it seems like the issue that is being coalesced around in canada right now is electoral reform, and it's really a no-win situation for the government. i just want to put a few things down here as a kind of brief memo, in order to explain the situation properly - because you're not likely to get a level-headed analysis from much of anywhere.

we need to begin by acknowledging that this was one of a couple of populist positions that drove trudeau's win, marijuana legalization being the other dominant factor. but, marijuana legalization is truly populist: it has support by upwards of three-quarters of the population, and across partisan lines and age divides. it really cuts the conservatives down to the most insular part of their base. i remember the media backlash when trudeau first announced this, and i couldn't understand. had they not seen the polls?

but, electoral reform is only populist on the left. liberals are split fairly cleanly, and conservatives do not support reform at all. so, yes: it was no doubt an important driver in getting left-leaning voters to choose the liberals over the ndp. in some ridings, it may have even been decisive. so, you can make an argument that it's why they won, and where their strongest mandate is. but, if you zoom out, you're only going to get around 40% support for the idea in general - and much less for any specific iteration of it.

worse is that the entire thing is built on a misunderstanding. unfortunately, or perhaps fortunately depending on your perspective, these voters that swung from the ndp to the liberals and decided the election did not actually do their homework before casting their votes. while there was initially some ambiguity on the topic, it should be very clear (in hindsight) that they were in fact voting for proportional representation. however, trudeau has himself repeatedly rejected proportional representation in favour of the ranked ballot system. there was never any ambiguity projected, here. these mostly urban, left-leaning voters heard "electoral reform" and converted it into "proportional representation" without actually bothering to look into what he was actually saying. it's just another example of the left creating fantasy realities instead of looking at the evidence.

here is the reality: trudeau will bring in proportional representation the day after obama ends the war on terrorism. he never promised you this. you just made it up in your head.

but, the facts aren't going to pierce through the veil, here. these people are going to continue to agitate for a system that, in truth, almost nobody wants.

see, that 10% or so that wants pr is key in swinging elections. but, the potential for growth is extremely low. this has been put to a vote in the most progressive provinces in the country, and failed. the reason it keeps failing is because it's really not the system that canadians want. while reform is a key demand amongst the strong minority that wants it (that 40% or so), almost nobody wants to drop the idea of representation. nobody wants a system where it is not clear what population a member represents. even pr advocates have had to settle for awkward mmp schemes that nobody thinks can actually work - which is why they keep getting defeated.

my advice to electoral reform advocates is to drop the demand for pr. the liberals never advocated it; you misunderstood what they said, and need to accept that. and, if it's that important to you, you should have stuck with the ndp. but, maybe you might also want to listen to the arguments against pr. on closer analysis, perhaps you might find that a ranked ballot system may be in your advantage, after all.

but, you need to understand what the choices are between now and oct, 2019. you can choose between ranked ballots and first past the post. and, if you want something differently in the long run, your task is not to convince parliament to accept your scheme but to convince voters that your ideas are not flawed - which is a hefty task, because they are.