GT: Canadian Federal Election 2019

[zamler]

The Cons biggest mistake is trying to be up front about their policies and positions. For example climate change, have to paint yourself as a champion that will save us from the looming catastrophe doesn't matter that you will do no such thing Libs missed their 2015 promises and we will not get anywhere near the 2030 targets.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

Idealistically, the Liberals would work with either side on a case by case basis. That, however, ignores the obviously increasing partisanship we've endured over the last couple decades.

One way I could look at that is that the Liberals would find it easier to work with the NDP because they aren't actually a threat. The NDP pretty much just exist for the most part. Other than the lows of the 90s and the high of 2011, they are good for 15-20% of the vote and will pretty much never actually challenge for control of government. If the Liberals worked with the Conservatives quite a bit, Trudeau runs the risk of having people ask 'why not just vote Conservative next time?'.

I can't see the main rivals working with each other either. Trudeau has the risk you ID. Scheer (or whoever) would alienate his base. Frankly, I think the Liberals work with the Bloc a bit because those guys are transactionally based - they do what is good for them and that's it. They might work with the NDP but only to a point and not for major concessions. The NDP are weakened, despite the speech by Singh last night (in fact all of those speeches were way too self-congratulatory).

[Matty81]

Originally Posted by -TC-

Ridiculous.. the Trudeau Liberals are radically left. Not even close to centre.

Wow. What do you consider the NDP or the Antifa crowd if you think the Liberals are radicals

[TheIronMaiden]

Originally Posted by -TC-

Ridiculous.. the Trudeau Liberals are radically left. Not even close to centre.

Radical left from the perspective of the Red Deer—Mountain View county riding. Centre left to most of the country. Political affiliations are relative.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

I can't see the main rivals working with each other either. Trudeau has the risk you ID. Scheer (or whoever) would alienate his base. Frankly, I think the Liberals work with the Bloc a bit because those guys are transactionally based - they do what is good for them and that's it. They might work with the NDP but only to a point and not for major concessions. The NDP are weakened, despite the speech by Singh last night (in fact all of those speeches were way too self-congratulatory).

The weakened state of the NDP is very likely a good thing for us, yes. The double whammy of the Liberals - and not the Conservatives - holding the most seats in a minority coupled with his own losses was catastrophic for his party. Singh made it patently obvious that he intended to be the power behind the throne in a forced coalition. Instead, he basically got guillotined last night.

I expect his own party pulls the daggers out in short order. For their sake, they better hope that the radical elements trying to take control fail again.

[Ark2]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

Absolutely. If you're going to suggest that more post-secondary would create "good jobs for young people", you need to support that, because it seems to me that that would simply produce more people with undergraduate degrees serving you coffee at Starbucks.

If you were to suggest transitioning subsidies from post-secondary to vocational training (i.e. making it cheaper and easier to become a plumber / electrician / etc) then we'd be talking.

Are people not entering the trades because of the cost? By no means am I an authority on this, but I was always under the impression that vocational training was much less expensive than attending university. Additionally, it typically allows you to enter the workforce earlier than someone completing a 4 year degree. I think the issue is that society has pushed this notion that you need to go to university. Take GullFoss's post: it is as though he believes that simply going to university will get you a good job. This is the exact opposite reality that young people are currently experiencing, and yet, this fallacy persists. Shifting dollars from one form of education to another won't change that. Tradesman are able to command wages higher now than ever and there are still shortages.

[FlamesAddiction]

I don't know if the NDP is really weakened or if a lot of Dippers just voted strategically for the Liberals this time to keep the Conservatives from winning.

There are a lot of fair-weather NDP supporters that when push comes to shove, will vote Liberal.

[Matty81]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

The weakened state of the NDP is very likely a good thing for us, yes. The double whammy of the Liberals - and not the Conservatives - holding the most seats in a minority coupled with his own losses was catastrophic for his party. Singh made it patently obvious that he intended to be the power behind the throne in a forced coalition. Instead, he basically got guillotined last night.

I expect his own party pulls the daggers out in short order. For their sake, they better hope that the radical elements trying to take control fail again.

Will be interesting to see - if I had to bet I'd guess he will be leading them into the next election. They're broke, he did well at the debate and I thought if anything he seemed to improve their polling numbers once he got some face time. I'd bet he'll get one more shot in a few years at the next election and then get bounced if they don't break 40. They're going to have their heads down for a couple years now, I heard it said during the coverage that they actually even had to mortgage their HQ during this campaign, would take something seismic for them to take on a new leadership race or election for a while

[GGG]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Well, he didn't fire her. She resigned (saying the pressure was the cause). So the question would be whether he intentionally pressured her knowing that she'd resign - or was it just to get a result. I think Trudeau is tunnel-visioned enough, and has a false belief in his own abilities, and thought he could just convince her to do what he wanted. He believed his press clippings at this point.

Nixon fired an AG who was essentially in charge of investigating Nixon, not some company. So he did it to stay in office. JWR wasn't investigating Trudeau.

She was removed as attorney general prior to her resignation from cabinet.

[Ark2]

Originally Posted by zamler

The Cons biggest mistake is trying to be up front about their policies and positions. For example climate change, have to paint yourself as a champion that will save us from the looming catastrophe doesn't matter that you will do no such thing Libs missed their 2015 promises and we will not get anywhere near the 2030 targets.

I think the CPC were fairly vague on their policies, but they were definitely the least dishonest when it came to climate change. In my mind, if you truly care about an issue, you make the effort to understand it. That way, you can gauge whether your efforts to address this issue actually work/make sense. Canadian's don't actually care about climate change. They just want to feel like they are doing something. A tax on carbon is only effective if it changes your consumer habits to less carbon intensive alternatives. Just about everyone that I spoke with that defended the carbon tax made the point of saying that it's honestly not that expensive and it doesn't really impact your day to day life that much. They just seem to think that paying this tax will magically save the planet.

[TheIronMaiden]

Originally Posted by Matty81

I think your first point is so bang on. Ranty angry people and media outlets like Rebel are defining their brand right now and killing their potential for growth.


Unless something changes this is going to be at least a 3 year minority and I'd bet Trudeau will step aside after 2 given the personal attacks and dwindling popularity. If the Liberals replace him with a fresh likeable face even if it's an empty suit the Cons are in tough unless they move to the centre.

The CPC brand is bad, even if their economic policies are arguably good. Let's face facts politics is all about brand. The CPC brand is by and large dictated on the outside by the fear that any conservative party is socially regressive, and the reality that a section of conservative voters are vocal science deniers, homophobes and racists. I would argue that neither are inherently true, but the CPC does themselves no favours.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by TheIronMaiden

Radical left from the perspective of the Red Deer—Mountain View county riding. Centre left to most of the country. Political affiliations are relative.

This is fundamentally a result of the liberals needing to protect their left flank instead of the right. A centrist Conservative party makes the liberals need to defend both sides and pushes them back into the Center.

A Socially right Conservative party makes the Bay Street vote easy to get.

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by Ark2

Are people not entering the trades because of the cost? By no means am I an authority on this, but I was always under the impression that vocational training was much less expensive than attending university. Additionally, it typically allows you to enter the workforce earlier than someone completing a 4 year degree. I think the issue is that society has pushed this notion that you need to go to university. Take GullFoss's post: it is as though he believes that simply going to university will get you a good job. This is the exact opposite reality that young people are currently experiencing, and yet, this fallacy persists. Shifting dollars from one form of education to another won't change that. Tradesman are able to command wages higher now than ever and there are still shortages.

Yup trades is hard work so nobody wants to do it which means it pays better. And the push to go to post-secondary by a society of helicopter parents.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

Yup trades is hard work so nobody wants to do it which means it pays better. And the push to go to post-secondary by a society of helicopter parents.

I’m pretty sure most programs at Sait are full each year so it appears that many people want to do it and cost isn’t a deterrence. Not sure about ROC

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by Ark2

Are people not entering the trades because of the cost? By no means am I an authority on this, but I was always under the impression that vocational training was much less expensive than attending university. Additionally, it typically allows you to enter the workforce earlier than someone completing a 4 year degree. I think the issue is that society has pushed this notion that you need to go to university. Take GullFoss's post: it is as though he believes that simply going to university will get you a good job. This is the exact opposite reality that young people are currently experiencing, and yet, this fallacy persists. Shifting dollars from one form of education to another won't change that. Tradesman are able to command wages higher now than ever and there are still shortages.

I think it's probably a combination, but when I say "subsidize vocational training", I also mean in terms of marketing it to young people as a viable option for a good life. You can do really well as a plumber. You're going to struggle to find meaningful work as a Poli Sci grad.

Essentially, if you're going to be subsidizing something that can help people succeed in life, it should be in an area where - as you say - there are actual shortages of people to do the work. This helps literally everyone.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

I think it's probably a combination, but when I say "subsidize vocational training", I also mean in terms of marketing it to young people as a viable option for a good life. You can do really well as a plumber. You're going to struggle to find meaningful work as a Poli Sci grad.

Essentially, if you're going to be subsidizing something that can help people succeed in life, it should be in an area where - as you say - there are actual shortages of people to do the work. This helps literally everyone.

Perhaps the governments should put more effort into steering grads to where jobs will be. Statscan may have to do more work, but analyze what fields need employees, and provide numbers like "electricians - shortage of 300 in Calgary for 2022, geologists - surplus 26,000 for 2022". Then grads could look over a list of occupations, see what interests them and have some idea what their prospects will be when they graduate.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

Yup trades is hard work so nobody wants to do it which means it pays better. And the push to go to post-secondary by a society of helicopter parents.

What a terrible post.

[peter12]

I think that your average philosophy or political science grad makes more money than your average tradesperson.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by peter12

I think that your average philosophy or political science grad makes more money than your average tradesperson.

It's definitely going to differ regionally, but I'd wager that's probably only true of post-grads. I have plumber friends who are absolutely crushing it in Victoria right now due to the high demand.

[Fuzz]

Conservative Leader Andrew Scheer said today he has no plans to resign, and vowed instead to stay at the helm of his party and take another swing at defeating Prime Minister Justin Trudeau in the next election.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/and...330762?cmp=rss


Ugh.