|
Helsing posted:You're too kind. I'll buy you a gift certificate for plat if you register a temporary e-mail address. Or you could just register a gmail address for SA use, that's what I did.
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2015 21:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 23:02 |
|
|
So, who thinks Newfoundland and Labrador will be a complete sweep for the Liberals?
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2015 21:02
|
|
|
Lustful Man Hugs posted:Then how do you respond to the fact that pharmacare was part of their platform? Does that sound like lovely worthless centrist pandering to you? The NDP played to the left -and- right at different points during the campaign and it read precisely as the scattergun vote-pandering it was. The Liberal platform- although still fundamentally centrist and neoliberal, don't get me wrong- was much better at presenting the image of a coherent platform that was relatively tight in its rhetoric and focus, and in many ways (if you overlook the lovely tax cuts, which is really hard to do, yeah) it -was- presented as a reaction to neoliberal con rhetoric. Stuff that felt very risky, like committing to deficit spending, was refreshing for a whole lot of people contrasted with the depressing NDP balanced-budget poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2015 21:13
|
|
|
Balanced budgets are good though and they are not the solely the domain of evil neoliberals.
Juul-Whip fucked around with this message at 21:29 on Nov 26, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2015 21:26
|
|
|
True but after years of austerity rhetoric they were not the thing to run on.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2015 21:27
|
|
|
They failed to differentiate their platform from austerity. It was definitely not an austerity platform, but the Liberals succeeded in branding it as such. That was their failure, but I don't feel it is a mistake to say the federal government should be striving for a balanced budget at this time, without cuts to services.
Juul-Whip fucked around with this message at 21:34 on Nov 26, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2015 21:32
|
|
|
The Butcher posted:Oh wow what a nightmare situation. The "outrage" is that this might "hurt the poor family farmers" because they are asserting this will somehow prevent people who are self-employed from working extended hours, despite this being absurd. Also they are claiming that having to follow health and safety regulations is "bad" and "interferes with hard working Albertans". The family member that posted it regularly posts things about Notley being the worst and or the NDP ruining the economy, so I am hardly surprised to see this response from them.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2015 21:44
|
|
|
Tighclops posted:Who can I vote for that is like Helsing? Nobody? gently caress. Paul Dewar, Peggy Nash, Megan Leslie Oh right. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2015 21:45
|
|
|
Helsing, I have a Plat Upgrade for you to use to get private messages for the forums. You can email me from my homepage on my profile and I'll get it to you. (Scroll down to the last page link.) Confirm you've mailed me in-thread and I'll send it along. If the blog gets going, let me know if you could use some webspace for it. I'd hate to see you on some no-name Blogspot. Morroque fucked around with this message at 22:09 on Nov 26, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2015 22:07
|
|
|
Sedge and Bee posted:Seriously though, I would like to echo the sentiment that your analysis is top notch, especially with the post election NDP. I'm struggling to think of any decent post election analysis of the NDP that was good in the broader Canadian media. Helsing posted one article, but honestly I thought it had some serious problems.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2015 22:09
|
|
|
bunnyofdoom posted:So, who thinks Newfoundland and Labrador will be a complete sweep for the Liberals? Sadly enough this is probably true. It has always been a matter of back and forth for the same crooks on both sides in the province. I still can't handle Ryan Cleary going from federal NDP to provincial PC. This is the one time I have considered just not voting, and the NDP leader provincially is in my riding. Just going to end up with 4 more years of the exact same corruption with a new coat of paint and all the mouth breathers demanding back Saint Danny.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2015 22:34
|
|
|
Ambrose Burnside posted:The NDP played to the left -and- right at different points during the campaign and it read precisely as the scattergun vote-pandering it was. The Liberal platform- although still fundamentally centrist and neoliberal, don't get me wrong- was much better at presenting the image of a coherent platform that was relatively tight in its rhetoric and focus, and in many ways (if you overlook the lovely tax cuts, which is really hard to do, yeah) it -was- presented as a reaction to neoliberal con rhetoric. Stuff that felt very risky, like committing to deficit spending, was refreshing for a whole lot of people contrasted with the depressing NDP balanced-budget poo poo. Don't forget that spectacular backroom NDP strategy of constantly reminding us that "we only need 30 more seats to defeat Harper, while the Liberals need 100! Vote us!" Mulcair and candidate sound bites, radio and TV ads, mailers, social media. It's impressive when you try to make an argument that is condescending, annoying, and spectacularly misleading the centre point of your campaign. Ron_Jeremy fucked around with this message at 23:01 on Nov 26, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2015 22:54
|
|
|
Coolwhoami posted:Unironically posted by a family member: There will be 9 input sessions all over Alberta in the coming weeks, as well as an online poll. This time of year is the best time to reach out to farmers because there's not too much day-to-day labour to be done on most farms when the crops/pasture are under snow. Additionally the technical requirements for each farm business won't be rolled out until early 2017. Calm your tits, Albertan farmers. http://work.alberta.ca/farm-and-ranch.html
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2015 23:09
|
|
|
Ambrose Burnside posted:The NDP played to the left -and- right at different points during the campaign and it read precisely as the scattergun vote-pandering it was. The Liberal platform- although still fundamentally centrist and neoliberal, don't get me wrong- was much better at presenting the image of a coherent platform that was relatively tight in its rhetoric and focus, and in many ways (if you overlook the lovely tax cuts, which is really hard to do, yeah) it -was- presented as a reaction to neoliberal con rhetoric. Stuff that felt very risky, like committing to deficit spending, was refreshing for a whole lot of people contrasted with the depressing NDP balanced-budget poo poo. Yeah when the NDP runs to left they get labelled as commies, nut jobs, etc.. when the liberals do it it's "refreshing" because everyone knows they're not actually that progressive. The parties have much different different perceptions with the public and the media.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2015 23:37
|
|
|
peter banana posted:There will be 9 input sessions all over Alberta in the coming weeks, as well as an online poll. This time of year is the best time to reach out to farmers because there's not too much day-to-day labour to be done on most farms when the crops/pasture are under snow. Additionally the technical requirements for each farm business won't be rolled out until early 2017. The online poll will admittedly not be very good at reaching many farmers, as less than half have access to high speed internet (at least on their farms). However, same goes for Rebel Media's "poll" (which is itself idiotic to request funding for given that the government is already gathering such information). There were 62,050 farm operators on 43,234 farms as of 2011, and even including farm workers this is an incredibly small demographic in Alberta, so the notion that "Albertans" should get their say (As Ezra and co are demanding) is absurd. Farmers should absolutely provide input, and holding town hall meetings is an appropriate way to do this, but to demand large scale and longer term consultation when there aren't really that many people to consult is not going to improve the bill more.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2015 23:55
|
|
|
I will never understand why some people think the NDP would have been embraced for running on a deficit platform. The reaction in the press would have been very different from what the Liberals received, and hint, it would have involved further evisceration of the NDP's daycare plan for debiting us to welfare queens. Did we forget how to do class analysis?
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2015 23:57
|
|
|
Funkdreamer posted:I will never understand why some people think the NDP would have been embraced for running on a deficit platform. The reaction in the press would have been very different from what the Liberals received, and hint, it would have involved further evisceration of the NDP's daycare plan for debiting us to welfare queens. Did we forget how to do class analysis? Juul-Whip fucked around with this message at 00:12 on Nov 27, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2015 00:06
|
|
|
That the NDP base is made up of the kind of people who think 'class analysis' is a valid tool of political strategy is one major reason why they will never form a government.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2015 01:24
|
|
|
Constant Hamprince posted:That the NDP base is made up of the kind of people who think 'class analysis' is a valid tool of political strategy is one major reason why they will never form a government. Shhh... let them figure it out on their own, so I don't have to worry about having an NDP prime minister in my lifetime.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2015 01:32
|
|
|
Here's a good site for keeping track of whatever ridiculous lies Trudeau will make and we can ask idiotofdoom to defend later. https://www.trudeaumetre.ca/
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2015 01:47
|
|
|
Constant Hamprince posted:That the NDP base is made up of the kind of people who think 'class analysis' is a valid tool of political strategy is one major reason why they will never form a government. Cultural Imperial posted:idiotofdoom
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2015 01:49
|
|
|
An NDP that does not form government is what many of their followers want, apparently. They would prefer a permanent rump party as long as it panders to them and their opinions 100% of the time.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2015 01:55
|
|
|
Cultural Imperial posted:Here's a good site for keeping track of whatever ridiculous lies Trudeau will make and we can ask idiotofdoom to defend later. Wow. That is the weakest burn I've ever had here. Step up your game man.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2015 01:58
|
|
|
bunnyofdoom posted:So, who thinks Newfoundland and Labrador will be a complete sweep for the Liberals?
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2015 01:59
|
|
|
overboard posted:Complete? I'd guess 1-5 non-Liberals, but yes, they will get a strong majority. These aren't your Liberals though, or at least not in Trudeau's image. So far they've committed to cutting $380 million in spending, raising $50 million per year in privatization, land, and asset sales, and the reverse of an upcoming sales tax increase (with no change in income tax brackets). We're hosed. A friend of mine from MUN wrote a comprehensive breakdown of how the NL Liberals plan to balance the budget: http://theindependent.ca/2015/11/24/dwight-ball-promises-to-balance-budget-using-magic/ 
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2015 02:11
|
|
|
colonel_korn posted:A friend of mine from MUN wrote a comprehensive breakdown of how the NL Liberals plan to balance the budget: http://theindependent.ca/2015/11/24/dwight-ball-promises-to-balance-budget-using-magic/ Quit stealing OLP.png
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2015 02:33
|
|
|
THC posted:An NDP that does not form government is what many of their followers want, apparently. They would prefer a permanent rump party as long as it panders to them and their opinions 100% of the time. If the NDP forms government by becoming Liberal Party II: Lib Harder then what is the point of these people, better to die on one's feet than live on one's knees. Of course the NDP's current leadership seems to think it's better to live on their knees and then die anyway so gently caress them And yeah I'd like if if they pandered to me instead of pretending like the poor and the working class don't exist and aren't suffering, big loving shock
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2015 02:36
|
|
|
The real problem is that the working class wants to be helped, but they don't want to help the rest of the working class. Why am I getting fired when we're letting Syrians in, etc., etc. Helping the poor is a losing strategy because a lot of the poor hate very significant other sections of the poor and do not wish them to be helped.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2015 02:45
|
|
|
Tighclops posted:If the NDP forms government by becoming Liberal Party II: Lib Harder then what is the point of these people, better to die on one's feet than live on one's knees. Of course the NDP's current leadership seems to think it's better to live on their knees and then die anyway so gently caress them Juul-Whip fucked around with this message at 02:57 on Nov 27, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2015 02:50
|
|
|
The party braintrust is certainly in need of a serious enema but this idea that they would win elections by running a Bernie Sanders type socialist campaign is amazingly delusional.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2015 02:54
|
|
|
PT6A posted:The real problem is that the working class wants to be helped, but they don't want to help the rest of the working class. Why am I getting fired when we're letting Syrians in, etc., etc. I don't think it works like that: if we help the poor as a whole (through programs, laws, etc.), then the fact that some of the poors are angry that other poor people are getting help won't matter because the good will have already been done.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2015 02:55
|
|
|
Surprise! Harper's glorious plan to build big boats for boys to play with is a huge clusterfuck!  quote:The government's massive $39-billion national shipbuilding procurement strategy (NSPS) is in need of repair, with costs for some projects soaring by as much as 181 per cent and others on the cusp of being cancelled, according to briefing materials prepared for some Liberal ministers.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2015 03:07
|
|
|
Morroque posted:Helsing, I have a Plat Upgrade for you to use to get private messages for the forums. You can email me from my homepage on my profile and I'll get it to you. (Scroll down to the last page link.) Confirm you've mailed me in-thread and I'll send it along. That's extremely generous of you. I'll be in touch some time tomorrow. Lustful Man Hugs posted:Then how do you respond to the fact that pharmacare was part of their platform? Does that sound like lovely worthless centrist pandering to you? I can't speak for anyone else but my problem with the NDP is actually less about this or that position on their platform (overall I think they had a good enough platform last election which is why I volunteered for them and donated a bunch of money) and more about the party's structure and governing philosophy. I don't believe a truly left wing party can simply mirror the organization structure or electoral tactics of the mainstream parties, i.e. the Liberals and Conservatives. This goes way beyond the platform or the campaign. I will try to explain what I mean below. Funkdreamer posted:I will never understand why some people think the NDP would have been embraced for running on a deficit platform. The reaction in the press would have been very different from what the Liberals received, and hint, it would have involved further evisceration of the NDP's daycare plan for debiting us to welfare queens. Did we forget how to do class analysis? Ok, first of all any time the NDP is close to forming government they're going to get bad press. Deal with it. Any realistic NDP strategy needs to start from the assumption that they're going to face a hostile media. This is like the defendant at a criminal trial complaining that the prosecutor is biased against him. And if the NDP ever gets to the point where they're so nonthreatening to the establishment that they don't face a hostile media then they'll truly have completed their transformation into a worthless husk of a party. More specific to your point: Rachel Notley was able to win decisively in Alberta without promising to balance the budget. Note I'm not saying she won because she said she'd run deficits. If anything I think her victory was mostly a reflection of the collapse of the PCs and Wild Rose. But that's really my point here: I think that election platforms, be they left wing or right wing or firmly centrist, are probably less consequential in winning elections than we want to think. That having been said, I do think that the way Mulciar handled the deficit issue was a defining moment in the campaign and destroyed his claim of being the real agent of change. More on that below: THC posted:They failed to differentiate their platform from austerity. It was definitely not an austerity platform, but the Liberals succeeded in branding it as such. That was their failure, but I don't feel it is a mistake to say the federal government should be striving for a balanced budget at this time, without cuts to services. The problem was not with the balanced budgets promise per se (though it was a dumb promise) but with the way it fit into the broader trajectory of the campaign. Let's go over a few of the basics. --Mulcair and the NDP inexplicably based their campaign around the claim that only they could beat Steven Harper. This was truly astonishing to me because it was so eerily reminiscent of Michael Ignatieff's famous claim that there was a Red Door and a Blue Door. "Vote NDP! You have no other choice!" is about the shittiest election pitch imaginable coming from a party that until very recently had been universally regarded as incapable of forming government. The NDP's status as the Opposition made it very clear that in fact almost any party with some name recognition and a decently sized base of support can win a Canadian election. More importantly, this claim set the tone for an incredibly bad campaign overall in which the NDP's rhetorical emphasis on being the "Anyone But Harper" sucked up attention that should have been focused on the NDP's policies. --The balanced budget comment came in a larger context because Mulcair had already voluntarily put the party into a fiscal straightjacket. Mulcair made an ironclad commitment that he would not raise personal income taxes. He promised only a minor corporate income tax increase that didn't even return us to the pre-Harper level. He was also going to waste a bunch of the income from a corporate tax increase by simultaneously cutting the small business tax. He had even said that under his leadership the NDP would still make cuts but that they would be "better cuts" than the ones Harper made. In addition to this, it was already very obvious that Harper's budget -- upon which the NDP's own spending projections relied -- was a political document designed to win the election and not a serious analysis of the Canadian economy. As such it was pretty obvious that had Mulcair won he would have been confronted with at least a mild deficit, so his ironclad commitment to balanced budgets and no major tax increases meant he was already painting himself into a corner. Did everything I list above factor into the decision making of the average voter? Probably not. A lot of it is inside baseball. But on the balance I think all those noises Mulcair made about being a competent centrist administrator meant that when he promised to balanced the budget it helped crystallize an impression about him that he wasn't really an agent of change, and each of the problems I list above played into that. Also speaking from personal experience it demoralized me and caused me to spend less time volunteering than I otherwise would have. I'm probably not alone in that. So whether or not that promise directly cost a lot of votes, it probably sapped the energy of a lot of volunteers whose participation in the election might have been very helpful on E-Day. --When it was revealed that Mulcair had once praised Margaret Thatcher his response was very revealing. He pretty much just ignored the story! It would have been a great moment for him to actually talk about his values and beliefs and how they've evolved over the years. He could have used it as a moment to actually make some comments on his philosophy of governance. Instead here is how he responded: quote:"My No. 1 priority is to get good services to the public," Mulcair said during an afternoon campaign stop in Surrey, B.C., on Wednesday. So not only was that an absolutely tone deaf and stupid response but it also makes it seem like he basically stands by what he said about Thatcher's Conservatives bringing the "winds of liberty" to Britain. Whether or not this seeps down into the consciousness of the average voter it certainly has an impact on people who pay attention to politics and who probably in turn have informal influence over who their friends and family end up voting for. It's also a pretty objective example of Mulcair being a piece of poo poo. Ok, so all that having been said, here's the biggest problem. --The NDP offered very little to leftist voters in Quebec. A lot of people want to pretend that the Niqab issue just came out of nowhere but in my opinion it's more an example of how a campaign with very little to say created a vacuum that got filled up by the Niqab. The centre piece of the NDP's platform was a policy that Quebec, supposedly the base of the party, already had! What did they offer to the Quebecois? Language legislation in federally regulated workplaces? Does anyone really think francophone voters are going to be seriously motivated to vote for a law mandating some bank teller in Saskatchewan must offer service in French? Or that voters were going to be super impressed by Mulcair refusing to take a clear position on a pipeline they overwhelmingly opposed? Perhaps a greater emphasis on pharmacare could have helped staunch the bleeding here but the point stands that Mulcair's tepid campaign basically took Quebec for granted. The point of all this being that When Mulcair finally announced his commitment to balanced budgets on August 25th he was clearly doing more than saying he wouldn't run a deficit. It was obvious that, taken in conjunction with the rest of the campaign, that he was making his priorities clear. Sure a real leftist might want to avoid running deficits, but they'd probably do that by advocating higher taxes instead of lowballing their own promises and relying on the Conservatives' sketchy budget math. THC posted:The party braintrust is certainly in need of a serious enema but this idea that they would win elections by running a Bernie Sanders type socialist campaign is amazingly delusional. THC posted:An NDP that does not form government is what many of their followers want, apparently. They would prefer a permanent rump party as long as it panders to them and their opinions 100% of the time. I don't get it. Are you complaining that people like me don't want to form government or are you complaining that I think the NDP could win with a hard socialist platform? I don't understand how you can be saying both these things at once unless your only real complaint is "why won't you join the NDP cheerleader squad!"
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2015 03:09
|
|
|
Dreylad posted:I'm struggling to think of any decent post election analysis of the NDP that was good in the broader Canadian media. I'll repost that article later and we can hash out your problems with it. Might be a better basis for the discussion than my ramblings.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2015 03:11
|
|
|
Some people want the NDP to be the "conscience of Parliament". AKA ineffectual rump party that will never form government. Some want it try to form government, but only as a strongly left party promising to bend business over a barrel. A proven election winner to be sure. I disagree with both groups of people! I would like an NDP federal government. I thought that the actual platform was mostly good, by far the best of the lot. It was the campaign that was terrible. It was as if they were trying to win the 2011 election. Fully agree with everything you just wrote, though it doesn't give any attention the internal failures that contributed. Juul-Whip fucked around with this message at 03:44 on Nov 27, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2015 03:13
|
|
|
Helsing posted:Apologies folks, this is gonna be a long post. I necessarily brush over some details here so if anyone is feeling particularly masochistic and wants more walls of text they're free to ask me to elaborate on the points I make here. Awesome, you summed up how I feel in a more articulate and in-depth way than I would have had the patience for. There is a portion of low-information voters who are strongly partisan against the NDP. No matter what the NDP say, they are not going to get those voters. These people believe the NDP is the devil incarnate and anything the NDP says is a lie. Balanced budgets and this type of rhetoric sounds like a lie to those they'd hope to swing, and sounds like a contract with the devil to the supporters they already have. Grasping for these irrationally anti-NDP voters is going to create more depressing "victory parties" like the one I attended this year. This election, all of my NDP partisan friends basically stood down from volunteering. They weren't cheering on social media (I know that social media doesn't win elections in itself but you're an old fart if you think that the internet isn't one of the main battlegrounds of current/future elections.) They didn't condemn the current NDP or anything but their silence was deafening. They didn't show up to go door to door. Because (I think) the messaging points we were given were frankly embarrassing. Namely, the NDP is the only one to beat Harper poo poo. All of the centrist flailing only limit the imaginations of remaining party insiders while pushing away socialists, leftists, and other people who the NDP requires to run successful campaigns. Not voters, but volunteers. One committed volunteer who believes in the vision/message can swing hundreds of voters. It's a crude comparison but Mulcair was a rhetorical Clinton when he should have been a rhetorical Sanders. COOLGUY TRUE fucked around with this message at 03:32 on Nov 27, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2015 03:29
|
|
|
Funkdreamer posted:I will never understand why some people think the NDP would have been embraced for running on a deficit platform. The reaction in the press would have been very different from what the Liberals received, and hint, it would have involved further evisceration of the NDP's daycare plan for debiting us to welfare queens. Did we forget how to do class analysis? Ok so class dynamics being what they are, the NDP cannot win without compromising its core values and by wholesale adopting balanced budget, no tax on rich orthodox economic ideologies. Why even bother with them then? E: FB. But seriously. Why bother with the NDP if socialism is too toxic with their history? Mighty as well just try and stealth take over the Liberals or replace them with the Rhinoceros party Beelzebufo fucked around with this message at 03:34 on Nov 27, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2015 03:29
|
|
|
THC posted:The party does in fact regularly acknowledge the existence and suffering of the poor. Most if not all party members will readily tell you they are in it to help the poor and the working class. Wouldn't know it from the way they campaigned. Instead,I saw a lot of mealy-mouthed pandering to born on third fucksticks who were never inclined to listen to them anyway. quote:Dumb aphorisms about glorious battle honour would hit harder if the rest of your post wasn't so completely detached from reality. I'm not detached from reality, you and the people in control of the NDP are. They can never win on the support of people who do not understand and will never trust them and even if it could it would mean abandoning whatever worth they have as a political organization, because if you're going to vote that route the Liberals already exist. e:fb ffffuck
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2015 03:33
|
|
|
I enjoyed this 3 part post-election rhetoric analysis Tax the rich: How the Liberals outflanked the NDP http://rabble.ca/news/2015/10/tax-rich-how-liberals-outflanked-ndp Balanced Budgets is a terrible hill for the NDP to die on http://rabble.ca/news/2015/10/balanced-budgets-terrible-hill-ndp-to-die-on The NDP's queasy opposition on the niqab http://rabble.ca/news/2015/11/ndps-queasy-opposition-on-niqab
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2015 03:35
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 23:02 |
|
|
Oh? I didn't know the Liberals promised pharmacare. I must be delusional
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2015 03:41
|
|