I couldn't agree more with your views, observer.
As it's always difficult to move parties an inch in any direction, the logical way to do it is to have committed people elected to positions on the exec, etc., who, once the party wins, then push hard for progressive values... but only when they gain the power to do it. (Isn't that the advice Tom Flannagan gives in his book on Harper?) Strategy counts a lot.
Warnings about going too hard the other way, because that's just the way things are, is just another recipe for doing nothing while coasting along with the flow over a cliff.
If the left pushes too hard on the center parties, they won't get elected, except in fringe areas. Quebec is something else right now, it seems to be a protest vote, it may not hold.
I don't think we can or should expect it to hold in Quebec. It's a brief opportunity, a platform and maybe a springboard to something more permanent or longlasting, with luck. But that's why the party has a lot of work to do. The new MPs and other members of the Quebec party need to be building the organization, riding associations, etc, and forging ties with other left-wing groups on the ground there and across the country.
I think communication is also key: over the next few years, NDP can hopefully also evolve a smart and careful platform, with measures that are expressing social principles of compassion and fairness, but with fiscal responsibility at its core. This will probably be called centrist by the ignorant media. However, it doesn't have to be. The party can still advance left-wing goals and promote left-wing voices.
But I also agree that the NDP won't likely win over a lot of Ontario; there will have to be some cleverness, pragmatism and strategy. Lots of the Canadian population are small c conservative by nature, and there are also plenty of prejudiced and ignorant people out there who like to shout everyone down.
I couldn't believe the number of calls I heard on CPAC from callers who were condemning the NDP as socialist, communist and dangerous, and who were quite visceral in their hatred and their certainty that the NDP would bankrupt the country, and that they're all selfish parasites etc. Many railed against the youth too, as lazy and entitled. It was an infuriating and depressing glimpse of our electorate.
Of course this type of person can never be convinced reverse position and has to be ignored, but hopefully there are still some more reasonable types -- ex-Liberals, Red Tories etc, people who formerly voted NDP or Bloc -- who can still be persuaded to vote for the NDP if it has a practical message with contains measures for compassion and fairness.
So how close to complete is the "Obama-ization" of the NDP, Spector?
*yawn*
Leave it to the left to somehow think success is really a failure.
What was the point of that post, Life? I think it's great that the NDP has displaced the Liberals and have formed the Opposition. The destruction of the LPC is a good thing.
and those people calling CPAC, some are certainly media shills, that is the USA tactic, which the cons imported.
I know people, who make a low income, who complain about taxes in their paycheck, and vote conservative! They are duped by the lies and con propaganda.
But humans are emotional and irrational. NDP won't get elected if they hint at raises taxes. Why can't they promote a small tax-cut for people?
But then you open that economic can of worms.
It looks like were screwed. Harper is going to rape Canada for years, and how long before people realize what is going on? 10 years? It could take that long.
Frankly, I predict Harper will do a Reagan, and bankrupt Canada after 2 majorites, then it doesn't matter what the next guy does, as there won't be any money left.
Frankly, its time for a legal tax-revolt. Most of the taxes are going to go to miltary arms companies, and US prison companies anyway. The rest will go to global oil companies. Canada is about to be raped, worse than how the Brits used to do it, during colonialism.
Hundreds of billion of wealth will be robbed from the citizens. Why is there no center-left Think Tank in Canada, with a budget, to constantly release information to the public to get the facts out?
I told those I know, that Obama would not be able to do anything. They all went into a rage at me.
But Obama can't do anything. No one can in the States. Its all locked up by the really powerful people.
And my view is those people just took Canada over, to access the oil and resources. Harper works for big oil, and now big oil runs Canada. They will bleed it until its dry, and use Canada like an old rag.
And now they own all the major media. I believe this is a turning point in Canada's history. one of the worst, if not the worst, we are going back to 1905 eventually.
on a sour note, each new MP is going to earn about $750,000 each from this. plus expenses.
150K a year for each NDP MP.
and the NDP party is going to make a lot of money too.
So the excessive celebration from the NDP, is distasteful, and people are picking up on that. They are going to do just fine, but the country is about to get wrecked.
Gee did any of our new "progressive" posters say anything to your Liberal friends and neighbours every time Iggy and his stooges voted in favour of Harper since 2008. Did you phone Liberal MP's offices and tell them to stop propping up the neo-cons?
For many people the problem really comes down to the fact that the NDP has outpolled the Liberals. If the Liberals were in opposition the doom and gloom from some quarters would be more muted.
"excessive celebration"?
Please do indicate what you think is excessive celebration....
Moreover, what is really distasteful and people are noticing is Liberals whining endlessly.
I am no fan of the corp Libs. But I just figured out why so many of the NDP newbies are so happy, they just made $750,000+ each. they won the lottery, some of them who were just photos on a page.
I like Layton, but his speech and the cheering I did not like on election night. I wanted to vomit, as Harper cleaned up.
Where do you get your numbers from the phoney baloney, tea bagging Canadian Taxpayers ? I apologize for implying that you might be a Liberal. The more you post the less you sound like a liberal and the more you sound like Preston.
An MP makes about $150K a year. x 5 years. Pretty easy maths. = $750K.
I am very socially progressive, and want to stop the neocons. But facts are facts, on all sides.
The paydays that come Con/Lib/NDP are getting on retirement are in the millions, for the pensions. That is reality.
there is an ugly partisanship, Lib this, etc, pretty vile stuff.
The system we are dealing with is quite corrupt, and power corrupts all humans, left or right or center. I support the new NDP, but their euphoria on election night, personally made me feel sick.
I like Layton, but his speech and the cheering I did not like on election night. I wanted to vomit, as Harper cleaned up.
It was a historic night and the symbology of the social justice voice being at almost parity in popular vote with the Harper Conservatives is beyond significant, again perhaps that is why some are so upset, as the implications for a socially just Canada and Canadian youth is huge. My 30 year old has hope for their and their children's future for perhaps the first time.
An MP makes about $150K a year. x 5 years. Pretty easy maths. = $750K.
I am very socially progressive, and want to stop the neocons. But facts are facts, on all sides.
The paydays that come Con/Lib/NDP are getting on retirement are in the millions, for the pensions. That is reality.
Your viewpoint devalues an MP's job. What you think they should be paid minimum wage? We elected 2 MP's in Burnaby who get the benefits you describe. The City of Burnaby also hires staff. I remember my MLA in the '80's when she first got elected right wing assholes used this same bullshit on her. Her reply which was the truth was that she had taken a cut in pay. Of interest the Liberals ran Ken Low a Municipal Engineer. I doubt if winning would have been a financial windfall for him. Especially given the change in his commuting times for work.
Another 15 city employees joined the $100,000-plus club last year, rising from 50 people in 2007 to 65 in 2008.
The city recently released its annual report detailing staff salaries and claimed expenses as part of its annual financial statements. By law, the city must publish details of the salary paid to each employee earning more than $75,000, as well as expenses, and a total of salaries paid to all other employees earning under $75,000.
In all, more than 320 city staff were paid salaries above that benchmark, with the top 20 ranging from a high of $205,052 to $132,571, and 65 above $100,000. (See list at left for the top 20). Last year, 50 employees were above $100,000, up from 41 in 2006.
Topping the list this year is city manager Bob Moncur, followed by Richard Mester - a contract employee in enterprise resource planning - at $187,304. The top five is rounded out with Chad Turpin, deputy city manager, at $178,676; Lambert Chu, director of engineering, at $165,265; and finance director Rick Earle, at $160,851.
http://www.richmond-news.com/story_print.html?id=2804029&sponsor=
I forgot to mention we elected a Professor from SFU as our new NDP MP. How much of a windfall in salary benefits and pension do you think this is for him? Right wing talking points that debase our democratic institutions is all this bullshit about compensation is.
No, those experienced folks are worth proper pay. Everyone who works hard deserves proper pay.
But there is NO EXCUSE for the NDP running Vegas girl, etc.
Running teenagers like the NDP did was a lazy mistake. Like the Vegas girl, of course it was a fluke and a mistake. But those mistakes will cost the NDP bigtime. She is news again. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/vacationing-ndp-candidate-a...
anyway, none of it matters anyway for 5 years.
No, those experienced folks are worth proper pay. Everyone who works hard deserves proper pay.But there is NO EXCUSE for the NDP running Vegas girl, etc.
Running teenagers like the NDP did was a lazy mistake. Like the Vegas girl, of course it was a fluke and a mistake. But those mistakes will cost the NDP bigtime. She is news again. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/vacationing-ndp-candidate-a...
Doesn't seem to prevent Conservatives from winning rock-solid majorities in Alberta. Heck, a Reform MP from BC who threatened to punch out a Liberal was even re-elected.
Vegas girl is what you call a single mother working and going to school. I am sorry for being rude but fuck off you asshole this is a progressive site and your commentary has become anything but.
obsever 521, i agreed with some of what you are saying, but its wrong to make so much assumptions about people you dont know. I am so happy Dan harris won in Scarborough Southwest, I know he tried many times and he worked so hard for it, and good for him.
Vegas girl is what you call a single mother working and going to school. I am sorry for being rude but fuck off you asshole this is a progressive site and your commentary has become anything but.
Hear hear. These journalists have no clue what regular, every day people have to go through, and it's good to see some of these regular, every day people represented in the halls of power.
Brousseau now has time to learn her job as an MP. If she does poorly, the voters will vote accordingly. We can cross that bridge when we get to it. For now, she and the rest of the Quebec caucus needs all the support they can get in learning how to effectively represent their constituents.
The voters decided who they would hire for the job of MP. The job of MP pays what it does because it should pay that well.
So what method of determining the pay scale or ELECTED MP's would you think is fair? Upper class professionals get the full meal deal and poor people get to stay poor because that is all they deserve? That is what I took from your classist response to my comparison of salaries for POSITIONS.
It's not Liberals or Greens that are responsible for the conservative majority..Who are responsible are the seniors that support the conservatives overwhelmingly everywhere and the people who did not vote ...those are the true B%^$#% of this election.
The conservatives represent 40% of 61% = 24%
The non voter represents 39% of 100% = 39%
Those are the true supporters of the Majority government....
I am not the world's most famous NDPer ;) but I am also glad that Dan Harris won in SSW. If anyone has worked for this, and deserved it, it is Dan. May he do well, and work with the Tories, McGuinty, Rob Ford et al. to bring in needed transit improvements for the riding.
a lot of rude people here! look, this person is not a real candidate. any honest person has to admit that.
Progressive is supposed to mean intellectually dishonest and lazy? She never went to the riding! You realize this kind of sloppy stuff can derail serious issues?
who's fault is that? So the progressives better learn, and fix this crap, or they are never going to get anywhere. I support the NDP, but I don't support this nonsense of sticking people in a riding like that. Its simply laziness, that's it.
In Toronto, people work their asses off in ridings.
If people "support" a fake candidate, that will destroy their credibility. And that is what is happening. That is not my fault.
and for those who think "progressive" means being intellectually dishonest? Well, take your own advice. This thing is blowing up, and badly.
No, those experienced folks are worth proper pay. Everyone who works hard deserves proper pay.
But there is NO EXCUSE for the NDP running Vegas girl, etc.
Running teenagers like the NDP did was a lazy mistake. Like the Vegas girl, of course it was a fluke and a mistake. But those mistakes will cost the NDP bigtime. She is news again. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/vacationing-ndp-candidate-a...
anyway, none of it matters anyway for 5 years.
This post is class bigotry pure and simple.
She is a 30-something single mother who was working two modest paying jobs in the service industry. She cared enough about democracy to let her name be on the ballot so that voters in a "lost cause" riding would have an NDP option. She clearly had no ambitions to be a career politician.
So, Observer, what exactly is your hatemongering objectyion to this candidate?
Is she "unqualified" because:
Which of these qualities so offends your arrogant bougeoise sensibilities?
Why are you threatened that an ordinary working class Canadian has become a Member of Parliament?
Personally, I'm proud of the fact that the SK NDP provincial caucus has an equal number of lawyers and grocery clerks.
But then, I was raised in the working class and I don't look down my nose at working class people.
Unlike some around here.
In Toronto, people work their asses off in ridings.
I'd be surprised if the Conservatives put much of a campaign in places like Toronto Danforth.
Observer, you don't get that every party runs paper candidates in ridings where they traditionally don't gain a significant vote share. The Liberals actually had to beg someone to run for them in Red Deer by advertising in the local newspaper. Before this election, few people would have thought the NDP would be competitive in this riding, but there was a massive shift to the NDP in Quebec that surprised everyone and put this riding in play. Had that shift in voter support not happened, the NDP would have finished very far back in this riding and Brousseau's candidacy would be a non-issue in the media.
In any case, this is democracy, the voters are the arbiters, and they have decided. I hope she learns how to do her new job as an MP, and that she does it well. If she doesn't, voters in her area will reflect that at the next election.
Moreover, what is really distasteful and people are noticing is Liberals whining endlessly.
Occured to me today that the Liberal Party is like an alcoholic or addict who hasn't yet hit bottom. They've driven themselves off a metaphorical cliff, but nothing is their fault. Everything is someone else's fault. They aren't getting what they deserve. And they expect everyone to listen to their pissing, moaning and whinging - and take it seriously.
Hi observer521, I don't think I've had the pleasure of welcoming you to babble yet. So: welcome. You agreed to adhere to babble policy when you signed up for this site. If you have trouble determining what an anti-oppression rubric is, I suggest you take a minute to listen to fellow babblers and get a handle on the culture here. I especially suggest the feminism forum. All this to say: referring to Ruth Ellen Brosseau, an elected member of the federal parliament, as "Vegas girl" is sexist. Don't do it again. Your evident class bias is also disturbing, though less pronounced. rabble.ca is a leftist website, not a centrist one. If the imperative to treat your fellow Canadians as human beings proved to difficult, I suggest you find a different website. I'm sure, however, that you can easily abide by the rules to which you agreed.
Getting back to strategic voting...
The Tories won 166 ridings. In 56 of those ridings, the combined NDP/Liberal/BQ/Green vote was greater then the Conservatives. I figured out what share of support for the 3rd, 4th and 5th place opposition candidates would have been necessary to vote for the 2nd place candidate to defeat the Conservative. (i.e. If 46% of the Liberal, BQ and Green voters in Levis-Bellechasse had voted NDP, the Tories would have lost by one vote.)
Here are the numbers:
In the 12 seats needed to deny Harper his majority, the NDP was the strategic choice twice (Bramalea--Gore--Malton, Lotbinière--Chutes-de-la-Chaudière) and the Liberals were the strategic choice in ten ridings (Nipissing--Timiskaming, Etobicoke Centre, Yukon, Mississauga East--Cooksville, Winnipeg South Centre, Don Valley West, Don Valley East, Willowdale, Labrador, Scarborough Centre).
I am just repeating the lingo being used in the mass media, ironically.
I assumed there is open free discussion in a forum about democracy! sheesh. Big things are happening right now on that issue.
As well, to assume that someone is class-based in a negative way, whatever that means, makes no sense. I am terrified for Canada.
So is Rebick, from her comments, and I have met her several times.
So is Maude Barlow, I have met her as well, and read her books.http://www.canadians.org/campaignblog/?p=7780
i know you have to moderate against con-trolls, but at the same time just open discussion is not going to hurt anyone?? I have been told to fuck off, and worse, and have just ignored it.
but its an error to jump to conclusions. But if someone wants to delete or censor posts, then fine.
The mass media lingo can stay in the mass media. We try to hold ourselves to a higher standard. Your "irony" was not coming through--perhaps that word does not mean what you think it means (fyi: it means "that word does not mean what you think it means"). At any rate, "ironic" sexism is also not allowed on babble. So, consider yourself informed.
Looks like the Conservatives are turning rural and suburban Southern Ontario into another Alberta. The North has gone to the NDP, so it is like the whole of Ontario has become like Manitoba, I guess... The margins the Tory candidates won by in rural Southern Ontario are fearsome...
Huron-Bruce 54%
Sarnia-Lambton 52%
Chatham-Kent Essex 53%
Haldimand-Norfolk 50% (this one's not THAT far from Toronto...)
Perth-Wellington 54%...
In 110 ridings (35%), the Tory candidate got more than 50%. These majorities were not phony. Or looking at it another way, 2/3 of the Phony Majority was made up of Real Majorities. And the NDP got 30% of the seats with 30% of the votes.
Say we were using an AV system, how many of the Liberals in the other 56 ridings would have chosen the Tories as #2 (especially considering the Liberals are not a progressive Party)? So I think even so the Conservatives would have have picked up some of those 56 under an AV system...
I am not sure how far off the mark the current results would be compared to an AV system, as we don't really know who would choose #2 and #3... I also admit we have a severe rep-by-pop problem in Canada with such a huge variance in the number of electors in each riding, generally at the expense of the urban areas (which would tend to benefit the Liberals and NDP).
Would be interesting if someone could work out what it would have been under an AV system, especially considering the Brits are voting on it tomorrow.. (I guess you would need the second choices from the polls before election night and the election results)
Ohferchristsakes
Did no one learn anything from this election. Predicting the results of the NEXT election a few days after THIS election is just darn right stupid. Did any of you predict Quebec? Have you learned nothing from what happened there in this election.
You simply cannot predict what is going to happen in 4 years time based on this election. You would think if people learned nothing else they would have learned this from this transformative election. A large number of people in southwestern Ontario have taken a shit-kicking in the economy. They voted for stability out of fear. The NDP now has a base to go after the Conservatives in 4 years time. People will see their health care decline, they will see seniors getting farther and farther behind, they will see young families struggling and they will see youth having trouble affording post-secondary education. They will be looking for an alternative.
Quit the GD whining and start getting to work.
Ironically enough, the Conservative Party uses AV to nominate their candidates at the electoral district (riding) level.
It may not be hard to sell AV to Conservative Party members.
At least they know how it works...
Looks like the Conservatives are turning rural and suburban Southern Ontario into another Alberta. The North has gone to the NDP, so it is like the whole of Ontario has become like Manitoba, I guess... The margins the Tory candidates won by in rural Southern Ontario are fearsome...
Huron-Bruce 54%
Sarnia-Lambton 52%
Chatham-Kent Essex 53%
Haldimand-Norfolk 50% (this one's not THAT far from Toronto...)
Perth-Wellington 54%...
In 110 ridings (35%), the Tory candidate got more than 50%. These majorities were not phony. Or looking at it another way, 2/3 of the Phony Majority was made up of Real Majorities. And the NDP got 30% of the seats with 30% of the votes.
Say we were using an AV system, how many of the Liberals in the other 56 ridings would have chosen the Tories as #2 (especially considering the Liberals are not a progressive Party)? So I think even so the Conservatives would have have picked up some of those 56 under an AV system...
I am not sure how far off the mark the current results would be compared to an AV system, as we don't really know who would choose #2 and #3... I also admit we have a severe rep-by-pop problem in Canada with such a huge variance in the number of electors in each riding, generally at the expense of the urban areas (which would tend to benefit the Liberals and NDP).
Would be interesting if someone could work out what it would have been under an AV system, especially considering the Brits are voting on it tomorrow.. (I guess you would need the second choices from the polls before election night and the election results)
I don't really like this system either. I would rather of proportional representation. No ridings. Do to the constitution, I think we have to give representation by province. This would mean having proportional representation by province. In the larger provinces, I think it best to break the province up into blocks of 14 seats each and then use proportional representation that way. To earn a seat a party would have to get some amount of the vote, perhaps 7%. Every additional seat earned would be through another 7%. Afterwards, if there additional seats to allocate, they would go to the party with the most votes, then then party with the second most votes.
Let's use Manitoba as an example.
Conservatives: 53% so they would get 7 seats
NDP: 25% so they would get 3 seats
Liberal: 16.6% so they would get 2 seats
The additional two seats would be distributed to the Conservatives and NDP in that order as there was no other party with more than 7% of the vote. So, the final seat distribution would be
Conservative 8
NDP 4
Liberal 2
Av is the neo cons dream come true. I say that because I believe in BC the NDP would get few 2nd place votes. Who knows what would happen under the system. We might elect the Greens or the next reincarnation of the Socred (a '50's tea bag type party). I suspect that the smart money would back the next incarnation of the Socreds. Here is what happened in BC the last time the voters were offered a right wing populist option to list as second choice. I'll bet some people even voted CCF first and Socred 2nd because they were neither the Libs or Cons.
AV in British Columbia
AV was used briefly for provincial elections in 1952 and 1953. Ironically, the story involves a coalition of Liberals and Conservatives plotting to eliminate a third, upstart party.
The 1945 and 1949 general elections in British Columbia were won by a coalition of Liberals and Conservatives. However, by the early 1950s, this coalition was starting to disintegrate, and a new party appeared, the leftist CCF (forerunner of the New Democratic Party). Viewing the CCF as a threat, while the coalition government was still in place, it introduced the Alternative Vote. This was done for purely political reasons. The Liberals and Conservatives believed that AV would hurt smaller parties (which it does tend to do), and using AV would, they thought, eliminate the CCF as a serious threat in the 1952 election.
However, the plan backfired because many voters listed another party, the Social Credit (Socred) party as their second choice, and the Socreds actually ended up forming the government (as a minority).
In 1953, due to the difficulties of governing with a minority, Socred Premier WAC Bennett deliberately forced an election over an education issue. The Socreds were re-elected with a majority government. Bennett immediately reinstated the First Past the Post system, which remains in use today.
You know, LTU, you are right on! I keep saying lets get to work. I want to beat Kevin Lamoureux, but we won't do it sitting on our hands.
@observant521:
You know, you have to understand that the vast majority of people involved in this blog's disussion are new dems, pqistes (my apologies if I butchered that), or further left. Most of us have been involved in this for a very long time; we have seen these Lib assertions over and over. We have seen these pleadings for a unified left over and over. But it NEVER comes without a price for New Dems. We are expected to accept Lib leadership, and before Monday, we were expected to become Libs.
Look, the Libs had so many years in government to implement a left wing agenda. But first, under Trudeau (yes, that Trudeau), then Chretien, and then finally Martin, government downsized, taxes for the wealthy decreased, government revenues fell, and there was more and more discussion of the need to run government fiscally responsible. In all of this time, the Libs were AWOL on the issue of government being good for people except at election time, and AWOL when it came to defending government, and the people who worked for it.
The Libs really have acted like the Democrats in the US. Instead of fighting the neo-con framing, the Libs triangulated in the hope of keeping power. All the time, giving substance and justification to the neo-con anti government, small size governance. The Libs could have done something about it but they didn't.
Now the New Dems are the Opposition, and there is finally a real voice advocating for the good government can do, and you seem to want us to back off in the name of fighting Harper and Tories, with what result? How can you expect us to buy what you are selling.
As I said on another thread, what is that you want? What SPECIFICALLY do you want the New Dems to do? And why haven't you said SPECIFICALLY what you want the Libs to do?
Ok, you have our attention. How about it?
Right on!
I am sick of these attacks. There have been all kinds of politically inexperienced Conservatives and Liberals elected in the past and no one said boo. In my riding the completely inexperienced in anything Ben Lobb was elected in 2008 after almost winning in 2006. His only claim to fame was being the product of a well-known and well-off Huron family. He had never held any kind of office, had never been active in his community and certainly never experienced the struggles Ruth Ellen Brousseau did and can bring to the national conversation. The double standard is profound.
The thing is, observer, the vacation Ms. Brousseau took is clearly NOT the most important thing about her. What is far MORE important, and genuinely admirable, is that Ms. Brousseau, a working-class single mother who has to work TWO jobs to support her family, managed to win. She's a hero. So can you please give the vacation thing a rest? It doesn't matter and it doesn't disqualify her. You're just going to have to accept the fact that the vacation doesn't invalidate her election. There's simply nothing to discuss there. OK?
Ruth Ellen Brousseau is a working-class hero. She's done nothing to deserve anyone's contempt.
In the 12 seats needed to deny Harper his majority, the NDP was the strategic choice twice (Bramalea--Gore--Malton, Lotbinière--Chutes-de-la-Chaudière)
And how many "strategic" voting sites recommended supporting the NDP in either of these seats?
The other piece, of course, is to look at the 20-30 seats where the Conservatives lost by the narrowest margins - most of which were won by New Democrats, I suspect. And in how many of those seats did the Liberal fraud artists recommend a "strategic" NDP vote?
In the 12 seats needed to deny Harper his majority, the NDP was the strategic choice twice (Bramalea--Gore--Malton, Lotbinière--Chutes-de-la-Chaudière)And how many "strategic" voting sites recommended supporting the NDP in either of these seats?The other piece, of course, is to look at the 20-30 seats where the Conservatives lost by the narrowest margins - most of which were won by New Democrats, I suspect. And in how many of those seats did the Liberal fraud artists recommend a "strategic" NDP vote?
In Ontario, one of the sites was confused about Welland before endorsing NDP incumbent Malcolm Allen. In Kenora, the sites endorsed former Liberal MP Roger Valley, then later retracted that endorsement. Valley came in third and the Conservatives won, and I suspect if there wasn't talk of strategic voting that the NDP would have taken Kenora. In Huron-Bruce, even though the Liberals were defeated by a large margin in 2008, and even though a new candidate ran for them this go around, they endorsed him to stop the Conservatives. I will let the Huron County faction of babble speak as to whether or not this confused local progressives.
I'm ashamed to admit that I voted strategically. I live in London West and have possibly one of the most useless MPs representing me. I voted for Doug Ferguson for a number of reasons, one of them being strategic. I don't think its helpful to blame greens. Nobody in London West would have ever guessed that the NDP candidate would have done as well as he did. Mr. Ferguson didn't even run a particularly high profile campaign.
Most Canadians I know (regardless of party affiliation) worry about the same things: affordability of education, healthcare, safe environment, unfair income distribution. As an actor, I'm very worried about cuts to arts and culture as many of my friends work in the culture sector. The funny thing is that I do have some Conservative and conservative friends, but all my lefty friends and acquaintances outnumber them by huge margins - yet the Cons won the election!?!?
Let's all hope that AV passes in England. If we had AV in London West I'm sure that Doug Ferguson or Peter Ferguson would have won. Anything is better than FPTP
In the 12 seats needed to deny Harper his majority, the NDP was the strategic choice twice (Bramalea--Gore--Malton, Lotbinière--Chutes-de-la-Chaudière)And how many "strategic" voting sites recommended supporting the NDP in either of these seats?The other piece, of course, is to look at the 20-30 seats where the Conservatives lost by the narrowest margins - most of which were won by New Democrats, I suspect. And in how many of those seats did the Liberal fraud artists recommend a "strategic" NDP vote?
In Ontario, one of the sites was confused about Welland before endorsing NDP incumbent Malcolm Allen. In Kenora, the sites endorsed former Liberal MP Roger Valley, then later retracted that endorsement. Valley came in third and the Conservatives won, and I suspect if there wasn't talk of strategic voting that the NDP would have taken Kenora. In Huron-Bruce, even though the Liberals were defeated by a large margin in 2008, and even though a new candidate ran for them this go around, they endorsed him to stop the Conservatives. I will let the Huron County faction of babble speak as to whether or not this confused local progressives.
In Kenora, it would have been hard to do anything with a 46.9% Conservative vote. In Huron-Bruce the Conservative ended up with 54.7% of the vote.
In the 12 seats needed to deny Harper his majority, the NDP was the strategic choice twice (Bramalea--Gore--Malton, Lotbinière--Chutes-de-la-Chaudière)
And how many "strategic" voting sites recommended supporting the NDP in either of these seats?
The other piece, of course, is to look at the 20-30 seats where the Conservatives lost by the narrowest margins - most of which were won by New Democrats, I suspect. And in how many of those seats did the Liberal fraud artists recommend a "strategic" NDP vote?
As it happens, the Conservatives lost 30 seats by 10% or less. 18 to the Liberals, 11 to the NDP, 1 to the Bloc
http://www.punditsguide.ca/parties/?party=11&elec_event=26&qry=2
Keep on keeping on, where are the female candidates?
Walkom was mentioned at the beginning of this thread. Here's his latest:
Walkom: NDP, Liberals Must Eventually Work It Out
http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/politics/article/985046--walkom-ndp-l...
"...pressure will be redoubled on both Liberals and New Democrats to unite the so-called left. Critics, including lame-duck Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff point out logically, that a union of the left makes no sense. The Liberals are not a left-wing party.
But then neither is the NDP..."
and man oh man are these dipper cheerleaders ever going to find that out this time round. It will give a whole new meaning to the term 'loyal' opposition. Of course their automatic denial mechanisms will carefully explain away every 'difficult' decision made, every compromising sellout as 'necessary' and, if all else fails, there's always that tried but true staple 'the others are worse'.
Of course there won't be a ndp-lib merger - because the harsher Harper makes it - the better NDP chances at victory next time round. And the pols won't hurt at all. They really are all cats now Mouseland. Vote with your feet prepare for the streets.
short answer - yes!
______________________________________________________________________________________ Our kids live together and play together in their communities, let's have them learn together too!In the 12 seats needed to deny Harper his majority, the NDP was the strategic choice twice (Bramalea--Gore--Malton, Lotbinière--Chutes-de-la-Chaudière)And how many "strategic" voting sites recommended supporting the NDP in either of these seats?The other piece, of course, is to look at the 20-30 seats where the Conservatives lost by the narrowest margins - most of which were won by New Democrats, I suspect. And in how many of those seats did the Liberal fraud artists recommend a "strategic" NDP vote?
In Ontario, one of the sites was confused about Welland before endorsing NDP incumbent Malcolm Allen. In Kenora, the sites endorsed former Liberal MP Roger Valley, then later retracted that endorsement. Valley came in third and the Conservatives won, and I suspect if there wasn't talk of strategic voting that the NDP would have taken Kenora. In Huron-Bruce, even though the Liberals were defeated by a large margin in 2008, and even though a new candidate ran for them this go around, they endorsed him to stop the Conservatives. I will let the Huron County faction of babble speak as to whether or not this confused local progressives.
