40th Canadian Federal Election - Welcome to another Conservative Minority (whee!)

[Ronald Pagan]

Originally Posted by Ford Prefect

With regards to Albertans voting en masse for right wing parties, Don Braid has an interesting article in today's Herald in which he comments on how Albertans are perceived as "stupid, undemocratic and live in a dictatorship" for their voting habits, yet Quebecers are "considered brilliant when they vote strategically". I've always mused about this difference in perceptions as well. In reality, Albertans and Quebecers are just voting for what's best for their own regional interests, yet they're certainly perceived differently for doing basically the same thing.

http://www.canada.com/calgaryherald/...6-ab2b388523cc

I have never heard anyone compare the Quebec vote as smart or strategic.

[MarchHare]

Originally Posted by arsenal

If you look at the GTA voting results (not all of Ontario), you will see that GTA is all red.
So while it may not be "Ontario" that blindly votes Liberal, but the majority of people that live in the GTA, do blindly vote Liberal. And the GTA has enough seats to make a difference.

What imaginary GTA that voted only for the Liberals are you talking about? Certainly not the one that, you know, actually exists in reality.

The Toronto-area elected 32 Liberals, 25 Conservatives, and 6 NDP candidates.

http://toronto.ctv.ca/electionResults/

You may also be interested to see how the popular vote broke down in that region:

POPULAR TORONTO VOTE
Conservative: 38.2%
Liberal: 36.9%
NDP: 16.2%
Green: 8.0%

[MarchHare]

Originally Posted by Ford Prefect

With regards to Albertans voting en masse for right wing parties, Don Braid has an interesting article in today's Herald in which he comments on how Albertans are perceived as "stupid, undemocratic and live in a dictatorship" for their voting habits, yet Quebecers are "considered brilliant when they vote strategically". I've always mused about this difference in perceptions as well. In reality, Albertans and Quebecers are just voting for what's best for their own regional interests, yet they're certainly perceived differently for doing basically the same thing.

http://www.canada.com/calgaryherald/...6-ab2b388523cc

I've never heard anyone make the argument that Albertans are "stupid and undemocratic" while Quebeckers are "brilliant strategic voters". Both provinces, as noted, vote for the own self-interests, and there's nothing wrong with that. It's also the reason why Harper has likely reached his peak in support and still came shy of a majority -- voters in many parts of the country view the CPC as a re-branded Reform Party, which could fairly be described as the Western-Canadian equivalent of the Bloc Quebecois (minus the sovereignty aspirations).

The only reason I make comments about Alberta's undying loyalty to the Conservative Party is because people like calculoso and arsenal like to whine about Ontario/Toronto always blindly voting for the Liberals. This is both a) factually incorrect (see post above) and b) hypocritical, given Alberta's voting record. You know what they say about people who live in glass houses...

[RedHot25]

Originally Posted by MarchHare

I've never heard anyone make the argument that Albertans are "stupid and undemocratic" while Quebeckers are "brilliant strategic voters". .

Its funny, I live in a province pretty much the polar opposite of Alberta, and I have not heard any mention of any of the above (stupid/undemocratic Alberta or stupid/undemocratic or brilliant strategic Quebec). Just that the Conservatives got a stronger minority, and it looks like Quebec is where he didn't get the seats he needed for a majority. And, well that's about it.

[FurnaceFace]

I think there are many people in various regions within the country who see the CPC as "the party that the Reform/Alliance turned into" instead of "the old Tory party".

I traditionally supported the PC party, thought Mulroney was great for the country and all that, however I have a difficult time supporting the CPCs. I can only think it's because of Reform/Alliance. I felt reform/alliance was not speaking to me as what I'll pigeonhole myself as a "moderate conservative" and having seen that side of what makes up the CPC it makes me pause and my support of the CPC waivers.

On the flip side I cannot support a Liberal Party with a dufus as a leader. Out of the options Harper is the only clear leader, albeit one that comes across as a bit of an android (in a sweater vest). If the Liberals pick a dynamic leader who can speak both languages clearly and put together a platform that makes sense and has a true vision I can't see them not gaining a lot of support that has eroded over the past few years.

That doesn't mean things will change in Alberta, we'll always be part of "Jesusland" and will always predominately vote Conservative here.

EDIT: I seem to have repeated/supported what MarchHare says above.

[Canada 02]

Originally Posted by Bobblehead

Harper doesn't have a majority today for 2 reasons.

1) The economy tanked during the campaign. Not that there was much Harper (or anyone) could do about that, but if the buoyant markets had held throughout the campaign then there would have been no ammunition for the opposition to go after him.

2) Saying he was going to cut culture spending. Quebec values "culture" seemingly more than anywhere, at least they are more vocal about it. How many votes did Harper scare away by that move?

i wondered why he even bothered to say that; why make it an election promise or issue? He could have kept quiet, and had Flaherty sneak that into his next budget

[EddyBeers]

Originally Posted by MarchHare

What imaginary GTA that voted only for the Liberals are you talking about? Certainly not the one that, you know, actually exists in reality.

The Toronto-area elected 32 Liberals, 25 Conservatives, and 6 NDP candidates.

http://toronto.ctv.ca/electionResults/

You may also be interested to see how the popular vote broke down in that region:

POPULAR TORONTO VOTE
Conservative: 38.2%
Liberal: 36.9%
NDP: 16.2%
Green: 8.0%

On behalf of all ignorant Albertans, I would request that you not use facts to confuse decades old stereotypes. We cannot compute such things, life is much simpler when you have a few tried and true tenants to live by:

1) Liberals Bad
2) Toronto Bad
3) Toronto votes liberal, double bad

[LChoy]

Originally Posted by EddyBeers

On behalf of all ignorant Albertans, I would request that you not use facts to confuse decades old stereotypes. We cannot compute such things, life is much simpler when you have a few tried and true tenants to live by:

1) Liberals Bad
2) Toronto Bad
3) Toronto votes liberal, double bad

4) The Toronto Maple Leafs are bad

[MarchHare]

I think there are many people in various regions within the country who see the CPC as "the party that the Reform/Alliance turned into" instead of "the old Tory party".

I traditionally supported the PC party, thought Mulroney was great for the country and all that, however I have a difficult time supporting the CPCs. I can only think it's because of Reform/Alliance. I felt reform/alliance was not speaking to me as what I'll pigeonhole myself as a "moderate conservative" and having seen that side of what makes up the CPC it makes me pause and my support of the CPC waivers.

On the flip side I cannot support a Liberal Party with a dufus as a leader.

I don't make it a secret that I'm a partisan card-carrying Liberal, but I'm of the "Paul Martin" wing of the party: fiscal conservative, social liberal (aka a "Blue Liberal"). Despite my party affiliation, though, in the last two elections I would have voted* for the Progressive Conservative Party if it had still existed. As you noted, the CPC is not that party; it's the Reform/Alliance Party with a new name.

* In 2006 the Liberals needed to be spanked for the Chretien scandals and spend some time in opposition as punishment; in 2008 they ran with a horrible leader and needed to lose so Dion would be forced to step down and a better leader selected in his place.

[habernac]

LOL! Eddy, I love the avatar.

[calculoso]

Originally Posted by MarchHare

The only reason I make comments about Alberta's undying loyalty to the Conservative Party is because people like calculoso and arsenal like to whine about Ontario/Toronto always blindly voting for the Liberals. This is both a) factually incorrect (see post above) and b) hypocritical, given Alberta's voting record. You know what they say about people who live in glass houses...

Whine? Way to discredit yourself.

Alberta isn't true to one party. They are true to one philosophy.

Liberal voters aren't. This philosophy has changed under Dion, and yet the Liberal voters are still true to the brand. Greater Toronto fits this bill exactly (Drill down to the Greater Toronto section of this interactive map: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canadavotes/map/2008/ )

With respect to the Province, I suspect that you'll see a very different voting record next Alberta election. Stellmach is not representing what I expect from a Conservative.

[calculoso]

Originally Posted by Slava

^ How exactly do you explain Rob Anders with that example?

The only way I know how:

I'd rather have one more seat for Harper and put up with the black sheep in the family than give one more seat to anyone else.

Personally, I think that as soon as Harper falters, Anders will be the first Conservative in Alberta shown the door... but that's just me.

[calculoso]

Originally Posted by MarchHare

I don't make it a secret that I'm a partisan card-carrying Liberal, but I'm of the "Paul Martin" wing of the party: fiscal conservative, social liberal (aka a "Blue Liberal"). Despite my party affiliation, though, in the last two elections I would have voted* for the Progressive Conservative Party if it had still existed. As you noted, the CPC is not that party; it's the Reform/Alliance Party with a new name.

What does the CPC have to do to shed that image without losing Harper as the leader?

I'm the same as you - Fiscally conservative, socially liberal. I have yet to see any movement on the socially conservative side of the ledger, no matter what boogyman fears that others want to bring up. If they do, I see it as complete political suicide, which is why I don't see them ever going that way.

[MarchHare]

Liberal voters aren't. This philosophy has changed under Dion, and yet the Liberal voters are still true to the brand. Greater Toronto fits this bill exactly (Drill down to the Greater Toronto section of this interactive map: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canadavotes/map/2008/ )

Do you mean the Greater Toronto section of the map that shows the following:

NDP Candidates elected in Toronto-Danforth and Trinity-Spadina.

Conservative Candidates elected in Oakville, Halton, Mississauga-Erindale, Wellington-Halton Hills, Dufferin-Caledon, Simcoe-Grey, Oak Ridges-Markham, York-Simcoe, Newmarket-Aurora, Thornhill, Durham, Haliburton-Kawartha Lakes-Brock, Whitby-Oshawa, Oshawa.

Is that the same Greater Toronto section of the map you were talking about, the one that you implied showed nothing but solid support for the Liberals? I guess my browser must not be displaying the correct results or something.

Even amongst the ridings that did vote Liberal, how can you possibly make the assertion that those citizens only blindly voted that way out of partisan party loyalty? Maybe there was a really strong local candidate running for the Liberals in that riding. Or maybe those voters -- SHOCKING I KNOW -- actually liked Dion's platform.

It's the absolute height of arrogance and absurdity to suggest that anyone who doesn't vote the same way as you must not be an informed, intelligent voter. I personally would never vote for the NDP or the Reform/Alliance/CPC, but I don't think anyone who does support those parties is making some terrible, ill-informed decision.

[Blaster86]

Originally Posted by calculoso

If they do, I see it as complete political suicide, which is why I don't see them ever going that way.

My mom was working for the NDP campaign in our riding and everyone shared one thought. If the CPC were to get a majority we'd see a lot of socially conservative bills and ideas pop up really fast. This wasn't the message they were giving out to fear monger, but what they genuinely felt was likely to happen. These are people that have been in the political game for ages, so it's not that they're naive.

They also believe that after that majority, we wouldn't see another Conservative party in power for the next 10 - 20 years.

[MarchHare]

Originally Posted by calculoso

What does the CPC have to do to shed that image without losing Harper as the leader?

I'm the same as you - Fiscally conservative, socially liberal. I have yet to see any movement on the socially conservative side of the ledger, no matter what boogyman fears that others want to bring up. If they do, I see it as complete political suicide, which is why I don't see them ever going that way.

Re: movement on the socially-conservative side:

In the last parliament, Harper introduced legislation to outlaw gay marriage which was made legal when Martin was PM. The motion was defeated by a combination of Liberal, NDP, and Bloc MPs.

Being in a minority position, the CPC had their hands completely tied when it comes to advancing a socially-conservative agenda because the other three parties would unite againt them. If Harper had a majority, his party would be free to pursue whatever right-wing social policies they wanted.

[Edit]
What Blaster said.

[RedHot25]

Originally Posted by calculoso

I'd rather have one more seat for Harper and put up with the black sheep in the family than give one more seat to anyone else.

Sorry, no go for me with this. Well I would hope not that this is why people vote for him. I actually ended up at the community all-candidates debate (my parents live in his riding), and he didn't bother to show up. Add that to his long list of everything else, and....I don't just get it. There were candidates throughout the country during this election that had to quit because of things they did; how he remains befuddles me (by the electorate or the conservative party itself).

[arsenal]

nm, already covered

[Bobblehead]

Originally Posted by RedHot25

Sorry, no go for me with this. Well I would hope not that this is why people vote for him. I actually ended up at the community all-candidates debate (my parents live in his riding), and he didn't bother to show up. Add that to his long list of everything else, and....I don't just get it. There were candidates throughout the country during this election that had to quit because of things they did; how he remains befuddles me (by the electorate or the conservative party itself).

Anders was actually one of only 2 CPC candidates who attended an all-candidates riding meeting.

[RedHot25]

Originally Posted by Bobblehead

Anders was actually one of only 2 CPC candidates who attended an all-candidates riding meeting.

Thanks Bobble, I didn't know that (I don't live in the city let alone the province). Which one did he attend, because he certainly wasn't at the one I was at with my parents

And edit to add, only 2? What was up with that? That seems pretty weak...