Canadian Election Thread, 2019 edition

[Parasaurolophus]

As to the ongoing travails of Trudeau the lesser -- I heard a commentator on NPR this morning claiming that the history of black/brown face in Canada means Justin's sins must be seen in a different context.  Unlike the US where blackface was used to denigrate blacks, she claimed that Canadian black/brown face historically did not serve that purpose.  It may be incredibly stupid and distasteful, but she saw Canadians believing this is a forgivable sin, unlike the US where it's a political death sentence.  Not sure I agree, but there you are.

I don't know that the history is significantly different here, apart from our relationship to slaves and slavery being significantly different. What I do know is that Canadians are much less aware of race and and racism than Americans are. I would bet good money that in the early aughts, the overwhelming majority of Canadians had no clue about the history of blackface or why it's wrong. I think this is still true for Canadians who are Gen X and older. And, by golly, it's absolutely true for Québec; I would be surprised if even most millennials in Québec (but outside Montréal) currently think it's bad. (In part, this is due to lack of access to American and English-language media.)

I think that what's important, in Trudeau's case, is that he does have a record to fall back on, and that record has been pretty good on issues of race, and that he's apologized unreservedly. I don't think that's true for most of the American politicians who've been caught in similar scandals (although IIRC most of them were also younger than Trudeau when they last did it...). So I think he'll be given a pass, and I suspect it won't make much of a difference overall. Québec will shrug and look confused, and Ontario will go back to its red vs. blue contest (with occasional orange pockets), figuring that between someone who did some racist things and someone who's currently still an avowed homophobe (Scheer), it's a wash, and everyone will go back to justifying their votes in terms of parties and MPs rather than leaders, while secretly caring more about leadership. Oh, and I think that the Liberals have already lost a lot of the new voters they won over the last time around, simply by not delivering on any key promise except for cannabis legalization.

But it's worth noting that this isn't surprising. Before entering politics, Trudeau was widely seen as a playboy and a clown--a total lightweight. If any of Pierre's children were going to be politicians, Justin would have been almost everyone's last bet. And Trudeau has a pretty long history of cultural appropriation and other dodginess--as the Haida tattoo on his left shoulder amply testifies. So, again: why is this coming out now, in his third election, and why in Time magazine? A lot of this wasn't hidden, and high school yearbooks are where you start for opposition research, so... what gives?

[marshwiggle]

As for Black/Brown face in Canada, I remember friends doing this for halloween costumes around the same period and it didnt really raise any eyebrows at the time (in my admittedly small, very white town).  I understand the issue with it, but he was a drama teacher dressing up as a character almost 20 years ago and has apologized profusely so I dont think it is really a big deal.  I am far more concerned with people's stances that would impact their policy decisions.  However, given his focus on diversity etc., it is quite ironic that he was a serial black/brown facer...

Would you say the same if it was Andrew Scheer or Maxime Bernier?

[secundem_artem]

We were living in Toronto in 1990 when David Peterson (Lib - Premier) called a snap election.  The Libs lost and Bob Rae (then NDP, now Lib i understand) found himself the premier of the biggest economy in Canada.  Historically, the NDP had acted as a sort of "conscience" for the party in power.  They seemed to be able to stop Lib and Con governments from running wild but never seriously had a chance of winning power.

And then they did.  Poor Bob Rae had espoused all of these wonderful social democratic policies and, once in office, had no way or money to implement them.  I was working in a hospital at the time and all of us had to take unpaid "Rae days" to try and bring some balance back to the provincial budget.

So... vote Green or NDP or libertarian as you wish.  But in my experience all the fine rhetoric in the world runs into a propeller blade when it's time to lead a government.  Campaign in poetry, govern in prose as they say.

Everyone uses Ray as an example of the NDP's inherent failure, but this is flawed without some context.  This was a little before I was paying attention, but from my understanding he came to power as the ship was sinking, so there would have been pain regardless of who was in power.  Perhaps Ray messed up, I dont know if his approach was the best, but it is not completely fair to blame him for the economy he was handed.

Of course not, but he got hoist on his own petard, by promising unions pie in the sky, which he couldn't actually deliver. (And if he'd been honest, he never would have promised as much.)  I enjoyed the fact that it was the NDP government that had to stand up to the unions that they had courted with big promises when reality hit them in the face.

Had the Ontario economy been in free fall at that time, Peterson would not have called an election.  He called a snap election believing he could maintain/enhance his majority.  His party lost the election and he lost his own seat.  Bob Rae woke up the next morning and found out "Holy crap, I'm actually going to have to govern now!!"  And then it all went to he77 and Mrs Artem & I moved to the US.

As to the ongoing travails of Trudeau the lesser -- I heard a commentator on NPR this morning claiming that the history of black/brown face in Canada means Justin's sins must be seen in a different context.  Unlike the US where blackface was used to denigrate blacks, she claimed that Canadian black/brown face historically did not serve that purpose.  It may be incredibly stupid and distasteful, but she saw Canadians believing this is a forgivable sin, unlike the US where it's a political death sentence.  Not sure I agree, but there you are.

Well, as mentioned I was not really paying attention at the time, too busy with lego and such.  However, everything I read would argue that the economy was indeed in trouble before he took office.  Perhaps not free fall, but not pretty and getting worse due to things far out of his control.  Just because that may not have been a good time to implement NDP policy dosnt mean it is wrong.  Building social programs takes time to build up and likely should be done while things are economically solid. 

As for Black/Brown face in Canada, I remember friends doing this for halloween costumes around the same period and it didnt really raise any eyebrows at the time (in my admittedly small, very white town).  I understand the issue with it, but he was a drama teacher dressing up as a character almost 20 years ago and has apologized profusely so I dont think it is really a big deal.  I am far more concerned with people's stances that would impact their policy decisions.  However, given his focus on diversity etc., it is quite ironic that he was a serial black/brown facer...

When I was about 7, my parents purchased a sombrero and some makeup and sent me out for Hallowe'en dressed as a "Mexican". The next year, I sported a feathered head-dress and makeup of a more reddish hue. I had no idea 7 year olds could be racists. There goes my dream of being elected Prime Minister. Honestly, standards and expectations change. Indeed, the very definition of racism has been moving from "don't say bad things" to a much more general definition of cultural appropriation, systemic advantage for whites, racial/class privilege etc. As these more expanded aspects of racism gain further support, we are stumbling across a lot of people who engaged in an activity decades ago that we now decry. Fair enough - make 'em understand they did wrong. But the endless pillorying of people who did a stupid thing 30 years ago is not helping matters. As for Justin, well, he certainly ain't his father. But as to his political opponents reviewing old year books looking for dirt? C'mon. Seriously??

[Parasaurolophus]

Would you say the same if it was Andrew Scheer or Maxime Bernier?

Scheer's homophobia is still real, live, unapologetic, and continues to inform his actions in Parliament. Bernier's straight-up racism likewise continues to inform his politics. Those are meaningful differences.

[marshwiggle]

When I was about 7, my parents purchased a sombrero and some makeup and sent me out for Hallowe'en dressed as a "Mexican". The next year, I sported a feathered head-dress and makeup of a more reddish hue. I had no idea 7 year olds could be racists. There goes my dream of being elected Prime Minister. Honestly, standards and expectations change. Indeed, the very definition of racism has been moving from "don't say bad things" to a much more general definition of cultural appropriation, systemic advantage for whites, racial/class privilege etc. As these more expanded aspects of racism gain further support, we are stumbling across a lot of people who engaged in an activity decades ago that we now decry. Fair enough - make 'em understand they did wrong. But the endless pillorying of people who did a stupid thing 30 years ago is not helping matters. As for Justin, well, he certainly ain't his father. But as to his political opponents reviewing old year books looking for dirt? C'mon. Seriously??

But why endlessly pillory people who are long dead, who no doubt, if they were alive today, would not do the things they did then?
That's why this whole thing is so stupid, and why he deserves what he gets because of his own moral grandstanding.

[Kron3007]

Would you say the same if it was Andrew Scheer or Maxime Bernier?

Scheer's homophobia is still real, live, unapologetic, and continues to inform his actions in Parliament. Bernier's straight-up racism likewise continues to inform his politics. Those are meaningful differences.

Exactly. 

[hmaria1609]

So, again: why is this coming out now, in his third election, and why in Time magazine? A lot of this wasn't hidden, and high school yearbooks are where you start for opposition research, so... what gives?

That crossed my mind too!  The same was raised when a photo of blackface was discovered in Virginia Governor Ralph Northam's medical school yearbook earlier this year.

[kaysixteen]

So let's follow up.  How does one get to be a parliamentary candidate in Canada?  Is the system the same as parties in Britain use, the 'selection weekends' and all, or do ordinary voters get a say?  And how does one become a party member, potentially be removed as one, etc., and do parties charge membership dues as they do in Britain?  I do know that Canada permitsto minority governments, which would seem to preclude two or three of the left leaning parties whose total number of MPs may equal a majority from forming a coalition, should the Conservatives have won a plurality?  Or am I missing something?  In any case this setup seems vastly different from the US o e?

[Parasaurolophus]

So let's follow up.  How does one get to be a parliamentary candidate in Canada?

Depends on the party. Every party has a different constitution, and different rules and regulations. All appointments are ultimately up to the leader, but the names that go before her can get there in different ways, depending on the party. For most parties, you need a certain number of signatures from citizens in your riding, plus you need to fundraise a certain amount (often absurdly high) and gift it to the party. For the Greens, there's no fundraising: you get voted in by Green party members in your riding, and the leader respects the results of the election.

Leadership selection is also variable. Sometimes it's party members who vote. Sometimes, any Canadian can (this is how the Liberals ran their last leadership contest).

And how does one become a party member, potentially be removed as one, etc., and do parties charge membership dues as they do in Britain?

To become a member, you click a link/write a letter, pay a nominal, tax-deductible fee (usually 5$), and wait to get your membership card in the mail. You can only belong to a single party at a time. Methods of removal also vary, but generally the leader can remove you, as can (IIRC) your riding association.

I do know that Canada permitsto minority governments, which would seem to preclude two or three of the left leaning parties whose total number of MPs may equal a majority from forming a coalition, should the Conservatives have won a plurality?  Or am I missing something?

It's not precluded. Minority governments can be formed, and sometimes are. Generally, whoever's won a plurality gets the first shot at forming government, but a coalition can approach the Governor General/Queen with the intent of forming government.

What you're missing is that this is actually quite rare because of the first past the post system. As soon as a party takes a plurality of votes in a riding, they win that entire riding. And seats in Parliament are based on ridings. So, usually, if a party wins around 31-33% of the vote, that translates into a majority government. What the minority parties need, collectively, in order to form a government, is not a plurality of votes, but a plurality of ridings.

In any case this setup seems vastly different from the US o e?

Well... yeah? We're a Westminster democracy. You're not.

[traductio]

What you're missing is that this is actually quite rare because of the first past the post system. As soon as a party takes a plurality of votes in a riding, they win that entire riding. And seats in Parliament are based on ridings. So, usually, if a party wins around 31-33% of the vote, that translates into a majority government. What the minority parties need, collectively, in order to form a government, is not a plurality of votes, but a plurality of ridings.

Thanks for this explanation. I've lived here (in Canada) nearly five years -- and my first book even concerns the Canadian constitution! -- but this is the clearest explanation I've seen of the first-past-the-post system.

[kaysixteen]

Thanks.  The U.S. Obviously isn't a Westminster system, but we have first past the post here too.  The difference is that with really only two parties plus the very occasional independent winning seats in the U.S. Congress, a 31 percent of the vote getting party, even with gerrymandering, really ain't going to win a majority of seats in either house of congress.  Is gerrymandering even possible in Canada, btw?  Otoh our political primary system allows for direct popular voter ability to choose candidates, which does seem more democratic, and which severely limits the ability of party leaders in either house to enforce lockstep party discipline.

Can Canadian parliamentarians challenge their party leader for the leadership at any time, or is this only possible at certain fixed intervals?

[pedanticromantic]

I'm a member of the Green party, but considering voting for the PPC. Why would I vote for these right-wing nutcases? Easy: 1) they have zero chance of winning in my riding and 2) if enough people vote for them they might continue, which will mean splitting the vote on the right in the future, ensuring we don't ever get Conservative majority governments in power again.
If we can create some balance so we split the right as much as we split the left, then governments will be forced to abandon FPTP and we may have some real democracy again.

[kaysixteen]

What is FPTP?

btw someone above alluded to possibly voting 'libertarian' in the upcoming Canadian national election?  Is there indeed a 'Libertarian' party up north contesting national parliamentary elections there, and, if so, how strong is it?

[pedanticromantic]

FPTP: first past the post. The electoral system in Canada.
There is no national libertarian party that I'm aware of but all kinds of small parties run candidates in most jurisdictions. Last election I saw the Marxist party, the Animal Rights party, maybe  a Libertarian on the ballot I can't recall... we have lots of options.

[kaysixteen]

So how many parties figure to win at least one seat in the upcoming election?