Canadian Federal Election

[Architype]

Originally Posted by LeadingEdgeBoomer

Election Canada reports that 7.3 million people voted at the advance polls. That is 7.3 million votes that can't be changed now.

That's about one quarter of eligible voters, so the turnout might be unprecedented.

Carney is calling out Poilievre's bogus numbers, and is sounding auspiciously credible.

Carney accuses Poilievre of using ‘phantom numbers’ in campaign platform

Both Carney and Poilievre are looking to poke holes in each other’s platforms -- Carney by claiming the Conservatives wouldn’t spend enough to counter a looming economic crisis, and Poilievre by accusing the Liberals of presenting a high-spending plan that would weaken the country’s fiscal position.

https://www.ctvnews.ca/federal-election-...ng-phantom-numbers-in-campaign-platform/

[Marshsparrow]

My preference is a Liberal majority - I don't want them tied to the NDP.

I would actually prefer a Conservative minority to a Liberal one... but the problem with a Conservative one is not sure what party will support them.

Carney seemed very much on the ball with his criticism of the CPC #s. Given 2 years, I am surprised at how weak their costed platform is - there are many gaping holes.

[casper]

Originally Posted by NotToScale

jesus... Trump caused all the problems for Canada huh? ffs ... wool over the eyes

You need to set priorities.

Dealing with Trump tariffs and threat to use economic force to have us submit to his authority is Priority #1, 2 and 3.

This "inflation tax" or whatever nonsense the conservative image is not a priority. If anything it is a distraction from the real problems. Conservatives concern about bans of plastic straws and whatever else is also a distraction.

That said, we all understand for those starting out and young families that are having a rough time of it being able to buy a house. We need to address housing as well. However, avoiding massive unemployment and depression like conditions is the critical issue of the day.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by JakeLRS

Conservative Platform
Summarized by CBC

Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre is in Vaughan, Ont., detailing his election platform.

• He is pledging to cut Canada’s deficit by 70 per cent.
• The platform includes tax and spending cuts, but also projects deficits that will add roughly $100 billion to federal debt over the next four years.
• The platform does not include a timeline for getting back to a balanced budget.

Liberals would add $225 billion to the federal debt.

My generation is screwed. Thanks Justin.

And to all the people who said PP would cut healthcare despite him saying he wouldnt.... He's keeping it and its in the platform!

"Poilievre faced accusations from his opponents that he’d cut back on some major social programs passed by the previous Liberal government. To that point, the Conservative platform promises to maintain federal health-care transfers, preserve existing dental care coverage, and honour existing deals with the provinces on child care and pharmacare."

Called it.

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

It's part of the strategy. But it's so disingenuous and cynical to attack the Liberals on their deficit and not to put out their own costed platform. And I think a big part of the is likely because:

1) It'll probably be a 12 figure cumulative deficit (over $100B).

2) They won't be that different from the Liberals on defence spending despite the rhetoric.

3) They'll have to be honest about what they are cutting in there.

[BlackDog204]

Originally Posted by Loco101

I'm glad that you've been keeping an eye on the Western provinces. I haven't had time to focus on them as much as elsewhere but I did mention and still think that BC will be interesting and unpredictable.

I wouldn't at all be surprised if Carney spends the last days of the campaign in AB and BC. There are also some Southern Ontario ridings that could be surprise Liberal pick-ups so he may also visit them.

What is interesting, is that as many as 9 ridings we in play in Alberta with 7 being led by Liberals. As of today, only 4 are, and if the trend continues, the Alberta Libs will be reduced to 2 seats.

In BC, they were leading that province for at least 10 days. Now the CPC has a 1-2 seat lead. I hope Carney fights hard for the west, if only to shut up the losers from Alberta who want to threaten separation.

[bodaggin]

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

Musk basically decided how much waste there was before starting (which apparently was $1 trillion) based on no data whatsoever.

$1T is not an arbitrary number.

America had a $1.7T deficit. Which means they need to cut $1.7T. Otherwise, eventually, they will go bankrupt.

Canada has a recurring deficit of ~$40B. So Canada needs to cut $40B to also prevent going bankrupt. It's very basic math. It doesn't care about feelings. And this is just the deficit. It still doesn't address the debt.

[BlackDog204]

[Marshsparrow]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Called it.

There is no new $ for childcare, dental care and pharma care - so great if you have it, membership will have its privileges - very divisive.

[BlackDog204]

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by bodaggin

I just did. Twice. The $300 billion River Class Destroyers which continue to be gleefully glazed over.

$200+ billion of which is literally taxpayer dollars lit on fire.

Go on. Justify this.

Easy. The extra money is going to basically building the ability to build modern warships from scratch. You can say that is wasteful. But the alternative is not having this capability in Canada.

[kiwi4353]

Anyone know where the pdf is for the conservative platform is?

[jonny24]

Originally Posted by NotToScale

jesus... Trump caused all the problems for Canada huh? ffs ... wool over the eyes

I didn't say that. In fact I think you must have wool over your eyes to have so wildly interpreted my post that way. And that's the kindest interpretation I can give for your reading comprehension.

Originally Posted by jonny24

the governments choices over the last decade have had extremely poor results for a lot of Canadians.

In this line, I directly blame the current government for making things worse for Canadians.

Originally Posted by jonny24

the threat of what Trump could do outweighs all of that

In this line, I directly contrast the threat of Trump vs all our other problems (which, if you're following along, I blame some portion on the current government).

Originally Posted by jonny24

economics (where a lot of our domestic problems lie)

In this line, I say that a lot of our problems are economic in nature, without blaming anybody. If you want to attribute that to Trump, that's your interpretation, but if you'll manage to recall, I've already blamed our own government,

Originally Posted by jonny24

being both rooted in economics (where a lot of our domestic problems lie) and no stranger to a crisis

Here, I use the word "and", which is used to connect two different ideas. I like Carney for having an economic background AND as a separate reason for liking Carney, think that his history of leadership in uncertain times makes him a good pick to lead us through this uncertain situation.



Jesus. For fuck's sake. Derisive noises. Et cetera.

[FrankieFlowerpot]

Originally Posted by kiwi4353

Anyone know where the pdf is for the conservative platform is?

https://canada-first-for-a-change.s3.us-...50418_CPCPlatform_8-5x11_EN_R1-pages.pdf

[bodaggin]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Easy. The extra money is going to basically building the ability to build modern warships from scratch. You can say that is wasteful. But the alternative is not having this capability in Canada.

It does not cost $200 billion to build a dry dock. Use your head man.

The market cap of Hyundai Heavy Industries, the largest shipbuilder in the world, including all their docks, tooling, and human capital is $31 billion CAD.

[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Easy. The extra money is going to basically building the ability to build modern warships from scratch. You can say that is wasteful. But the alternative is not having this capability in Canada.

Yes it cost more to build in Canada but not $200 Billion more don't encourage that kind of fuzzy math.

[Marty_Mcfly]

I had prompted you folks to participate in an independent, amateur federal election poll about a month ago, which a few of you did take the time to fill out. Unfortunately we never received a large enough sample to work with so we never worked up the data.

However, myself and colleague launched a new poll yesterday which will run until Sunday afternoon. Initial response rate is actually pretty good, so we should be able to get a publishable sample size, though it may be well under what a place like Leger would publish.

Completely unscientific, but if you'd like to participate, I'll leave the link below. No identifying information is collected. Especially interested in hearing from you if you're from Quebec as that's probably our lowest sample right now. However anyone is welcome to participate, the more the merrier.

If we get a good enough sample (and we should), I'll share the data with you guys and we can compare to the professional agencies, and also (likely) have a discussion on biases of non-random samples.

Cheers all

Link to google form: https://forms.gle/PHLB553PFvdPuRpa8

EDIT: My word, how many folks from New Brunswick just lurk here? I post one of these and immediately its like half of Moncton awakes from their slumber to fill it out.

[Nouvellecosse]

Originally Posted by bodaggin

$1T is not an arbitrary number.

America had a $1.7T deficit. Which means they need to cut $1.7T. Otherwise, eventually, they will go bankrupt.

Canada has a recurring deficit of ~$40B. So Canada needs to cut $40B to also prevent going bankrupt. It's very basic math. It doesn't care about feelings. And this is just the deficit. It still doesn't address the debt.

It most certainly was arbitrary because he was calling that amount waste before even knowing how it was being spent. That has nothing to do with wanting to cut a certain amount to reduce deficit spending. If you say that something is waste then you're saying it should be cut whether the budget is balanced, in a deficit, or a surplus. But saying you want to cut a certain amount for deficit reduction in no way implies the things being cut are forms of waste. It may be painful cuts to things that are important but that you're sacrificing to achieve a larger goal.

[Loco101]

Originally Posted by Marshsparrow

My preference is a Liberal majority - I don't want them tied to the NDP.

I would actually prefer a Conservative minority to a Liberal one... but the problem with a Conservative one is not sure what party will support them.

Carney seemed very much on the ball with his criticism of the CPC #s. Given 2 years, I am surprised at how weak their costed platform is - there are many gaping holes.

Some people on here criticized me when I said that it was a huge problem that PP and the CPC had no platform at all and that we didn't know where they stood on so many things. A couple people said that Doug Ford had no platform so why does PP need one. Well PP isn't Ford and he didn't present much of interest to swing voters early in the game. It was all about axing the carbon tax and so much so that Carney knew what to do to take the wind out of the CPC's sails.

PP had two years to come up with a good platform but didn't do the work nor did he come up with something good in the last week of the campaign. He should have been bold but now we see that he was actually afraid to lay out everything. If he would have released a half-decent plan a even two months ago he would have had a good shot at winning.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by YOWetal

Yes it cost more to build in Canada but not $200 Billion more don't encourage that kind of fuzzy math.

Nobody ever said it cost $200B to build the capability. I said that this is the extra cost. That $200B also includes the ships and their lifecycle costs. Ever done the math for what a car would cost over its full life including paying the driver for his time, all the fuel burned and every nut and washer (and the training and tooling to make those)? That's the equivalent of what is happening here. And of course, when we're projecting out to 2050, there's a lot more uncertainty in what happens to prices.

The idea that there's automatically waste because it's a big number, is ignorant. We have high costs across literally everything we build. It's not just ships. It's pipelines. It's subways. It's battery factories. It's power plants. Etc. Unless you somehow believe that Canada is more corrupt than a lot of the third world the simplest explanation here is that we are out of practice building things, have under invested in the capital base and now lack the talent and skill to successfully execute. So we're going to have to pay to get that back.

[janbe74]

I feel the Liberals are on the brink of a surge of support. Come this weekend you will see it.