Canadian Federal Politics Thread v5

[Monahammer]

Meh, I know many NDP volunteers who believe that the party should have made shorter prop up deals to guarantee more power. I wouldn't say they're unhappy with Jagmeet necessarily, but I agree with CC's feeling that there is discomfort over the future direction of the party.

My larger point remains; this is not a 3 party race. It's still a 2 party race, which is why it continues to baffle that the cons prefer to pander to their fringe than fight for the middle to win.

[CaptainCrunch]

https://twitter.com/user/status/1544796582738100230


As they say . . . . the call is coming from in your house.

[calgarygeologist]

Originally Posted by rubecube

Lol, by what metrics? You realize that NDP's goal isn't to form government, right? Other than the Layton years, which were more a byproduct of the collapse of the LPC, the NDP's numbers are right in line with where they've been historically, especially the popular vote.

You keep pushing this narrative and there's zero truth behind it. He's still incredibly popular within the party and has been successful at leveraging the seats he has to get important party platforms passed. Why would they want him out?

Hasn't NDP funding/donations taken a pretty significant hit since Singh became leader? I know they are in pretty terrible shape financially and I wonder if that has any direct correlation to Singh?

[SebC]

Originally Posted by Locke

Yeah, I dont really see any mobility for the NDP one way or the other. I would think the Party and its supporters would be thrilled with where the NDP is right now.

The absolute worst thing that could happen to the NDP would be a Liberal Majority, but so long as they're a minority and the NDP continue to get to play 'Kingmaker' I imagine they're as happy as they're going to get.

You're thinking way more logically than a party whose "greatest result ever" was a conservative majority.

[calculoso]

Found on Twitter in response to the Boris Johnson news:

https://twitter.com/user/status/1544733935250288642

Damnit Trudeau!

[DevilsAdvocate]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

https://twitter.com/user/status/1544796582738100230


As they say . . . . the call is coming from in your house.

Because there is absolutely 0.0% chance that the CPC President would lie. Even if that is the case, Brown has thousands of volunteers working on his campaign. He claimed on CBC tonight that CPC never gave him details of the allegation and no name of the volunteer in question. From my understanding of the allegation is that a company was paying volunteers on company time to "volunteer" for Patrick Brown. But the company name and the employee details have not been made public.... even, supposedly, to the Brown campaign.

Calgarygeologist: I have seen that posted here 100 times, but CP is an echo chamber. When Jagmeet became leader, there were financial issues because he refused to go to $100 a plate fundraisers. But I've not seen anything recent saying they are in financial trouble. So I'd love to see some article or documentation as to the NDP's current financial situation.

[PeteMoss]

Originally Posted by DevilsAdvocate

Calgarygeologist: I have seen that posted here 100 times, but CP is an echo chamber. When Jagmeet became leader, there were financial issues because he refused to go to $100 a plate fundraisers. But I've not seen anything recent saying they are in financial trouble. So I'd love to see some article or documentation as to the NDP's current financial situation.

I'd also doubt they were ever fundraising monsters in most other years.

[calgarygeologist]

Originally Posted by DevilsAdvocate

Calgarygeologist: I have seen that posted here 100 times, but CP is an echo chamber. When Jagmeet became leader, there were financial issues because he refused to go to $100 a plate fundraisers. But I've not seen anything recent saying they are in financial trouble. So I'd love to see some article or documentation as to the NDP's current financial situation.

There are countless articles over the last 1.5 years or so that talk about the weak financial position they are in. They were in serious debt as result of election spending which they partially covered by mortgaging their headquarters in Ottawa. Here are two articles from 2019, because obviously the Covid era fundraising was impacted by financial instability: https://globalnews.ca/news/5866474/n...l-return-2018/
https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/ndp-...he=iygszduyapv

[Firebot]

https://www.nationalobserver.com/202...-ndp-just-done

https://www.thestar.com/politics/fed...-of-money.html

They were broke...before going all in and spending 24 million last election.

Their financial woes isn't exactly a secret and they have spoken about it themselves on several occasions.

She said the increase is a result of improved fundraising after donations plummeted from the $18.6 million in 2015 to around $5.2 million in 2018. The party raised more than $8 million in 2019, around $6 million through the pandemic in 2020 and $3.2 million in the first half of 2021, according to returns filed with Elections Canada.

Simple math, they are broke as #### and are in massive debt.

[PostandIn]

Lame-duck Premier Jason Kenney announces that all other Provinces are seeking intervenor status in Alberta's Supreme Court challenge of Trudeau's Bill C-69 Federal Impact Assessment Act.

https://www.alberta.ca/release.cfm?x...847CC84CDD2C1D

[Ashartus]

Some bold statements from Charest in the Conservative leadership race, promising an "Alberta Accord" and to revise equalization to make it more fair for Alberta. Also said:


“Premier (Francois) Legault has been saying he wants to get Quebec off equalization. Well, you know what? We’ll be helping.”


https://calgaryherald.com/opinion/co...deal-in-canada



With Brown out it is basically Charest vs the social conservatives.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Well if the last couple of races have told us anything it's RIP Charest... I mean Erin O'Toole wasn't actually a social conservative but he ran as one during the leadership race then took the mask off shortly thereafter. It just seems like there's no way to win otherwise.

How are people handicapping Lewis's chances? I recall the post-mortem of the last election suggesting she would be a likely front runner but it doesn't seem to have come off that way.

[Monahammer]

Charest could win a general election. I don't think he'd hold the vote through Alberta, but it wouldnt matter at all to his shot at being Prime Minister.

[Ozy_Flame]

Originally Posted by Monahammer

Charest could win a general election. I don't think he'd hold the vote through Alberta, but it wouldnt matter at all to his shot at being Prime Minister.

Pretty sure any winner of the CPC race will hold Alberta. Everyone there is just anti-Trudreau.

Whoever can basically break through the GTA vote (CPC leadership, governing party) is going to win the race.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by Ashartus

Some bold statements from Charest in the Conservative leadership race, promising an "Alberta Accord" and to revise equalization to make it more fair for Alberta. Also said:


“Premier (Francois) Legault has been saying he wants to get Quebec off equalization. Well, you know what? We’ll be helping.”


https://calgaryherald.com/opinion/co...deal-in-canada



With Brown out it is basically Charest vs the social conservatives.

I love that the CPC still runs on this and dum dums in Alberta still eat it up considering the current formula was drafted by the Harper government after they ran on changing it.

[redforever]

Originally Posted by rubecube

I love that the CPC still runs on this and dum dums in Alberta still eat it up considering the current formula was drafted by the Harper government after they ran on changing it.

And Harper did change it, around 2006 or so. However, the formula is ever changing...it is supposed to be reviewed every 5 years or so. JT just pushed through the last one for another 5 years and no consulting was done to amend the formula.

Harper tried to implement further changes as well but could not get an agreement. Just because Harper amended the last agreement in place does not mean it cannot be further amended.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by redforever

And Harper did change it, around 2006 or so. However, the formula is ever changing...it is supposed to be reviewed every 5 years or so. JT just pushed through the last one for another 5 years and no consulting was done to amend the formula.



Harper tried to implement further changes as well but could not get an agreement. Just because Harper amended the last agreement in place does not mean it cannot be further amended.

Didn't they make changes in 2011 and the West still wasn't happy about it? It's a thing they'll always dangle because it fires up the base, but they're never going to actually make meaningful changes because they know it won't win them an election if they piss off Quebec.

[PeteMoss]

Originally Posted by rubecube

Didn't they make changes in 2011 and the West still wasn't happy about it? It's a thing they'll always dangle because it fires up the base, but they're never going to actually make meaningful changes because they know it won't win them an election if they piss off Quebec.

The last thing the UCP wants to do is actually compete against other parties on their actual policies so they just constantly complain about Ottawa screwing them so they can run against the government of Canada.

[Harry Lime]

So, is the problem that the people with Conservative Party memberships are all social conservatives, and it is unrealistically skewing the demographic into being way more powerful than it should be.

I'm in a pretty conservative part of Alberta, and the people who are socially conservative kind of stick out as being unusual. They are a minority among conservatives.

[Ashartus]

Originally Posted by Harry Lime

So, is the problem that the people with Conservative Party memberships are all social conservatives, and it is unrealistically skewing the demographic into being way more powerful than it should be.

I'm in a pretty conservative part of Alberta, and the people who are socially conservative kind of stick out as being unusual. They are a minority among conservatives.

Generally I think the people who are hard-core followers of a particular ideology are the most likely to get actively engaged in politics and buy party memberships, so yes I think that is why the social conservatives hold disproportionate sway in Conservative Party leadership races.