Support NeoGAF

[BladeWorker]

If I were a betting woman, I'd say that the next election will be Sound Management of the Economy (TM) versus You Made People Sell their Kitchen Tables; and the unemployment and going interest rates will determine the winner.

Over/under on unemployment will be 7%; over/under on interest rates will be 1.5%.

 

[diaspora]

I don't predict parties which combined optimistically match the incumbent in terms of fundraising capacity have a shot at governing within the next 24 months. That's just me I guess.

 

[maharg]

Neither us nor the NDP are particularly likely to win government in 2015, unlikely in 2017, with a slight chance for 2019. Both of us are outgunned in every way, shape, and form by the tories. Justin, Marc, Martha, Mulcair, nor anyone else will change this. A big part of the problem is that the tories are the only ones with a really national organization. Yes, they're weak in Quebec, but not to same degree of rot that our grit "organizations" have in swaths of the country. As for the NDP, it faces a similar problem as the GPC in that it's not necessarily the same... party in one part of the country as the other.

None of that really matters to the fact that the CPC's best strategy is to encourage a further split vote, so I'm not sure what you're getting at. The CPC doesn't really care that you don't have money, they'll do everything they can to make you lose as badly as you can no matter what. Frankly, imo, that organizational aggressiveness is more why they win than anything else.

 

[matthewwhatever]

Look how well that worked on Obama. If the CPC are even half the political operators they've been given credit for, they know that "idealistic newcomer" is not a workable strategy in the wake of Obama's Hope campaign.

I think that the CPC's political acumen is vastly overrated...in 2006 they benefited from a Martin campaign that was sluggish and relying on a stupid strategy (according to Paul Wells' book about the campaign, their goal was to fall in the polls until Christmas, and then rebound when people turned against Harper). In 2008, they went up against a candidate with zero communications skills. And in 2011, they started with the Just Visiting campaign from even before Iggy was officially chosen, and then they nearly got upended by an NDP campaign that even I'll admit was pretty disciplined. Besides, by 2015 the Hope & Change campaign will have been 7 years ago...that'll be long enough ago that it'll have negligible impact.

They're half-assing it because our database is 10% the size of theirs with no fulltime staff and with 30-50% of their fundraising capacity.

Have there been any updated fundraising numbers since these? Trudeau being able to raise so much money (and the Liberals finishing 2012 well ahead of the NDP in terms of fundraising dollars) has to make the CPC at least a little worried.

Incidentally, while I'm personally supportive of Marc and his (amazing) twitter, Justin's policy forum is surprisingly cool.

I didn't even know about Trudeau's policy forum, so thanks for the link.

 

[maharg]

I think that the CPC's political acumen is vastly overrated...in 2006 they benefited from a Martin campaign that was sluggish and relying on a stupid strategy (according to Paul Wells' book about the campaign, their goal was to fall in the polls until Christmas, and then rebound when people turned against Harper). In 2008, they went up against a candidate with zero communications skills. And in 2011, they started with the Just Visiting campaign from even before Iggy was officially chosen, and then they nearly got upended by an NDP campaign that even I'll admit was pretty disciplined. Besides, by 2015 the Hope & Change campaign will have been 7 years ago...that'll be long enough ago that it'll have negligible impact.

I think their acumen at exploiting division is not at all overrated. They're very good at it.

As for 7 years, take a look at conservative/liberal swings in Canadian and American politics sometimes. Policies and campaigns that work well in the US have a habit of popping up and succeeding in Canada several years after.

And yeah, I think they should be worried. But I also think that letting the LPC wither away and die would leave them with a minority government. A temporarily resurgent liberal party is the best thing for them right now. Like I said, moderate risk high gain.

 

[diaspora]

I think that the CPC's political acumen is vastly overrated...in 2006 they benefited from a Martin campaign that was sluggish and relying on a stupid strategy (according to Paul Wells' book about the campaign, their goal was to fall in the polls until Christmas, and then rebound when people turned against Harper). In 2008, they went up against a candidate with zero communications skills. And in 2011, they started with the Just Visiting campaign from even before Iggy was officially chosen, and then they nearly got upended by an NDP campaign that even I'll admit was pretty disciplined. Besides, by 2015 the Hope & Change campaign will have been 7 years ago...that'll be long enough ago that it'll have negligible impact.

The internal mismanagement up until 2012 has been crippling, and it's been really, really bad before Martin even got axed.
In 2008 and 2011 the tories went up against a party that:

• Wasn't a national organization anymore
• Had 1/10th of the data they had at best on the actual electorate
• Had 1/3rd of the amount of money with little of it going into actual communications- massive internal mismanagement

The lack of coherent communication in 2008, and really 2011 were just symptoms of deeper internal issues which have only been getting sorted out since last year.

Have there been any updated fundraising numbers since these? Trudeau being able to raise so much money (and the Liberals finishing 2012 well ahead of the NDP in terms of fundraising dollars) has to make the CPC at least a little worried.

Not that we've released. It should't since they're still so far ahead.

I didn't even know about Trudeau's policy forum, so thanks for the link.

No problem. Seems reddit-esque with less hivemind.

As an aside: I'm seeing a Martha Hall Findlay ad at the top of the page. Well.

 

[You Are Viewtiful]

Meh, policies and ideas are is overrated. The Liberals got destroyed in two successive elections even though they arguably had more fleshed-out policies than anyone else (with Dion's Green Shift and Iggy's...smorgasbord). The NDP rode to Official Opposition on Smiling Jack Layton and generic stuff about everyday Canadians and kitchen tables. The Conservatives have won through a combination of policies they knew were terrible, but could be sold easily (i.e. the GST cut) and scare-mongering (though a Conservative partisan would probably call it them projecting a comforting image during uncertain times, or something along those lines). Looking back to the most recent Liberal dynasty under Chretien, they won with Red Books I, II and III -- and I challenge you to name one big idea from any of them.

Obviously, Trudeau has an image of being a bit of a lightweight, and there's no doubt that that'll be the cornerstone of Conservative and NDP attacks against him. But 1) as I said, policy isn't nearly important to voters as some people pretend it is, and 2) I think they'll end up lowering the bar for him so that when he is able to stand up to Harper/Mulcair in debates with a little bit of policy (not to mention a healthy dose of charisma -- which he undeniably possesses; whether you're a fan or not is a different story) people will just be impressed that he's not reduced to tears by hard questions.

Do we want a person who wins elections or do we want someone who knows what he's doing? That's the question that Liberals need to answer. As a non-partisan I hope the Liberals choose the latter.

 

[diaspora]

For what it's worth, ye olde passivity of the liberals in general elections is effectively over now. Working on building a non-shitty database is going to be a mission though. Anyone want to help? =\

 

[Ronald_mcd]

Joyce Murray is going to be my Candidate. I'm a little bias, being a tree planter, but I like the idea of a one cooperative to beat the Conservatives.

Really hoping she can keep the momentum up so JT doesn't take the leadership

 

[SRG01]

For what it's worth, ye olde passivity of the liberals in general elections is effectively over now. Working on building a non-shitty database is going to be a mission though. Anyone want to help? =\

Depends on what you want that database to do, really.

 

[diaspora]

Depends on what you want that database to do, really.

It's not what it needs to do that I need to change, it's what it has. I (we?) need at least five times the number of electors in it than we already have, and bump up the data points we have on them from 4 to at least 6-8. moving on from there we've got a few scientists familar with statistical software who'd be able to work on using the data to predict voter trends to make our comms more effective and from there increase the efficacy of our fundraising efforts.

 

[firehawk12]

Do we want a person who wins elections or do we want someone who knows what he's doing? That's the question that Liberals need to answer. As a non-partisan I hope the Liberals choose the latter.

So... were Dion and Ignatieff the former or the latter, because I'm not sure. lol

 

[diaspora]

So... were Dion and Ignatieff the former or the latter, because I'm not sure. lol

They knew policy but didn't know how to articulate it well. Better suited as Ministers than PM.

Also, fwiw, this is what I mean about moving beyond passivity:

 

[gutter_trash]

Thomas Mulcair was responsible for recruiting candidates in Qc in 2011.

Claude Patry voted YES both in 1980 and 1995, and was openly a separatist.

Mulcair knew and selected him and many others to win over nationalists.

I personally wont vote NDP in 2015 because I hate separatist candidates.

Justin 2015 gets my vote

 

[maharg]

Thomas Mulcair was responsible for recruiting candidates in Qc in 2011.

Claude Patry voted YES both in 1980 and 1995, and was openly a separatist.

Mulcair knew and selected him and many others to win over nationalists.

I personally wont vote NDP in 2015 because I hate separatist candidates.

Justin 2015 gets my vote

Just curious, are you saying this is a bigger failure in candidate 'selection' (like people were beating down their door to be one) than the candidate who didn't even live in Quebec? Did they *lose* your vote over this?

 

[diaspora]

Thomas Mulcair was responsible for recruiting candidates in Qc in 2011.

Claude Patry voted YES both in 1980 and 1995, and was openly a separatist.

Mulcair knew and selected him and many others to win over nationalists.

I personally wont vote NDP in 2015 because I hate separatist candidates.

Justin 2015 gets my vote

Enjoy:

 

[firehawk12]

Thomas Mulcair was responsible for recruiting candidates in Qc in 2011.

Claude Patry voted YES both in 1980 and 1995, and was openly a separatist.

Mulcair knew and selected him and many others to win over nationalists.

I personally wont vote NDP in 2015 because I hate separatist candidates.

Justin 2015 gets my vote

I figure Mulcair openly supporting 50+1 would be more damaging than whatever lazy vetting he did before the last election if you were an ultra-nationalist.

They knew policy but didn't know how to articulate it well. Better suited as Ministers than PM.

Also, fwiw, this is what I mean about moving beyond passivity: https://fbcdn-sphotos-h-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-snc7/380745_10151375197139715_575236826_n.png

Of course I'm totally biased, but if the Liberals wanted to stop being passive, they'd figure out how to work with the NDP now rather than go through another bloodbath in a few years.

Funny enough, even I can't remember some of the past failures of the Conservatives because the oxygen is just sucked out of all those old issues (Oda and the lying about the F35 costs being the only thing that comes to mind). That said, at least the NDP can make some hay out of the Senate blow up this week... happy accident that the big names involved are Harper appointees too. lol

 

[matthewwhatever]

Joyce Murray is going to be my Candidate. I'm a little bias, being a tree planter, but I like the idea of a one cooperative to beat the Conservatives.

The cooperation idea is a terrible one, especially coming from a Liberal at this point in time. Mulcair has already shot down the idea, so if Murray somehow won, she'd reach across the aisle (well, down the same aisle, technically), get slapped down and then...what? She couldn't argue that the Liberals were a viable political party any more, because she'd have already sent a message that they were basically the same as the NDP. Maybe if Cullen had won, the conversation would be different, but at this point in time, cooperation is off the table.

As for "Do we want a person who wins elections or do we want someone who knows what he's doing?"...I'd say that someone who knows what he's doing will usually win elections. Martin, Dion and Iggy never really seemed like they knew what they were doing, at least from the standpoint of doing the things necessary to win elections (that is, developing a message and a plan, communicating it, and sticking to it).

 

[diaspora]

(that is, developing a message and a plan, communicating it, and sticking to it).

Developing these things are the job of the party administration, no? Martin, Dion, and Iggy's failure was that they favoured their friends and internal supporters run party communications, messaging, and management over people who actually knew how to do these things. We didn't even have a voter database until Brian Rice out in BC gave the party admin a kick in the pants to adopt VAN.

Spoiler

Also, the cutoff date to register to vote is March 3rd, so if anyone wants to participate, get on that shit.

 

[gutter_trash]

Just curious, are you saying this is a bigger failure in candidate 'selection' (like people were beating down their door to be one) than the candidate who didn't even live in Quebec? Did they *lose* your vote over this?

NDP is supposed to be a federalist party.

there should be zero tolerance for separatists candidates in the party,


Justin 2015 FTW

 

[diaspora]

NDP is supposed to be a federalist party.

there should be zero tolerance for separatists candidates in the party,


Justin 2015 FTW

Are you registered to vote? Last day's tomorrow.

 

[gutter_trash]

Are you registered to vote? Last day's tomorrow.

yup, I am registered. Thanks for the reminder. I will check my emails to make sure where my stuff is at.

I am tired of Consrvatives and NPD pandering to nationalists. Yeah Harper pandered to them when he won his 1st minority government and his Transport Minister is a former separatist. Harper abandonded his pandering when he realized he can win a majority without them, simple oportunism

 

[Ronald_mcd]

The cooperation idea is a terrible one, especially coming from a Liberal at this point in time. Mulcair has already shot down the idea, so if Murray somehow won, she'd reach across the aisle (well, down the same aisle, technically), get slapped down and then...what? She couldn't argue that the Liberals were a viable political party any more, because she'd have already sent a message that they were basically the same as the NDP. Maybe if Cullen had won, the conversation would be different, but at this point in time, cooperation is off the table.

Mulcair is the leader of the opposition, obviously he's not going to support it right off the bat but the next election will turn out the same as the last if we do the Conservatives vs Libs/NDP/Green . Are the Libs and NDP really that different in the grand scheme of things?

I also like the fact that Joyce Murray supports electoral reform for proportional representation.

 

[maharg]

NDP is supposed to be a federalist party.

there should be zero tolerance for separatists candidates in the party,


Justin 2015 FTW

Boy that sure was an answer to my question.

 

[gabbo]

I also like the fact that Joyce Murray supports electoral reform for proportional representation.

Which is a nice sentiment, but the Cons would never go for it, as it would cut away at their seat count.

 

[Oppo]

NDP is supposed to be a federalist party.

there should be zero tolerance for separatists candidates in the party,


Justin 2015 FTW

You are the first person I've ever see actually say they'd vote for Justin. Just realized that.

That's like voting for Inanimate Carbon Rod

 

[BigJonsson]

Just name me supreme emperor and all will be fine

 

[gutter_trash]

You are the first person I've ever see actually say they'd vote for Justin. Just realized that.

That's like voting for Inanimate Carbon Rod

it's not just about the leader, it's also about the party.

who had many consecutive budget surpluses and helped our economy recover from the late 80s/ early 90s recession?
The Liberals.

Conservatives claim to be fiscally responsible during campaigns but end up spending more than Liberals. We are in deficit mode now under Harper.

 

[matthewwhatever]

I'm proudly voting for Justin Trudeau. As I said, though, I don't care about policy, just someone who can win elections, and I think he's our best bet.

I'm really not sure who my second choice would be. It might've been MHF or Garneau, but after both of them had their weird little anti-Trudeau moments, I'm less sure. I like that Murray is progressive, but I'm opposed to cooperation. Maybe Coyne?

Mulcair is the leader of the opposition, obviously he's not going to support it right off the bat but the next election will turn out the same as the last if we do the Conservatives vs Libs/NDP/Green . Are the Libs and NDP really that different in the grand scheme of things?

I also like the fact that Joyce Murray supports electoral reform for proportional representation.

Yes, yes they are. The Liberals are for free trade, the NDP are against it. The Liberals are staunch federalists and authors of the Clarity Act; the NDP are a bunch of crypto-separatists. I'm sure there are other major policy differences/dealbreakers, but those two things alone are reason enough for me to never vote NDP.

 

[Zzoram]

Liberals are basically a centrist and populist party, generally a safe bet for not taking the country to any extremes.

 

[Sapiens]

Another post to the pile:

If the Liberals and NDP merge, I will probably end up voting Conservative, and I do not like Stephen Harper.

So that will be contingent on whoever succeeds Harper (where are the Prentices? The Mulronys?)


Didn't like Jack Layton, don't like Mulcair.

 

[Guesong]

Didn't like Jack Layton, don't like Mulcair.

No matter your views or ideal, how could anyone not like Jack Layton?

He was, in all appearances, about as straight a politician should be.

Really wish he was still alive. Mulcair doesn't have a quarter of his character.

 

[maharg]

Liberals are basically a centrist and populist party, generally a safe bet for not taking the country to any extremes.

Centrist yes, but populist? Not by a long shot. They've had a couple of populist leaders, but that's the exception rather than the rule.

 

[firehawk12]

Mulcair is the leader of the opposition, obviously he's not going to support it right off the bat but the next election will turn out the same as the last if we do the Conservatives vs Libs/NDP/Green . Are the Libs and NDP really that different in the grand scheme of things?

I also like the fact that Joyce Murray supports electoral reform for proportional representation.

Andrew Coyne continually likes to point out that there are many Liberal centrists that would hate a platform of a supposed Liberal-NDP party. I presume the more extreme socialist NDP members have mostly been quelled by Muclair's move to the centre anyway, so there may be less problems on that end.

Everyone acknowledges that you can't simply add their votes together, especially when you boil it down, the Liberals represent management and the NDP represent the unions (also when the CAW/Buzz Hargrove ditched the NDP for the Liberals years ago, that was a fun time), but it's not like the Democrats don't function in the US despite the tremendous extremes in that party.

Regardless of what happens, the status-quo hasn't worked for the last few cycles and other than relying on an old name, the Liberals don't seem to have any new tricks up their sleeves this time around.

 

[BigJonsson]

No tricks, have to build slowly and properly

 

[Sapiens]

I liked Ignatieff and Dion, but it infuriated me that they just rolled over and let the CPC drag their names through the mud.

We need a sharp bulldog that will go far enough to rebuke the claims of the attack ads but not go far enough to lack credibility.

I mean, Harper could be found in an airport washroom (if you know what I mean), and the Liberals still wouldn't say anything.

The Trudeau attack ads from the CPC are going to be delicious.

 

[BigJonsson]

They should reply to attack ads with internet memes

 

[gutter_trash]

They should reply to attack ads with internet memes

that would be epic

 

[Ronald_mcd]

Which is a nice sentiment, but the Cons would never go for it, as it would cut away at their seat count.

Which is why you need some cooperation between the parties of the left, so it really doesn't matter what the Cons think.


Yeah, there are differences between the Greens, Libs, and NDP. But I also think that they have a ton in common and aren't as far apart as they would like to think.


And voting Conservative if the NDP and Libs were to have a one time agreement to cooperate in key ridings seems a bit silly.



With all this said, I really wish the conservatives had another party to split votes like the left does.

 

[Zzoram]

Do we want a person who wins elections or do we want someone who knows what he's doing? That's the question that Liberals need to answer. As a non-partisan I hope the Liberals choose the latter.

You're wrong. A winner is always better. Sure he may be inexperienced but that's what Cabinet and advisors are for. It's far more important to win. A leader is only there to talk to the public and pick a knowledgeable Cabinet and advisors. The people who actually draft legislation don't include the Prime Minister in any major capacity.

 

[gabbo]

Which is why you need some cooperation between the parties of the left, so it really doesn't matter what the Cons think.


Yeah, there are differences between the Greens, Libs, and NDP. But I also think that they have a ton in common and aren't as far apart as they would like to think.


And voting Conservative if the NDP and Libs were to have a one time agreement to cooperate in key ridings seems a bit silly.



With all this said, I really wish the conservatives had another party to split votes like the left does.

What I meant was that it's all well and good, but they have to come up with a way to unseat the Conservatives first. Come up with that plan, then we can talk PopRep

 

[Zzoram]

I liked Ignatieff and Dion, but it infuriated me that they just rolled over and let the CPC drag their names through the mud.

We need a sharp bulldog that will go far enough to rebuke the claims of the attack ads but not go far enough to lack credibility.

I mean, Harper could be found in an airport washroom (if you know what I mean), and the Liberals still wouldn't say anything.

The Trudeau attack ads from the CPC are going to be delicious.

I suspect Trudeau won't be a pushover. He did agree to charity box the Conservative Senator Brazeau who had a martial arts and military background. Trudeau was perceived as a weak pretty boy but he TKO'd Brazeau. Kid has some fight in him and seems pretty alpha behind the charm. Dion, in contrast, was weak, charmless, and mousey so it's no wonder he didn't fight back against the attack ads.

 

[matthewwhatever]

Dion was...a mistake. I loved him -- I even joined the Liberals because of him -- but in retrospect, what made him such a great Cabinet Minister was also what made him a terrible leader.

No matter your views or ideal, how could anyone not like Jack Layton?

He was, in all appearances, about as straight a politician should be.

Really wish he was still alive. Mulcair doesn't have a quarter of his character.

I thought Layton was a massive phony. For me, his defining moment will always been from the Olympics a few years ago, after Canada scored the gold medal winning goal -- he made sure he positioned himself in front of a camera, and then, when someone's arm blocked his face, he pushed it down and made sure the camera was still on him. I never get why people started loving him near the end; I found him totally insincere.

As for how I'd vote if there was a merger...I don't know. I'll never vote for a Harper-led Conservative Party; Prentice would be a maybe, but that's a very, very big maybe. (I was a federal PCer when they were hospitable to Red Tories, but that time passed long ago.) I don't like the NDP's stances on free trade or national unity. I probably wouldn't vote Green, since I worked for them years ago and the whole experience soured me on them (though I like Elizabeth May personally). So...bring back the Rhinos?

 

[Dyno]

Justin is going to run on - among other things - legalizing weed. The timing is right and it's such a simple concept to run with. He could take it.

 

[Azih]

I don't like the NDP's stances on free trade or national unity.

About national unity, what seems to be the aversion of setting the clarity act's 'clear majority' vague clause at 50.1%? I mean why would we want to force Quebec to stay if a majority of Quebeckers don't want to stay? How would that even work? Send in the tanks? What?

I mean sure they better take their share of the debt and they better allow any part of Queubec that wants to stay in Canada to secede from them but those are separate issues.

 

[maharg]

The reference decision by the SCOC said that "a clear vote on a clear question". That's what really matters. Unfortunately, it's not clear (lawl) what a clear vote is, but the clarity act was an attempt to entrench into law a definition that went above and beyond a simple majority. A clear majority seems like it should be taken as something greater.

 

[firehawk12]

About national unity, what seems to be the aversion of setting the clarity act's 'clear majority' vague clause at 50.1%? I mean why would we want to force Quebec to stay if a majority of Quebeckers don't want to stay? How would that even work? Send in the tanks? What?

I mean sure they better take their share of the debt and they better allow any part of Queubec that wants to stay in Canada to secede from them but those are separate issues.

Well, I remember back in the day when a lot of silly things were also posited. For example, could Anglo-Montreal separate from an independent Quebec? Could the First Nations separate from an independent Quebec? Would Canada be obligated to support those that wanted to stay Canadian?

 

[Azih]

Well, I remember back in the day when a lot of silly things were also posited. For example, could Anglo-Montreal separate from an independent Quebec? Could the First Nations separate from an independent Quebec? Would Canada be obligated to support those that wanted to stay Canadian?

Yeah all of those kind of horrible details should at least be mentioned in a clear question (so Quebeckers have a good idea that they're probably not going to start with a fresh slate and by splitting Canada they're leaving themselves open to splitting Quebec).

But I just don't see how you'd force a region to stay after more than 50% say they don't want to stay?

 

[firehawk12]

Yeah all of those kind of horrible details should at least be mentioned in a clear question (so Quebeckers have a good idea that they're probably not going to start with a fresh slate and by splitting Canada they're leaving themselves open to splitting Quebec).

But I just don't see how you'd force a region to stay after more than 50% say they don't want to stay?

The Clarity Act was meant to address some of these issues and to in effect protect the rights of minorities that would be overwhelmed by a sheer majority, but really, the death of the sovereignty movement pushed that aside.

Now it's just an uncomfortable vestige of Canadian law... exactly like how we dealt with abortion, in a way. lol

 

[maharg]

Well, I remember back in the day when a lot of silly things were also posited. For example, could Anglo-Montreal separate from an independent Quebec? Could the First Nations separate from an independent Quebec? Would Canada be obligated to support those that wanted to stay Canadian?

I'm not really sure that any of those things are particularly silly. Especially when there were vast regional differences (particularly for the largely native north) in desire for separation. There's almost no way Quebec would have seceded entirely intact had it gone that way.