Canadian Election Thread, 2019 edition

[marshwiggle]

That may be the best argument, but I still dont buy it.  I generally oppose the monarchy and everything it represents.  I also wish the queen would get off my coins and we could celebrate Canadians instead.       

And then Trudeau and future leaders could have new coins issued every year or so as the people pictured on them fall out of favour.

Well that doesn't have to be the case: look at our paper money, as an example. Plenty of great Canadians to celebrate, and I vote for Tommy Douglas to be the first!

He was, if I recall, a preacher, so he probably said some things which would now be politically incorrect. He also probably drove a gas-guzzling car, which would now be (or soon will be) environmentally incorrect. Someone would be sure to nix him pretty quickly.

[mamselle]

Actually, the "real" Hamilton (not the character portrayed in the rap show) had precisely those fears.

M.

And an interesting Atlantic article considers the issues that arise between John Jay and Jefferson (and others) re: the Presidential invocation of "Executive privilege," or not, in a different setting.

(Sorry, can't link from this phone...)

M.

[Parasaurolophus]

Did my duty and voted yesterday.

Also, I finally got around to watching the first English-language debate (the Maclean's debate). I cannot believe Scheer said all that about indigenous peoples on camera, live, and so explicitly. What. The. FUCK?


EDIT: He stuffed his foot further down his throat in the French debate. Man alive, what is he doing? Has nobody coached him?

[ciao_yall]

Did my duty and voted yesterday.

Also, I finally got around to watching the first English-language debate (the Maclean's debate). I cannot believe Scheer said all that about indigenous peoples on camera, live, and so explicitly. What. The. FUCK?


EDIT: He stuffed his foot further down his throat in the French debate. Man alive, what is he doing? Has nobody coached him?

Maybe he thinks "If Trump can win that way..."

[mamselle]

Our fault, sorry...

M.

[pedanticromantic]

I voted in the advance polls yesterday. There were 4 people in line ahead of me--and 2 of them were young, first-time voters. That's a good sign! I've never seen young people get so involved before.
Unfortunately I live in a region where it's always a toss-up between Libs and Cons, so most people vote strategically. I did not. I voted for the candidate I want to win, which I feel is effectively throwing my vote away in this stupid system, but oh well. I'm hoping for a minority government so whoever wins has to negotiate with the NDP, Bloc and Greens to get anything done.

[Parasaurolophus]

I voted in the advance polls yesterday. There were 4 people in line ahead of me--and 2 of them were young, first-time voters. That's a good sign! I've never seen young people get so involved before.
Unfortunately I live in a region where it's always a toss-up between Libs and Cons, so most people vote strategically. I did not. I voted for the candidate I want to win, which I feel is effectively throwing my vote away in this stupid system, but oh well. I'm hoping for a minority government so whoever wins has to negotiate with the NDP, Bloc and Greens to get anything done.

Yay! My vote may also have been thrown away, but then again, anybody who votes for a candidate that doesn't win has thrown their vote away, so...

Honestly, I'm not at all moved by arguments for strategic voting. To my mind, it's a recipe for perpetual strategic voting. The other side is always the main threat, and they're always worse. I'd rather do my part to help make our lower-tier parties into viable options.

It would be nice if the social conservatives could hive off their progressive fellows, though. The Progressive/Reform merger was a bad deal for the country (including progressive conservatives).

[Kron3007]

I voted in the advance polls yesterday. There were 4 people in line ahead of me--and 2 of them were young, first-time voters. That's a good sign! I've never seen young people get so involved before.
Unfortunately I live in a region where it's always a toss-up between Libs and Cons, so most people vote strategically. I did not. I voted for the candidate I want to win, which I feel is effectively throwing my vote away in this stupid system, but oh well. I'm hoping for a minority government so whoever wins has to negotiate with the NDP, Bloc and Greens to get anything done.

I also voted in the advanced polls for a candidate that has no chance of winning.  I am in a deeply conservative riding though, so there is no strategic voting possible here.  If there were, I may consider it, even though I agree that it is problematic.

[marshwiggle]

I voted in the advance polls yesterday. There were 4 people in line ahead of me--and 2 of them were young, first-time voters. That's a good sign! I've never seen young people get so involved before.
Unfortunately I live in a region where it's always a toss-up between Libs and Cons, so most people vote strategically. I did not. I voted for the candidate I want to win, which I feel is effectively throwing my vote away in this stupid system, but oh well. I'm hoping for a minority government so whoever wins has to negotiate with the NDP, Bloc and Greens to get anything done.

Yay! My vote may also have been thrown away, but then again, anybody who votes for a candidate that doesn't win has thrown their vote away, so...

Honestly, I'm not at all moved by arguments for strategic voting. To my mind, it's a recipe for perpetual strategic voting.

I'd go even farther than that. If the winning candidate won by 5000 votes, then in principle even 4999 of the people who voted for that candidate "wasted" their votes; ie. they were unnecessary.

So taking it to its logical conclusion, only a small fraction of votes aren't "wasted" in the strictest sense.

ChantaL Hebert wrote a column a couple of weeks ago that basically expressed my feelings; the Greens will keep picking up votes until the major parties convince people they're serious about the environment. (And FWIW, I don't see the environment as specifically a "left" issue; there are lots of reasons that many more conservative voters, who often are more rural and have to deal with things like pollutants in their groundwater, can be very strongly in favour of environmental protection.)

[Parasaurolophus]

Greens and Tories are currently tied for second in my riding. It would be amazing if the Greens could win it, and shake things up a bit.

Too bad the Liberal candidate is just another poteau de téléphone, as we say. He'll earn his sinecure and largely ignore the interests of the riding.

[kaysixteen]

Correct me if I err, but seeing as Canada has several parties credibly contesting parliamentary elections, do ant provinces have something like a handful of US states do, where if no candidate wins an absolute majority in the general, the top two finishers square off in a runoff, assuring that the eventual victor ultimately did earn a majority of sorts, rather than letting someone take the seat who may not even have gotten a third of the vote?  Many big US cities do this for mayoral elections as well, though those races are usually nonpartisan.

[Parasaurolophus]

Correct me if I err, but seeing as Canada has several parties credibly contesting parliamentary elections, do ant provinces have something like a handful of US states do, where if no candidate wins an absolute majority in the general, the top two finishers square off in a runoff, assuring that the eventual victor ultimately did earn a majority of sorts, rather than letting someone take the seat who may not even have gotten a third of the vote?  Many big US cities do this for mayoral elections as well, though those races are usually nonpartisan.

No. Plurality takes all.

[pedanticromantic]

This is certainly proving to be an interesting election. The system is positively broken if someone getting only 30% of the vote is allowed to govern. I'd be happy with a minority coalition government: The NDP apparently made it one of their pre-reqs to any coalition to open electoral reform. Then again, I trust all politicians about as far as I can throw them. We've been let down too many times, and most will grab power whatever way they can (I think of what the Lib Dems did in the UK... utter disgrace).
A minority is how our system should work: parties working together to get things done for the common good, not for their own point-scoring.

[marshwiggle]

This is certainly proving to be an interesting election. The system is positively broken if someone getting only 30% of the vote is allowed to govern. I'd be happy with a minority coalition government: The NDP apparently made it one of their pre-reqs to any coalition to open electoral reform. Then again, I trust all politicians about as far as I can throw them. We've been let down too many times, and most will grab power whatever way they can (I think of what the Lib Dems did in the UK... utter disgrace).
A minority is how our system should work: parties working together to get things done for the common good, not for their own point-scoring.

But periodically you need majorities so that tough necessary things can be done. Reigning in deficits, for example; in a minority situation no-one wants to be the bad guy so hard things just get ignored.

[pedanticromantic]

This is certainly proving to be an interesting election. The system is positively broken if someone getting only 30% of the vote is allowed to govern. I'd be happy with a minority coalition government: The NDP apparently made it one of their pre-reqs to any coalition to open electoral reform. Then again, I trust all politicians about as far as I can throw them. We've been let down too many times, and most will grab power whatever way they can (I think of what the Lib Dems did in the UK... utter disgrace).
A minority is how our system should work: parties working together to get things done for the common good, not for their own point-scoring.

But periodically you need majorities so that tough necessary things can be done. Reigning in deficits, for example; in a minority situation no-one wants to be the bad guy so hard things just get ignored.

I'm not sure how a minority fixes that... after all, the biggest deficits we've had have been in recent years under majority governments. I think in general the 4-year cycle means that no party wants to actually reduce deficits because raising taxes and cutting programs are never popular.
No party should be able to make a hard decision if they only have 30% of the population's support anyway... this is why I think the system is completely broken.