|
Yeah that's right, we live in a world that's longer lasting than one election cycle. So we need to push left and NDP as hard as we can and build up a history of going NDP so that more people are comfortable with them in the future. We can write off any maybes the cons might do with all the maybes a future government may undo. It's all speculation.
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2019 22:45
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 01:00 |
|
|
BGrifter posted:Canadian polling isn’t this accurate. And even if it were, you can't vote for a minority government. That's not how voting works and there is no calculus you're going to do that will ever make that a thing.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2019 22:48
|
|
|
It cannot be emphasized enough that Canadian polling by riding essentially doesn't exist. I imagine there's a fair amount of internal party polls that will never be released and there's usually a few close ridings that get polled by media organizations but the vast majority of Canadians will never see a poll of their riding. That is the biggest flaw in Eric Grenier's attempt to be the Canadian Nate Silver. It's also the biggest issue with trying to vote strategically. It's so difficult to know who has the best chance against the Conservatives that you might as well just vote for the party or candidate you actually like. Actually if anybody has a link to that website from last election that supposedly showed the best candidate to beat the Conservatives in each riding I'd like to do some analysis on that. Or if that analysis already exists I'd love to see it! I would be surprised if it was more than 60% right in close ridings.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2019 23:09
|
|
|
painted into a coroner posted:Those people who are saying that abortion and LGBT issues are a settled case that Conservatives won't touch - are you actually following any news about current Conservative policy in Canada? Are you just ignoring Ford's hijacking of the sex-ed issue to drive his campaign and shore up his support? Did you all just miss the Federal Conservatives reopening a debate on the party's stance on abortion? Of course they aren't settled. Quite the opposite they are at real long term risk. When our extraction and asset based economy stops chugging along just as the climate change and migration panics start to really sharpen you're going to see all the social progress evaporate as our wealthy masters realize that the only way to prevent sharpening class tensions is by drumming up anxieties over race and gender and cultural barbarity and the need to protect the homeland. The kind of liberal pluralist attitude that supports a vigorous public square and civil society where people of many different identities can freely cohabit and interact requires a lot of trust and social cohesion that cannot be sustained in a hyper aggressive and unstable world of endless neoliberal restructuring and growing climate chaos. Scorchy posted:This is basically the summary of what I read here. Accelerationism, and wishing for the land to burn for something better to arise, is only appealing to those whose lands aren't the ones going to be burned. 2016 isn't the story of purist white progressives sitting home and dooming the country to Trump. It's a more general case of the Democratic establish insisting on appointing literally the most hated candidate in teh party's history following 8 years of dissapointment, resulting in African American turnout declining by 7 points between 2012 and 2016. That's the largest ever decline for African Americans, the first time there had been a decline in 20 years. African American voters also declined in absolute terms by about three quarters of a million voters. You can attribute some of that to the specific circumstances of Obama pushing the voting rate particularly unsustainable high. You can say that voter suppression also factored into the decline given how aggressively it was pursued in many states. You're still left with a pretty clear sense that voter enthusiasm had declined substantially since 2012 which is unsurprising given that African American households suffered massively during the Obama presideny and Obama himself was a moral coward and all around awful President. Trump is Obama's legacy. Vintersorg posted:It's a different world than 2011 as well. Right-wing extremism is on the rise and only growing more popular in Canada. Who knows what the Cons will do once in power with a very vocal base spurred on by false information and goddamn meme's of all things. It's a different world specifically because the basic mechanisms in a liberal democratic society that are supposed to be activated by a massive political failure were stymied. Obama got elected on a huge mandate for change and then served up more of the same. Neoliberalism has lost most of its political legitimacy but lurches on in a zombie like afterlife because nobody can actually imagine what we would replace it with. Since leftist economic policies are systematically discredited or muted while authoritarian right wing racism is constantly platformed (all the race realism stuff ya'll are freaking out about now was initially getting promoted by mainstream publications like the Atlantic just a few decades ago, and Ezra Levant literally just wrote a column for the Globe) we shouldn't exactly be surprised by the direction things are trending in. You're on a sinking ship and instead of taking the opportunity to get into a lifeboat and leave in a controlled manner you're insisting you want to cling to the bow right up until the moment it sucks you under and drowns you. Dreylad posted:Harper gut institutions and tried to hamstrung as much of the bureaucracy as possible. I don't know if the Liberals actually restored the cuts made by Harper, certainly I wouldn't be surprised if they didn't. But it does need to be said that while you can keep things like abortion legal regardless of who is in power, providing access to it is much easier to gut. Nominally that should be difficult for the federal government to control, but we had one province that did not provide access to abortion for 35 years after it was made legal. As we've seen in the US, anti-abortion states have found it easier to restrict access to abortions instead of making them outright illegal. And in a country as decentralized as ours, that means access to abortion for rural women (which includes First Nations women before anyone starts the 'gently caress rurals' chant) is pretty limited already. I agree completely with this but at the end of the day what actually protects abortion rights or LGBTQ or anything else is the broad social consensus in Canadian civil society. Right now the majority of potential political entrepreneurs in Canada are content with the status quo. We've got a few guys like Mad Max trying to open space for the far right but as of right now it's not clear sufficient demand exists at the national level to sustain such a project. If we continue down our current course - an unstable economy that can't generate enough good jobs, a very unequal distribution of income and wealth, and a growing environmental crisis plus a global migration crisis, then the 'demand' for radical politics will increase. If there's no existing leftist policy entrepreneurs to cater to that market then it will all go to the far right. Wealthy individuals and some politicians will then start catering to this constituency, giving it legitimacy and allowing it to grow. Any government that isn't actively searching for solutions to those basic economic and environmental problems is de facto ushering us along to that grim future where the housing equity runs out and the Canadian middle class goes reactionary. That won't be pretty.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2019 23:18
|
|
|
Vote for whomever you want.* *Does not apply to conservatives.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2019 23:39
|
|
|
I dunno. I'm excited for the national childcare program the Liberals promised in each of the last dozen elections including several where they won majority governments. This time it's going to happen. I can feel it. (if we ever get thread-specific backgrounds this has to be the CanPol one) 
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2019 23:48
|
|
|
BGrifter posted:I dunno. I'm excited for the national childcare program the Liberals promised in each of the last dozen elections including several where they won majority governments. Lol this is also the same playbook the Ontario liberals play with Windsor Toronto high speed rail.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2019 23:49
|
|
|
If you guys can sell me on why Voting NDP in Etobicoke loving Centre is a better idea than voting liberal to keep the cons out I'm listening. I used to live in Richmond Hill and when I got excited about the orange wave I voted NDP and convinced everyone I knew (including my father who has voted Liberal since we became citizens of this country). I watched in horror as my riding went conservative from vote splitting. Similarly if I look at 2011 results for my current riding, Ted Optiz got it by nary a few hundred votes due to vote splitting with the NDP. In the Ontario Elections my riding went Conservative too. I don't want to be a part of it. I don't want the tories peeling off even more seats.Until I see some reliable information that the NDP are a resurgent strong political force I'm not gonna waste votes.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2019 23:58
|
|
|
Kraftwerk posted:If you guys can sell me on why Voting NDP in Etobicoke loving Centre is a better idea than voting liberal to keep the cons out I'm listening. Their point is that by voting liberal you’re propping up a dying system that will ultimately hurt everybody. If you let the conservatives win now and only gently caress over the most disenfranchised, then the great social fabric of Canada will rise in a mighty socialist upheaval
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2019 00:00
|
|
|
Kraftwerk posted:If you guys can sell me on why Voting NDP in Etobicoke loving Centre is a better idea than voting liberal to keep the cons out I'm listening. Is it really a "wasted" vote if you give your vote to a party whose policies you support instead of a party whose policies you do not support?
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2019 00:00
|
|
|
vyelkin posted:Is it really a "wasted" vote if you give your vote to a party whose policies you support instead of a party whose policies you do not support? If the Lieberals delivered on electoral reform like they promised we wouldn't be having this conversation right now. If Mulcair didn't take such a hard right turn, we also wouldn't be having this conversation now (I think). The NDP blew their shot and I'm still angry at them for it and part of me wants them to implode and disappear so a more capable third party can take their place. My fear of a conservative government trumps anything else and I'll do anything to keep them out of power. Kraftwerk fucked around with this message at 00:08 on Sep 24, 2019 |
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2019 00:06
|
|
|
The ndp will never be a resurgent political force if you keep voting against them to keep the Cons out.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2019 00:08
|
|
|
Kraftwerk posted:If the Lieberals delivered on electoral reform like they promised we wouldn't be having this conversation right now. Well then to be frank I don't think the answer is to reward them by handing them your strategic vote.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2019 00:09
|
|
|
Like seriously to all the posters in this thread lamenting that the Liberals promised to do electoral reform and didn't follow through and therefore the only answer is to strategically reelect the Liberals to keep out the Conservatives, that is literally exactly the reason they didn't do electoral reform. You are doing exactly what they wanted and they are playing you like fiddles.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2019 00:11
|
|
|
No votes are ever wasted they are all counted. Whether you vote for the winner or the loser ultimately does not matter. Your one vote is not deciding the election. You aren't that special.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2019 00:13
|
|
|
vyelkin posted:Would you rather be stabbed or shot? Sure, there's a third option where maybe neither happens, but half this thread is hemming and hawing over whether to vote for the "I will stab you" party because they really don't want to get shot. To extend this analogy, Helsing's point is that sometimes it's better to be shot because at least everybody hears the bang and knows what happened.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2019 00:15
|
|
|
Franks Happy Place posted:To extend this analogy, Helsing's point is that sometimes it's better to be shot because at least everybody hears the bang and knows what happened. It's real easy to say that when you're privileged and know you're not going to be the ones getting shot.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2019 00:17
|
|
|
mediaphage posted:Their point is that by voting liberal you’re propping up a dying system that will ultimately hurt everybody. If you let the conservatives win now and only gently caress over the most disenfranchised, then the great social fabric of Canada will rise in a mighty socialist upheaval It is more so that eventually governments go stale. The longer you are in government the harder it is to stay in government. Spending any amount of time and effort trying to get just one more term for the centerist party does not meaningfully advance your interests. Eventually conservatives are going to come into power. The key is ensuring that the times when your side is in power are productive. Liberals who do not feel pressure from the left flank do not make progress in society.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2019 00:19
|
|
|
man this has turned into some dumb accelerationist horse poo poo a lot quicker than i expected
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2019 00:27
|
|
|
Sigh.... Even my apolitical girlfriend is telling me to vote for the party I actually support. I guess I'm voting NDP again... if Ted Optiz wins again don't blame me for it. What makes this hard is it turns out my incumbent isn't running again and instead Yvan Baker (my former MPP under Wynne) is running instead. I met the guy personally, he showed up at my door and we shot the poo poo about infrastructure, housing and keeping this dumpster fire of province from imploding. I came out of it with a very positive impression of him. I know thanks to party whips anything he personally feels plus his need to maintain career trump ideals but I have no idea who my NDP candidate is and I have even less faith in her credentials.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2019 00:28
|
|
|
Kraftwerk posted:my apolitical girlfriend Are we allowed to request name changes ITT?
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2019 00:31
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/nationalpost/status/1176261918752989186 This is the dumbest election.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2019 00:31
|
|
|
DynamicSloth posted:https://twitter.com/nationalpost/status/1176261918752989186 You are probably going to say this before the 2023 election too. Because its all downhill from here.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2019 00:48
|
|
|
Maneck posted:The Glebe Green candidate is a former NDPer Fixed it I canvassed my neighborhood and we had decent NDP support, except the old man who turns out owns six houses on the same street Wonder why
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2019 00:52
|
|
|
Chicken posted:It cannot be emphasized enough that Canadian polling by riding essentially doesn't exist. I imagine there's a fair amount of internal party polls that will never be released and there's usually a few close ridings that get polled by media organizations but the vast majority of Canadians will never see a poll of their riding. That is the biggest flaw in Eric Grenier's attempt to be the Canadian Nate Silver. It's also the biggest issue with trying to vote strategically. It's so difficult to know who has the best chance against the Conservatives that you might as well just vote for the party or candidate you actually like. Pollsters and pundits are repeatedly wrong about federal elections outcomes - Grenier especially https://www.thestar.com/news/federal-election/2015/10/20/how-did-the-pollsters-do-in-the-2015-federal-election.html https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canada-election-2015-grenier-projections-oct22-1.3282596 http://globalpublicaffairs.ca/advance-polls-vs-reality-a-comparative-look-at-polling-numbers-from-past-elections/  Turns out an AI named Polly, who feeds on salty tweets, has been able to accurately predict results https://www.cpacanada.ca/en/news/pivot-magazine/2018-10-30-erin-kelly-advanced-symbolics The rise of the machines is already happening https://twitter.com/Polly_ASI/status/1175077672134881280?s=19
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2019 01:51
|
|
|
EvidenceBasedQuack posted:Pollsters and pundits are repeatedly wrong about federal elections outcomes - Grenier especially Ok I predict bloc resurgence overtaking ndp to become power brokers
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2019 01:55
|
|
|
In a couple of words, what makes the Greens so bad?
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2019 02:07
|
|
|
How do you join the NDP, participate in the party and its activities or do anything at all to influence its direction? In the UK, the labour party threw open its doors to general public membership that lead to it being lead by a genuine left wing movement headed by Jeremy Corbyn. In the US, they have a primary system where there's a chance (however slight) of left insurgency be people like Sanders and AOC. When I looked into the NDP all I could find was some form that asked you to donate to them, nothing about active participation or having any influence on its candidates, leadership or platform in any way?
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2019 02:12
|
|
|
Jay Rust posted:In a couple of words, what makes the Greens so bad? 1. Elizabeth 2. May
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2019 02:16
|
|
|
Jay Rust posted:In a couple of words, what makes the Greens so bad? They let any kook run/let pseudoscience slip into their platform sometimes, and they have an official policy to not whip MPs so you can't trust them making a consistent voting block. Apparently May is kind of a bully too? As for their actual policies, aside from the environmental stuff they tend to be much less socially concious than you'd think. Very bland centrist economic stuff. A policy wonk could probably explain it better.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2019 02:23
|
|
|
The only MP they'd ever elected to parliament tried to petition the Queen to override the legislature.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2019 02:25
|
|
|
mila kunis posted:How do you join the NDP, participate in the party and its activities or do anything at all to influence its direction? In the UK, the labour party threw open its doors to general public membership that lead to it being lead by a genuine left wing movement headed by Jeremy Corbyn. In the US, they have a primary system where there's a chance (however slight) of left insurgency be people like Sanders and AOC. When I looked into the NDP all I could find was some form that asked you to donate to them, nothing about active participation or having any influence on its candidates, leadership or platform in any way? I'm unsure of the NDP's structure, but for the post part you register to become a party member and you'll be sent out a membership card and number. Do you have an NDP MP, MPP, or city/local councillor? Try getting in contact with them about joining. Once you join, you should get correspondence for local meetings. These can range from just sitting and listening to asking questions to leaders/candidates, to actual voting measures. Usually any big policy is decided at party conferences which happen once every year. Again, I'm not entirely sure how the NDP handle that, but you would only be there as a delegate for your riding or because the event is local to you. EDIT: Doing a search, you fill out your details here (https://secure.ndp.ca/membership_e.php). Your costs will be calculated based on province and employment/age (which is typical of left leaning parties elsewhere). From there, it's up to you. One thing to consider is your location. Are you in a place with a regular candidate? That is even slightly orange? If so, there is probably already a group to apply yourself to. If not, then you would have to build it yourself from the ground up. You may get some help from the Federal and Provincial arms, but probably not right now, as they would be focusing more on the election campaign. Still, even if there is a group there, it might not be effective. It depends on the party, but in areas where there is little history of electoral support, groups are often given less oversight and can be a bit of a mess. It's your choice then if you want to get involved and try and shape it up or leave it as it is. Skull Servant fucked around with this message at 02:37 on Sep 24, 2019 |
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2019 02:29
|
|
|
mila kunis posted:How do you join the NDP, participate in the party and its activities or do anything at all to influence its direction? In the UK, the labour party threw open its doors to general public membership that lead to it being lead by a genuine left wing movement headed by Jeremy Corbyn. In the US, they have a primary system where there's a chance (however slight) of left insurgency be people like Sanders and AOC. When I looked into the NDP all I could find was some form that asked you to donate to them, nothing about active participation or having any influence on its candidates, leadership or platform in any way? I'm not sure what you mean by "threw open its doors to general public membership" in the UK Labour context, membership to that party is a lot more expensive than membership in the NDP and exactly as open to the general public. My understanding of what happened in Labour is that people other than the entrenched establishment organised and muscled them out. The NDP's rules are pretty democratic, it's just the case that the membership has largely atrophied that muscle. In theory, what needs to happen is people join the party, and then ridings are allotted national convention delegates based on membership. Ridings elect a delegate slate, and at convention (every two years), delegates can change party rules, change party policy, elect party backroom leadership, and turf the leader. Party members in a given riding also (ostensibly) select the candidate, but party leadership currently has a lot of power over the choices offered to members. Party leadership are very good at using procedural rules to stymie insurgencies, but they can be beaten at convention - in 2016, they lost Mulcair and the Leap Manifesto votes (though I'd probably consider that more the party establishment being split than defeated, maybe), but while Leap was a great document to organise around, passing a policy resolution isn't enough. Insurgents would need to get a slate elected to the party executive and federal council on a platform of restoring party democracy, change party rules to decentralise nominations and decisions from the leader's office, and work on having a larger tie between party policy and the electoral platform. These are all changes that can be done with majority votes at convention (or various regional/identity subcaucuses at convention) and a lot of party regulars would support them, but the bureaucracy has been really good at not having things like that come to a vote because they've cared enough to organise against them but nobody has effectively organised for.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2019 02:39
|
|
|
infernal machines posted:The only MP they'd ever elected to parliament tried to petition the Queen to override the legislature. Technically they did elected a 2nd one this year Paul Manly. From Vancouver Island too
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2019 02:41
|
|
|
bunnyofdoom posted:Technically they did elected a 2nd one this year Yeah, that was poorly phrased past tense. The first one they elected to parliament, leader of the party, who had held her seat for six years at the time, wrote the Queen asking her to intercede in the legislature.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2019 02:45
|
|
|
Reality Sinner posted:The ndp will never be a resurgent political force if you keep voting against them to keep the Cons out. It's this you loving moron 'strategic' voters
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2019 02:51
|
|
|
gently caress strategic voting. The Grits not delivering electoral reform means your vote still doesn't mean poo poo. Your only tool to cast a strategic vote is whatever garbage Eric Grenier or other polls come up with, which is going to be wildly inaccurate at best and downright misleading under FPTP, so just vote for a party you actually agree with. In the grand scheme of things, your single vote is insignificant, so at least voting with your conscience will feel slightly less miserable no matter what the outcome is. If you really want to enact change, educate your chud uncle that insists on voting conservative because carbon tax, convince your dumb friend who plans to just stay home because his vote doesn't matter to show up anyway, yell on your Facebook wall and alienate yourself from the suckers who insist voting libs to own the conservatives, shitpost on a dead gay comedy forum if you must. But don't for a second fool yourself into thinking strategic voting will do Jack poo poo. Meaningful change will have to come next electoral cycle if this one doesn't deliver.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2019 02:51
|
|
|
Helsing posted:Of course they aren't settled. Quite the opposite they are at real long term risk. When our extraction and asset based economy stops chugging along just as the climate change and migration panics start to really sharpen you're going to see all the social progress evaporate as our wealthy masters realize that the only way to prevent sharpening class tensions is by drumming up anxieties over race and gender and cultural barbarity and the need to protect the homeland. The kind of liberal pluralist attitude that supports a vigorous public square and civil society where people of many different identities can freely cohabit and interact requires a lot of trust and social cohesion that cannot be sustained in a hyper aggressive and unstable world of endless neoliberal restructuring and growing climate chaos. While I do ultimately agree with you, I was directly responding to the words of several people in this thread who said that issues surrounding equal marriage and abortion were "settled issues" and would not come under attack from successive conservative governments. In general, you will not win the support of those who's rights are political pawns by saying "it's okay, society just needs to experience hell for a few decades and then we will get a truly equal society" These people will always pick a lovely status quo where at the very least they have some control over their bodies and ability to marry over a right-wing repressive government for X amount of years for the chance that things will work out okay later. The accelerationist argument is complete bunk and ahistorical. Have we seen a socialist uprising in places impacted by capitalistic famine like Ireland and India? Have Germany, Italy, and Spain renounced their fascist pasts and established a truly free state? We are not unique in our modern day strife, and to assume that this time it will work is ridiculous. All you are doing by advocating for an accelerationist point of view is, at best, driving away the vulnerable, the support of which you need, or at worst, literally killing them off. Neoliberalism is absolutely a rot infecting modern economics and actively facilitates the growth of the far-right, but minorities will take it over the social conservatism which denies them their rights, or depressive leftists who say we must all suffer to maybe bring about a change in the future. All three are stabbing you, but at least the Liberals are smiling at you, not telling you that you deserve it, or we all deserve it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2019 02:54
|
|
|
Maybe I’m the idiot but I’m not seeing any accelerationist arguments here? There are people saying "I’m not voting Liberal", and there are other people saying "there is a blue door and a red door", but nobody is saying "I want the Conservatives to win so things get worse and then they will get better". I realize there’s a logical implication there if you’re team two-door but there’s still no accelerationist component. The closest I’ve seen is "Liberals may give small short-term concessions but long-term everyone is worse off", but again that’s not an argument for accelerating anything. In fact it’s a warning against. Unless we’re using "accelerarionist" to mean "bad", in which case ok.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2019 03:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 01:00 |
|
|
gently caress voting "strategically". As mentioned, this is exactly what Trudeau wanted when he gave us that "What voting type are you?" personality quiz then said we didn't know what we wanted. It is not my fault that Sheer wins if I vote NDP. It's the Liberal's fault for not earning my vote.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2019 03:11
|
|