Canadian Federal Politics Thread v5

[Maritime Q-Scout]

Originally Posted by Slava

And this is the issue with why ERs are so insanely busy and have these enormous wait times. They get everyone for every problem. "Why is that guy here, it's not really an emergency!" Probably true, but where is he supposed to go at say 8:30pm?

Exactly why I think there should be a department staffed by a nurse practitioner that deals with the non-emergengy stuff that ties up the ERs because there's no where else to go, and those tend to be the ones with the 8 hour wait times because it's not overly serious so you wait as more serious stuff goes ahead of you.

But if you were assessed then put into the "walk-in clinic" section of the hospital then you could be seen in order, in, out, wham, bam, thank you, ma'am.

Now I don't work in healthcare so there could be a laundry list of reasons why that wouldn't work but on the surface I don't see the issue.

[CaptainCrunch]

Looks like a really ugly result for the Liberals in Durham as Jivani at this point has gotten 56% of the vote, with Rock getting 22% of the vote and the NDP 10. This was after the Libs sent a huge number of the caucus members to campaign.


Voter turnout was low which is concerning at 22.5% as well.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

Looks like a really ugly result for the Liberals in Durham as Jivani at this point has gotten 56% of the vote, with Rock getting 22% of the vote and the NDP 10. This was after the Libs sent a huge number of the caucus members to campaign.


Voter turnout was low which is concerning at 22.5% as well.

That riding has been blue since the Chrétien Liberals though and prior to that rarely Liberal. It’s a byelection, and while I think Trudeau and the Liberals have a huge issue, this means almost nothing.

But I don’t know what it is with these people staying on far past their best before date. Between Trudeau here and Biden in the US, it’s just weird to me that the parties allow them to cling to power despite growing unpopularity. It’s one thing the Conservatives haven’t done (in Canada) recently; they have leaders who seem unpopular and they got taken out of the position quickly.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Slava

That riding has been blue since the Chrétien Liberals though and prior to that rarely Liberal. It’s a byelection, and while I think Trudeau and the Liberals have a huge issue, this means almost nothing.

But I don’t know what it is with these people staying on far past their best before date. Between Trudeau here and Biden in the US, it’s just weird to me that the parties allow them to cling to power despite growing unpopularity. It’s one thing the Conservatives haven’t done (in Canada) recently; they have leaders who seem unpopular and they got taken out of the position quickly.

It’s because they keep losing.

[Fuzz]

Ya, the Liberals cycled through them pretty quick when they were losing too.

[timun]

And historically when an unpopular leader steps down the party still loses anyway; witness Kim Campbell in 1993, and John Turner in 1984. Slava, can you name one instance in recent memory where an unpopular governing leader was replaced and salvaged the next election's results?

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by timun

And historically when an unpopular leader steps down the party still loses anyway; witness Kim Campbell in 1993, and John Turner in 1984. Slava, can you name one instance in recent memory where an unpopular governing leader was replaced and salvaged the next election's results?

Kenney-Smith?

[timun]

Smith is less popular than Kenney was though. His problem was unpopularity within factions of his own party, not the electorate. I think had he stayed the election results would have been pretty much exactly the same.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by timun

And historically when an unpopular leader steps down the party still loses anyway; witness Kim Campbell in 1993, and John Turner in 1984. Slava, can you name one instance in recent memory where an unpopular governing leader was replaced and salvaged the next election's results?

Hasn't this happened numerous times in Alberta though? A lot of the PC leaders stepped down and their successor won the next election. Maybe that says a lot about Alberta voters?

And then you had Chretien being ousted and Paul Martin taking over and winning a minority. It's not unbelievable to think that a different Liberal leader could win a minority at this point?

[bizaro86]

Originally Posted by timun

Smith is less popular than Kenney was though. His problem was unpopularity within factions of his own party, not the electorate. I think had he stayed the election results would have been pretty much exactly the same.

I think at least as good. Kenney was more unpopular with the far right wing of the party and people who aren't UCP voters anyway, but neither of those groups changed their vote in the actual election so the switch didn't affect the outcome there.

But Smith, with the Wild Rose/kicked off the school board band of crazy is less palatable to the moderate conservative voter, which is the majority in AB. Some/many of those people held their nose and voted for her anyway, since the alternative was named NDP. But I bet more of them would have voted UCP for Kenney.

[Maritime Q-Scout]

Originally Posted by Slava

Hasn't this happened numerous times in Alberta though? A lot of the PC leaders stepped down and their successor won the next election. Maybe that says a lot about Alberta voters?

And then you had Chretien being ousted and Paul Martin taking over and winning a minority. It's not unbelievable to think that a different Liberal leader could win a minority at this point?

I thought that was more a popular PM stepping down to retire, and the heir apparent taking over. Only Chretien hated Martin (and vice-versa) and Chretien set Martin up to fail as much as he possibly could.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by Maritime Q-Scout

I thought that was more a popular PM stepping down to retire, and the heir apparent taking over. Only Chretien hated Martin (and vice-versa) and Chretien set Martin up to fail as much as he possibly could.

Well he was asking whether a government leader was replaced they salvaged the next elections results. I think Martin coming in after Chrétien qualifies?

[Firebot]

Originally Posted by Maritime Q-Scout

I thought that was more a popular PM stepping down to retire, and the heir apparent taking over. Only Chretien hated Martin (and vice-versa) and Chretien set Martin up to fail as much as he possibly could.

Martin pretty much had the party mutiny against Chretien. It was most definitely more of a coup than Chretien stepping down gracefully.

[Maritime Q-Scout]

Originally Posted by Slava

Well he was asking whether a government leader was replaced they salvaged the next elections results. I think Martin coming in after Chrétien qualifies?

Originally Posted by timun

And historically when an unpopular leader steps down the party still loses anyway; witness Kim Campbell in 1993, and John Turner in 1984. Slava, can you name one instance in recent memory where an unpopular governing leader was replaced and salvaged the next election's results?

I thought he was asking about an unpopular government leader, which I don't think Chretien was.

Regardless, it wasn't a great transition from Chretien to Martin.

[calgarygeologist]

Originally Posted by Maritime Q-Scout

I thought he was asking about an unpopular government leader, which I don't think Chretien was.

Regardless, it wasn't a great transition from Chretien to Martin.

In Ontario, Liberal Premier Dalton Mcguinty stepped down due to various government issues and popularity and was succeeded in the next election by Liberal Kathleen Wynne (who ended up being equally or maybe even more disliked by the end of her term.)

[timun]

Originally Posted by Slava

Hasn't this happened numerous times in Alberta though? A lot of the PC leaders stepped down and their successor won the next election. Maybe that says a lot about Alberta voters?

And then you had Chretien being ousted and Paul Martin taking over and winning a minority. It's not unbelievable to think that a different Liberal leader could win a minority at this point?

Again, those were mostly cases of internal party strife, not because they were otherwise facing defeat in a general election.

Lougheed retired on his own terms, having publicly announced that the 1982 election would be his last.

Getty I'll credit you wasn't very popular personally, in fact losing his own seat in the '89 election, but the party wasn't in any danger of losing the election overall; they only suffered a net loss of two seats in '89.

Klein's leadership going into the '93 election certainly didn't seem to lose them any votes, but I'm not sure in retrospect that Getty staying would have sunk them entirely either. I don't think Decore's Liberals were ever actually going to win. Klein eventually got pushed out by his own party, much like Kenney, not because Klein would have lost the 2008 election, but because others were angling for the job.

Stelmach wasn't even popular within the PC caucus in the first place, basically being the third choice candidate that few preferred but was the most palatable alternative to Ted Morton and Jim Dinning. He resigned of his own accord because party leadership was otherwise pushing him out.

Redford was also not popular in the first place, essentially just being the more palatable alternative to Gary Mar, Doug Horner and Ted Morton (again). She looked poised to lose the general election in 2012 until last-minute bungling by the hillbilly wing of the Wildrose handed the PCs their last electoral victory.

Originally Posted by Slava

Well he was asking whether a government leader was replaced they salvaged the next elections results. I think Martin coming in after Chrétien qualifies?

I don't think that qualifies at all, because I don't think Martin salvaged the next election's result whatsoever. Chretien was still fairly popular; no reason to believe that the Liberals would have lost that election in '03 with Chretien at the helm.

With Chretien and Martin you had two guys who'd been at each other's throats for over a decade over leadership of the Liberal Party. Chretien didn't get pushed out because he was unpopular and going to lose the general election: he got pushed out because Martin supporters took over the party apparatus and made it happen.

[Firebot]

Not sure where this should go, but considering we are talking of pharma care of late, this post on the Ontario subreddit has picked up quite a lot of steam and people in that thread are in quite an uproar. Loblaws / SDM is apparently giving employees bonus points to enroll patients and giving med reviews that are not needed.

https://www.reddit.com/r/ontario/com...ing_out_bonus/



Isn't this fraud? @Street Pharmacist as you are the most in the know in the industry you want to chime in on this and your take?

[calculoso]

Originally Posted by Firebot

Loblaws / SDM is apparently giving employees bonus points to enroll patients and giving med reviews that are not needed.

(Not a shot at you)
Something, something, private business is more efficient, has more oversight, and has less ethical issues than government. Government waste. Privatize everything! /sarcasm

[calculoso]

On a more serious note, I’m pretty sure I had this happen to me when I went in for my last Covid and Flu shots at Shoppers Drug Mart. The pharmacist started asking me about the prescriptions that I have and any other medication that I take (eg: Tylenol, Reactine, etc). Came completely out of the blue, was unexpected, definitely not needed, and a different experience than the last set of shots I received.

I wasn’t surprised when this became a news story. Seemed to not just be idle curiosity, but I didn’t know SDM would get extra $$ for asking the questions.

[Firebot]

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ontar...sure-1.7126811

It seems to stem from this story, with whistleblowers working at SDM calling out Loblaws shady tactics of abusing patients for profits. Supposedly this is a bigger deal in Ontario that implemented MedsChecks for which Loblaws execs clearly saw free money to gouge. I don't think we have a direct equivalent in Alberta.

In an interview on Tuesday, Shoppers Drug Mart president Jeff Leger said the company does not "pressure pharmacists to bill for MedsChecks" in order to turn a profit.

https://www.ontario.ca/page/professi...rmacy-services

The reddit screenshot shows proof of a SDM store providing a loyalty incentive to employees (which is of course only spendable through Loblaws) to get more med checks and clearly contradicts Leger's statement. Loyalty program points are scrutinized and accounted for and no way that corporate was not aware of these incentives given.