As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/

[Canadian Politics] Justin Trudeau's Great Canadian Electoral Reform Personality Test

SwashbucklerXXSwashbucklerXX Swashbucklin' CanuckRegistered User regular
edited December 2016 in Debate and/or Discourse
CANADIAN POLITICS, EH?

'Twas the night before Christmas and all through the house

yrw4shx6iyfm.jpg

Not a creature was stirring, not even a louse

mebb6uzasb7t.jpg

Back to our ridings we'd gone without care

Secure that St. Vickers would always be there

iudtlqgjm2oe.jpg

The sex-balanced cabinet, snug in their beds

Let visions of accolades dance in their heads

esch5ubxbqx3.jpg

While leaders no longer in hairspray shellac

Had just settled down for a midwinter snack


5vzvrl8pq76p.jpghputil05w391.jpggy3ixs3yrg13.jpg

When out on the lawn there arose such a clatter
Trudeau rushed out of Sussex Rideau to check out the matter

When what to his wide-open eyes should appear
But the spectres of problems in shapes of reindeer

And a lich of a driver both haughty and shamed
Justin knew it was Canuck He Who Shall Not Be Named

anigif_optimized-5585-1439241788-7.gif

More rapid than eagles his chargers they came
And he whistled, and cackled, and called them by name:

"Now Refugees, Pipelines, and Lin'gring Recession!
On Health Care, On Senate, On Native Oppression!

"From BC to Newfoundland, winter to fall
You've made so many promises, look at them all!

"And as regular Canucks kick back with their beers
You'll be trying to solve all of this in four years

"Sure they all think you're cute when they find me appalling
But it won't be too long 'fore election comes calling

"The honeymoon's over, won't be long till you say
Something dumb and get chided by MP Liz May."

rpgnu8xfvd16.jpg

But Justin, he laughed at the ex-PM's point
Declaring, "Hey, Gen X is runnin' this joint!

"We'll legalize pot and ditch first-past-the-post
Make sure that we're helping the middle class most

"And sure, some will grumble and cons will despair
And this goddamn economy's hard to repair

"But hey, I am handsome and know some smart peeps
And my government's made up of mostly-not-creeps."

With a nod and a finger astride of his nose
Young Justin, he struck an invincible pose

For until he screws up he's got new-PM sheen
"We're back!" He declares, "And it's 2015!"

bk9bbtskiqnm.jpg

Want to find me on a gaming service? I'm SwashbucklerXX everywhere.
SwashbucklerXX on
«13456799

Posts

  • The EnderThe Ender Registered User regular
    A meager request:

    Can that gif of Mr. Harper, amusing as it still is, be left out of the OP? He's no longer in politics, and IMHO, we'll all be much better for the day that he's finally forgotten about altogether.

    With Love and Courage
  • CanadianWolverineCanadianWolverine Registered User regular
    Relax Ender, its just a Ghost of Christmas Past. Canadian Scrooge and his Canadian Tire 'money' will be fine.

    steam_sig.png
  • KhavallKhavall British ColumbiaRegistered User regular
    Trudeau does the rapid-fire Macleans 60-second "challenge" of questions.


    My favourite part is where he just sort of passes off his porn name.

    And it's a damn good porn name.

    Smokey Sussex

  • Some_tall_guySome_tall_guy Registered User regular
    Well done on the new OP. Chuckled the whole way through.

    LOL ZEALURKS
  • SwashbucklerXXSwashbucklerXX Swashbucklin' Canuck Registered User regular
    Thanks!

    I think I'll keep Harper.gif for now... those who don't remember the past are doomed to repeat it an' all. ;)

    Want to find me on a gaming service? I'm SwashbucklerXX everywhere.
  • quovadis13quovadis13 Registered User regular
    I can now buy six packs of beer at my local Real Canadian Superstore.

    What a time to be alive

  • The EnderThe Ender Registered User regular
    edited December 2015
    Well, word on the grapevine is that we're going to be looking for a Mulcair replacement during future conventions, and specifically looking for people from traditionally disaffected social groups (LGTB, women, ethnic minorities including First Nations people, etc).

    I'm... happy, but not enthusiastic.


    Am I really the only person who feels like Mr. Mulcair just needed a little more time? I mean, I guess so. Oh well.

    OTOH, I do like that we've been pushed along this last election to the point of actively looking for diversity in the leadership ranks. It's about damn time. Also I can already guess that I'll be excited at the prospect of NDP leadership change just because it's always exciting to get new things.

    The Ender on
    With Love and Courage
  • DaimarDaimar A Million Feet Tall of Awesome Registered User regular
    I feel they could do really well with a guy named Jack.

    steam_sig.png
  • The EnderThe Ender Registered User regular
    Daimar wrote: »
    I feel they could do really well with a guy named Jack.

    Well, let me know when you've come up with a way of bringing him back to life. I'm sure his widow would appreciate it.

    With Love and Courage
  • TubularLuggageTubularLuggage Registered User regular
    I like Mulcair, and I would have been okay with him sticking around for a bit. On the other hand, he definitely made some questionable choices during the campaign.

    I think more than anything, I'm bummed out that their new leader almost definitely won't be Megan Leslie.
    I do like that they're putting an emphasis on considering candidates from less represented backgrounds.

  • CorehealerCorehealer The Apothecary The softer edge of the universe.Registered User regular
    I absolutely think Mulcair should stick around more, he just needs a bit of time to inhabit the role of NDP leader. Layton left a big gap there that isn't going to get filled overnight by anyone. It's premature to rush off towards some kind of alternative before at least perhaps another election or barring some kind of scandal or urgent need to replace Mulcair.

    488W936.png
  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    edited December 2015
    I like Mulcair, and I would have been okay with him sticking around for a bit. On the other hand, he definitely made some questionable choices during the campaign.

    I think more than anything, I'm bummed out that their new leader almost definitely won't be Megan Leslie.
    I do like that they're putting an emphasis on considering candidates from less represented backgrounds.

    Yeah, I like Mulcair and I think he's good but he ran a bad campaign.

    shryke on
  • TraceTrace GNU Terry Pratchett; GNU Gus; GNU Carrie Fisher; GNU Adam We Registered User regular
    edited December 2015
    Khavall wrote: »
    Trudeau does the rapid-fire Macleans 60-second "challenge" of questions.


    My favourite part is where he just sort of passes off his porn name.

    And it's a damn good porn name.

    Smokey Sussex

    Really, not the big about him getting to build the Millenium Falcon lego set.

    Your PM is a nerd and I love him.


    edit: also "nova scotia or british columbia yeah not a chance I'm answering that"

    Trace on
  • The EnderThe Ender Registered User regular
    Welp.

    I see that our trust with the Tim Horton's brand has been well placed with the Americans.


    :|

    With Love and Courage
  • notdroidnotdroid Registered User regular
    The Ender wrote: »
    Welp.

    I see that our trust with the Tim Horton's brand has been well placed with the Americans.


    :|

    While the hate and bigotry displayed here is deplorable, the fact that Americans call timbits "donut holes" is a crime of its own.

  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    Good news everyone!
    http://www.thestar.com/news/queenspark/2015/12/15/beer-arrives-in-ontario-grocery-stores.html
    Premier Kathleen Wynne became the first Ontarian in a century to buy beer at a grocery store Tuesday, as the province unveiled the first 58 supermarkets to sell suds.

    Most of the outlets, which had to bid for special licences from the government, are major chains – Loblaw, Sobeys, Metro and Walmart – with a handful of independents.
    Despite the hoopla at Ms. Wynne’s photo-op, the reforms are fairly modest. Grocery stores will be allowed to sell only six-packs and singles. The Beer Store, run by a private cartel of multinational corporations, will retain the exclusive right to sell 24-packs and most 12-packs. There are also rules prohibiting supermarkets from offering lower prices or longer hours than The Beer Store or the government-owned LCBO.

    The beer-in-grocery-stores program, formulated earlier this year by Ms. Wynne’s business adviser, Ed Clark, is meant to deliver more money to government coffers. The province aims to eventually auction off 450 licences.

    Could be better, but it's better then nothing.

    Also apparently 20% of the beer sold must be from Ontario Craft Brewers. Loblaws has said they are trying to do up to 50% in their stores.

    And hey, one of these stores is right down the street from my house!

  • CaedwyrCaedwyr Registered User regular
    Well, this is a horrible realization, but also not surprising. Just depressing.

    Canadians see Donald Trump's Muslim-ban idea not so differently from Americans, polls indicate
    CBC wrote:
    Donald Trump's controversial bid to lead Republicans into the next presidential election appears to highlight differences between American and Canadian politics, but a new survey suggests they may not be so different after all.

    The poll by the Angus Reid Institute (ARI) found that 33 per cent of Canadians strongly or moderately agree with Trump's call for a "total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States."

    While two-thirds of Canadians disagreed (and 49 per cent strongly so), that still leaves a large proportion of Canadians looking kindly on a plan that has been widely condemned both in Canada and the U.S.

    And it puts Canadians on almost the same level with Americans. A Washington Post-ABC poll conducted at the same time as the ARI survey found that 36 per cent of Americans supported Trump's ban, with 60 per cent thinking it "the wrong thing to do."

    Majority of Republicans, Tories on board

    At this stage of the presidential primaries, Trump is only trying to win over Republican voters. The Post-ABC poll suggests his plan is a winner, with 59 per cent of Republicans supporting it and 38 per cent thinking it the wrong thing to do.

    However, despite interim Conservative leader Rona Ambrose recently telling the Canadian Press that "I think [Trump's] off the spectrum, frankly … that's not a voice that we welcome in our party," the ARI poll indicates that a majority of Canadians who voted for the Conservatives in October think Trump is onto something.

    In total, 55 per cent of Canadian Conservative voters strongly or moderately agreed with Trump's proposed ban on Muslims entering the U.S.

    Liberal voters opposed

    Canadians who voted for the Liberals and New Democrats were strongly opposed, however — 77 per cent of New Democrats and 82 per cent of Liberals disagreed with the ban, with about two-thirds strongly disagreeing with it.

    In a town hall held by Maclean's magazine this week, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau rejected Trump's "hateful" rhetoric.

    In the U.S., 82 per cent of Democrats in the Post-ABC poll said it was the wrong thing to do.

    Note that the ARI poll was conducted using the firm's online panel, whereas the Post-ABC poll was conducted by telephone with live interviewers. This difference in methodology has the potential to influence responses, and so some caution should be exercised when comparing the two polls.

    Trudeau on Donald Trump's views on Muslims - 2:00

    The ARI poll showed some regional and demographic differences on the issue, with support for Trump's Muslim ban being highest on the Prairies. There was also a link to education: less educated Canadians looked more favourably on the ban than more educated Canadians.

    Quebeckers less supportive

    And despite the controversies over reasonable accommodations in Quebec, the ARI poll showed that Quebeckers were less likely than other Canadians to support Trump's ban.

    When presented with two options, one suggesting that Trump's rhetoric is "bad for society, it encourages fear and hatred" and the other that it is "good for society, it gets at 'politically incorrect' issues that should be talked about," 63 per cent of Canadians thought it was bad for society (including 66 per cent of Quebeckers). The remaining 37 per cent thought it was good for society.

    Perhaps Canadian and American politics aren't so different after all.

    The poll by the Angus Reid Institute was conducted between Dec. 10 and 13, 2015, interviewing 1,530 Canadians via the Internet. As the poll was conducted online, a margin of error does not apply.

    The poll by the Washington Post-ABC was conducted between Dec. 10 and 13, 2015, interviewing 1,002 Americans via the telephone. The margin of error associated with the survey is +/– 3.5 percentage points, 19 times out of 20.

  • The EnderThe Ender Registered User regular
    Caedwyr wrote: »
    Well, this is a horrible realization, but also not surprising. Just depressing.

    Canadians see Donald Trump's Muslim-ban idea not so differently from Americans, polls indicate
    CBC wrote:
    Donald Trump's controversial bid to lead Republicans into the next presidential election appears to highlight differences between American and Canadian politics, but a new survey suggests they may not be so different after all.

    The poll by the Angus Reid Institute (ARI) found that 33 per cent of Canadians strongly or moderately agree with Trump's call for a "total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States."

    While two-thirds of Canadians disagreed (and 49 per cent strongly so), that still leaves a large proportion of Canadians looking kindly on a plan that has been widely condemned both in Canada and the U.S.

    And it puts Canadians on almost the same level with Americans. A Washington Post-ABC poll conducted at the same time as the ARI survey found that 36 per cent of Americans supported Trump's ban, with 60 per cent thinking it "the wrong thing to do."

    Majority of Republicans, Tories on board

    At this stage of the presidential primaries, Trump is only trying to win over Republican voters. The Post-ABC poll suggests his plan is a winner, with 59 per cent of Republicans supporting it and 38 per cent thinking it the wrong thing to do.

    However, despite interim Conservative leader Rona Ambrose recently telling the Canadian Press that "I think [Trump's] off the spectrum, frankly … that's not a voice that we welcome in our party," the ARI poll indicates that a majority of Canadians who voted for the Conservatives in October think Trump is onto something.

    In total, 55 per cent of Canadian Conservative voters strongly or moderately agreed with Trump's proposed ban on Muslims entering the U.S.

    Liberal voters opposed

    Canadians who voted for the Liberals and New Democrats were strongly opposed, however — 77 per cent of New Democrats and 82 per cent of Liberals disagreed with the ban, with about two-thirds strongly disagreeing with it.

    In a town hall held by Maclean's magazine this week, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau rejected Trump's "hateful" rhetoric.

    In the U.S., 82 per cent of Democrats in the Post-ABC poll said it was the wrong thing to do.

    Note that the ARI poll was conducted using the firm's online panel, whereas the Post-ABC poll was conducted by telephone with live interviewers. This difference in methodology has the potential to influence responses, and so some caution should be exercised when comparing the two polls.

    Trudeau on Donald Trump's views on Muslims - 2:00

    The ARI poll showed some regional and demographic differences on the issue, with support for Trump's Muslim ban being highest on the Prairies. There was also a link to education: less educated Canadians looked more favourably on the ban than more educated Canadians.

    Quebeckers less supportive

    And despite the controversies over reasonable accommodations in Quebec, the ARI poll showed that Quebeckers were less likely than other Canadians to support Trump's ban.

    When presented with two options, one suggesting that Trump's rhetoric is "bad for society, it encourages fear and hatred" and the other that it is "good for society, it gets at 'politically incorrect' issues that should be talked about," 63 per cent of Canadians thought it was bad for society (including 66 per cent of Quebeckers). The remaining 37 per cent thought it was good for society.

    Perhaps Canadian and American politics aren't so different after all.

    The poll by the Angus Reid Institute was conducted between Dec. 10 and 13, 2015, interviewing 1,530 Canadians via the Internet. As the poll was conducted online, a margin of error does not apply.

    The poll by the Washington Post-ABC was conducted between Dec. 10 and 13, 2015, interviewing 1,002 Americans via the telephone. The margin of error associated with the survey is +/– 3.5 percentage points, 19 times out of 20.

    Yeah; I have no doubt at all that if someone as rich & inflammatory as Mr. Trump were to decide to take a crack at conservative leadership up here, they'd sweep the CPC support hands down (especially if the 'establishment' people like Ambrose tried to oppose the rhetoric).

    With Love and Courage
  • CanadianWolverineCanadianWolverine Registered User regular
    Wait, "Canadians see Trump's ideas as not so bad..." reads a whole lot different than "1/3rd of Canadians see Trump's ideas as not so bad..."

    We kinda already knew some of us Canadians are hosers and posers. How about read it like "2/3rds of Canadians would tell Trump to take off, eh"

    Its not so depressing in that Northern light.

    steam_sig.png
  • RichyRichy Registered User regular
    Wait, "Canadians see Trump's ideas as not so bad..." reads a whole lot different than "1/3rd of Canadians see Trump's ideas as not so bad..."

    We kinda already knew some of us Canadians are hosers and posers. How about read it like "2/3rds of Canadians would tell Trump to take off, eh"

    Its not so depressing in that Northern light.

    Well, except for the part where the other 2/3rd of Canadians would then go on to argue about which progressive left-wing party would be better to lead them and split their vote, and Trump would win anyway.

    sig.gif
  • The EnderThe Ender Registered User regular
    Richy wrote: »
    Wait, "Canadians see Trump's ideas as not so bad..." reads a whole lot different than "1/3rd of Canadians see Trump's ideas as not so bad..."

    We kinda already knew some of us Canadians are hosers and posers. How about read it like "2/3rds of Canadians would tell Trump to take off, eh"

    Its not so depressing in that Northern light.

    Well, except for the part where the other 2/3rd of Canadians would then go on to argue about which progressive left-wing party would be better to lead them and split their vote, and Trump would win anyway.

    Look Richy, maybe we agree on 99% of issues, and maybe 9/10 legislative issues would be to my benefit under the left wing candidate most well positioned to win my riding.


    But my special snowflake candidate would give me 100% of what I want, so fuck y'all. I'm voting special snowflake!


    If the country burns down around me afterward because I couldn't get 100% of what I want instead of just 99% of what I want, so be it!

    With Love and Courage
  • ShadowenShadowen Snores in the morning LoserdomRegistered User regular
    Wait, "Canadians see Trump's ideas as not so bad..." reads a whole lot different than "1/3rd of Canadians see Trump's ideas as not so bad..."

    We kinda already knew some of us Canadians are hosers and posers. How about read it like "2/3rds of Canadians would tell Trump to take off, eh"

    Its not so depressing in that Northern light.

    If there's one thing that the Bush years taught me, it's that 27% of people--well, 27% of people who can be contacted by pollsters--will profess to believing anything.

  • CorehealerCorehealer The Apothecary The softer edge of the universe.Registered User regular
    I simply subscribe to the idea that there is some percentage of morons everywhere on Earth, and maybe elsewhere in the universe, including in Canada.

    And that they will believe anything if you make enough of an emotional plea, be it directly via a Trump or indirectly via a terrorist attack.

    488W936.png
  • CaedwyrCaedwyr Registered User regular
    I'm not surprised that there is a sizable portion of the Canadian populace who agree with Trump. I'm not surprised that there is a sizeable portion of Conservative supporters who agree with Trump. What I am disappointed and disturbed by, is that a majority of Conservative supporters agree with Trump. It speaks to the degree of polarization and a large xenophobic contingent of the Canadian population and a likely future where airing those views in public or in response to a poll is more socially acceptable. There will always be a cohort of the population who are xenophobic/anti-outsider, but it feels like in the past year the actions of Harper's dogwhistle/identity politics and Trump's trumpeting of horrible xenophobic and hateful messages has shifted the discourse back to where it is seen by many that airing such beliefs is socially acceptable.

    It also speaks to the increased level of polarization in the population where the breakdown is so strongly linked to Conservative supporters. It means that the red Tories are pretty much extinct and that politically we can expect stronger pendulum swings in the politics of the governing party (assuming we don't change our voting system to one that favours more centrist parties). From a tribal/sport team level this isn't bad, but from a social cohesion perspective it makes it harder for society to get along with itself and is the type of divisions that could exacerbate tensions between different cultural and ethnic groups even further. For a country with such a diverse ethnic and cultural composition, it also goes against some of the more common Canadian identity keystones.

  • notdroidnotdroid Registered User regular
    edited December 2015
    The Ender wrote: »
    Richy wrote: »
    Wait, "Canadians see Trump's ideas as not so bad..." reads a whole lot different than "1/3rd of Canadians see Trump's ideas as not so bad..."

    We kinda already knew some of us Canadians are hosers and posers. How about read it like "2/3rds of Canadians would tell Trump to take off, eh"

    Its not so depressing in that Northern light.

    Well, except for the part where the other 2/3rd of Canadians would then go on to argue about which progressive left-wing party would be better to lead them and split their vote, and Trump would win anyway.

    Look Richy, maybe we agree on 99% of issues, and maybe 9/10 legislative issues would be to my benefit under the left wing candidate most well positioned to win my riding.


    But my special snowflake candidate would give me 100% of what I want, so fuck y'all. I'm voting special snowflake!


    If the country burns down around me afterward because I couldn't get 100% of what I want instead of just 99% of what I want, so be it!

    Wait, did Harper get re-elected, or did we literally have an election less than 2 months ago that disproves this?

    notdroid on
  • Disco11Disco11 Registered User regular
    I think a big part of Trump's appeal is his "shoot from the hip" way of speaking and, for better or worse, lack of filter. With politicians today afraid to take a firm position on most issues that are not a slam dunk I think that wins him a lot of votes.

    He's the only one of a group of obvious bullshitters that is honest abut it.

    He could be America's Nero.

    PSN: Canadian_llama
  • RichyRichy Registered User regular
    notdroid wrote: »
    The Ender wrote: »
    Richy wrote: »
    Wait, "Canadians see Trump's ideas as not so bad..." reads a whole lot different than "1/3rd of Canadians see Trump's ideas as not so bad..."

    We kinda already knew some of us Canadians are hosers and posers. How about read it like "2/3rds of Canadians would tell Trump to take off, eh"

    Its not so depressing in that Northern light.

    Well, except for the part where the other 2/3rd of Canadians would then go on to argue about which progressive left-wing party would be better to lead them and split their vote, and Trump would win anyway.

    Look Richy, maybe we agree on 99% of issues, and maybe 9/10 legislative issues would be to my benefit under the left wing candidate most well positioned to win my riding.


    But my special snowflake candidate would give me 100% of what I want, so fuck y'all. I'm voting special snowflake!


    If the country burns down around me afterward because I couldn't get 100% of what I want instead of just 99% of what I want, so be it!

    Wait, did Harper get re-elected, or did we literally have an election less than 2 months ago that disproves this?

    Did we disprove this? Let's look at the last four election results, the three Harper won and the most recent one he lost.

    2015:
    Conservatives: 32%
    Liberals + NDP: 59% (39% + 20%)

    2011:
    Conservatives: 40%
    Liberals + NDP: 50% (19% + 31%)

    2008:
    Conservatives: 38%
    Liberals + NDP: 44% (26% + 18%)

    2004:
    Conservatives: 36%
    Liberals + NDP: 48% (30% + 18%)

    Do you see the left putting aside its minor ideological differences and uniting to stop the right? Because I certainly don't. I see the left consistently dominating the right, but being consistently split with a little over a third of voters going one way and the other two thirds going the other. This pattern did no change in 2015. Ten fucking years of Harper was not enough to push Liberal and NDP supporters to work together.

    The difference in 2015 is the drop the Cons suffered, and that is mostly due to people being sick of Harper personally. That's why he had ads near the end of the campaign pleading people to forget about him and vote for money (because when you want people to forget about you, the best thing to do is to go on national television to ask them to).

    If Trump ran for Canadian PM under the CPC banner, free of the 10 years of baggage Harper was carrying in 2015, the left still wouldn't unite, and he'd win hands down.

    sig.gif
  • Nova_CNova_C I have the need The need for speedRegistered User regular
    And the wheel keeps turning.

    The unite the "Insert your choice ideology here" is what got us into this mess.

    Things were fine until the Reform party took over the Tories. Now there's no Tories thanks to Unite the Right and we're worse off for it.

    Hopefully with the Liberal victory the CPC will break apart into the two factions again, but aping the US two party system is not what we should be striving for.

  • RichyRichy Registered User regular
    Nova_C wrote: »
    And the wheel keeps turning.

    The unite the "Insert your choice ideology here" is what got us into this mess.

    Things were fine until the Reform party took over the Tories. Now there's no Tories thanks to Unite the Right and we're worse off for it.

    Hopefully with the Liberal victory the CPC will break apart into the two factions again, but aping the US two party system is not what we should be striving for.

    Oh don't get me wrong, I'm 100% with you on that. I do not want a US-style two-party system. I'd love for the right to splinter into multiple parties like the left, rather than see the left unite.

    My post was to disprove the idea that the 2015 election somehow shows that the left can work together to defeat a horrible right-wing candidate, and would do it again to stop Trump if he ran here. Trudeau's victory owes nothing to a united left at all.

    sig.gif
  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    Nova_C wrote: »
    And the wheel keeps turning.

    The unite the "Insert your choice ideology here" is what got us into this mess.

    Things were fine until the Reform party took over the Tories. Now there's no Tories thanks to Unite the Right and we're worse off for it.

    Hopefully with the Liberal victory the CPC will break apart into the two factions again, but aping the US two party system is not what we should be striving for.

    The problem is that the reason the Cons exist in the first place is still true: there's alot of Reform party types and the PC types are just much less numerous and dependable overall. Without the alliance, they can't win.

    It's basically the same kind of issue the Left has, except more extreme imbalance and they already got united which makes their position LESS likely to reverse.

    The truth is the Cons exist because they need to in order to make a government. And that has not changed. They likely see this election, correctly, as only a temporary setback and not a fundamental problem with their alliance.

  • TubularLuggageTubularLuggage Registered User regular
    I think at least part of it is that, when Reform was on the rise on the right, a lot of red tories looked at Reform, looked at the state of the PCs after their collapse, and decided they were best served by voting Liberal. Hence, most of the 90s and early 2000s. When the PCs and Alliance merged, a lot of red tory voters were tricked into thinking that the new Conservative party was close enough to their interests that they went back (not necessarily a knock against them, hiding the fact that the CPC is basically just Reform with a new coat of paint to lure PC voters back in is a major part of the CPC's ongoing strategy). To this day, there are red tories who think the current Conservatives are basically the PCs (and sometimes even call them the Progressive Conservatives). There are still plenty of them out there, it's just that many of them have been duped.

  • FrankiedarlingFrankiedarling Registered User regular
    All I want from this PM is a dollar that doesn't suck. It's really quite embarassing atm.

  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    I think at least part of it is that, when Reform was on the rise on the right, a lot of red tories looked at Reform, looked at the state of the PCs after their collapse, and decided they were best served by voting Liberal. Hence, most of the 90s and early 2000s. When the PCs and Alliance merged, a lot of red tory voters were tricked into thinking that the new Conservative party was close enough to their interests that they went back (not necessarily a knock against them, hiding the fact that the CPC is basically just Reform with a new coat of paint to lure PC voters back in is a major part of the CPC's ongoing strategy). To this day, there are red tories who think the current Conservatives are basically the PCs (and sometimes even call them the Progressive Conservatives). There are still plenty of them out there, it's just that many of them have been duped.

    This is why I don't think they will split though. Because what you are talking about is a big part of what makes the red tories unreliable and makes the PC party so dependant on their alliance with the Reform people.

  • EtiowsaEtiowsa Registered User regular
    shryke wrote: »
    I think at least part of it is that, when Reform was on the rise on the right, a lot of red tories looked at Reform, looked at the state of the PCs after their collapse, and decided they were best served by voting Liberal. Hence, most of the 90s and early 2000s. When the PCs and Alliance merged, a lot of red tory voters were tricked into thinking that the new Conservative party was close enough to their interests that they went back (not necessarily a knock against them, hiding the fact that the CPC is basically just Reform with a new coat of paint to lure PC voters back in is a major part of the CPC's ongoing strategy). To this day, there are red tories who think the current Conservatives are basically the PCs (and sometimes even call them the Progressive Conservatives). There are still plenty of them out there, it's just that many of them have been duped.

    This is why I don't think they will split though. Because what you are talking about is a big part of what makes the red tories unreliable and makes the PC party so dependant on their alliance with the Reform people.

    Eh, if we actually get voter reform passed the chances of a united CPC forming the government go down considerably, which might convince the less crazy wing to take their chances free of the reform baggage. But who knows.

  • notdroidnotdroid Registered User regular
    Richy wrote: »
    notdroid wrote: »
    The Ender wrote: »
    Richy wrote: »
    Wait, "Canadians see Trump's ideas as not so bad..." reads a whole lot different than "1/3rd of Canadians see Trump's ideas as not so bad..."

    We kinda already knew some of us Canadians are hosers and posers. How about read it like "2/3rds of Canadians would tell Trump to take off, eh"

    Its not so depressing in that Northern light.

    Well, except for the part where the other 2/3rd of Canadians would then go on to argue about which progressive left-wing party would be better to lead them and split their vote, and Trump would win anyway.

    Look Richy, maybe we agree on 99% of issues, and maybe 9/10 legislative issues would be to my benefit under the left wing candidate most well positioned to win my riding.


    But my special snowflake candidate would give me 100% of what I want, so fuck y'all. I'm voting special snowflake!


    If the country burns down around me afterward because I couldn't get 100% of what I want instead of just 99% of what I want, so be it!

    Wait, did Harper get re-elected, or did we literally have an election less than 2 months ago that disproves this?

    Did we disprove this? Let's look at the last four election results, the three Harper won and the most recent one he lost.

    2015:
    Conservatives: 32%
    Liberals + NDP: 59% (39% + 20%)

    2011:
    Conservatives: 40%
    Liberals + NDP: 50% (19% + 31%)

    2008:
    Conservatives: 38%
    Liberals + NDP: 44% (26% + 18%)

    2004:
    Conservatives: 36%
    Liberals + NDP: 48% (30% + 18%)

    Do you see the left putting aside its minor ideological differences and uniting to stop the right? Because I certainly don't. I see the left consistently dominating the right, but being consistently split with a little over a third of voters going one way and the other two thirds going the other. This pattern did no change in 2015. Ten fucking years of Harper was not enough to push Liberal and NDP supporters to work together.

    The difference in 2015 is the drop the Cons suffered, and that is mostly due to people being sick of Harper personally. That's why he had ads near the end of the campaign pleading people to forget about him and vote for money (because when you want people to forget about you, the best thing to do is to go on national television to ask them to).

    If Trump ran for Canadian PM under the CPC banner, free of the 10 years of baggage Harper was carrying in 2015, the left still wouldn't unite, and he'd win hands down.

    You are assuming all Liberal voters qualify as "left". That is an oversimplification. The Liberal Party is close to the center, and as a result appeals to people who would qualify themselves as "center-right" as well. As per the results you've posted above, the vote does not simply swing back and forth between the NDP and the Liberals - the CPC is also clearly affected by it. There's a reason why Trudeau campaigned for Torie votes in Ontario this election (http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/trudeau-makes-pitch-to-conservative-voters/article26770502/).

    If Canada had a two-party system with only the CPC and the NDP present, I would expect vote percentages to be much closer to 50% for each respective party.

  • The EnderThe Ender Registered User regular
    ...Does anyone who posts here happen to live near the area where the Oland trial occurred?


    Apparently the Canadian press really really wants me to believe that a terrible injustice has occurred, and I am trying to figure-out what the deal is (...seems kind of open and shut to me? Dude was wearing a jacket with the victim's blood on it, lied about wearing that jacket / claimed it had been lost, etc).

    With Love and Courage
  • breton-brawlerbreton-brawler Registered User regular
    There is alot of problems with the trial and the evidence, alot of bumbling by the local police force in general. The jacket had very minute amount of blood, he had lied about wearing it, they performed the DNA test late. There is a question of whether they treated the jacket properly as evidence. The crime scene was not controlled. open access to quite a few people. no hard evidence putting him at the scene of the crime. There was the case of an officer being told to lie / ignore some things by a superior (the superior denied any of this happening)
    The basis of the case was very circumstantial, alot of people viewing from outside the trial feel there was more than reasonable doubt.

    That's what I gathered from it going on. the local police force is doing an inquest into how they handled it, although they feel vindicated that a conviction did occur.
    general consensus is he did it but the case wasn't good enough for a conviction. There will be appeals and it will take even longer to sort out.

  • The EnderThe Ender Registered User regular
    they performed the DNA test late

    ...How late? That can be pretty big deal.
    general consensus is he did

    Well, in fairness, that's all you really need for a jury trial.

    With Love and Courage
  • CanadianWolverineCanadianWolverine Registered User regular
    The Ender wrote: »
    they performed the DNA test late

    ...How late? That can be pretty big deal.
    general consensus is he did

    Well, in fairness, that's all you really need for a jury trial.

    Well, not really fair. General consensus is not helpful, the higher the media profile of a particular case before the courts, the more likely people are to think the person is guilty, with or without all the evidence brought to the court.

    steam_sig.png
  • breton-brawlerbreton-brawler Registered User regular
    edited December 2015
    The Ender wrote: »
    they performed the DNA test late

    ...How late? That can be pretty big deal.
    general consensus is he did

    Well, in fairness, that's all you really need for a jury trial.

    Well, not really fair. General consensus is not helpful, the higher the media profile of a particular case before the courts, the more likely people are to think the person is guilty, with or without all the evidence brought to the court.

    right. outside consensus is not the same as consensus in the jury. The media and reporting of the events can heavily sway opinion. plus the general public doesnt have to abide by the strict rules of trial and jury considerations.

    The late testing was an issue that the police had a length of time for the warrant and evidence. the testing occurred after the end date of the warrant. The judge let the jacket come into evidence, basically stating that it was a procedural error. There was also some things with a cell phone, trying to pinpoint the son's location using the fact that his cell phone used a tower nearby, but from all reporting it seemed like a pretty flimsy way of putting the son in the office.

    Also there is alot more going on there that will probably never be public. the fact that he was supported by his whole family, there was the issue of the father's mistress, he was not the most nice guy. I think there was alot of strange internal family politics going on.


    Oh! another fact is they never recovered a murder weapon, he was apparently struck over 40 times, alot of speculation that it was a hammer used. The whole thing is kinda like a boat full of holes that refused to sink.

    breton-brawler on
Sign In or Register to comment.