I said before, that Proportional Representation is something we should mildly support, because it destroys much of the inbuilt advantage for existing parties, should they not serve the people. I've also written up how the NDP here in BC intentionally threw the fight on Prop Rep, which we should have predicted considering just how much Donor-Parties hate that. Here, I'm going to give you some takes from the Mouthpieces. Vancouver Sun: TDC_ARTICLE_START B.C. voters have made it clear they wish to continue using the first-past-the-post voting system in provincial elections, after the government’s referendum on electoral reform failed to swing their support to a form of proportional representation. TDC_ARTICLE_STOP No, as I stated earlier, the people did not reject Proportional Representation. What the people rejected was a clear and obvious horseshit power play by the Donor-Left Party to either intentionally lose on Prop Rep, or make it so that they could do whatever they wanted on a victory. And honestly, I could just stop there. You don't need to read this, the entire shot is that they want to gaslight you into thinking that Prop Rep was defeated, not this bullshit referendum specifically. TDC_ARTICLE_START Registered voters submitted mail-in ballots from Oct. 22 to Dec. 7, after the original Nov. 30 deadline was extended by one week due to revolving Canada Post strikes. Turnout was 42.6 per cent, with registered voters returning roughly 1.4 million of 3.3 million ballot packages. TDC_ARTICLE_STOP And that's another thing that isn't highlighted enough. This got far less turnout than the BC Provincial Election preceeding it. In part, because the NDP intentionally didn't do any advertising for this, which was part of them throwing the fight. There is a certain character that is mentioned in this article, Bill Tieleman, who is of exceptional interest to us. TDC_ARTICLE_START Bill Tieleman, of the No Proportional Representation Society, said he was pleased with the results. “We said from the beginning of this campaign that proportional representation is complicated and confusing, that it was a big risk for British Columbia to consider, and voters overwhelmingly agreed,” he said. “Not only did they overwhelmingly agree, they did it for the second time in nine years.” Tieleman, a veteran NDP organizer, said he believed that by working with former Liberal attorney general Suzanne Anton and retired senior bureaucrat Bob Plecas, his ‘No’ side ran a strong non-partisan campaign that appealed to voters from all major parties. “That’s obviously paid off,” he said. “I think the fact that New Democrat voters rejected proportional representation in several ridings is an important indicator to the provincial government that this is not something they should go back to, at all. This is the end of proportional representation in this province for a long time to come.” Tieleman said the government should shift their focus from changing the electoral system to other means to improve democracy in B.C. Deputy premier and finance minister Carole James conceded that “electoral reform is finished” in a press conference Thursday afternoon. “The public has clearly spoken and we will respect the results,” she said. “Are we disappointed? Yes, there’s no question. But again, we committed to giving the public a chance to have a say on how they voted and they had their say, and that was important to us.” James said government would continue to do work to improve the democratic process, expanding upon previous efforts such as banning corporate and union donations, and making changes to the lobbyist registry. TDC_ARTICLE_STOP I find it somewhat interesting to see the parallels between Donald Trump the Bloviating Orange Zionists and his broken promises down in the states, with the broken promises here to the Donor-Left Peasants. Frankly, I don't want to rub it in. I know how much it sucks to get really invested in some bullshit peddled by lying shills. But did everyone notice how the most prolific anti-PR campaigner, was also in the NDP? I'll get into his reasons later, they're basically "nazis might get power." As luck would have it, while this story is two years old, the shitbag that prompted me to write this article, Bill Tieleman, has written a followup article. Vancouver Sun: TDC_ARTICLE_START Bill Tieleman: Revisionist history on Proportional Representation referendum must be corrected Opinion: For the second time in nine years, voters strongly rejected a proportional representation electoral system, voting this time by 61 to 39 per cent to retain our first-past-the-post system. Two recent opinion columns in The Vancouver Sun about the 2018 B.C. referendum on electoral systems require a lot of explaining — because the revisionist history contained therein must be corrected. Prof. Maxwell Cameron’s “B.C.’s snap election reflects our electoral system” and Green party leader Sonia Furstenau’s comments in Vaughn Palmer’s column, “Furstenau can’t blame just the NDP for failure of electoral reform” create a false picture of what happened. Their disappointment is understandable: For the second time in nine years, voters strongly rejected a proportional representation electoral system, voting this time by 61 to 39 per cent to retain our first-past-the-post system. TDC_ARTICLE_STOP Having gotten a chance to see Bill Tieleman's writing firsthand I have to say, I am not impressed in the slightest. First, Tieleman mentions two articles written in the very same propaganda rag he's writing in. However, he slips and falls on a banana, shits his pants, has his brain explode, and then utterly fails to provide a link to either of them. This really pissed me off, because the second article took a while to find on DuckDuckGo, but then I got it. For those curious, those articles are actually not terrible. You can find the OpEd by UBC Professor of Political Science Maxwell A. Cameron here. The less good, but still okay article by Vaughn Palmer, which at least gives a much closer to reality take on how fake and gay everything to do with Electoral Reform really was here in BC, including the complicity of the Green Party, can be read here. The article by Maxwell A. Cameron is worth quoting, at least this part at the start. TDC_ARTICLE_START The snap election called by B.C. Premier John Horgan is motivated by two considerations that are connected to the first-past-the-post electoral system. First, with a plurality of the vote in a majority of ridings Horgan can win a majority in the legislature. The term of art for this is a “false majority” government. There is often a strong temptation for the larger of two parties in a coalition or supply and confidence arrangement to seek a majority at the expense of the smaller party. Under a more proportional system, this temptation would be attenuated by the unlikelihood of forming a false majority government. TDC_ARTICLE_STOP I would bet 99:1 that Professor Maxwell A. Cameron is not in any way shape or form our goy. I think it much more likely that he is doing this on behalf of either the Green Party, or the Liberal Party, probably the Green Party, considering what's written above. His article was written October 15th, about a week before the election, and the Green Party ended up doing almost exactly as well as before, hence his concerns. Even still, the points he raises are completely valid, which got Bill Tieleman incredibly butthurt. Back to Tieleman. TDC_ARTICLE_START But Cameron claims Premier John Horgan was motivated to call an early election to attempt to win a “false majority”. And Furstenau alleges the government that created the referendum with the Greens, actually wanted to lose: “Because when I look back on it, it does feel like it was set up to not succeed.” Both are wrong. First, the term “false majority” is simply pro-rep propaganda arguing that elections should be based on seats reflecting the provincial popular vote, regardless of local riding results. TDC_ARTICLE_STOP Oh, okay Bill. If you say so. Before I really get balls deep in this, notice how he wrote "pro-rep," instead of "prop-rep." Nobody else calls it "pro-rep," since that's an incredibly confusing abbreviation. Do you see what I mean about this guy being kind of off? Like he can't be bothered either spellchecking his own opinion pieces, or just likes to use really confusing terms that nobody else uses. TDC_ARTICLE_START In first-past-the-post, voters in each geographic riding elect as their MLA whoever wins the most votes. The winning MLA is accountable to electors into the next election. The party or combination of parties with a majority of seats forms government. This is a real majority, not a false one, and is based on actual elected local representatives — not on percentages each party achieved and complicated formulas to fill the legislature. Proportional representation is like deciding the World Series not on which team won four of seven baseball games, but who scored the most runs overall. TDC_ARTICLE_STOP Well now there's a non-sequitur. TDC_ARTICLE_START As a veteran New Democrat and president of the society, joined in a non-partisan effort by my B.C. Liberal colleague Suzanne Anton, a former attorney-general, and Bob Plecas, a neutral and former deputy minister, we were not happy with the way the referendum was structured. “We believe this consultation process is unfairly biased in favour of Proportional Representation electoral systems and against our current First Past The Post electoral system. These are fundamental concerns that we fear will undermine the referendum,” we wrote to Attorney-General David Eby on Feb. 28, 2018. TDC_ARTICLE_STOP Has there ever been a single good thing done with Bipartisanship? When you realize that Donor Democracy is a joke, this is exactly what you would expect. Both flavours of puppets get together and do something that absolutely none of the Peasants want, but it's still pretty rough having it shoved in your face like that. TDC_ARTICLE_START My colleagues and I would love proportional representation to rest in its political grave, but when prominent advocates such as Furstenau and Cameron attempt to raise the dead with referendum fiction, it’s important to state the facts and vanquish the ghosts. TDC_ARTICLE_STOP Nasty character this Tieleman. Anyway, there's no written form, but Tieleman has stated very clearly in multiple debates he's done, that the reason he is against Prop Rep is specifically because it "might give anti-immigrant parties power." He's also expressed dismay that small parties of "extremists," can win elections and hold potentially deciding votes. Basically, he's a Donor Shill. If you would like, click on the video below, wherein he debates some other Donor-Leftist on Prop Rep. I don't want to cloud your judgement, but this guy outright gives me the creeps. In fact, let me quote from Bill Tieleman at about 6:25 onwards in the above debate. TDC_ARTICLE_START But when we look at the stability question. When we look at, does a business want to invest in our country or province, based on the certainty that they can make that investment stick. Having a situation where you have perpetual minority government, you've got shifting alliances, you've got deals being made in the background, you've got situation where the government could change, internally, not with an election but because a coalition falls apart, that's not a place where a business is going to want to invest to create jobs. TDC_ARTICLE_STOP So weird that this entrenched Donor-Leftist, who fully supports Pervertism and Anti-Whitism, is really deeply set against Prop Rep, which shifts power to the peasants, as well as anything that makes things worse for International Capitalists. I mean, next you'll be telling me that this Tru Anti-Capitalist Leftist works at a bank... Moving on to his Wikipedia Page, I didn't find anything in the Early Life section. In fact, there wasn't any Early Life section. However, I did find something else quite interesting. TDC_ARTICLE_START Tieleman has served as a director of the board for VanCity, the Vancouver City Savings Credit Union. TDC_ARTICLE_STOP So think about that next time you hear some Donor-Rightist going on about the "Socialist Left," and other tired garbage. These people are literally bankers. More weirdly, this is a screenshot I found of this guy from his personal blog, here. Is he... threatening NDP members with a Glock if they vote to kill the Long Gun Registry? I mean this guy is so weird, and viscerally repulsive when talking, I wouldn't put it past him to just have a really weird sense of humour. And here's a little bit more of his bio, from The Tyee: TDC_ARTICLE_START Bill Tieleman is one of BC's best-known communicators, political commentators and strategists. For 13 years he has run West Star Communications, a consulting firm providing strategy and communication services for labour, business, non-profits and government agencies. Former communications director in the B.C. Premier's Office and at the BC Federation of Labour, Bill holds a masters degree in political science from UBC and publishes a weekly column in 24 Hours and on The Tyee. TDC_ARTICLE_STOP He's also married to a woman named "Shirley Ross." Again, the jewdar is going off, but not a confirmed hit. Truth is, I can't prove that we've got a Schlomo on our hands, but we certainly have a Spiritual Schlomo, if ever there was one. A shill deep inside the supposedly anti-capitalist NDP who literally works for a bank, or used to, who's spent his entire life flitting from one Globo Homo semi-job to another. And no, this isn't going anywhere, I just thought you should be reminded of the types of people who oppose us.