Canadian Federal Politics Thread v5

[#-3]

Originally Posted by GGG

In a PR scenario though you increase the value of a third party vote so more people will do it. Some voters try to avoid vote splitting in contested ridings. So I’d suspect that in a PR system where there isn’t a penalty for voting for fringe candidates you’d see large shifts in the Cons to the PPC.

You can see the far right success in any European country, there is no reason to believe that wouldn’t occur here. There are enough white nationalists to have a white nationalist party.

it will also reduce the number of people who throw their vote away because voting in the riding is meaningless. I've done that a few times voting in Alberta. Although the last two elections i voted in polling suggested I would be in a tighter riding than ended up happening.

[Wolven]

Originally Posted by GGG

In a PR scenario though you increase the value of a third party vote so more people will do it. Some voters try to avoid vote splitting in contested ridings. So I’d suspect that in a PR system where there isn’t a penalty for voting for fringe candidates you’d see large shifts in the Cons to the PPC.

You can see the far right success in any European country, there is no reason to believe that wouldn’t occur here. There are enough white nationalists to have a white nationalist party.

Like I said, they would need 900,000 votes just to cross the 5% threshold earning PR seat(s). If a fringe white nationalist party is able to organize enough to do that... well, that would be a massive surprise.

On the plus side, if the right fractured their vote as much as the left, that would result in a more balanced democracy.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Wolven

Like I said, they would need 900,000 votes just to cross the 5% threshold earning PR seat(s). If a fringe white nationalist party is able to organize enough to do that... well, that would be a massive surprise.

On the plus side, if the right fractured their vote as much as the left, that would result in a more balanced democracy.

The Cons got 42%. You don’t think 1/8 share the views of the PPC if you knew it wouldn’t cause vote splitting?

[Wolven]

Originally Posted by GGG

The Cons got 42%. You don’t think 1/8 share the views of the PPC if you knew it wouldn’t cause vote splitting?

I am not sure where you are trying to get to ... do you think the current first past the post system is somehow better than a MMPR system? Are you unsure what the difference is between MMPR and PR?

To answer your question: Yes, I think the PPC has been working hard to build an alternative to the Conservative Party since Maxime Bernier lost the Conservative Party leadership race to Sheer. I think the PPC are a terrible party of fear and hate covered in the lipstick of "FREEDOM" and their platform is full of misinformation.

In 2021 they made it to 840K votes, which is a big step up from the 2019 election but still below the 5% mark. But even if they make it to the 5% threshold in a MMPR system, that just means they get a seat in government. It does not mean that they automatically get party status, which is currently defined as needing 12 seats (and that party status requirement is likely to go up if we add more seats in a new government system that has more seats to it). Without party status, they would essentially be sitting in the house like Independents. The Green party has been showing us for decades how ineffective holding 1 or 2 seats can be, so again I am not entirely sure what the concern is?

Also, all of the votes they capture are votes they are taking away from the Conservatives... so I do not think that is a bad thing as I would rather see those fringe groups outside of a mainstream party instead of in the center of one. (Reform)

Having said all of that, I think the cure to these kinds of parties is education. An educated population can see through these parties and their culture war BS. (This is why most right wing governments work so hard to undermine and attack education systems)

[GGG]

I’m saying you will get extreme parties in your parliament in a proportional representation system with a 5%threahold.

I’m making no comment as to whether PR or MMPR is better or worse just that fringe parties with representation and power is a consequence of that system.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by Wolven

In 2021 they made it to 840K votes, which is a big step up from the 2019 election but still below the 5% mark. But even if they make it to the 5% threshold in a MMPR system, that just means they get a seat in government. It does not mean that they automatically get party status, which is currently defined as needing 12 seats (and that party status requirement is likely to go up if we add more seats in a new government system that has more seats to it). Without party status, they would essentially be sitting in the house like Independents. The Green party has been showing us for decades how ineffective holding 1 or 2 seats can be, so again I am not entirely sure what the concern is?

If the PPC got a hair short of 5 per cent of the vote in a FPTP system, they undoubtedly would have gotten more in a proportional system where every vote counts. A 5 per cent threshold clearly wouldn’t keep extreme parties out of parliament.

Originally Posted by Wolven

Having said all of that, I think the cure to these kinds of parties is education. An educated population can see through these parties and their culture war BS.

Canada today has the most educated populace in the country’s history. In 1970, fewer than 70 per cent of students graduated from high school. Today, that figure is 88 per cent. In 1970, only 22 per cent of Canadians had post-secondary education, compared with 58 per cent today. And yet here we are with the highest support for populist politics in living memory.

People aren’t blank vessels that you just pour education into to make them enlightened. Unless we want to lower standards in post-secondary education even more, we’ve pushed up against the limits of participation.

[Wolven]

Originally Posted by GGG

I’m saying you will get extreme parties in your parliament in a proportional representation system with a 5%threahold.

I’m making no comment as to whether PR or MMPR is better or worse just that fringe parties with representation and power is a consequence of that system.

You think we do not have extreme parties in our government now?

Since the Federal PCs merged with the Reform, the PCs have been consumed from the inside and all that is left of the party is Reformers.

Since the Alberta PCs allowed the Wildrose to cross the floor, the UCP has been completely converted into the Take Back Alberta Wildrose party.

If you are saying that moving to a MMPR system would help keep these parties separate and safe from usurpation by the more extreme elements, then sign me up. Having the PPC gain one or two seats is better than having the Reform party gain 143 seats.

[Wolven]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Canada today has the most educated populace in the country’s history. In 1970, fewer than 70 per cent of students graduated from high school. Today, that figure is 88 per cent. In 1970, only 22 per cent of Canadians had post-secondary education, compared with 58 per cent today. And yet here we are with the highest support for populist politics in living memory.

People aren’t blank vessels that you just pour education into to make them enlightened. Unless we want to lower standards in post-secondary education even more, we’ve pushed up against the limits of participation.

2 things here.

1) The socialist in me would love it if Canada absorbed Universities into public education and that everyone was given a post-secondary education of their choice. If they are not interested in getting a BSc in Chemistry then maybe they could go get a trade certification. I believe Sweden does this successfully.

Eliminating the barrier between the population and post-secondary education would likely stimulate the workforce and industry and generate enough tax revenue to pay for the decision to fund the universities on public dollars. Also, eliminating the need to make a profit would drive down the cost of universities.

2) Populist politics should have a lot of support. The problem is that the Conservatives are not populists, they just pretend to be by saying popular things like "common sense" so that they can gain power but none of their policies are actually populist.

Populists should be pushing policies that bring benefit the most people. Their priorities would include: Human rights, Public Education, Healthcare, Pharmacare, Dentalcare, EI / UBI, labour protections, regulations on corporations, ethics in government, etc.
Populists advocate that there is not 3 classes of society (upper/middle/lower) but actually 2 classes of society: Owners v Workers. (Bernie Sanders boils it down to Billionaires v everyone else.)

These are all the opposite of what the Conservative party advocates or acts upon.

The Conservatives have become much more Corporatist (which I view to be the opposite of populist).
- They believe in slashing services and privatization to corporations that will try to make profit off providing necessary services to the people.
- They believe in de-regulation of corporations to increase profits for rich people, even if it means destroying the environment or harming people
- They believe in reducing taxes for rich people at the expense of the rest
- They bust unions and force them back to work when there are strikes
- They use culture wars to divide the population and distract the people from the class war (Owners v. Workers)
- Corporatists will reduce work-life balance by taking away workers rights (weekends, overtime, holidays, paid leave, child labour, retirement age, etc)
etc.

Usurping the populist label has been quite the trick as everything the Conservatives advocate for is actually bad for the average citizen... but then they roll out the culture wars and get everyone all hot and bothered about Trans people so that they vote away their healthcare.

As of right now, the most populist party is the NDP and they have lost their way a bit and have been acting more neoliberal than populist. They need to get back to being the populist party and reclaim the label.

[calgarygeologist]

^ Most universities in Canada are public, non profit and funded by provincial and federal governments.

[Wolven]

Originally Posted by calgarygeologist

^ Most universities in Canada are public, non profit and funded by provincial and federal governments.

Yes, and as a "progressive populist" I would specifically eliminate tuition from the funding model and make it available for Canadian citizens to go to post-secondary.

(They would still charge foreign and exchange students to attend but there should be caps on how many they are allowed to bring in so that the spots are available for Canadians.)

[GordonBlue]

this is disturbing, especially how many people now don't have faith in a fair election process. thanks for this you dumb americans and far right conservatives.



Conservative fundraising email suggests Liberals trying to 'tip the scales' in recounts

A Conservative Party fundraising email alleges the Liberals are trying to "tip the scales" in riding recounts, language political watchers say is concerning as some Canadians say they don't trust the results of last week's election.

The Conservative Party did not respond to a CBC News request to explain how they think the Liberals are tipping the scales.

A recent poll from Leger suggests the majority of Canadians' trust last week's results, but not by an overwhelming amount.
The poll suggests just under two-thirds of Canadians fully trust the results.

"I wouldn't suggest that I'm over the moon," said Andrew Enns, Leger's executive vice-president for Central Canada, of that response. "It's a bit disconcerting."

According to the poll, 13 per cent of Canadians don't trust them "at all."

Liberals were the most likely to trust the results, while 25 per cent of Conservatives said they don't trust the results at all.

[Cappy]

Man, can't we get our own "Made in Canada" Conspiracies...

Sick of these cheap American knock offs

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by GordonBlue

this is disturbing, especially how many people now don't have faith in a fair election process. thanks for this you dumb americans and far right conservatives.



Conservative fundraising email suggests Liberals trying to 'tip the scales' in recounts

A Conservative Party fundraising email alleges the Liberals are trying to "tip the scales" in riding recounts, language political watchers say is concerning as some Canadians say they don't trust the results of last week's election.

The Conservative Party did not respond to a CBC News request to explain how they think the Liberals are tipping the scales.

A recent poll from Leger suggests the majority of Canadians' trust last week's results, but not by an overwhelming amount.
The poll suggests just under two-thirds of Canadians fully trust the results.

"I wouldn't suggest that I'm over the moon," said Andrew Enns, Leger's executive vice-president for Central Canada, of that response. "It's a bit disconcerting."

According to the poll, 13 per cent of Canadians don't trust them "at all."

Liberals were the most likely to trust the results, while 25 per cent of Conservatives said they don't trust the results at all.

It’s depressing how this idiocy has spread into our media and political culture from the U.S. like a contamination.

[IliketoPuck]

Directly correlated to media literacy and sources of information for many people being subject to overt manipulation.

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

It’s depressing how this idiocy has spread into our media and political culture from the U.S. like a contamination.

I’m not sure that it’s idiocy so much as it is hypocrisy. If the survey asked do you trust the results when your party loses equally as when your party wins you’d probably figure out in a hurry that it’s usually a case of sour grapes combined with willful ignorance that is leading people to question results that can be publicly audited.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

I’m not sure that it’s idiocy so much as it is hypocrisy. If the survey asked do you trust the results when your party loses equally as when your party wins you’d probably figure out in a hurry that it’s usually a case of sour grapes combined with willful ignorance that is leading people to question results that can be publicly audited.

I don’t doubt that the number would be much lower if the CPC won the election. But people who genuinely believe there’s widespread, systemic electoral fraud in Canada are either dimwits, or they’ve lost the minds to conspiratorial nonsense.

[D as in David]

The Deputy Returning Officers are required to keep their copy of the results from their poll for 60 days. I've wondered whether that was related to preventing voter fraud.

[GGG]

The biggest gap is from each polling station at the end of the night a single person loads up all the polling boxes into their car and takes them alone to the elections office.

Now each box has already been counted and ballot numbers and counts are known but if you were in a really tight riding and somehow you stole ballots throughout the day you could perhaps add a few ballots in each box that would be not suspicious in a judicial recount.

The rest of the time the parties have the ability to have scrutineers present to validate everything and two people doing every task.

Anyone who thinks their is voter fraud should just work an election.

[opendoor]

Originally Posted by GGG

The biggest gap is from each polling station at the end of the night a single person loads up all the polling boxes into their car and takes them alone to the elections office.

Now each box has already been counted and ballot numbers and counts are known but if you were in a really tight riding and somehow you stole ballots throughout the day you could perhaps add a few ballots in each box that would be not suspicious in a judicial recount.

The rest of the time the parties have the ability to have scrutineers present to validate everything and two people doing every task.

Anyone who thinks their is voter fraud should just work an election.

Aren't the boxes and documents sealed and signed by scrutineers after being counted? The only way to add additional ballots would be to break the seal, which would be impossible to not notice when the returning officer receives the boxes.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by opendoor

Aren't the boxes and documents sealed and signed by scrutineers after being counted? The only way to add additional ballots would be to break the seal, which would be impossible to not notice when the returning officer receives the boxes.

I think you’re right. I hadn’t thought of that and it’s been 10 years since I had done it.