Federal Election - 2015 (started January 27, 2015)

385 posts / 0 new
Last post
NorthReport

Details, details: Defence minister Jason Kenney blunt style betrays him

“I don’t take very seriously Mr. Mulcair’s views on these matters,” Kenney said. “As you know, the NDP has opposed every single overseas military deployment in Canadian history, and so I think the position he’s taking is just remarkably predictable.”

Not quite true: The NDP initially supported Canada’s war in Libya four years ago. They voted with the Conservatives and Liberals in favour of sending fighter jets aircraft and a naval ship to participate in the NATO mission in March 2011; and they agreed to an extension that June. They voted against a second extension in September 2011. The war ended in October.


http://www.canada.com/News/politics/Details+details+Defence+minister+Jas...

Pondering

Brachina wrote:

https://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&ei=8CgLVYPnCMvCggT51oL4C...

 

 

 Interesting interview with Tom Mulcair.

Either he has no interest in forming a coalition with the Liberals or he has no clue how to go about making deals with people. 

 

NorthReport

I think this is the situation in a nutshell. Trudeau's ego is getting in the way of defeating Harper. Too bad.

Quote:

Despite recent polls showing either the Conservatives or Liberals leading, Mulcair downplayed Trudeau’s appeal and attacked him for a lack of leadership and his tepid support of Bill C-51.

“I’m the leader of the official opposition,” Mulcair said. “We’re the only ones who have ever been able to stand up to Mr. Harper.”

Besides, the NDP has “always fought for every column inch,” he added.

Pundits warn that Harper could ride to yet another victory if the Liberals and NDP split the progressive vote. Mulcair said his party has been open to working with the Liberals to prevent that.

He extended the invitation in a speech one year ago, and then again in December. Both times the Liberals “slammed that door,” Muclair said.

“So my priority is getting rid of Stephen Harper. Justin Trudeau’s priority is Justin Trudeau,” he said. “The public will know that as they head into this election campaign.”

NorthReport
Pondering

NorthReport wrote:

I think this is the situation in a nutshell. Trudeau's ego is getting in the way of defeating Harper. Too bad.

Quote:

Despite recent polls showing either the Conservatives or Liberals leading, Mulcair downplayed Trudeau’s appeal and attacked him for a lack of leadership and his tepid support of Bill C-51.

“I’m the leader of the official opposition,” Mulcair said. “We’re the only ones who have ever been able to stand up to Mr. Harper.”

Besides, the NDP has “always fought for every column inch,” he added.

Pundits warn that Harper could ride to yet another victory if the Liberals and NDP split the progressive vote. Mulcair said his party has been open to working with the Liberals to prevent that.

He extended the invitation in a speech one year ago, and then again in December. Both times the Liberals “slammed that door,” Muclair said.

“So my priority is getting rid of Stephen Harper. Justin Trudeau’s priority is Justin Trudeau,” he said. “The public will know that as they head into this election campaign.”

Someone who wants to form a coaltion doesn't insult their potential partner. 

NorthReport

Trudeau now is in a box, and he is going to have to stick his head out sooner rather than later, otherwise he will be in trouble with his own potential supporters.

Why wouldn’t the Liberals and NDP make a deal to replace Stephen Harper?

Why not a coalition? Or at least an accord?

 

http://www.macleans.ca/politics/why-wouldnt-the-liberals-and-ndp-coopera...

Sean in Ottawa

Pondering wrote:

NorthReport wrote:

I think this is the situation in a nutshell. Trudeau's ego is getting in the way of defeating Harper. Too bad.

Quote:

Despite recent polls showing either the Conservatives or Liberals leading, Mulcair downplayed Trudeau’s appeal and attacked him for a lack of leadership and his tepid support of Bill C-51.

“I’m the leader of the official opposition,” Mulcair said. “We’re the only ones who have ever been able to stand up to Mr. Harper.”

Besides, the NDP has “always fought for every column inch,” he added.

Pundits warn that Harper could ride to yet another victory if the Liberals and NDP split the progressive vote. Mulcair said his party has been open to working with the Liberals to prevent that.

He extended the invitation in a speech one year ago, and then again in December. Both times the Liberals “slammed that door,” Muclair said.

“So my priority is getting rid of Stephen Harper. Justin Trudeau’s priority is Justin Trudeau,” he said. “The public will know that as they head into this election campaign.”

Someone who wants to form a coaltion doesn't insult their potential partner. 

This is the kind of statement that really loses respect and credibility.

You know they do not like each other and are going into a hard fought campaign against each other.

You know that Trudeau is not going to agree to a deal becuase he likes Mulcair. He will do a deal IF he has to and only if.

The better the NDP does the more likely there will be a coalition -- unless of course Trudeau loses the right of the Liberal party to Harper in which case he will be beyond help.

 

 

ajaykumar

 The ‘no’ is categorical, absolute, irrefutable and non-negotiable. It’s no. End of story. Full stop.

NorthReport

It doesn't matter to the NDP. There will be an agreement or the Trudeau Liberals will continue to bleed votes. Dropping a few more points in the polls will give Trudeau's ego a shake. 

NorthReport

POLITICAL FOOT-IN-MOUTH DISEASE: WHEN IS IT AN ACCIDENT, AND WHEN IS IT DELIBERATE?

http://warrenkinsella.com/2015/03/political-foot-in-mouth-disease-when-i...

NorthReport

FWIW

Gormley: Harper's guns and Saskatchewan's population

http://www.thestarphoenix.com/news/Harper+guns+Saskatchewan+population/1...

NorthReport

Stephen Harper, would you recognize Stephen Harper? Delacourt

Prime minister has come a long way from many of his positions as a Reform MP in the 1990s (including a previous vote supporting a gun control bill).

http://www.thestar.com/news/insight/2015/03/20/stephen-harper-would-you-...

josh
Michael Moriarity Michael Moriarity's picture

This is a mildly interesting article, but Simpson completely misunderstands the meaning of the term "dog whistle" as used in politics.

Jeffrey Simpson wrote:

Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s Conservatives have been a dog-whistle government since first being elected. With an election seven months away, the whistles are blowing more insistently than ever.

The whistles summon the Conservative base to another political mobilization. Those beyond the base can’t stand the sound; it drives them to distraction. But for those within the base, the whistles are music to their ears.

The correct definition is found in wikipedia.

wikipedia wrote:

Dog-whistle politics is political messaging employing coded language that appears to mean one thing to the general population but has an additional, different or more specific resonance for a targeted subgroup. The phrase is only used as a pejorative, because of the inherently deceptive nature of the practice and because the dog-whistle messages are frequently themselves distasteful, for example by empathising with racist or revolutionary attitudes. It is an analogy to a dog whistle, whose high-frequency whistle is heard by dogs, but is inaudible to humans.

The term can be distinguished from "code words" used by hospital staff or other specialist workers, in that dog-whistling is specific to the political realm, and the messaging referred to as the dog-whistle has an understandable meaning for a general audience, rather than being incomprehensible.

 

Centrist

Just came to my attention that, for the first time ever, Canadians residing outside Canada will now be allowed to vote in the 2015 fed election. Again, for the first time ever. That equates to an additional ~2.4 million more voters!

Elections Canada now maintains an International Register of Electors database and these folk will be mailed a ballot during the 2015 campaign.

Got me to think who these ~2.4 million Canadians living abroad are:

1. Embassy staff;

2. Military personnel;

3. High income earners, such as in financial sectors, in the U.S., Europe, and Asia;

4. Retirees residing in California/Arizona;

5. etc.

I personally know many who fit the latter two categories here in BC and they disproportionately would be categorized as Con voters and I would also assume the same for the first 2 categories.

Which leads to another thought. If the Cons lose seats by narrow 100 - 500 vote margins on e-day in 2015, these ballots could potentially swing a riding to a Con win at the end of the day. 

In that vein, many close riding results will be up in the air for weeks until these mail-in ballots have been received and counted.

The Cons are a clever bunch for making those changes to the Elections Act. Give 'em that much.

http://www.elections.ca/content.aspx?section=vot&dir=reg/etr&document=in...

Centrist

PS. Those ~2.4 million overseas Canadian voters represent ~7,200 per riding (338 ridings). From that perspective, it is even worse than I first imagined.

Jacob Two-Two

Maybe, but these people still deserve their vote. I support this policy completely. Who knows? These voters might surprise you.

NorthReport
Centrist

Jacob Two-Two wrote:
Maybe, but these people still deserve their vote. I support this policy completely. Who knows? These voters might surprise you.

That`s all nice and fine... but then political reality sets in. Strongly suspect that just some BC ridings, won somewhat marginally in 2011 by the NDP, would have been flipped over to the Cons back in 2011 with these new expat voting rules (representing about 9% of Canadian citizens):

1. Burnaby-Douglas;

2. Esquimalt-Juan De Fuca;

3. Newton-North Delta;

 

 

 

Aristotleded24

Centrist wrote:
I personally know many who fit the latter two categories here in BC and they disproportionately would be categorized as Con voters and I would also assume the same for the first 2 categories.

There are also younger folks living abroad who may do NGO work, and these people may lean towards the NDP and the Greens. As Jacob says, you can't make that assumption.

Centrist

Aristotleded24 wrote:

Centrist wrote:
I personally know many who fit the latter two categories here in BC and they disproportionately would be categorized as Con voters and I would also assume the same for the first 2 categories.

There are also younger folks living abroad who may do NGO work, and these people may lean towards the NDP and the Greens. As Jacob says, you can't make that assumption.

I know, well enough, that the older demographic as well as the more affluent demographic gets out and votes on e-day by very large margins. The younger demographic has the poorest voter turnout in that vein.

Aristotleded24

Centrist wrote:
I know, well enough

Well I guess you know everything then.

sherpa-finn

Lets get real with the numbers here: about half of all those Canadians living "overseas" are the 1 million Canadians living in the US.  Not sure what the breakdown of those is amongst retirees vs working folks vs students - but your typical snowbirds would not count as most keep keep their official residence in Canada for obvious reasons.

The next biggest sub-group is indeed the Hong-Kong connection - so that one would be worth looking into for political impact.

Centrist

Aristotleded24 wrote:

Centrist wrote:
I know, well enough

Well I guess you know everything then.

`Twas a major media topic after the BC election - Older demographics get out and vote while younger demographics don`t. Even an Elections Canada study confirms same.

http://www.elections.ca/content.aspx?section=res&dir=rec/part/estim/41ge...

Again, with a potential additional around 7,200 voters per riding, that could potentially affect the final outcome in many ridings to benefit the Cons methinks. And according to U.S. studies, U.S. expats vote in higher percentages than U.S. residents as a whole.

We will see the impact of same after the 2015 election as a special tally column for Canadian expats will be in place for each riding result. If my suspicions bear out, it will become problematic moving forward, election after election. 

Centrist

To further add, looks like Canadian expat votes will have the most impact upon BC ridings:

40 per cent of Canadians in Asia or the U.S. (or 720,000 people) were from Ontario; 30 per cent of the diaspora (about 550,000) are from B.C. and about 12 per cent (216,000) are Quebecers.

Crunch those numbers a little more and you will find an interesting fact about British Columbians. We actually turn out to be Canada's leaders in going global. On a per capita basis, the Asia Pacific Foundation’s survey finds a British Columbian is more than twice as likely as an Ontarian, and five times more likely as a Quebecer to actually go abroad to work and live.

This survey leaves no doubt that Canada — and particularly British Columbia — is seeing some of the best talent going offshore.  These people are generally building careers in banking, international trade, and international relations, as well as running businesses.

http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/story.html?id=f7c5de76-9bed-4679...

Jacob Two-Two

I'm not so sure that this will be as big a factor as you suggest. At least, not right away. American ex-pats are used to retaining their vote. Canadian ex-pats aren't. It might take a few elections before this becomes a habit for them. Also, while I agree they are going to skew Conservative, people living abroad might be more sensitive to Canada's international reputation than those living here, and Harper's not well respected in the wider world.

Centrist

Jacob Two-Two wrote:

I'm not so sure that this will be as big a factor as you suggest. At least, not right away. American ex-pats are used to retaining their vote. Canadian ex-pats aren't. It might take a few elections before this becomes a habit for them. Also, while I agree they are going to skew Conservative, people living abroad might be more sensitive to Canada's international reputation than those living here, and Harper's not well respected in the wider world.

Hopefully you arre correct. But just looking at BC, 550,000 reside in the U.S. and Asia alone. Not including BCers in Europe. Just those 550,000 in the U.S. and Asia equates to an average of 13,000 potential new votes for each of BC`s 42 ridings.

Many ridings in BC are won by under 1,000 votes. If just a fraction of those average 13,000 per riding vote in 2015 (say 20% or 2,600 per riding), that could potentially mean the difference between a Con win and defeat - esp on Van Isle as well as Van City and neighbouring inner Van City suburbs. 

 

Jacob Two-Two

Also, purely anecdotally, I met a number of ex-pats when I was visting New York last year, and they didn't care about Canadian politics at all. I would be highly surprised if they bothered to vote. This is conjecture, but I think that the cultural mythology of the USA will create a stronger imperative to stay involved in the country even when living somewhere else. That may not be as strong with Canadians.

But whether you're right or not, I can't see the point in worrying about it. There's nothing to be gained by denying people their vote. It'll just have to fall out however it falls out. Personally, I don't think that Harper's going to have much appeal this time around even to his usual constituency, so the demographics might be misleading.

Sean in Ottawa

Let's agree to look at the voting rate of people living outside the country after the election. We have no idea how many will vote.

I thought military people already voted -- this would seem to give the option to others.

nicky

This is worth reading:

For Mulcair, the real enemy is, and always has been, Harper. And perhaps Mulcair’s most winning point is that he has demonstrated that he will never let political ego make him forget that the main mission is defeating the Harper government.
Despite the fact that he is the Leader of the Opposition, and that the Liberals have less than a third of the NDP’s seat count in Parliament, Mulcair has opened the door to a coalition that would guarantee that Harper’s last day on the job will be sometime this year. So far Trudeau has eschewed such an arrangement, even though if the parties themselves don’t do the strategic thing to put Harper out, voters will. Above all else, Canadians are longing for authentic leadership. Only two politicians in Canada are providing it – Green Party leader Elizabeth May and Mulcair.
If Bill C-51 was Trudeau’s Big Blunder, his fatal step could be supporting Harper on the expansion of Canada’s military mission in Iraq. Remember, he opposed the initial deployment and with good reason. Just as he did to overcome the whirlwind of Brazeau in the ring, it’s time for Trudeau to start channelling his father.

http://www.ipolitics.ca/2015/03/22/is-trudeau-just-handing-harper-the-el...

Sean in Ottawa

I would avoid absolutes. It is not impossible for Harper to get a majority. He could fail very badly but there are no guarantees of that.

Trudeau seems to be focussing on taking away votes from Harper and acting as attractive to the red-Tory/blue-Liberal cohort as he can. This is likley the way he sees the world and it may work -- Trudeau letting NDP take his lunch while he easts Harper's dinner. But it could also fail badly either leaving Mulcair to pass him or Harper to hold him off and remain in government.

NorthReport

!!

NorthReport
NorthReport

!!

Pages