Canada federal election October 21, 2019 part 2
RCMP Interviews Jody Wilson Rabould To Discuss Political Interference in the SNC Criminal Prosecution: Globe and Mail.
With Union Support, Trudeau's Big Business Liberals Vie For Re-election in Fall Vote
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2019/09/12/elec-s12.html
"...Trudeau does not celebrate Canada, as Harper did, as a 'warrior nation'. But under his government, Canada is playing an ever more important role in Washington's military-strategic offensives against Russia and China, and in the oil-rich Middle East, any of which could ignite a catastrophic global conflict. Trudeau and Foreign Minister Chrystia Freeland are also providing American imperialism's regime change operation in Venezuela with much needed political cover and support.
And like the other imperialist powers, Liberal-led Canada is rearming. Trudeau has committed tens of billions to purchase new battleships, warplanes, drones and other armaments, and ordered the military budget be hiked by more than 70 percent, to over $32 billion per year by 2026..."
Canada will be deep in a global depression soon. This outrageously expensive and dangerous rearmament must be vigorously opposed and the funds plowed instead into critical social priorities of Canadians. Acquiesence and passivity to the coming spike of militarism could be fatal, especially given the demonstrated tendencies of Canucklehead 'progressives' to be swept up in msm, Guardian-style propaganda and support/cheerlead virtually each new imperialist venture that comes along.
Green candidate in Simco North bites the dust:
‘Trudeau’s empty words, and petty promises.’
Andrew Scheer - what a useless excuse for a human being!
Andrew Scheer - what a useless excuse for a human being!
I sit corrected re comments on Conservatives.
The 60 ridings that tell the story of where the election will be won and lost
Éric Grenier • CBC News • Sept 15, 2019
https://newsinteractives.cbc.ca/elections/federal/2019/battlegrounds/
If we had electoral reform most areas, if not all, would be “battle grounds.” I think it’s undemocratic having so many safe ridings that get overly ignored by the political parties.
Agreed
.
If we had electoral reform most areas, if not all, would be “battle grounds.” I think it’s undemocratic having so many safe ridings that get overly ignored by the political parties.
But there are still quite a few competitive ridings -- more than there used to be during the Jean Chretien years, for example.
In those days the Liberals, Reform/Alliance, BQ & NDP all had core seats that rarely changed hands.
There's actually a lot more fluidity now than there was from the 1990's to early-mid 2000's.
But there are still quite a few competitive ridings -- more than there used to be during the Jean Chretien years, for example.
In those days the Liberals, Reform/Alliance, BQ & NDP all had core seats that rarely changed hands.
There's actually a lot more fluidity now than there was from the 1990's to early-mid 2000's.
I agree that tge PC's splitting the right of centre vote with the Reform /Alliance created more safe seats, mostly for the Liberals. That might explain why many on the right, including Stephen Harper, supported electoral reform during that period.
I agree that tge PC's splitting the right of centre vote with the Reform /Alliance created more safe seats, mostly for the Liberals. That might explain why many on the right, including Stephen Harper, supported electoral reform during that period.But there are still quite a few competitive ridings -- more than there used to be during the Jean Chretien years, for example.
In those days the Liberals, Reform/Alliance, BQ & NDP all had core seats that rarely changed hands.
There's actually a lot more fluidity now than there was from the 1990's to early-mid 2000's.
There were other entrenched voting patterns, too.
Yes, the Chretien Liberals benefitted from the right-wing split, which is how Chretien won 100 seats in Ontario 3 times.
But in those days B.C. was much more right-wing and voted almost all Reform/Alliance except for a few Liberal & NDP seats in the Vancouver & Burnaby area and Lib environment minister David Anderson on Vancouver Island. Now B.C. is more competitive with the Libs winning seats in other parts of B.C., and with the NDP & Greens becoming the dominant players on Vancouver Island.
And in Quebec the BQ used to dominate in Francophone Quebec, whereas now the Liberals, Conservatives & BQ each have their own seats (with a few remaining for the NDP at the moment).
Will the Greens actually elect 2 Greens for the first time ever in a federal election this year?
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/green-party-platform-2019-1.5284872
NDP to allow municipalities to ban handguns
Unless I misunderstand this policy, it should not be seen as a cut that particularly benefits people with low or modest incomes. Anyone making over $47,630, i.e., the 2019 divide between the lowest income tax rate (15%) and the next highest tax rate (20.5%) will get the full savings. Anyone with income below $47,630 will see only a portion of the savings. Those numbers would move upward slightly, as the thresholds are indexed to inflation and it is supposed to be phased-in over four years but the principle remains that higher earners get a more substantial benefit even if in most cases, they get a lower proportional benefit.
Canada's Media Join Conservatives in Pushing For RCMP To Play Key Role in Election Outcome
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2018/09/16/sncl-s16.html
"...The Tories and the media, led by the Globe and Mail, the traditional voice of the Bay Street financial elite, are cynically and hypocritically seeking to use the SNC-Lavalin affair to shift politics further right. Particularly sinister is their insistence that the RCMP must be empowered to investigate the SNC-Lavalin affair, and the actions of Trudeau and the PMO in particular, in the midst of the election campaign.
This would effectively give Canada's national police - a force notorious for its right-wing sympathies and repeated violations of Canadians democratic rights - a powerful say in the election's outcome..."
All the decent but disenchanted Conservatives, who can’t stomach the silver-spooned born Trudeau, might want to give the NDP a look.
It will be funny to see a massive surge in interest from Conservatives for electoral reform in the very possible scenario of winning the most votes but coming second in seats.
Bernier invited to the debates:
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/maxime-bernier-debates-commission-election-1.5285162
Bernier invited to the debates:
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/maxime-bernier-debates-commission-election-1.5285162
Well, at least some New Democrats thought it was justifiable to include right-winger Derek Fildebrandt in the leaders' debates in the last Alberta election, on the grounds that his party had a seat in the legislature.
So, if you agreed with them on that(and maybe you didn't), it's kind of hard to see how you wouldn't extend the same courtesy to Bernier.
It will be the 2 official Commission debates that Bernier can enter -- the ones on October 7 & 10.
He won't be in the TVA debate or the Munk's debate.
The Conservatives released an angry statement about Bernier being allowed into 2 of the debates, but here's the Commisioner's decision:
This is huge for Bernier, just like it was for the Greens when they unfortunately were included, neither of which have elected enough MPs to merit inclusion in these national debates
They should perhaps have secondary debates for the Greens, the PPC, etc.
All this does is water down what most voters want which is a debate between the main contenders and it has the usual Liberals dirty tricks campaign written all over it
You're parroting Conservative talking points.
The Commissioner is David Johnston, who was a Conservative Harper appointee for Governor General.
You're parroting Conservative talking points.
The Commissioner is David Johnston, who was a Conservative Harper appointee for Governor General.
Indeed. Members of commission listed in article:
Who do you guys think you are kidding! No wonder so many people don’t vote. It’s a shame Liberals are supporting Bernier’s inclusion in the debates providing him a platform to promote his hatred
Ideas shouldn't be the metric on whether you're allowed in the debates, whether you won a seat in the previous election and/or meet polling criteria should be the only thing considered.
I consider the CAQ a racist party based almost entirely on enthnic nationalism, but they should be in the Quebec debates because they have support, that's where it begins and ends for me. It is up to the other parties to expose the PPC's ideas for the trash they are.
Who do you guys think you are kidding! No wonder so many people don’t vote. It’s a shame Liberals are supporting Bernier’s inclusion in the debates providing him a platform to promote his hatred
Him finishing a very close second in the Conservative leadership race provided him with a platform.
The PPC met the criteria for the debates. It's the correct decision to include Bernier. That he's odious to me and many Canadians shouldn't factor into that.
The impact of his inclusion will be interesting to watch. I'd been thinking it would harm Scheer, since Bernier would appeal to hard conservative voters, but Bernier could also serve to make Scheer appear more moderate, and less Harper-like, which would undermine the Liberal strategy.
Then they should have allowed Elizabeth May in for all those elections that she was excluded from. This benefits the Liberals at the expense of the other parties.
His close second position in the Conservative leadership race is totally irrelevant.
Then they should have allowed Elizabeth May in for all those elections that she was excluded from. This benefits the Liberals at the expense of the other parties.
His close second position in the Conservative leadership race is totally irrelevant.
It is almost certainly because Elizabeth May was included this time that Bernier qualifies.
Two MPs is not much of a leap past one, though of course, I do note that May and later Manly were at least elected as such and obviously have longer-standing infrastructure and somewhat more support - but the Green numbers have not exceeded 4% in the last two general elections and the Bernier party is polling at anywhere between 2% and 5%.
There is also precedent for having a one-MP party in the debate, as only Deborah Grey was a Reform MP before the 1993 election but Manning was allowed into the debate. That example (ugly though it was) showed that a new party can win a lot of seats with little or no previous parliamentary history.
Then they should have allowed Elizabeth May in for all those elections that she was excluded from. This benefits the Liberals at the expense of the other parties.
His close second position in the Conservative leadership race is totally irrelevant.
It is almost certainly because Elizabeth May was included this time that Bernier qualifies.
Two MPs is not much of a leap past one, though of course, I do note that May and later Manly were at least elected as such and obviously have longer-standing infrastructure and somewhat more support - but the Green numbers have not exceeded 4% in the last two general elections and the Bernier party is polling at anywhere between 2% and 5%.
There is also precedent for having a one-MP party in the debate, as only Deborah Grey was a Reform MP before the 1993 election but Manning was allowed into the debate. That example (ugly though it was) showed that a new party can win a lot of seats with little or no previous parliamentary history.
Yes, and the BQ qualified for the 1993 debates because Gilles Duceppe had won the 1990-by-election in Laurier-Sainte Marie, and because there were several PC MPs (eg. Lucien Bouchard, Louis Plamondon) and a few Liberal MPs (Jean Lapierre) who had crossed the floor under Mulroney.
Meddling Schmeddling
https://twitter.com/dimitrilascaris/status/1173947641694175233
"Professor Paul Robinson pans a Canadian Press article warning of the supposed peril of Russian meddling in Canada's election."
Perhaps some reality and well deserved embarrassment has set in and this lunacy is passing. During the last Dems debate the word Russia wasn't mentioned once. Let us see if the Canadian politicos who are easily as Russophrenic make it an issue in the upcoming electoral excruciations. I predict 'the threat posed by Russia and China' will indeed make an appearance at some point. Israel and Palestine probably not.
"Decision to include PPC leader in the TV debates will pull discussion even further to the right..."
So, let us not be fooled by the decision to suddenly add Maxime Bernier, leader of Canada’s neo-fascist party, to the federal leaders’ debate, despite his party not meeting the stated criteria for participation.
Has it been demonstrated that Bernier doesn't meet the criteria? From what I can tell, the writer seems to be using as his comparison two other elections, a provincial and a local one, both in BC and both in the 90s/early 2000s, in which the Greens and the Proudly Surrey party respectively, were excluded from debates. But those are all different jurisdictions, in different time periods, in which different standards might have been in effect.
"Decision to include PPC leader in the TV debates will pull discussion even further to the right..."
A crucial feature, we must remember, of the Greens being allowed into leaders’ debates in B.C. and nationally was the replacement of avowedly socialist leaders with, in the case of the national party, a senior civil servant in the Mulroney government, Elizabeth May. May’s antipathy for the NDP and socialism and her willingness to make deals with Liberals and Tories made her an acceptable candidate, whereas socialist Joan Russow was not.
This is nonsense. Has he forgotten Jim Harris? The Greens only ran 111 candidates under Russow.
The article only makes sense if you subscribe to a series of premises, specifically...
...the powers-that-be in Canada are so threatened by the current Liberal government that they will manipulate the debate process in order to give the benefit to Andrew Scheer, and...
...they will do this by getting Bernier into the debate in order to make Scheer look moderate, and...
..they are not at all worried that a higher-profile for Bernier will lead to more vote-splitting on the right.
In other words, a string of fairly doubtful assumptions.
The alternative is of course that to permit Bernier in the debates will split the Conservative vote to guarantee the Liberal Corporate State to maintain Government, possibly in alliance with the Greens?
For those of the supposed Left so hostile to a more open debate, I refer you to our Charter of Rights....Figueroa v. Queen, Harper v. the Queen.....
While so many Peoples have fought and died for a Constitution, Canadians seem oblivious to the fact that ours is positive, is not enforced by our corrupt (Federal) Court system , and to totally apathetic audiences especially amongst so called progressives (freedom of speech, the right to make an informed vote?).
Where are the socialist Parties of Canada? Why are not progressives demanding that their voice be heard? To meet the requirements of our Section 3 Charter Rights?
The election should be cancelled based on this fact, alone!
Jeesh!
Obviously not very ready for prime time.
NDP Promises To Build 500,000 Affordable Homes Across Canada
Jagmeet Singh says the Liberals haven't done enough on housing.
https://www.huffingtonpost.ca/entry/ndp-jagmeet-singh-affordable-housing_ca_5d80f281e4b00d69059f4608
Why would you vote Liberal seeing as they have failed on the 2 most important issues facing Canadians today:
Both housing and climate change are a national disgrace in Canada!
There you have it folks - right wing to the core!
http://rabble.ca/news/2019/09/green-surge-vancouver-island-progressive-alternative-or-centrist-flop