Would a PC party led by Doug Ford reduce the NDP to non-party status in 2018?

Mr. Magoo wrote:

Quote:

Can you really be mad at us for voting for Ford when our so called NDP councillors don't give a fuck about our problems?

Did "youngsocialist" ever come back to tell us how Ford gave a fuck about his/her problems?

Quote:

who is too busy eating at fancy restaurants

Ah.  The NDP is too busy "eating at fancy restaurants".  "youngsocialist" doubled down on the usual "latte" comment or "Champagne" comment.  Frankly, I'm predicting "troll" here, but "youngsocialist" is certainly free to explain his/her interest in voting far-right because the NDP councillors are eating risotto.

I have to wonder if this young socialist ever asked Ford for more bike lanes, and what the response was from a Real Man who eats at Real Jerk.

Or, for that matter, if "youngsocialist" WAS young or in any sense a socialist.  Could've been one of the Fords trolling us themselves, for all we know.

Mr. Magoo wrote:

  Right now, voting NDP could mean "squandering" your one vote on a party that might not win.

Really, though, I'm only suggesting that there's a difference between voting for what you want and voting against what you don't want.

The squandering votes thing seems to be solely an NDP or NDP supporter concern or theory. Most people do not consider their vote wasted just because the person they voted for didn't win. 

As Ken says: "And it doesn't matter if Justin advocated it or not.  No Liberal leader ever actually does."

Right, so the notion that large numbers of people are voting strategically is just an NDP theory.

The thing is most people do not hate or fear the Conservatives the way NDPers do. They were not "afraid" of another Conservative win so there was no reason to vote "strategically".  Conservatives don't vote Liberal out of fear of the NDP winning even in seats where the NDP does have a good chance of winning. Most people are voting for their least bad choice.

The NDP aren't "doing great" in polls between elections. People don't answer polls strategically. They can tell the pollster the party they really support. 

What evidence is there that the NDP loses because people vote strategically under FPTP?

SeekingAPoliticalHome wrote:

2.  Start messaging that only Liberals can save the province from ford.  And paint the liberals are a truly progressive party. 

Scare the province and pummel the NDP and hope voters drift in Liberal waiting hands.  If I ran the Lib machine I try that.

Non-NDP people are not that afraid of the Conservatives even led by Doug Ford. Promoting strategic voting means admitting your party can't win on merit. 

Pondering wrote:

SeekingAPoliticalHome wrote:

2.  Start messaging that only Liberals can save the province from ford.  And paint the liberals are a truly progressive party. 

Scare the province and pummel the NDP and hope voters drift in Liberal waiting hands.  If I ran the Lib machine I try that.

Non-NDP people are not that afraid of the Conservatives even led by Doug Ford. Promoting strategic voting means admitting your party can't win on merit. 

And it also means admitting that you believe your non-NDP party is simply ENTITLED to the votes of every non-Conservative voter, now and for the rest of eternity.  And being willing to create a new "extreme menace" every few years to justify that sense of electoral entitlement.  Once the last Ford is gone, they'll find another menace.  And another. AND another...over and over for the rest of bloody eternity.

Ken Burch wrote:

Pondering wrote:

SeekingAPoliticalHome wrote:

2.  Start messaging that only Liberals can save the province from ford.  And paint the liberals are a truly progressive party. 

Scare the province and pummel the NDP and hope voters drift in Liberal waiting hands.  If I ran the Lib machine I try that.

Non-NDP people are not that afraid of the Conservatives even led by Doug Ford. Promoting strategic voting means admitting your party can't win on merit. 

And it also means admitting that you believe your non-NDP party is simply ENTITLED to the votes of every non-Conservative voter, now and for the rest of eternity.  And being willing to create a new "extreme menace" every few years to justify that sense of electoral entitlement.  Once the last Ford is gone, they'll find another menace.  And another. AND another...over and over for the rest of bloody eternity.

I'm not supporting them so they aren't "mine".  I'm saying the Liberals will not resort to promoting strategic voting. I can't see how that expresses entitlement. 

Ken Burch wrote:

To clarify, I wasn't saying that YOU were supporting them-I was directing that comment to the "strategic voting" crowd.

I see, thanks. I don't think near as much strategic voting goes on as some people seem to think.

quizzical wrote:

https://ilwu.ca/ilwu-protest-the-upcoming-changes-to-cabotage-february-2...

huh again i'm proven right.

Unfortunately  the page can't be found. Could you please provide it again and double check if the link is working?

I'd like to read it.

[/quote]

I actually think Andrea Horwath might do pretty well in a head-to-head-to-head contest with the Ford-led PCs and the Wynne-led Liberals. Among other things, she'd be the only major party leader from outside of Toronto. She's a known commodity. She has a bit of the "common touch" and her working class bona fides are certainly solid. I was never a big fan (I supported someone else for leader in 2009 and I thought she should have stepped down after 2014) but I am reconsidering my views in light of current political reality. I'm certainly more comfortable with her in this scenario than, say, Tabuns. I know in the last couple of weeks of the Toronto mayoral election, many "progressive" voters stampeded from Chow to Tory to stop Ford. But Tory wasn't carrying the baggage of fifteen years in government in the face of voters' clear desire for change. Who knows, maybe this time the strategic voting trend will go in the other direction?

It's just as possible that you'd have Liberal voters stampeding to the NDP to stop Ford(if they DID make him leader) as it would be that you'd have NDP voters stampeding to the Liberals.

Voting NDP could be seen, in fact as the only way to stop Ford AND vote against a discredited governing party.

quizzical wrote:

alan smithee wrote:

Pondering wrote:

The thing is most people do not hate or fear the Conservatives the way NDPers do.

This is massively untrue. Not only do NDPers NOT fear the Conservatives but a a lot or vast majority of them would VOTE Conservative if they knew they couldn't get their way.

If you don't believe me,take the time read most posts in current and past threads. This is the one thing I can't figure out. It's highly illogical logic. These NDPers are very schizophrenic. They scream at the top of a mountain how socialist and/or progresssive.they are always trying to prove themselves the true progressive of all progressives. But somehow,if they were to flip their vote,they'd hand it to a regressive bat shit crazy union-busting,welfare state killing,backward minded,authoritarian, sociopathic mob who hate these NDPers and everything they stand for. But I guess none of that is a problem when the reality is they're hypocrites and completely full of shit.

The real party most NDPers fear are the Liberals. They'd happily cut off their noses to spite their faces than vote red,no matter how superior they prove to be next to the Conservatives particularly in the last 30 something years.

 

https://ilwu.ca/ilwu-protest-the-upcoming-changes-to-cabotage-february-2...

huh again i'm proven right.

Thanks for using "schizophrenic" to describe "hypocritical" or "duplicitous", and continuing the demonization of people with severe mental illness.

You can swear all you like at me. Water off a duck's back.

Schizophrenia is FUCKING TORTURE. It is a SEVERE emotional disorder, and it has nothing to do with hypocrisy or being two-faced. I have called out major journalists on this bullshit by e-mail and they have all written back with contrition. You are no better than them.

Quiz, I think he was reacting to Alan Smithee and not you.

 

i hear a lot of journalists and writers on CBC from time to time refer to a dichotomy of anything as being schizophrenic. An old antiquated assumption of schizophrenia is that it is about having a split mind.

This is factually inaccurate and people need to stop using this term in this way because it is false and it demeans people who have the illness.

Never mind Doug Ford,make way for Caroline Mulroney. The new PC golden candidate. A lot of people think her name brand will win her the party nomination and general election. But there are a few wrinkles in this toilet tissue.

First of all,besides name recognition,nobody has any idea of what kind of policies she supports. Unlike Justin Trudeau who was a sitting MP for years before running and winning both the Liberal nomination and 2015 election,she iss a plitical nobody whose name may not be very popular in Ontario.

Caroline has absolutely no political experience and she already seems to be a shameless panderer as she outed herself as an NFL fan. Clearly trying to connect with the province's lowest common dominators. Beer drinking, middle aged fanboys without a college education. She is also playing mum with simple platitudes when directly asked about her policy plans.

She's also been living and working in the US for the past 20 years,questions about her citizenship,whether she has dual citizenship. Does she even have a permanent Ontario home?

And as for the family name. Like Trudeau,her name is polarizing but unlike Trudeau whose father died years before he entered politics,she's going to have Daddy (Jay Leno chin) Brian chiming in and helping her campaign which could spectacularly backfire.

I don't know if Ontarians are interested in an inexperienced, American,pandering nepotist product who has so far only provided platitudes when pressed for answers about her politics and plans to ' Make it happen' in Ontario.

She has just over 120 days to prepare herself and prove that she has the aptitude to lead the province being completely inexperienced politically. Is that enough time for her to do so?

Frankly,she should run as an MPP and be elected somewhere in Ontario and spend a few years getting experience and being familiar with Ontarians. It's unlikely that Daddy will be enough to carry her to any political success.

Some op-eds I have read bring up Wynne's age as an advantage for Mulroney. Very weak arguement. But I can see her appearing on eTalk a few times to promote herself . Standing next to Ben,she may come off as a complete joke.

So having said all that,I've changed my mind. Doug Ford does have a chance of winning the nomination. Voters most likely will choose experience over a candidate who describes herself as an NFL fan and a hockey mom (hello,Sarah Palin)

Quote:

Doug Ford does have a chance of winning the nomination. Voters most likely will choose experience over a candidate who describes herself as an NFL fan and a hockey mom (hello,Sarah Palin)

Doug's experience seems limited to taking over his brother's council seat.  That's not a particularly fat resume.

Which isn't to say he couldn't win.  But if he does, it won't be because of his experience.

Ken Burch wrote:

Caroline Mulroney is an NFL fan, as opposed to being a CFL fan?  You'd think she'd want to be seen as rooting for the Argos or the Tiger Cats or the Redblacks(or maybe all three).

 

I know right? I think it just proves that she's lived in the US too long and forgot Canada has its own football league.

Some Ontario Conservatives are giving Doug Ford serious consideration

https://ipolitics.ca/2018/02/12/ford-nation-breaks-ground-ottawa-bubble/

Doug Ford's experience is not an issue at all. I think the vast majority of people do not believe that you need a lot of experience to take a wrecking ball to government. That includes both those who do not want that done and those who do. The real issue is how the many people who are angry at the Liberals, want that prescription and if their desire to avoid that prescription is greater or less than their anger with the Liberals.

I disagree that NDP voters in significant numbers would back the Conservatives against the Liberals. To me that's a smear. Rather they may detest the Liberals but they will vote NDP before any other party and insist that the Liberals rise or fall on their own steam. They may cheer Liberals going down when the Conservatives win, but that does not mean they voted Conservative.

Pondering, I disagree with you here, I definitely think that people outside the NDP are terrified of a Ford victory and that a smaller number are afraid of any Conservative victory. Some of those afraid of Ford, I think they are in the PC party as well as Greens, Liberals and NDP. Some PC supporters may fear Ford ofr the potential damage to their party and others damage to the province. The question, for me, is how many who from any party fear Ford, how they line up for other parties or not voting and how that compares with the anger at the Liberals.

The show south of the border could motivate a small number of people to want to come to the banner of Ford, but I think a greater number of people who are motivated against a Trump-like candidate may reconsider their votes. Those who would come to Ford were probably already there.

As far as strategic voting initiatives these are usually arms length but it is hard to imagine these being NDP supporters only -- that is illogical. I think the majority of the leadership in both the NDP and the Liberals are nervous of this force or wanting to take advantage of it. I think the dynamics of this particular campaign are such that it may be hard to predict which party would gain the most.

I am not a fan of strategic voting but I will not dismiss this as people belonging to only one party or that their motivations are not what they claim. You do not have to agree with them to acknowledge that a majority of them may be sincere. I do think that they are open to motivation from political machines. I do not think that attempting to motivate this and turn it to advatnage is beneath either the Liberals or the NDP, arguably that is their job. Both are fearful enough that the other is doing this that they will do their best themselves.

When it comes to strategic voters who dislike Conservatives, I think they are a powerful and potentially decisive force. I do not think that they are a majority of voters for those parties. I think that the majority of voters for either of those parties does not move much. But those who do make the difference. Let's consider a split of voters something like this:

26% Conservative

25% Liberal

16% NDP

3% Green

15% swing voters available to all parties

5% Liberal Conservative switchers who would not consdier the NDP

10% NDP-Liberal potential strategic voters

As well you have the enthusiasm of each and potential for them to stay how when upset warping the results.

In the above I suggest over 2/3 of voters are fairly decided.

This leaves less than a third split between those who could vote for any party, would never vote NDP and would never vote PC and consider voting strategically against them.

This third is huge and the NDP-Liberal strategic force is also significant.:

Conservative accessible voters can take their 26% core plus a share of Liberal-Conservative 5% and swingers 15% to get to about 46% with a massive majority. This can even be greater if Liberals or New Democrats stay home in anger within their parties. This is a loss of the core.

Liberal accessible voters can start with their 25% plus swingers of 15%, Liberal Conservatives 5% and NDP Liberal 10% switchers and get to 55%. It is extremely difficult to get both Liberal Conservatives and Liberal NDP without repelling the other so the likelihood of getting a high percentage of this accessible vote is lower than the Conservatives getting a high percentage of their accessible voters, but it increases the numbers of narratives and scenarios whereby the Liberals can win.

The NDP starting from 15% can add the 10% NDP-Liberal switchers to the 15% swing voters and get to 40% which can produce a majority. They can go further if Conservatives or Liberals in anger stay home. In 1990, I think they got a relatively high number of this coalition as well as benefitted from some Liberals staying home.

So with this a 15% swing and a 10% NDP-Liberal strategic vote group makes the difference between fighting for party status and a majority government -- especially amplified by those who don't vote. The non-voters can be inspired to boycott the vote by fake news as well...

One last note: This is a significant change from a three decades ago. Prior to the Harris government, the Conservatives were more moderate and they began with a higher base and the Liberals a lower one such that the Progressive Conservatives then were the natural governing party in Ontario and not the Liberals. More changes can occur. This is not something that is static long as it adjusts each way a few points over time. Again we are talking about very small adjustments that change the landscape.

I say all this becuase of those who seek to minimize the impact of strategic voting based on a correct assumption that they are not a big number. They miscalculate the strategic importance of that small number. I here suggest that they represent no more than 10% of the electorate and still decide elections.

Mr. Magoo wrote:

Quote:

The real issue is how the many people who are angry at the Liberals

I agree.  But I would "level up" your comment and suggest that another real issue is just how many fustercluck governments we've enjoyed, federally and provincially, based on the electorate's amnesiac need to punish the Liberals.

I say "amnesiac" because it seems like when they're done punishing the Liberals with a government they hate even worse, they say "Only the Liberals can stop Harris" or "Only the Liberals can stop Harper" or whatever, as though it was NDP voters who made the mess.

In fairness this amnesia goes all around:

How many times does the population accept Liberal promises as likely and keep seeing the same ones broken?

There seems to be an amnesia to all governments.

 

Quote:

In fairness this amnesia goes all around

For sure.  Charlie Brown, Lucy and the football.

The curious thing is only that when the electorate needs a change from "this damned Liberal government" they go Conservative, and when they need a break from "this damned Conservative government" they go Liberal.

Quote:

There seems to be an amnesia to all governments.

Au contraire, mon frère!  We shall never forget the ONDP provincial government of three decades ago!  Not that I think their fails should be swept under the rug of forgetfulness, but still.

Ken Burch wrote:

Caroline Mulroney is an NFL fan, as opposed to being a CFL fan?  You'd think she'd want to be seen as rooting for the Argos or the Tiger Cats or the Redblacks(or maybe all three).

Considering how adamantly her father pushed closer ties with the US and signed the first free trade agreement, that makes perfect sense.

Ugh, first Brian sold us out to his corporate friends for 9 years, and then we had to put up with Ben as a TV host. Hasn't this family done enough damage as it is?

Remember when Paul Wells predicted in January that there was no chance Doug Ford would become PC Leader?

@Unionist, everything Judy Rebick and her cronies said was true. Unfortunately, their message was redefined by the MSM as being dissention within the NDP and it was everything the MSM were looking for to derail the NDP campaign.

Misfit wrote:

@Unionist, everything Judy Rebick and her cronies said was true. Unfortunately, their message was redefined by the MSM as being dissention within the NDP and it was everything the MSM were looking for to derail the NDP campaign.

It's four years later.  It's a different situation.  There's no reason to pre-emptively assume that those same people would do the same thing this time.  And it would do nothing but damage to make some sort of heavy-handed effort to suppress them.  How about just bringing them in quietly to party hq now for some communication and negotiations?  

It will also be interesting to see how the provincial dynamics in Ontario affect the next Federal election.

The unpopularity of the Wynne Liberals is probably dragging down the Federal Liberals in Ontario.

If Ford gets elected, it could benefit the Trudeau Liberals in 2019.

So Elliott gets more votes but loses.  Challenging the results based upon improper allocation.

https://ipolitics.ca/2018/03/11/christine-elliott-wont-concede-ontario-pc-leadership-race/