Canada Poligaf - The Wrath of Harperland

Status
Not open for further replies.
maharg said:
In Alberta the federal and provincial NDP are, as in every province but Quebec (where there is no provincial NDP), quite tightly associated.

The provincial Liberals are not associated at all with the federal. They would probably lose what seats they have if there was even a shred of a direct connection.

The PC party is somewhat in the wilderness right now, with most of the federal CPC support having been thrown behind the Wildrose (but unofficially). Officially the CPC is supportive of both those parties but considers their split an internal matter, more or less.

The Green party equivalent in Alberta has, afaik, no direct association with the federal greens.
Click to expand...

Also in other provinces concerning provincial Liberals no longer being affiliated with the Federal Liberals:
BC Liberals became independent from the LPC in 1987.
Quebec Liberals became independent themselves in 1955
 
for sure, there are tons of establishment Liberals who have gotten too comfortable and 12 years of power has gotten them to lose in 2006

But nothing like Harper's gang lol
 
R.I.P. Elijah Harper

a great Canadian who stood up for First Nations people in the face of whiny nationalists.

r-ELIJAH-HARPER-DEAD-large570.jpg


http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2013/0...3107.html?utm_hp_ref=canada-politics#comments
 
gutter_trash said:
Also in other provinces concerning provincial Liberals no longer being affiliated with the Federal Liberals:
BC Liberals became independent from the LPC in 1987.
Quebec Liberals became independent themselves in 1955
Click to expand...

It's been a long, long time since I read the Elections Act, but I vaguely recall that the Act prohibits federal and provincial parties from being formally associated. That hasn't stopped the NDP, obviously, but being closely tied skirts a few electoral laws (unless that's changed, of course).
 
bonesmccoy said:
Brazeau is now claiming he has written proof that he was told he could commit fraud.

Now given the source, I'm immediately skeptical, but at this point I wouldn't be surprised if it's true.
Click to expand...

Someone needs to teach Brazeau to stop digging when he finds himself in a hole. Whatever documentation that counsels fraud he has in his possession does not absolve him of any guilt in any crimes he may have committed - short of a letter of immunity signed by the AG himself. All it does is make it more likely that he is guilty in the first place.
 
gutter_trash said:
where did Stephen find Brezeau anyway? He just wanted a First Nation token Conservative Senator for the fun of it?
Click to expand...

He was the national chief of the Congress of Aboriginal Peoples for quite a while, which is a quasi-elected position.

It'd be good if more FN people were appointed to the senate, getting them more representation in government, so that one bad apple wouldn't make the idea look so bad.
 
Please don't let this be the end of things. This needs a lot more scrutiny, and I fear his resignation will put the kibosh on it, especially from the PM. It's not like Harper ever demands any Con MP or bureaucrat (is that what the PMO are considered?) resign over a scandal anyway.
 
BladeWorker said:
Someone needs to teach Brazeau to stop digging when he finds himself in a hole. Whatever documentation that counsels fraud he has in his possession does not absolve him of any guilt in any crimes he may have committed - short of a letter of immunity signed by the AG himself. All it does is make it more likely that he is guilty in the first place.
Click to expand...

Yeah, it sounds like he's going down the same path as Helena Georgis.


Anyway, if the Harper Gov't manages to get another majority in 2015, I'll be shocked.

I'm putting my bets on a weak minority for the CPC in 2015, with Grits as Opposition and NDP down to 30 seats.

And Harper will step down, leaving Jason Kenney or Baird to replace him....and that'll be all she wrote for that party, lol.
 
I bet everyone forgets about this in 2014, let alone 2015.

If he's smart, he'll try to set the elections during the NHL Playoffs and hope that the Leafs are still playing. lol
 
Sapiens said:
Yeah, it sounds like he's going down the same path as Helena Georgis.


Anyway, if the Harper Gov't manages to get another majority in 2015, I'll be shocked.

I'm putting my bets on a weak minority for the CPC in 2015, with Grits as Opposition and NDP down to 30 seats.

And Harper will step down, leaving Jason Kenney or Baird to replace him....and that'll be all she wrote for that party, lol.
Click to expand...

Prepare to be shocked. This is a huge scandal and yet Angelina Jolie's double mastectomy gets bigger coverage.

Voter apathy is at all time highs. Just ask BC'ers. I think we'll see another majority for harper, a near collapse of the NDP and rise of the Liberals under Trudeau.

People have short memories. And that's why he had them resign quickly, try to put this to bed.
 
The Conservatives literally have had at least one fuck up a month for the last year. Remember when we found out that they lost 3 billion? Most people have already forgotten that.

Hell, anyone remember how we sunk over 100 million of a ship DESIGN when other countries were able to buy two or three ships for the same price?
 
firehawk12 said:
The Conservatives literally have had at least one fuck up a month for the last year. Remember when we found out that they lost 3 billion? Most people have already forgotten that.

Hell, anyone remember how we sunk over 100 million of a ship DESIGN when other countries were able to buy two or three ships for the same price?
Click to expand...

I can only hope the NDP or Liberals (or on some far off remote chance, the Greens) are able to remind people of all this when it really counts.
 
RileyLewis said:
Breaking: Bob Fife (again) has learned that Benjamin Perrin, the former legal counsel for the Prime Minister is the one who drafted the deal between Nigel Wright and Mike Duffy to whitewash the Senate investigation into his affairs, and provide him with $90,000 to pay off the illicit expenses.

http://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/pm-s...l-for-wright-to-give-duffy-90k-1.1289718?www=
Click to expand...

And apparently Harper knows nothing about any of this. For a control freak he sure does let a lot of shit go on behind his back.
 
How come the public lets leaders off the hook so much with shit that happens right underneath the leader's nose. In pretty much any other profession, you take some ownership if people directly under you are fucking up.
 
Big-E said:
How come the public lets leaders off the hook so much with shit that happens right underneath the leader's nose. In pretty much any other profession, you take some ownership if people directly under you are fucking up.
Click to expand...

Well y'see. We need to focus on the economy. Please direct your attention to Appendix F of the Economic Action Plan 2013 for more information on why The Harper Government is the best choice to create jobs for hard working Canadians.
 
maharg said:
Well y'see. We need to focus on the economy. Please direct your attention to Appendix F of the Economic Action Plan 2013 for more information on why The Harper Government is the best choice to create jobs for hard working Canadians.
Click to expand...

To quote the BC "Liberals:" Strong Economy, Secure Tomorrow.


*pukes*
 
People still believe in polls after BC? Don't underestimate incumbents. People generally think that Canada is doing well economically, and the Conservatives are in power. Most people are going to put the square peg into the round hole.
 
You Are Viewtiful said:
People still believe in polls after BC? Don't underestimate incumbents. People generally think that Canada is doing well economically, and the Conservatives are in power. Most people are going to put the square peg into the round hole.
Click to expand...

This is true. However, trends are what polls can show, even if the numbers are precise. As an example in AB and BC, the trends showed the eventually winners gaining rapidly, though the absolute numbers were off. The same in the last federal election with the NDP, where polls showed them rising rapidly but didn't have the exact numbers.

So large swings can be easily seen, but the specifics can be off. At least in Canada. In the US they use actual scientific polling methods (whereas in Canada it's pretty much crap because all the polling companies are cheap).
 
But PR is less democratic than FPTP
Click to expand...
Bull. The exact opposite is true.

if MPs had more leeway to vote in the interests of their constituents rather than their party.
Click to expand...
Here's the thing. Why don't they? FPTP in its basic design doesn't even require parties at all. Every local seat is filed by an election of individual candidates. Parties are an external institution to that completely. Theoretically speaking that should mean that MPs have all the leeway in the world to vote 'in the interests of their constituents' rather than their parties. So why not?

The first reason backbenchers have become so pointless isn't because they don't have power to do what they wish and ignore their party whips. They do. It's because of the nature of the world now. Voters don't pay attention to local candidates and instead pay attention to party brands and party leaders in deciding who to vote for. That might not be how things should be in a FPTP election but that's how things are. The vast majority may be technically voting for Local candidate Joe Dumpernick of the Conservative party for example but what they're really voting for is STEPHEN HARPER Leader of the NEW CONSERVATIVE PARTY OF CANADA and everybody knows it. This doesn't have anything to do with FPTP really it's a function of the media driven world we're in. The leader is who we're exposed to on TV and in debates, you have to make a special effort to even see the local candidates in the community hall after work during a campaign and who does that?

The second reason has a lot to do with FPTP (and AV as well incidentally). What does a local candidate for a big party want? Do they want to get elected as a member of an opposition party? A government with a minority of seats? Or a majority government? Obviously the latter. Being a government backbencher is a WAY better gig than either of the other two and under the fucked up consequences of FPTP that dream is ALWAYS sort of attainable. You just have to get to around 38 % of the popular support and hopefully the rest of the vote will be split enough to get your team into FULL FUCKING POWER DO WHATEVER THE HELL YOU WANT WOOOOOO! Territory. Who will get you there? The leader. Getting your party the majority is what you strive for.

And what are you going to do when you get there? Bite the hand that got you into the cushy job and got your chosen ideology the ability to rule unopposed and unchecked for the next few years? Hell no. The person on top got you and yours into the most powerful position and they're the ones who are probably going to be the face of and run the next campaign to maintain that full power and cushy positions as well. You going to undermine that by questioning dear leader?

That's not very possible in PR at all because to get full majority power to do whatever the fuck you want requires you to y'know ACTUALLY HAVE THE SUPPORT of the majority of Canadians and as that is incredibly hard to do the damaging consequences of the lust and temptation and corruption of an easily attainable full power false majority is severely reduced.
 
RileyLewis said:
This is true. However, trends are what polls can show, even if the numbers are precise. As an example in AB and BC, the trends showed the eventually winners gaining rapidly, though the absolute numbers were off. The same in the last federal election with the NDP, where polls showed them rising rapidly but didn't have the exact numbers.

So large swings can be easily seen, but the specifics can be off. At least in Canada. In the US they use actual scientific polling methods (whereas in Canada it's pretty much crap because all the polling companies are cheap).
Click to expand...

It's also a lot easier to do exact polling in the U.S. than it is in Canada. Since so much depends here on riding-by-riding breakdowns, a lot of the time polling companies are using extremely small samples of people. While I'm sure they try to account for that, there's only so much useful data they can get out of, say, a few dozen people per riding (at most). Calgary Grit posted a good breakdown a few days ago of why pollsters do such lousy jobs.
 
RileyLewis said:
This is true. However, trends are what polls can show, even if the numbers are precise. As an example in AB and BC, the trends showed the eventually winners gaining rapidly, though the absolute numbers were off. The same in the last federal election with the NDP, where polls showed them rising rapidly but didn't have the exact numbers.

So large swings can be easily seen, but the specifics can be off. At least in Canada. In the US they use actual scientific polling methods (whereas in Canada it's pretty much crap because all the polling companies are cheap).
Click to expand...

They showed an upswing for the BC Libs but they were still behind 10-15%, the day before the election. And towards the election, the results for NDP were improving as well.

Their results cannot be taken seriously at all, for one, and even the trends they show should be taken with a huge bucket of salt.

From 308.com

BC+Polls.PNG
 
I'd be surprised if Stephen Harper didn't resign by 2015.

He's just too secretive. It's starting to make him look less and less like a leader. As if he was in over his head. Is he just visiting?
 
Does anyone know how absentee balloting works? I'm likely to move to Japan this year, and will pretty much be an ex-pat. I know the federal elections aren't until 2015 but still.
 
matthewwhatever said:
It's also a lot easier to do exact polling in the U.S. than it is in Canada. Since so much depends here on riding-by-riding breakdowns, a lot of the time polling companies are using extremely small samples of people. While I'm sure they try to account for that, there's only so much useful data they can get out of, say, a few dozen people per riding (at most). Calgary Grit posted a good breakdown a few days ago of why pollsters do such lousy jobs.
Click to expand...

I think it's still fairly similar. For congressional elections the polling is still quite accurate in the US, as it is for senate elections. Even for the president you are dealing with the electoral college votes so it's not just a national popular vote. I think the big difference is the likely voter model. In Canada we simply don't use it, and it shows. Here they just ask "are you going to vote for A or B." Then people say "A," but the poller doesn't take into account that the majority of A's supporters are under 25 which means they are not going to show up at the polls. In the US they use actual voter models to alter the poll results to suit the scientific data (like what Nate Silver does) and it works.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

  • Locked
PoliGAF 2016 |OT9| The Wrath of Khan!
395 396 397 398 399
20K
1M
PBY replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT5| The Man In the High Chair
395 396 397 398 399
20K
2M
RDreamer replied
  • Locked
UK PoliGAF |OT3| - Strong and Stable Government? No. Coalition Of Chaos!
37 38 39 40 41
2K
255K
firehawk12 replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT6| Made this thread during Harvey because the ratings would be higher
338 339 340 341 342
17K
2M
UselessNapkin replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT4| The leaks are coming from inside the white house
396 397 398 399 400
20K
2M
ShironRedshift replied
Top Bottom