-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Canadian PoliGAF - 42nd Parliament: Sunny Ways in Trudeaupia
- Thread starter matthewwhatever
- Start date
- Status
AuthenticM
Member
I forget: is Scheer an alright candidate? I was thinking of putting Chong first on my ballot, but everyone keeps saying he has no chance of winning. I'm trying to maximize the chances of Leitch, O'Leary and Bernier of NOT winning. I don't want the crazies to be on the ballot in four years.
matthewwhatever
Member
Scheer is...enh. He's basically a blander version of Harper. He has pretty conservative views socially, but he's said that he wouldn't try and relitigate those battles because he knows it makes them unelectable in huge swaths of the country. Because he was Speaker while they had their majority he doesn't have much of a record one way or another, but if you take him at face value, he's presenting himself as Harper-lite.
At this point, there's really no point. They've paid their non-refundable $100K registration fee. More importantly, they've incurred debts, and paying those off would be a lot harder if they no longer have leadership donations coming in. I imagine that people like Lemieux, Saxton, Peterson, etc. have no actual illusions about winning, but are rather looking at it as a brand/profile-building exercise in the hopes that when the CPC next forms government, they'll be seen as being sufficiently important that they need to be included in cabinet.
Or, in Trost's case, he wants to get in on that sweet evangelical money train, and this is the quickest way to do it.
At this point, there's really no point. They've paid their non-refundable $100K registration fee. More importantly, they've incurred debts, and paying those off would be a lot harder if they no longer have leadership donations coming in. I imagine that people like Lemieux, Saxton, Peterson, etc. have no actual illusions about winning, but are rather looking at it as a brand/profile-building exercise in the hopes that when the CPC next forms government, they'll be seen as being sufficiently important that they need to be included in cabinet.
Or, in Trost's case, he wants to get in on that sweet evangelical money train, and this is the quickest way to do it.
On a ranked ballot with runoffs the strategic way to reduce a candidate's chances (if that is your primary goal) is to rank everyone above them and/or not rank them at all (depending on whether the ballot allows it). There is no particular advantage to any particular ordering above them unless you have an actual preference for one or more of the alternatives.
Remember that the way this works is there are multiple 'votes' held where ballot ranks are used and then rejected as candidates are pulled off. No matter how that process goes, so long as the unwanted candidate doesn't get 50% of the vote (which, if you don't vote for them at all you haven't contributed to), your vote will go to someone running against them in each round, giving them a greater chance of winning.
matthewwhatever
Member
To build on what maharg is saying, if you want to vote Chong and don't want Leitch/Bernier/O'Leary, your hypothetical ballot could go:
1. Chong
2. Obhrai
3. Raitt
4. O'Toole
5. Scheer
The Obhrai vote would be discarded when he gets eliminated early on in the process. Chong, too, since he's almost certainly going out before Raitt, O'Toole, and Scheer. That means your ballot stays with those three to the very end, with your ultimate vote going to whoever stays on the longest (and potentially wins). As long as you keep Leitch/Bernier/O'Leary off your ballot, you don't support them in any way -- whereas if you put, say, O'Leary ahead of Scheer on that hypothetical ballot (for some insane reason), then O'Leary gets your vote before Scheer would.
1. Chong
2. Obhrai
3. Raitt
4. O'Toole
5. Scheer
The Obhrai vote would be discarded when he gets eliminated early on in the process. Chong, too, since he's almost certainly going out before Raitt, O'Toole, and Scheer. That means your ballot stays with those three to the very end, with your ultimate vote going to whoever stays on the longest (and potentially wins). As long as you keep Leitch/Bernier/O'Leary off your ballot, you don't support them in any way -- whereas if you put, say, O'Leary ahead of Scheer on that hypothetical ballot (for some insane reason), then O'Leary gets your vote before Scheer would.
AuthenticM
Member
That is good to know, thanks. I should probably check a youtube video that shows with pretty graphs and images how the ranked ballot process goes, to have a better chance of remembering how it works.
killer rin
Member
local politics for the other quebecers :
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/gabriel-nadeau-dubois-quebec-solidaire-gouin-1.4012983
i'm very happy about this
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/gabriel-nadeau-dubois-quebec-solidaire-gouin-1.4012983
i'm very happy about this
firehawk12
Subete no aware
Canada is going to get its own Bernier!
Now Québec has two messiahs!
The talk of a merge with ON probably means the PQ will still have to stand there on the side on its own. hehe. I'm waiting for the editorial on Vigile about how Nadeau-Dubois is a pawn of the Desmarais family...
i'm excited to see how the PQ will try to smear him considering they got the other 2 spineless leaders from 2012 with them
gutter_trash
Banned
If it hurts the PQ, then that's a good thing
The Red Square protesters were taken advantage of by Marois who saw the student protests as a political gain.
Desjardins and Bureau-Blouin got seduced by the PQ later. The Unions and the PQ's hijacking of the student protest just for regime change.
Where are the Red Squares now?
Idk where you're from but I'm from Toronto and I would gladly take a crack smoking redneck mayor over a racist or anti-immigrant 'values' premier.
Morrigan Stark
Arrogant Smirk
I edited him out because I obviously think he sucks, but honestly, it was incredibly stupid of you to name him since he ran Québec SIXTY FUCKING YEARS AGO.
First of all, I never used Ford to condemn all of Ontario, I'm saying your list is incredibly suspect. To list Bouchard, Lévesque, etc. in the same vein as Duplessis, or to list commissions that actually investigate and try to handle the corruption as a mark against Québec is absurd.
WTF
I'm not even a separatist, but your ignorance about Québec and its politicians is borderline offensive. These people are a far cry from Trump or Le Pen, for crying out loud.
Wut. Rob Ford is recent history and Duplessis was six+ decades ago.
In a way you are right, the comparison is absurd.
*jaw drop*
Holy shit...
Why
Are you referring to Marois? I don't care for her, but to call her racist or compare her to the likes of Le Pen is beyond ignorant. If you'd rather have Ford than her, then uh... k bro
Btw are we all forgetting that smoking crack isn't the worst thing Ford did? That man was a violent psychopath who was caught on tape making death threats, are we forgetting that 'cause "lol crack"?
matthewwhatever
Member
Sorry, I should've remembered who I was conversing with. I forgot that for you, bigotry is cool as long as it's against Muslims. It can't be racist if it's just low-level, less infringe-y things than burning crosses, right?
gutter_trash
Banned
There you go again wrongfully labelling secularists as bigots.
You also forget how the Catholic Church was heavily engrained in everday Quebec life.
Secularism didn't just happen out of the blue, the oppressive nature of the Church being involved in everything created the secularist counter culture as an opposite reaction.
I will never understand Liberals who defend anti-liberal religions.
LOL you forget the Sex Ed backslash in Ontario where religious groups of all faiths joined the Tories in opposition to Sex Ed
matthewwhatever
Member
And I'll never understand people like yourself and Morrigan, who claim to be Liberal (or, at least, liberal), but are willing to throw minority rights under the bus at every opportunity. I know that asking for intellectual consistency from you is a lot, but considering how much you go on at length about the glory of Pierre Trudeau, it's shocking that you hold the Charter of Rights and Freedoms in such low regard.
gutter_trash
Banned
Minority rights are important.
Fighting against descrmination is imperative
Conservatism in religion is not to be defended but critiqued ,
especially when misogyny and homophobia are expoused by Conservative religious leaders
You Are Viewtiful
Member
Can we all agree that both Ontario and Quebec politics are shit so we can finally move on from this topic? 
matthewwhatever
Member
Can we all agree that both Ontario and Quebec politics are shit so we can finally move on from this topic?
We need more people from smaller provinces so we can come to a consensus that every province's politics suck. As far as I can tell:
- Quebec is a racist, corrupt hellhole
- Ontario is so broke we're looking at California's fiscal situation longingly, and no one can afford electricity
- BC may be even more corrupt on account of insanely lax electoral financing laws, but the opposition is so inept they can't do anything about it
- Manitoba is so bad that their own premier flees the province for six weeks in the winter, and doesn't leave a forwarding address
- Alberta is about to become a one-party state again, and it's home to a bunch of Conservative academics who pine for the politics of a place like Texas
- Saskatchewan is about to sell Sasktel on account of the shale boom going bust, and all its pipelines have a nasty habit of leaking
How about the Atlantic Canada provinces? I'm vaguely aware of school teachers in Nova Scotia being pissed off, and Newfoundland seems to be a mess, but I can't be more specific than that.
We in the Atlantic have low expectations, so we're rarely disappointed.
In Nova Scotia, the teachers' membership rejected three straight agreements negotiated by their leadership, each one more generous than the previous. At a certain point, the NS Liberals realized that they were actually better off running against the teachers, because nobody else in the province is on their side. With the new collective agreement being legislated, expect a snap election in the short term, which even people on the union's negotiating team privately say the government is likely to win in a landslide (a real treat for them, since their approval ratings of late haven't been great).
Maybe Kathleen Wynne needs to pick a fight with somebody the general public dislikes more than her.
Unrelatedly, I met Joe Clark today.
Simon Belmont
Banned
Wynne needs to step down, but even then it's hard to imagine a scenario where the Libs don't lose the next provincial election.
Then again, that's what I've thought for the last two elections.
Then again, that's what I've thought for the last two elections.
Barrage
Member
I would agree. Even if it's too late to save the provincial election for the Libs (although with the incompetency of the Cons,you never know) her record will be used- justified or not-to attack Trudeau in 2019, and Ontario will be very much up in the air. Her stepping down will at least somewhat mitigate that, rather than her being starched in an election.
For real. I think they've dug themselves too deep a hole, and they need to jettison Wynne and have someone run on a strong change platform if they want any hope of salvaging this mess.
The last election was Tim Hudak's to lose. Then he opens his campaign saying he'd cut 100,000 jobs. I won't put it past them to do that again...
agreed, she needs to step down if she's to salvage the party.
Yeah, the last election was all about the inevitable fall of the Liberal minority, and yet we came out with a majority which no one expected.
Pancake Mix
Copied someone else's pancake recipe
Only because the NDP and Tories are both particularly weak right now, while the Liberals have had a resurgence. Otherwise, BC is probably second to Alberta in not being pro-Liberal (the provincial "Liberals" are centre-right and unaffiliated with the federal party).
The NDP and Tories always do well in BC, and now the Greens get a seat too. It's basically a three-way race in most constituencies there. The Liberals are doing well in spite of themselves there, and if the NDP and Tories pick up more support again, the Liberals will probably go back to normal. The West generally feels neglected by that party.
As for Quebec, it's really hard to judge Quebec. They certainly have the most unique federal election outcomes in the country. The Liberals also barely won it, however. The NDP, Tories, and (god forbid) a resurgent Bloc can all win there, and have won there. In the last 4 cycles, the Bloc won in 2006, the Tories in 2008, the NDP in 2011, and the Liberals in 2015. Not a particularly strong spot for the Liberals either, they just barely won this time with a even with a potential (and ultimately successful) candidate for a seat and ultimately Prime Minister from Quebec.
BC and Quebec can turn on a dime and aren't Liberal hotbeds. Had to correct mo60 there. The strongest region for the Liberals is Atlantic Canada, with Ontario generally close behind, aside from in 2011.
Morrigan Stark
Arrogant Smirk
Wow dude. This is such a shockingly, grotesquely inaccurate portrayal of my beliefs that I don't even know what to say. And that's even without mentioning your disgusting portrayal of the decades-old sovereignty movement as nothing more than bigotry.
Off to ignore with you, I won't patronize this bullshit any further. Keep telling yourself that Québec is a "racist corrupt hellhole" if that smug sense of superiority is what helps you sleep at night, because it's obvious that you aren't interested in any kind of evidence to the contrary.
Pancake Mix
Copied someone else's pancake recipe
You know, making sure the people who come into the country don't believe in shit like this doesn't sound that unreasonable. Edgy posts don't convince anyone to the contrary.
You Are Viewtiful
Member
There are a lot of Canadians who don't practice premarital sex and we haven't imploded as a country. :s
Pancake Mix
Copied someone else's pancake recipe
But there's not a law against it because we live in the 21st century. Compare that to places that imprison people (at least the women) who do so, plus execute homosexuals, and you can see there's an issue.
Not going to pretend everything is fine and there's not an issue.
You Are Viewtiful
Member
And we'll continue to not have laws against it. It's unconstitutional. It's not a problem because it can never be a problem.
Pancake Mix
Copied someone else's pancake recipe
Importing anyone who believes in Sharia law is trouble, as there seem to be far more of them than there are of us.
You Are Viewtiful
Member
What exactly do you think will happen?
Also there are 1 billion Muslims and 6 billion non-Muslims on this planet so you need to check your math.
Pancake Mix
Copied someone else's pancake recipe
Legal acceptance of sharia law for some, miniature Canadian flags for others, the "We're so welcoming, let's pat ourselves on the back" types.
There are 35 million people in Canada, so you need to check your math. Canada has a higher rate of immigration than almost any other country on Earth. It's relevant.
You Are Viewtiful
Member
How do you imagine that coming about? You think pro-diversity = pro-religious law? The parties that are most pro-immigration are the least religious...
That's even less of a threat. I thought you were fearing an Islamic takeover. 33.5 million non-Muslims vs. 1.5 million Muslims (not all of whom believe in implementing Sharia Law). You need to put this crank theory to rest. The math doesn't play let alone the actual law/constitution.
AuthenticM
Member
Ok, explain me this.
Why is it that whenever Canada Post shows up when no one is here, I have to wait until the following day to pick up my package? Why couldn't I pick up my package later in the evening? It's really annoying.
Why is it that whenever Canada Post shows up when no one is here, I have to wait until the following day to pick up my package? Why couldn't I pick up my package later in the evening? It's really annoying.
???
Red squares aren't around anymore because we won, where do you want them to be? It was a strike, a movement, not an organization...
The PQ highjacked it, won the elections and gave us what we wanted, and failed on every other level. I was in the streets that year and still didn't vote for PQ. Which is why i'm calling Desjardins and Bureau-Blouin spineless careerist, while GND stayed true to his beliefs. QS are aligned with him, and always were
Pancake Mix
Copied someone else's pancake recipe
Sigh. Doesn't matter that they're the least religious, they enable crazy crackpots. Not to mention, at some point there could be different legal interpretations, i.e. an acceptance of austere Islamic divorce law. That's not outside the realm of possibility.
For the average Canadian, a "values test" that basically asks what, (and this is true), several European countries already ask in their citizenship tests. It's not a big deal and nothing to get your panties in a twist about. Canadian tend to not be particularly socially conservative and care more about non-social issues, something people like matthewwhatever can't comprehend in their desire to be as open as possible to absolutely anything. The values test or whatever you call it is irrelevant and not a concern to voters. The NDP lost support in 2015 compared to 2011 partially for being like matthewwhatever.
matthewwhatever
Member
Awww, muffin. I'm crushed.
...you may want to check your math on this, because I'm quite sure this isn't remotely true. Creeping Sharia isn't a thing.
You Are Viewtiful
Member
Err when do they enable crazy crackpots? What laws have they passed that can be interpreted as pro-religious law? Afaik, the only time I remember this ever coming up was when McGuinty outlawed the idea of religious courts with legal standing, so you're definitely picking fights with the wrong people. We shouldn't entertain remote disaster-case scenarios that will stop us from doing something that will be a net-benefit to the country (immigration).
We have freedom of thought and expression in this country, as long as you are not inciting hatred. That's a Canadian value. We don't need government thought police.
Pancake Mix
Copied someone else's pancake recipe
You're really resorting to alternative birthrates and other statistics at this point?
It's not too much to ask potential newcomers if they accept women's rights, gay rights, etc. It's not something to overthink and it's not something that most voters will give a second thought.
OOPS, you're right, my bad.
I give GND credit for passing on a sure 100 000 $ a year job with the PQ 5 years ago, but let's not act like him entering politics today isn't a careerist move. It happens just as Françoise David steps down, giving him a sure riding (and a 100 000$ a year job), and an easy road to being named
matthewwhatever
Member
Yes, look at us, all enraged about...people being allowed to worship privately as they choose.
I mean, there's certainly someone in this conversation being enraged by the wrong things, but it's not who you seem to think it is.
...what?
The Bloc got the most seats in 2008 in Quebec. Even if the Liberals get between 20-30 seats in BC in 2019 I expect the ndp to get between 10 and 14 seats in that province in 2019. BC was the NDP's was barely their second strongest province in 2015 and it's likely to be their strongest province in 2019 unless they improve their polling numbers in Quebec.
heh I get what you mean, but then again it's also about the ideology. I feel like they match, even if he had joined QS 5 years ago, I probably would've respected his choice
Going to the PQ at any point in time after fighting that fight is the equivalent of selling your soul to me
Pancake Mix
Copied someone else's pancake recipe
Large amounts of private worship can turn into acceptance of legal differentiation, or courts that "take religious beliefs into account", particularly in family law. It's a bit of a thing in the US, and given how we operate and often take US case law into account, it could potentially be in Canada. I don't want to see that.
I'm not enraged, I'm just being realistic. Birth rates and percentage increases every census of that religion in Canada don't lie, and the Middle East isn't exactly progressive. I'm not looking forward to the future.
The reality is that most Canadians may not think like me, but they don't think like you do either, that's for sure.
Barring some sort of Liberal scandal, there's no way the NDP will be able to improve their Quebec numbers.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked