Support NeoGAF

[killer rin]

I dont think most Canadians even know what PR is. There is no doubt that it's much more democratic than FPTP and should be implemented ASAP, regardless of what most Canadians think.

The way I see it, electoral reform is one of those issues which doesn't get the publics attention, but if you spell it out for them and say clearly why it needs to be done almost everyone comes around.

Whenever I try to talk about PR within my circles it usually starts off with nobody but me knowing what it is, followed by the majority saying that it sounds amazing, but is too idealistic or would never happen.

 

[gabbo]

I'm not really convinced either party would actually change the voting system. Nor that most Canadians even want a different electoral system.

it depends on how you explain it to them. I think Ontario would have had a different outcome the last time it was a ballot issue, if it had been explained a lot better.

Most people I talked to about it thought that somehow it made their vote count even less.

 

[Appleman]

it depends on how you explain it to them. I think Ontario would have had a different outcome the last time it was a ballot issue, if it had been explained a lot better.

Most people I talked to about it thought that somehow it made their vote count even less.

It also doesn't help that the proposed PR system on the referendum was bizarre and didn't even feel like a better alternative to FPTP.

With PR federally there would never be any majorities, good for making sure the party in power is represented by the most Canadians, but bad for getting stuff done perhaps. I think the left vote split is more of an issue then our electoral system

 

[jstripes]

The only positive sign I've seen for Harper and the CPC in the past few weeks is the Wild Rose win in the Alberta byelection last night. They actually started chanting "Harper! Harper!" at one point...

The more a conservative candidate aggravates "liberals", the more the conservative core is going to love that candidate.

See: Rob Ford, Donald Trump, and George W Bush winning twice.

It's not always about voting for what's best. It's quite often about spite.

 

[matthewwhatever]

It seems that whatever Anon planned on leaking this Monday has been delayed because John Baird's dad is dead. They say they have something "smaller" planned for Tuesday and will drop the big one sometime this month.

You're placing waaaay too much faith in Anonymous threats. It'll probably turn out to be nothing. And if it's something, then I wouldn't expect the media to report on it very widely, if at all. I mean, just look back at how they handled the whole Vic Toews thing a few years ago: he got his babysitter pregnant and had a nasty divorce while he was railing against gays and saying he was a bastion of family values, but the real scandal judging from media reaction was that someone (later revealed to be a Liberal staffer) tweeted out the details of his divorce trial. That was what they did with the sitting justice minister, so I suspect that regardless of what the news is, the prevailing view will be that Baird is out of politics and thus off-limits, as far as most outlets are concerned.

Holy fucking shit, they really are like the US Republicans. >_<

I have no doubt that the CPC and the GOP share advisors. Not that there's anything inherently wrong with that -- at various points in history, the Liberals and Democrats have had some crossover -- but when you see things like Rick Santorum wearing a sweater vest because it worked for Harper, or the Conservatives releasing ads that are eerily similar to ones being put out by Republican contenders, I think anyone who tries to pretend that the Conservatives wouldn't love to be far more right wing than they already are is ignoring reality.

Iran and Pierre Trudeau. Something tells me the Cons are desperate to hold on to their very core. Internal party polling must be pretty bad.

Like I said, the pollster I spoke with yesterday said that the Conservative vote isn't as firm as everyone seems to think. There's a huge disconnect between the CPC's topline number and all the underlying factors -- satisfaction with the direction of the country, personal approval ratings, belief that it's time for a change -- that usually go into how well a party polls. I think a chunk of the Conservative vote right now is a lot more persuadable than most people would expect, and I think that's why Harper is doubling down on the talking points -- Iran! ISIL! Pierre! -- that have traditionally kept those voters in the fold.

 

[Sakura]

I dont think most Canadians even know what PR is. There is no doubt that it's much more democratic than FPTP and should be implemented ASAP, regardless of what most Canadians think.

I was more meaning that because of that, I don't think it would really be a priority when a new government comes in, regardless of what they've said they will do.

 

[Apathy]

I don't think some of the other parties in my riding haven't started handing out lawn posters except for the Conservatives. I'm in Scarborough - Agincourt, pretty much a liberal stronghold, but the only signs out are for the Conservative candidate.

 

[Tiktaalik]

I wouldn't worry too much about polls a month+ before the election.
Polls for the 2011 election a month before hand had Liberals at about 30% and NDP at 15~20%.
Yet on election day it ended up being the reverse.
It will flip back and forth quite a bit between now and election day.

Oh I completely agree with you, there's a lot of election left and a lot can happen, but hey polls are an easy injection of new news to talk about.

Liberals, NDP, and Conservatives going up and down by a few percentage points is nothing really that interesting, but the Greens rising in Vancouver Island is a more relevant story to keep ones eye on. From an earlier poll we know they're the close #2 choice behind the NDP. What that means in terms of seat counts however is unknown. I'm hoping the media catches onto this story and does a bit more digging.

 

[Tiktaalik]

Ipsos Poll shows 40% of voters think NDP, Liberals, Tories are basically the same. That&#8217;s good news for Harper

What&#8217;s the difference between the NDP, Liberals, and Conservatives? It seems a good chunk of Canadian voters don&#8217;t really know, according to a new Ipsos poll.

And that&#8217;s good news for the Conservative party.

The poll conducted on behalf of Global News found 40 per cent of Canadian voters agree that the Liberals, Conservatives, and NDP &#8220;are basically the same&#8221; despite the leaders&#8217; best efforts at every campaign stop to differentiate themselves from their opponents.

The difficulty is most apparent when voters compare the Liberals and NDP, according to the Ipsos poll. Forty-two per cent of Canadian voters say it&#8217;s hard to tell the difference between policies introduced by the two left-leaning parties.

&#8220;It&#8217;s dominated by what people see on the left, which is increasingly the problem with progressive voters in this country &#8211; do I go to the Liberals or do I go to the NDP?&#8221; Darrell Bricker, CEO of Ipsos, said in an interview Friday.

Among Liberal and NDP voters, there&#8217;s a contingent that has a hard time telling the difference. Thirty-one per cent of NDP voters and 33 per cent of Liberal voters say it&#8217;s hard to see the difference. Fifty-four per cent of Tories agree.

And for Stephen Harper, that&#8217;s good news because it means progressive voters who want Harper out don&#8217;t know the best way of going about it.

The latest Ipsos poll showed a tight race across Canada with the NDP eking out a small 33 per cent of popular support, three more than the Conservatives and four more than the Liberals.

The Conservatives won approximately 39 per cent of the popular vote and a majority government during the 2011 election while the progressive vote, split mostly among the Liberals and the NDP, formed the two opposition parties with more popular support but less power.

In contrast, the Conservatives have differentiated themselves from the other two parties, only 31 per cent say it&#8217;s hard to tell the difference between the Liberals and the Conservatives and only 23 per cent have a hard time telling the difference between the NDP and the Conservatives.

Part of the confusion could stem from how the parties have changed over the last ten years. The Conservatives have been fairly stable over the last decade and the poll reflects that &#8211; 68 per cent of respondents told Ipsos the party is basically the same as it was a decade ago.

&#8220;The Conservatives, people are the least confused about them,&#8221; Bricker said. &#8220;For their voters, that&#8217;s important because they want them to be consistent in what they thought they were and what they voted for in the past.&#8221;

But that&#8217;s not so for the NDP and the Liberals. The NDP has undergone significant change including removing most references to socialism from the party constitution, and a gradual move to the centre of the political spectrum as it looks to win instead of just being the &#8220;voice of conscience,&#8221; Bricker said.

According to Ipsos, 56 per cent of respondents say the party isn&#8217;t the same as it was ten years ago.

&#8220;They were perfectly happy being a third party, well that&#8217;s changed,&#8221; Bricker said. &#8220;And then you have the Liberal party trying to do what they did in the election in Ontario which is to try and move to the left of the NDP and try and upset some of the NDP voters so they&#8217;ll move back to the Liberal party.&#8221;

Voters are split on how much the Liberal party has actually changed &#8211; 50 per cent say the party is basically the same, 50 per cent say it&#8217;s changed.

Pretty unsurprising considering:
1. The NDP have moved right and Libs left
2. Canadians care more about US politics for some baffling reason.

There's some great graphics in this article that provide some more stats. Worth a look. They pour cold water on the idea that the two left wing parties are essentially the same and some sort of "unite the left" merger is possible. (eg. 35% of NDP voters find it hard to tell the difference between the Liberals and Conservatives!)

* Thinks all parties are basically the same, so goes with the guy they'd most rather have a beer with *
* Votes Conservative *
* Is typical Canadian voter *

 

[maharg]

Among Liberal and NDP voters, there&#8217;s a contingent that has a hard time telling the difference. Thirty-one per cent of NDP voters and 33 per cent of Liberal voters say it&#8217;s hard to see the difference. Fifty-four per cent of Tories agree.

... [snip] ...

In contrast, the Conservatives have differentiated themselves from the other two parties, only 31 per cent say it&#8217;s hard to tell the difference between the Liberals and the Conservatives and only 23 per cent have a hard time telling the difference between the NDP and the Conservatives.

I like how in one case it's a significant 31% and in the other it's 'only' 31%. I've been noticing a lot of this kind of hair splitting, where the same percentage or a marginally different one is painted as night and day even within the same article and it's starting to bug the hell out of me.

 

[gutter_trash]

Justin Trudeau is running his campaign more to the left of Paul Martin of 10 years ago.
Thomas Mulcair is running his campaign more to the right of Jack Layton of 10 years ago.
Stephen Harper is running his campaign more to the right of Stephen Harper of 10 years ago.

 

[gabbo]

Justin Trudeau is running his campaign more to the left of Paul Martin of 10 years ago.
Thomas Mulcair is running his campaign more to the right of Jack Layton of 10 years ago.
Stephen Harper is running his campaign more to the right of Stephen Harper of 10 years ago.

Two leaders running different platforms than their predecessors? How is that surprising?
Harper running harder right economically isn't too shocking either, since he's stayed pretty consistent on the social stuff 'officially' - that isn't to say it's not still garbage

 

[maharg]

Thomas Mulcair is running his campaign more to the right of Jack Layton of 10 years ago.

I would seriously love to see a point by point comparison that supports this, to be honest. Layton was also anti-deficit and also made raising corporate taxes, rather than income taxes, the centerpiece of his tax policy.

I'm really struggling to come up with a way in which Mulcair's policies significantly diverge, especially to the right, from Layton's. If anything, the one area I can think of is on the environment, where Mulcair is almost certainly to the left (along a different, confusing axis) of the NDP's traditional pro-worker stance.

 

[Fuzzy]

I don't think some of the other parties in my riding haven't started handing out lawn posters except for the Conservatives. I'm in Scarborough - Agincourt, pretty much a liberal stronghold, but the only signs out are for the Conservative candidate.

The Liberal signs went up along Kennedy this week,

 

[Silexx]

Ok, now we can start blaming the Conservatives for this mess.

The Conservative government imposed a new rule for potential refugees in 2012 — a change refugee groups say is squarely to blame for why so few Syrians have made it to Canadian soil.[...]

Then-immigration minister Jason Kenney implemented the new rule in October 2012 as part of a broader Conservative government overhaul of Canada’s refugee system.

It only applies to those refugees being sponsored by groups of five or more Canadians, called G5s. It does not apply to so-called sponsorship agreement holders, which are large organizations like churches and community associations that have a long history of privately sponsoring refugees to come to Canada.

Briefing notes obtained by the Citizen say the change was intended to protect against fraud, but also to deal with a large backlog of applications from private sponsors while speeding up applications. “It is anticipated that this regulatory change will reduce G5 submissions by 70 per cent,” reads one memo to Kenney.

Refugee groups are now hoping the Kurdi tragedy, and resulting groundswell of interest in sponsoring Syrian refugees, will prompt the government to finally waive the rule. Otherwise, they warn, all those Canadians clamouring to help will face the same result as Tima Kurdi.

And then there's this beauty.

So basically, Harper instituted a policy that would deny refugee claimants health benefits. The policy was then brought before the Federal Court and ruled against the government. Decision can be read here.


Harper has appealed the decision, despite knowing that the policy is blatantly unconstitutional, but is doing so in order to pander to his base and drive up donations to the party.

Anyways, if you're as pissed as I am, here's something to lighten up the mood.

Justin TrudeauVerified account
&#8207;@JustinTrudeau

Ok @pmharper and @thomasmulcair, let's make a deal. No more #BlueJays games for us during the campaign. #notsuperstitiousbut...

Leadership!

 

[Walpurgis]

Ok, now we can start blaming the Conservatives for this mess.



And then there's this beauty.

So basically, Harper instituted a policy that would deny refugee claimants health benefits. The policy was then brought before the Federal Court and ruled against the government. Decision can be read here.


Harper has appealed the decision, despite knowing that the policy is blatantly unconstitutional, but is doing so in order to pander to his base and drive up donations to the party.

Anyways, if you're as pissed as I am, here's something to lighten up the mood.



Leadership!

They've also deliberately made the immigration forms way harder to fill out. Pretty much everything they have done was in an effort to create more situations where people can't come to Canada. Anyone trying to absolve the Conservatives of what happened to that boy can only be a blind hardcore Conservative. It's a perfect example of the system they created working as intended.

 

[killer rin]

The Liberal signs went up along Kennedy this week,

Signs have been going up around my neighborhood for awhile now. Thankfully its mostly NDP... though I have seen 3 Conservative and 1 Liberal.

Really makes me nervous though as my riding is Essex and looking at the past 10 years, the conservatives have won because of the split vote. Even looking at 308 my riding is sitting 51% NDP/49% Conservative.

 

[SRG01]

I just heard about the refugee health care claimant thing this morning on Day6. I recall hearing something similar a while ago too... The strangest thing about the whole thing is that the bill and mailers were specially designed to be wedge issues for their base, but the CPC victories in the past didn't come from the base but from wooing swing voters in Ontario -- which happen to have a relatively large migrant and refugee population.

As much as the CPC is painted as this intricate political machine, this really seems to be against their own self-interest.

 

[maharg]

I just heard about the refugee health care claimant thing this morning on Day6. I recall hearing something similar a while ago too... The strangest thing about the whole thing is that the bill and mailers were specially designed to be wedge issues for their base, but the CPC victories in the past didn't come from the base but from wooing swing voters in Ontario -- which happen to have a relatively large migrant and refugee population.

As much as the CPC is painted as this intricate political machine, this really seems to be against their own self-interest.

These sorts of mailers are targetted to the riding. Kelly Block is a Saskatoon MP. I get them here in Edmonton as well. I'd be surprise if anyone's gotten one from a suburban toronto MP.

Or not. This one's apparently from Paul Calandra:

Though it's actually a bit different in tone.

 

[IceIpor]

I feel sad that some people think we should treat other humans as less, just because they are "refugees". (In fact, we should be trying to support them, especially if they are refugees.)

 

[Mr.Mike]

I feel like people should mail these back choosing the option disagreeing with their candidate.

But then you'd just be putting yourself on some terrible mailing list.

 

[Walpurgis]

I feel sad that some people think we should treat other humans as less, just because they are "refugees". (In fact, we should be trying to support them, especially if they are refugees.)

Exactly. Too bad there are enough selfish or uneducated people in this country to give the Conservative party another chance at forming government.

 

[mo60]

It looks like I'm aligned with the NDP mostly according to CBC's vote compass, but not by much. I'm also pretty aligned with the Liberals.

 

[dragonfart28]

'Just not ready' Trudeau ad may be getting to voters, poll suggests

According to the poll, nearly half of the 1,384 people surveyed, 47 per cent, believe he's not ready for the job, while 39 per cent believe that he is.

http://www.cbc.ca/m/news/politics/conservative-attack-ads-not-ready-justin-trudeau-1.3217203

 

[GSG Flash]

'Just not ready' Trudeau ad may be getting to voters, poll suggests



http://www.cbc.ca/m/news/politics/conservative-attack-ads-not-ready-justin-trudeau-1.3217203

Attack ads should be banned IMO

They are dishonest and manipulate the uninformed.

 

[gabbo]

Attack ads should be banned IMO

They are dishonest and manipulate the uninformed.

And that's exactly how our current federal government would like to keep things thank you.
Much like those mailers above.

 

[Walpurgis]

Attack ads should be banned IMO

They are dishonest and manipulate the uninformed.

While I agree that those "just not ready ads" are BS, I think attack ads in general are needed to call out BS. I think all official parties should have equal funds to advertise with, though.

 

[killer rin]

Attack ads should be banned IMO

They are dishonest and manipulate the uninformed.

I could see that happening. Though, like it requires the NDP for PR; it'll likely take the Liberals to ban Attack Ads... or atleast put restrictions on Campaign Advertising

 

[gabbo]

While I agree that those "just not ready ads" are BS, I think attack ads in general are needed to call out BS. I think all official parties should have equal funds to advertise with, though.

There's a difference between an attack ad and a policy ad.
One takes aim at the person, the other takes aim at a record/policy platform, and I don't think Justin being a teacher is a policy plank of the Liberal party.

 

[SRG01]

These sorts of mailers are targetted to the riding. Kelly Block is a Saskatoon MP. I get them here in Edmonton as well. I'd be surprise if anyone's gotten one from a suburban toronto MP.

Really?! Which riding in Edmonton? I'm in Edmonton-Whitemud and I've never seen anything like this before...

 

[Walpurgis]

There's a difference between an attack ad and a policy ad.
One takes aim at the person, the other takes aim at a record/policy platform, and I don't think Justin being a teacher is a policy plank of the Liberal party.

I agree that the personal attack ads should be banned. They don't serve any useful purpose. I vote for parties and policies, not for people.

 

[maharg]

Really?! Which riding in Edmonton? I'm in Edmonton-Whitemud and I've never seen anything like this before...

Centre. Ironically, Hawn is probably among the more progressive CPC MPs, though. On free votes on social issues he's usually voted to the left.

 

[Stumpokapow]

Or not. This one's apparently from Paul Calandra:

Though it's actually a bit different in tone.

This one is less cartoon evil than the last one, but still displays a shocking lack of awareness that they ask a question where they have an opportunity to respond in a way that makes all Canadian lives better, and they'd rather take a shit on people they don't like.

Any theory of governance that doesn't begin with the most basic commitment towards building a better world is de facto illegitimate:

"All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood."

 

[Expansion Pack]

Hey check this out, guys.

This stupid party thinks it can just roll out an ad without talking shit about the other guys. What a bunch of morons.

Spoiler

It's so beautiful.

 

[gabbo]

Hey check this out, guys.

This stupid party thinks it can just roll out an ad without talking shit about the other guys. What a bunch of morons.

Spoiler

It's so beautiful.

And yet somehow... that smile still comes off a bit creepy at times.
Still a decent ad. Wis they'd start including 'how' in any of the party ads

 

[matthewwhatever]

'Just not ready' Trudeau ad may be getting to voters, poll suggests

http://www.cbc.ca/m/news/politics/conservative-attack-ads-not-ready-justin-trudeau-1.3217203

That's Forum today. Forum a few weeks ago put out this poll: Most think Trudeau &#8220;resume&#8221; ad will prompt liberal votes

Two thirds of those who saw the ad, the plurality, say it will make them more likely to vote Liberal (32%), while fewer than a quarter say it will make them vote Conservative (24%) or NDP (23%).

In other words, it's your daily reminder that Forum Research is a complete and utter joke.

And yet somehow... that smile still comes off a bit creepy at times.
Still a decent ad. Wis they'd start including 'how' in any of the party ads

Normally politicians -- especially ones who have a reputation for being dour or angry -- are reminded to smile more because it helps make them look more approachable. I feel like someone needs to pull Mulcair aside and let him know he's the rare exception to that rule.

This one is less cartoon evil than the last one, but still displays a shocking lack of awareness that they ask a question where they have an opportunity to respond in a way that makes all Canadian lives better, and they'd rather take a shit on people they don't like.

This is the Conservative Party we're talking about. Needlessly attacking or gratuitously insulting people they don't like has become a core part of who they are.

 

[gutter_trash]

Liberals take the lead in Ontario, true three-way race nationally

http://www.tooclosetocall.ca/2015/09/liberals-take-lead-in-ontario-true.html

too close to call projections updated:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/278613756/Too-Close-To-Call-Projection-Canada-5-09-2015

 

[GuessWho]

I still don't know who to vote for. Last time I voted for Harper but it's time for change. I'm thinking liberal but I truly can't stand Trudeau. Seems to me that he truly changes his opinions and morals depending on where the wind blows. It seems like I will vote NDP by default. Still undecided.

 

[PumpkinSpice]

I still don't know who to vote for. Last time I voted for Harper but it's time for change. I'm thinking liberal but I truly can't stand Trudeau. Seems to me that he truly changes his opinions and morals depending on where the wind blows. It seems like I will vote NDP by default. Still undecided.

You could pretty easily say the same of Harper or Mulcair.

Honestly the right thing to do if you don't want Harper is to vote for whichever other party, NDP or Liberal, is most likely to win your riding.

 

[Fuzzy]

I still don't know who to vote for. Last time I voted for Harper but it's time for change. I'm thinking liberal but I truly can't stand Trudeau. Seems to me that he truly changes his opinions and morals depending on where the wind blows. It seems like I will vote NDP by default. Still undecided.

Stop worrying about the leaders and look at your local candidates.

 

[matthewwhatever]

Stop worrying about the leaders and look at your local candidates.

So much this. You're voting for your MP, not your PM. No matter how centralized power may get, an MP's main responsibility is to help constituents, so you need to look at who you think will do the best job of that.

 

[gabbo]

So much this. You're voting for your MP, not your PM. No matter how centralized power may get, an MP's main responsibility is to help constituents, so you need to look at who you think will do the best job of that.

*Looks up info on riding candidates, sees that a Marxist-Leninist party member is running*
Interesting reads for Humber River--Black Creek

 

[Azih]

So much this. You're voting for your MP, not your PM. No matter how centralized power may get, an MP's main responsibility is to help constituents, so you need to look at who you think will do the best job of that.

That's a cute theory. Hasn't been the case in reality for decades.

 

[gutter_trash]

Stop worrying about the leaders and look at your local candidates.

I never voted for a local candidate in my entire life, I always either voted for the Party/Leader or strategic to block a party I disliked.

MPs, backbenchers are as good as houseplants IMO. In French they call those MPs "plantes vertes"

So much this. You're voting for your MP, not your PM. No matter how centralized power may get, an MP's main responsibility is to help constituents, so you need to look at who you think will do the best job of that.

hahahahahahahah more like benchwarmers

 

[maharg]

There are definitely times when voting for a local MP instead of the party can make sense, imo. But it's not the general case. Mostly just when that MP is likely to be part of cabinet, or is otherwise kind of a star. My MLA was worth voting for even though I had no interest in her party for a long time, because she was easily the most effective and vocal opposition member in the legislature. Of course, she got swept up by the NDP, which doesn't bother me at all -- I'll take a government I agree with over a powerful opposition member I agree with any day.

 

[Alavard]

I never voted for a local candidate in my entire life, I always either voted for the Party/Leader or strategic to block a party I disliked.

MPs, backbenchers are as good as houseplants IMO. In French they call those MPs "plantes vertes"


hahahahahahahah more like benchwarmers

That's a very simplistic view. MPs do more than just vote in the House of Commons. Many do valuable work outside of parliament for their constituents.

 

[Professor Renegade]

I've been noticing on my Facebook feed that asome of my friends are sharing a lot more news articles or links about the American election and issues pertaining to the US more than our election. I can't help but feel a little bothered by it, like these people aren't paying attention to what's going on in our own country and how much of an impact this election will have. Granted the American election is important as well, and the outcome of that could bring some changes between Canana and the US, but shouldn't our own election be of more concern?
Has anyone else noticed anything similar, or am I the only one and worrying too much about it?

 

[matthewwhatever]

That's a cute theory. Hasn't been the case in reality for decades.

...until you actually need help with navigating the bureaucracy, and suddenly it matters. I'm not going to pretend average MPs have much power in the House, but they can still do extremely valuable work outside of it. I may not have liked or agreed with someone like John Baird, but apparently he worked pretty tirelessly when it came to riding work.

Good MPs can also have a major impact on committees. Even under Chretien, I remember the Environment Committee constantly giving him headaches because they'd constantly ignore what he wanted in favour of making stronger legislation. It's less so under Harper, but it's still possible.

At the other end of the spectrum, I remember going to an Environment Committee meeting a little over a decade ago, and seeing one Liberal backbencher signing a giant stack of Christmas cards while they were voting on amendments. He only remembered to vote because his neighbour would elbow him every time it was his turn.

I know that doesn't fit in with the narrative of all power being centralized in the PMO, but reality is a lot more complex than that.

 

[maharg]

...until you actually need help with navigating the bureaucracy, and suddenly it matters. I'm not going to pretend average MPs have much power in the House, but they can still do extremely valuable work outside of it. I may not have liked or agreed with someone like John Baird, but apparently he worked pretty tirelessly when it came to riding work.

Good MPs can also have a major impact on committees. Even under Chretien, I remember the Environment Committee constantly giving him headaches because they'd constantly ignore what he wanted in favour of making stronger legislation. It's less so under Harper, but it's still possible.

At the other end of the spectrum, I remember going to an Environment Committee meeting a little over a decade ago, and seeing one Liberal backbencher signing a giant stack of Christmas cards while they were voting on amendments. He only remembered to vote because his neighbour would elbow him every time it was his turn.

I know that doesn't fit in with the narrative of all power being centralized in the PMO, but reality is a lot more complex than that.

The reason this isn't really much of a basis to decide your vote on, though, is that it's a criteria that *always* favours incumbency. Predicting what candidate will do good outreach and will work effectively on committees (which are now so often in camera anyways) is almost impossible unless you just assume the person who's been doing it all along will keep doing so. This is, quite simply, something almost no one is equipped to evaluate in advance.

 

[Fuzzy]

The reason this isn't really much of a basis to decide your vote on, though, is that it's a criteria that *always* favours incumbency. Predicting what candidate will do good outreach and will work effectively on committees (which are now so often in camera anyways) is almost impossible unless you just assume the person who's been doing it all along will keep doing so. This is, quite simply, something almost no one is equipped to evaluate in advance.

Unless you know their history in lower forms of government.