Canada Election 2015

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by Acajack

I don't know how you guys can be so sure about how the SCC would rule in such a case.

Dissent is totally legal and constitutionally protected. It could be used pretty effectively as an argument against mandatory voting.

One can never be certain how the SCC will rule, but my "gut" says that dissent can be accommodated under a mandatory voting system (it would almost certainly have at least a conscientious objection exemption) because one can spoil or refuse to accept one's ballot. The fact that it seems to work in Australia (don't know how they do it) would also likely influence the Court.

Plus, having mandatory voting and actually enforcing mandatory voting are two different things....

[lio45]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Yeah, I like the idea of mandatory voting too but as you say, it's hard to believe that in the current climate it won't run into issues of personal freedom and human rights.

I risk eternal damnation if I vote, so...

Joking aside, there needs to be possible exceptions for Canadians who might be away. If it's possible to vote online then I'm fine with it.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by ainvan

Come on my Québécois brothers and sisters, let's take back our country that has been gone meaner and heartless in the last 9.5 years. Vote ABC!

Hope, not fear

Quebec already is one of the most ABC provinces when you look at CPC share of total provincial ridings forecasted. Only minor provinces (Newfoundland, PEI) can beat us there. We're the most ABC major province.

[ainvan]

Originally Posted by Migs

That's funny that you say "not fear" & just before that spreading misinformation about the country. Who's the one spreading fear? You guys make my chuckle. You're so misinformed that you don't even know who you should try & persuade to change their vote.

You and I have different visions for Canada, but we're still brothers and sisters. We don't have to fight about the definition of fear. Everyone has different definition of what is hope and what is fear.

However, I don't want to see this beautiful Canada to be identified as the 51st state of the US. I want Canada to be the Great White North, with its unique identity.

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by rousseau

You called it "mock outraged reporting."



The prime minister's office interfering with and micro-managing the immigration department is disturbing and typical of Harper's dictatorial style. It's just yet another in a long laundry list of awful things he's done to this country, and further confirmation that he needs to be kicked out.

The outrage at what Harper has done isn't fake. Though the fact that more Canadians aren't angry at Harper for turning Canada into place "you won't recognize" when he gets through with it is indeed outrageous.

Just read this story and it disgusts me. That Harper had the gall to cry crocodile tears (well as close as that cold fish could get) all the while knowing he had deliberately interfered and slowed down the refugee process is contemptible.

[travis3000]

New EKOS daily poll has for the first time this election ... Justin Trudeau's Liberals at #1 in the country. Liberals now lead Quebec by 3 points and Ontario by 7 points. We now have NANOS, EKOS, and FORUM all pointing to a small but consistent Liberal lead nationally.

http://www.ekospolitics.com/index.php/2015/10/liberals-now-have-slight-lead/

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by whatnext

Just read this story and it disgusts me. That Harper had the gall to cry crocodile tears (well as close as that cold fish could get) all the while knowing he had deliberately interfered and slowed down the refugee process is contemptible.

Just to note that Harper has denied the story and said that he ordered an "audit" of the refugee files. Not clear to me whether this involved the PMO in a direct role or was conducted by Immigration, as one would expect. The audit revealed no security issues, which is not a surprise either. One is left wondering a bit about any missing details.

It's been a while since a stray issue came along to divert Harper from his campaign focus. I don't know if this one has any legs or not - stay tuned for tomorrow's reports.

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by travis3000

New EKOS daily poll has for the first time this election ... Justin Trudeau's Liberals at #1 in the country. Liberals now lead Quebec by 3 points and Ontario by 7 points. We now have NANOS, EKOS, and FORUM all pointing to a small but consistent Liberal lead nationally.

http://www.ekospolitics.com/index.php/2015/10/liberals-now-have-slight-lead/

The gender, age and education numbers are interesting. It seems to me that the Conservatives have reduced somewhat their "gender gap" with women. The strong Liberal support in the 18-34 age group seems to me like a risk - will this group turn out to vote?

[CanSpice]

Originally Posted by flar

The Conservatives would be fine, they'd just have to move closer to the centre, where the majority of Canadians are.

I was at an all-candidates meeting where the question of "what happens under a minority Conservative government" came up. Both the Liberal and NDP candidates said that at the very first opportunity they'd vote non-confidence. There's a strong Anybody But Conservative current running through Canadian politics and I think both the Liberals and NDP are tapping that.

They didn't answer anything about a potential coalition government, or if the NDP would support the Liberals without a formal coalition, though, and that's the more interesting question.

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by CanSpice

I was at an all-candidates meeting where the question of "what happens under a minority Conservative government" came up. Both the Liberal and NDP candidates said that at the very first opportunity they'd vote non-confidence. There's a strong Anybody But Conservative current running through Canadian politics and I think both the Liberals and NDP are tapping that.

They didn't answer anything about a potential coalition government, or if the NDP would support the Liberals without a formal coalition, though, and that's the more interesting question.

Most likely yes, on a case-by-case, horsetrading basis.

[Migs]

Originally Posted by ainvan

You and I have different visions for Canada, but we're still brothers and sisters. We don't have to fight about the definition of fear. Everyone has different definition of what is hope and what is fear.

However, I don't want to see this beautiful Canada to be identified as the 51st state of the US. I want Canada to be the Great White North, with its unique identity.

For sure.

Answer me this, how do you think Canada became the great free country we are enjoy today?

[travis3000]

Originally Posted by kwoldtimer

The gender, age and education numbers are interesting. It seems to me that the Conservatives have reduced somewhat their "gender gap" with women. The strong Liberal support in the 18-34 age group seems to me like a risk - will this group turn out to vote?

Notice however that Liberal support is also increasing in the older age groups as well. It's a trend worth noting for sure. We now have 5 companies all using different methodologies showing a Liberal lead in Ontario. This is important. Quebec still seems all over the place.


I still say this is still a toss up. 2-3 point leads mean nothing, they can evaporate in a matter of a day or two. Tories could easily win this. With only 10 days left, we are entering the final stretch now.

[Hali87]

Originally Posted by Migs

Dead wrong. Our prominent religion of Christianity & our way of life that has made us a target.

You seriously think that Canada is a country where most people are publicly devout Christians, or that the rest of the world sees us that way?

Not-Sunni, maybe, but "prominently" Christian?

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by Migs

For sure.

Answer me this, how do you think Canada became the great free country we are enjoy today?

Sustained periods of Liberal government throughout the last century?

[Hali87]

Originally Posted by geotag277

If you want to have a conversation, fine, address the relevant conversation.

The topic of this discussion is the PMO's involvement in the refugee program, and it serves as a descent microcosm for the PMO's involvement in everything.

You start from a partisan perspective: being anti-Harper, and proceed to interpret the actions of the PMO from that perspective.

The PMO defunding the science department is the same as Harper being anti-science.

The PMO defunding women's programs is the same as Harper being anti-women.

The PMO being involved in overseeing the refugee program is the same as Harper being a fascist dictator who has overstepped his authority, despite the fact that you would be blaming Harper if there were any process failures.

I don't deny that there are legitimate nuggets of criticism buried in some of these attacks, but the way they are framed in this thread is exactly the same way as the Sun news comments are framed. Harper is a fascist pig, therefore, this is the narrative and it isn't open for discussion.

By the way, I completely agree with you regarding Harper's stance on science and transparency. I think he's done more harm than good for the oil sands in particular through his behaviour and his relationship with allies including Obama. I see the perspective of Harper that federally funded science should be strongly correlated with the economy and economic progress, but he did go too far in poisoning our relationships with our neighbours and the lack of pipeline progress speaks to that failure. I didn't respond to your point about science because I largely agree, except insofar as I don't see the federal government defunding science as necessarily being equivalent to the federal government being anti-science. Sometimes the federal government should turn off the taps, and sometimes it just makes sense to do it.

Sure there are ideological and partisan starting points.

But another dichotomy in this debate (that isn't recognized and leads to it going nowhere) is that many Canadians are primarily concerned with the 1 refugee out of 10,000 who might turn out to be a "serial killer".

While many others are much more concerned with the other 9,999 who are not serial killers but will be killed (or become ISIS sympathizers) if they remain in Syria.

The second group is not really thinking about the potential serial killer and the first group is not really acknowledging that people are being slaughtered as they wait for permission to enter our country.

[Hali87]

A related dichotomy would be those who think the "right thing to do" is to do everything we can to mitigate the humanitarian crisis for those directly affected versus those who think the "right thing to do" is to do everything possible to make sure that Canadians (or - and these people I have less sympathy for - "Canadian interests") are not adversely affected by the humanitarian crisis and its fallout. I am firmly of the belief that we need to be good global citizens and not just look out for our own asses (and that this is not always about military intervention).

[Hali87]

Originally Posted by Migs

For sure.

Answer me this, how do you think Canada became the great free country we are enjoy today?

We "won" the war of 1812 and then the UK/Catholic Church got tired of having to run all our shit?

[drew]

Originally Posted by Migs

how do you think Canada became the great free country we are enjoy today?

Many reasons - but a stroke of geographical luck is the shortest answer IMO.

[giallo]

Originally Posted by Migs

Dead wrong. Our prominent religion of Christianity & our way of life that has made us a target.

That sounds exactly like what George W. Bush said just before he launched an invasion based on false (fake?) information that lead to the killing of hundreds of thousands of people in a country that poised no direct threat to the West. It's amazing that over 10 years later, leaders can still use these scare tactics to curry favour amongst the public for war. The smartest thing Canada did back then was to stay far away from Iraq pt.2. If Harper was in power then, we would have lost a lot of Canadian soldiers, and our country would have had a lot of blood on its hands.

From the outside looking in, it looks like "we" hate their religion and way of life, and will invade their land to try, and stop it.

[travis3000]

New Leger poll out today show the Liberals and NDP now TIED in Quebec at 28% each. The Bloq is 3rd at 23% , the Conservatives fourth at 20%. Given the large sample sizes here, these Quebec results should be taken more seriously then other pollsters. These results seem to somewhat reflect the NANOS numbers. Leger was out in the field this week from Monday to Wednesday.

The Liberals are leading Montreal, The Bloq is leading the rural areas, and the Conservatives lead Quebec City.

Nationally, 29% of Canadians believe Harper will win the election VS 28% believing Trudeau will be the next PM. Mulcair has plunged to only 13% now. Not good news for the NDP.

Nationally Leger found the Liberals leading with 34%, the Tories at #2 at 30%, and the NDP third at 25%.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/poli...s-turn-to-liberals-poll/article26728061/