourselves along.> Well, that is, maybe a good point, but considering the rest of the world and UK, PR seem to be the way to go, maybe even Mexico will put some pressure on Canada. < Canada has shown itself able to change; we are not hitched lock-step to our southern neighbour. > Greate old joke from the late 1700s. <We even spell neighbour differently.> How do you spell FPTP?? < In the meantime, you've been hitched to this PR/FPTP issue ever since I noted you posting after 9/11> 9/11/177-what?? <Perhaps its time to broaden your own horizons? > yes, I wonder how the moonians and marsians do their elections, but other than that I have enough of horizons. Ilmarinen However, interesting to find such black holes. In terms of US I understand it, deadly stuff for them. I even understand the problems in UK, and now I am learning more about Canada.