BC May 9, 2017 Election Results and Comments

481 posts / 0 new
Last post
NorthReport
Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

Just as a total aside, I love how Keith Baldrey's picture at that link looks like a very badly forged bank note.  That or he really does have little parallel lines all over his face.

NorthReport

Sad that this is the best the CBC News Department can do for election coverage, but it is typical CBC News Department right-wing misleading headlines.

 

'We're insignificant to them'

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/we-re-insignificant-to-th...

NorthReport

My hunch is Canada's rising inequality was a significant contributing factor in the recent BC election results.  The citizens of BC are tired of getting financially screwed over.

In Canada, Luxury Retailers Rule as Inequality Rises

Sears struggles, Holt Renfrew thrives as rich get richer and the rest fall behind.

https://thetyee.ca/News/2017/06/02/Luxury-Retailers-Rule-in-Canada/ 

Mighty Middle

THIS JUST IN - BC Liberal party spokesman said their MLA all agreed not to take the job of speaker. If NDP & Greens follow suit it means another elxn

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

JKR wrote:

NorthReport wrote:

If the NDP and the Greens merged they would become unbeatable.

I think a merger would be the way to go for the NDP and Greens if FPTP is the system used in the next election.

If not a merger, an electoral pact, which could work like THIS:

The Greens would not nominate candidates in any ridings where the NDP just barely beat the Liberals, or just barely lost to them.

The NDP would not nominate candidates in any of the ridings the Greens currently hold, or in any where polling in the run-up to the next provincial election show the Greens have the better chance of beating the Liberal incumbent.

This would only involve a handful of seats, but would make a huge difference.

And it would have to be tied to a guarantee that pr in some form would be in place AT the election after that-a written guarantee, if needed.

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

Ken Burch wrote:

JKR wrote:

NorthReport wrote:

If the NDP and the Greens merged they would become unbeatable.

I think a merger would be the way to go for the NDP and Greens if FPTP is the system used in the next election.

If not a merger, an electoral pact, which could work like THIS:

The Greens would not nominate candidates in any ridings where the NDP just barely beat the Liberals, or just barely lost to them.

The NDP would not nominate candidates in any of the ridings the Greens currently hold, or in any where polling in the run-up to the next provincial election show the Greens have the better chance of beating the Liberal incumbent.

This would only involve a handful of seats, but would make a huge difference.

And it would have to be tied to a guarantee that pr in some form would be in place AT the election after that-a written guarantee, if needed.

Ken look at the results on Vancouver Island. If you think either the Green's or NDP will agree to not contest some of those seats you have absolutely no understanding of what that would do to their bases. People have built the Green party because they hate the NDP for the war in the woods 20 years ago. The NDP supporters are very pro-union and the Green's are ambivalent at best and  on an indivdual basis many of them are anti-union neo-libertarians.

brookmere

Ken Burch wrote:
And it would have to be tied to a guarantee that pr in some form would be in place AT the election after that-a written guarantee, if needed.

In other words, have the NDP betray its promise to the voters that PR be put to a referendum. I think that's exactly the kind of issue the Liberals would want to campaign on.

NorthReport

Boo fucking hoo!

The Clark Liberals lost the election. They need to get out of the fucking way, and let the people that garnered 57% of the vote, and 44 seats which is the friggin' majority of the seats, govern.

The Liberals royally fucked up with Clark's arrogance by her not participating in the negotiations

What's not to understand about that!

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

Quote:
What's not to understand about that!

What you say is partisan, not principle.  If the NDP had won a plurality of seats, and the Libs and Greens were talking deal, I honestly expect you'd be the first to say "fair's fair, and who won the most seats?  What's not to understand about that!"

We get that you mistrust and dislike the Liberals.  But the fact that they haven't forfeited is not further proof of their immorality.  They owe it to their supporters to stick it out to the finish the same way that the NDP and Green and even PC candidate do.

Policywonk

Mr. Magoo wrote:

Quote:
What's not to understand about that!

What you say is partisan, not principle.  If the NDP had won a plurality of seats, and the Libs and Greens were talking deal, I honestly expect you'd be the first to say "fair's fair, and who won the most seats?  What's not to understand about that!"

We get that you mistrust and dislike the Liberals.  But the fact that they haven't forfeited is not further proof of their immorality.  They owe it to their supporters to stick it out to the finish the same way that the NDP and Green and even PC candidate do.

There's not forfeiting and then there's playing silly games around the Speaker.

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

Quote:
There's not forfeiting and then there's playing silly games around the Speaker.

Is it "silly games" when the Liberals don't want to offer up a Speaker, and not "silly games" when the NDP and Greens don't want to offer up a Speaker?

NorthReport has pointed out several times that the NDP + GPC have elected the most MPPs... so shouldn't they be the ones to graciously offer up someone for this role?

NorthReport
NorthReport
NorthReport
NorthReport

No wonder the Liberals do as well as they do in BC elections with the entire mainstream press the CBC Radio and TV, Global TV, CTV, Vancouver Sun and Province, Times Colonist, most of the local weekly papers, and CKNW, being their media arm

https://news.google.ca/news/amp?caurl=http%3A%2F%2Fvancouversun.com%2Fne...

jas

FWIW, live video of the proceedings. https://www.leg.bc.ca/documents-data/broadcasts-and-webcasts

 

jas

Mr. Magoo wrote:

Is it "silly games" when the Liberals don't want to offer up a Speaker, and not "silly games" when the NDP and Greens don't want to offer up a Speaker?

NorthReport has pointed out several times that the NDP + GPC have elected the most MPPs... so shouldn't they be the ones to graciously offer up someone for this role?

The Libs are the ones who are first attempting to form government. The onus is on them to offer up a Speaker. To then require, as a party, that the Speaker step down if their government fails goes against parliamentary tradition, as the Speaker is supposed to be an independent role. So while both parties are acting in a partisan way over this issue, the Libs will be the first ones to corrupt the role of the Speaker by requiring that he (it is a he, as of this morning) step down if they lose government.

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

 Huh, ok.  I typed a bunch of stuff, but then, while looking up something re: the above, I find out that the BC Leg has elected a Liberal Speaker, so, all a moot point!
 

quizzical

did i hear right free post secondary education?

quizzical

1 dollar of marijuanna sales will go towards drug education and opiate addiction....???

quizzical

500 beds split between 105 hospitals in BC? less than 5 beds per. lol

there's just so much bs i can't believe it.

if they believed these policies should be in play why did they destry everything over the last 16 years getting rid of the very things they say they will now impliment???

promise to eliminate tolls when 'they can'. lolol

quizzical

5000 a year rent to own homes to be built for the next 10 years.

quizzical

"submitted with humility and open to change" 'cause we heard you.

Left Turn Left Turn's picture

Chirsty Clark doesn't get it -- if we'd wanted a right-wing Liberal pretending to be a New Democrat, we would've kept Thomas Mulcair.

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

When the NDP take over they can expect an easy ride in getting legislation passed since the Liberals have just agreed with a good part of its agenda. It'll be nice to see all three parties working in committee to decide how to fix the many social problems mentioned in the throne speech. I can imagine them sitting and commenting on the annual migration of the flying pigs they can see out the windows.

If Christy does get an early election and runs on this as a platform expect the BC Conservatives to become a major factor. Grassroots free enterprisers in BC hate corrupt politicians and federal Liberals. The Conservative candidiate in Courtenay Comox for instance will likely increase her vote directly at the expense of the BC Liberals.

quizzical

from Macleans surprisingly:

The premier lost an election just weeks ago. Her party has been in power for 16 years. She has been premier for six years. And staring down defeat, what does she do? She “borrows” policies from the parties poised to defeat her days from now, abandons years of party commitments, and spins her reversal as “listening to voters,” as if she’d just now discovered the practice of consulting the electorate whom she is meant to serve. And all this after declaring that NDP leader John Horgan is a flip-flopper who isn’t to be trusted and labeling him “Say Anything John.”...

...British Columbians will survive this frustrating and embarrassing chapter in the history of our politics. Citizens are not fools, and our system of government remains, as ever, plenty sound—if not quite as inclusive and participatory as it might be. Indeed, I believe Clark’s cynical gambit will fail, and we’ll all move on.

And yet, we shouldn’t forget what happened with this speech from the throne. That speech represents the worst of a short-sighted, desperate, and cynical kind of politics. In the future, leaders ought to hold it up as an example of what we should all strive to avoid in civic life. If we can do that, perhaps some good will come from this sad mess.

http://www.macleans.ca/opinion/the-foul-cynicism-of-christy-clarks-speec...

NorthReport

Right-wing McLeans just wants a Liberal leadership change because they know the Liberals are doomed with Clark remaining at the helm

NorthReport

Well said krop

I'm surprised we haven't already heard from the Conservatives. But Iike you I'm sure it's coming

kropotkin1951 wrote:

When the NDP take over they can expect an easy ride in getting legislation passed since the Liberals have just agreed with a good part of its agenda. It'll be nice to see all three parties working in committee to decide how to fix the many social problems mentioned in the throne speech. I can imagine them sitting and commenting on the annual migration of the flying pigs they can see out the windows.

If Christy does get an early election and runs on this as a platform expect the BC Conservatives to become a major factor. Grassroots free enterprisers in BC hate corrupt politicians and federal Liberals. The Conservative candidiate in Courtenay Comox for instance will likely increase her vote directly at the expense of the BC Liberals.

Aristotleded24

kropotkin1951 wrote:
If Christy does get an early election and runs on this as a platform expect the BC Conservatives to become a major factor. Grassroots free enterprisers in BC hate corrupt politicians and federal Liberals. The Conservative candidiate in Courtenay Comox for instance will likely increase her vote directly at the expense of the BC Liberals.

And on the flilp side, Green voters in close ridings like Burke Mountain would have a good reason to vote NDP, considering that the NDP essentially agreed to implement the Green Party agenda.

Pages