Robocall, F-35, Vegas getaways, etc.

[Captain.Sassy]

Things are a smidgen scandalesque for the blue team these days.

Think any of it will stick come Canada's Got Votes 2015?

Meanwhile the dips have a new king. The boss of the grits is an ex NDP. Should be a match made in heaven but they're both lobbing pebbles at each other. What gives, guys? Shape the f. up.

 

[Corsair 115]

Meet the new Conservatives, same as the old Conservatives.

 

[Wolfman]

A smidgen? Only a smidgen?

The biggest scandal in my mind isn't any of these things...it is that Canadians in general still seem to support this party. It's ironic that when Harper took power, he was so strongly anti-China...and now not only is he kissing their asses to beg for cooperation with them, he seems to have learned one of China's most important political lessons: that you can stomp all over the law, freedom of information, and all sorts of other stuff, so long as you manage to keep a good portion of the population materially comfortable.

 

[Captain.Sassy]

It's a biggish smidgen though.

Agree on the lunacy of their support not budging.
http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/br...th-tories-with-mulcair-cp-poll-146151875.html

For that minority of Canadians that still supports these guys I don't know what it will take for their opinion to change.

It's time for proportional representation, a merger, strategic voting, something...

 

[fitzgibbon]

Meet the new Conservatives, same as the old Conservatives.

Actually, I suspect Dief is doing a lot of spinning. Compare 'gotthavetheF35man' with 'GodsaveusfromtheArrow'

Fitz

 

[fitzgibbon]

he seems to have learned one of China's most important political lessons: that you can stomp all over the law, freedom of information, and all sorts of other stuff, so long as you manage to keep a good portion of the population materially comfortable.

Golden rule, baby; he who has the gold makes the rules. Welcome to offshore WalMart world

Fitz

 

[fitzgibbon]

It's time for proportional representation, a merger, strategic voting, something...

Preferential balloting would be most fair. Trouble is a majority government wouldn't want to change the dynamics that brought it to power and about the only circumstance that'd bring it to the fore is years upon years of unworkable minority governments.

Fitz

 

[Segnosaur]

...Trouble is a majority government wouldn't want to change the dynamics that brought it to power...

There's one other reason they wouldn't want to change the way our elections work...

Doing so would probably require opening up the constitution, which is a political mine field which could really backfire. (Mulroney's boneheaded attempts with Meech Lake and Charlottetown ended up causing a boost to separatism, in my opinion.)

Better to let sleeping dogs lie.

 

[Segnosaur]

Think any of it will stick come Canada's Got Votes 2015?

Probably not. (Not that I necessarily think that the Conservatives will win the next election, just that I don't think these particular issues will play a roll.)

First of all, its still pretty early in Harper's mandate (more than enough time for the electorate to move on to other issues.)

Secondly, these particular scandals don't seem to be all that significant. We don't know all the facts about the robocall issue, but I rather suspect its the actions of a lone idiot rather than some master plan by the leadership of the party. As for the F35, the arguments regarding cost were already discussed prior to the last election, and it didn't really affect conservative support back then.

For that minority of Canadians that still supports these guys I don't know what it will take for their opinion to change. .

Speaking as someone who voted conservative in the last election, what it would take for me to change is for the opposition to put forward policies that I like. However, it seems that right now most of the arguments against the conservatives are either A: based largely on unsubstantiated fear-mongering, or B: drowning in hypocrisy.

It's time for proportional representation, a merger, strategic voting, something...

Just out of curiosity, would you feel the same way back in the 90s, when the Liberals were in power, thanks largely to vote splitting by the political right? After all, things like strategic voting would have resulted in the Liberals loosing power much sooner.

Or does your eagerness for political change only manifest itself when its the "evil right" that's in power?

 

[Davidlpf]

You think a lone idiot and political mastermind are two seperate things.

 

[Border Reiver]

Given what we presently know about the robocalls I would say that yes, lone idiot and political mastermind are two separate things.

What you have is some people in a riding indicating that they received automated calls purporting to be from someone other than Elections Canada telling them that their polling station had changed.

No indication that this was policy, or that the party leadership gave direction or approved.

 

[Davidlpf]

I don't think the party leadership had anything to do with it but some idiot thought it was a good idea, also. The above comment is a general statement about politics.

 

[Captain.Sassy]

Just out of curiosity, would you feel the same way back in the 90s, when the Liberals were in power, thanks largely to vote splitting by the political right? After all, things like strategic voting would have resulted in the Liberals loosing power much sooner.

Or does your eagerness for political change only manifest itself when its the "evil right" that's in power?

Yes, I'm a big proponent of PR. So are some sophisticated conservatives in Canada, like Andrew Coyne.

The case of the Liberal majority with less than 40% of the vote was bad, sure, but at as a centrist party they had more legitimacy than the current conservative gov't in my opinion (and speaking strictly from how well they represent general Canadian political opinion). While some voters who didn't vote for the liberals were to the right of them, and some were to the left of them, in the case of the conservatives everyone that didn't vote for them is to their left. In this respect, they can't lay claim to representing any kind of median tendency in Canadian politics.

 

[Corsair 115]

Just out of curiosity, would you feel the same way back in the 90s, when the Liberals were in power, thanks largely to vote splitting by the political right?

Is there specific evidence to back up that claim? That is, for every riding in the 1993, 1997, and 2000 federal elections, tally up the number of votes for the PC candidate and the number of votes for the Reform candidate and count the ridings in which this combined vote would have been higher than the vote for the elected Liberal or NDP candidate, and how much that would have changed the seat count in Parliament. (This assumes that in the absence of a Reform candidate the votes would have gone to the PC candidate, and in the absence of a PC candidate the votes would have gone to the Reform candidate. But just how reliable is that assumption?)

 

[Fitter]

Is there specific evidence to back up that claim? That is, for every riding in the 1993, 1997, and 2000 federal elections, tally up the number of votes for the PC candidate and the number of votes for the Reform candidate and count the ridings in which this combined vote would have been higher than the vote for the elected Liberal or NDP candidate, and how much that would have changed the seat count in Parliament. (This assumes that in the absence of a Reform candidate the votes would have gone to the PC candidate, and in the absence of a PC candidate the votes would have gone to the Reform candidate. But just how reliable is that assumption?)

I think the Reform votes going to the PCs is more of a sure thing than the reverse. There are quite a few of us "red Tories" who would never consider voting Refoooooorrrrrmmmmmmm.

 

[Segnosaur]

Just out of curiosity, would you feel the same way back in the 90s, when the Liberals were in power, thanks largely to vote splitting by the political right? After all, things like strategic voting would have resulted in the Liberals loosing power much sooner.

Or does your eagerness for political change only manifest itself when its the "evil right" that's in power?

Yes, I'm a big proponent of PR.

Given your past discussions in other threads, I do have my doubts. But for now I'm willing to accept that (but with a grain of salt. Ok, a ton of salt.)

So are some sophisticated conservatives in Canada, like Andrew Coyne.

Good for Andrew Coyne.

The fact is, there are good points and bad points to proportional representation. Is it an overall better system than what we have now? Possibly. I'm not totally convinced it is, but I'm leaning in that direction. Is it such a big improvement that its worth destroying our country to try to obtain it? Errr... that is something I'm less likely to believe.

The case of the Liberal majority with less than 40% of the vote was bad, sure, but at as a centrist party they had more legitimacy than the current conservative gov't in my opinion...

Errr... there you go, first of all you claim "Oh yes PR all the way regardless of the results!", then you turn around and say "well ok, it was at least more acceptable when the Liberals were in power..."

Perfect illustration of why I doubt your sincerity.

(and speaking strictly from how well they represent general Canadian political opinion). While some voters who didn't vote for the liberals were to the right of them, and some were to the left of them, in the case of the conservatives everyone that didn't vote for them is to their left. In this respect, they can't lay claim to representing any kind of median tendency in Canadian politics.

Here's the problem... you are under the rather mistaken assumption that people actually vote along politically-ideological lines. (This issue has been discussed before in this forum... I think it was covered in the big thread we had on the Canadian election.)

There are many reasons that a voter may choose a candidate that has nothing to do with "ideology"... scandals, personality, tradition, heck even their hair cut. (It wouldn't surprise me if a large number of voters had no idea what the various party platforms were before they went into the voting booth.)

Heck, if you look at various opinion polls, you'll probably find that canadian opinions are more "right wing" than you imagine. Heck, in some ways they're even further to the right than the Conservative's platform. For example:

- More than half of all Canadians favor some sort of 2-tier health care (See: http://www.canada.com/national/nationalpost/news/story.html?id=75f6cbe4-6da5-4c84-9e8a-17e447c651ca). That's even more 'right wing' than the conservatives, who don't seem to have any interest in even discussing the possibility of "2-tier"

- 61% of Canadians in a poll suggested they support capital punishment (http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/...ns-support-return-of-death-penalty-poll-finds)

- Remember when the Liberals brought in same-sex marriage? There were plenty of polls that showed a majority of Canadians either disagreed with same sex marriage all-together, or preferred the Conservative plan of 'civil unions'. (See: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2005/04/10/gay-marriage-050410.html)

- There were some opinion polls showing that more Canadians supported scrapping the registry than keeping it (http://www.torontosun.com/news/canada/2010/09/20/15407831.html)

 

[Segnosaur]

Just out of curiosity, would you feel the same way back in the 90s, when the Liberals were in power, thanks largely to vote splitting by the political right?

Is there specific evidence to back up that claim? That is, for every riding in the 1993, 1997, and 2000 federal elections, tally up the number of votes for the PC candidate and the number of votes for the Reform candidate and count the ridings in which this combined vote would have been higher than the vote for the elected Liberal or NDP candidate, and how much that would have changed the seat count in Parliament.

First of all, keep in mind that I said that the Liberals stayed in power largely by vote-splitting on the right. I do recognize it wasn't the only reason they obtained power, just that it was a factor.

Secondly, expecting data for every possible liberal loss for 3 different elections would take an exceptional amount of time and effort. Let me concentrate on the 1997 election. In that election the Liberals won a total of 155 seats (a 4 seat cushion with their majority.) However, lets look at the following Ontario ridings that the Liberals won, vs. how much a single Candidate would have won by had he combined the PC and Reform votes:

Bramalea-Gore-Mahton (Libs: 19k, PC:11K, Ref:9K, Combined margin: 1k)
Bruce Grey (Libs: 18k, PC:11k, Ref: 16K, Combined Margin: 9k)
Burlington: (Libs: 22k, PC: 16K, Ref: 9k, Combined Margin: 3K)
Cambridge: (Libs: 17k, PC: 9k, Ref: 11K, Combined Margin: 3K)
Duffern (Libs: 21k, PC: 11k, Ref:15k, Combined Margin: 5K)
Durham (Libs:20k, PC: 9k, Ref: 12k, combined margin: 1k)
Oxford (Libs: 16k, PC: 15k, R: 10k, combined margin: 9k)

So, if their had been a single "right wing" candidate in each of those ridings, it would have knocked the Liberals from majority status to minority.

And yes, i do recognize that not every voter who would vote for the PCs or Reform party would necessarily vote for a combined party candidate. However:
- I specifically picked ridings where the combined margin of victory was over 1 thousand votes (allowing a significant number of voters to switch to the Libs or NDP yet still allow a 'right wing' victory)
- I picked both ridings where the PC was the 'second place' candidate, and the Reform party was second place, to handle different voting dynamics

(This assumes that in the absence of a Reform candidate the votes would have gone to the PC candidate, and in the absence of a PC candidate the votes would have gone to the Reform candidate.

Actually, I picked ridings where the "right wing" had more than 1000 votes than the Liberal victor. So yes, even if people jump from PC/Reform to Liberals or NDP, there would still probably be enough cushion to have the right-wing candidate win.

But just how reliable is that assumption?)

Perhaps you could ask Captain Sassy; after all, he's the one who suggested we needed a "merger/strategic voting" to get rid of the Conservatives.