|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Canadian politics
|
Stetson
Shipmate
# 9597
|
Posted
On the US election thread, there were some complaints, somewhat understandable, about the drift into Canadian politics, and it was suggested by at least one poster that we start a separate thread.
The drift started with John Holding, here. But I'm going to reply to this comment from Og, lower on the page...
quote:
The NDP got its keester kicked and is still blaming everybody but itself.
Personally, I'm not really faulting the Liberals for doing anything evil. All parties have their own unique bag of tricks, and the Liberals' bag happens to be top-heavy with appeals to symbolism and rhetorical nationalism. I think it's mostly BS myself, but historically, they HAVE had their finger on the emotional pulse of the nation, far better than either the Tories(who tend to be about fifteen years behind the times in terms of their cultural appeal), or the NDP(whose class analysis, accurate though it may be from a socialist perspective, does not QUITE reflect the way Canadians in general actually see themselves).
So no, I'm not sitting here bawling my eyes out about how unfair it is that the Liberals are doing a con job on the public. And for even-handedness, I'll just say that I think that both the Liberals and the NDP were being pretty shifty when they said that the Saudi LAV contract was a done-deal which could not be cancelled. Since we now know that wasn't true.
--------------------
I have the power...Lucifer is lord!
Posts: 6574 | From: back and forth between bible belts | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sober Preacher's Kid
Presbymethegationalist
# 12699
|
Posted
Regrets, sure, I have a few regrets from the campaign, but that's not the point. The length of the campaign had nothing to do with what happened, and to say that it did is a Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc fallacy.
What did occur was that the Liberal campaign hit a point of resonance when they said they would run deficits. This combined with some favourable polling in what had been a neck-and-neck race up to that point generated a breakout of momentum. That could have happened at any point in the campaign, length is immaterial.
The lift that wave generated was strong enough it sunk what had been solid NDP ridings in Ontario and the Maritimes, particularly Toronto.
Many of Mr. Trudeau's campaign pledges were unmistakable appeals to NDP dogwhistles. Vote Reform was the biggest, gender equality was another. "It's 2015" right? No, it's a naked and unmistakable appeal to the NDP's Waffle/New Left end.
Spin and positioning are not inherently bad things, all parties have them and do them. What I do take issue with is to deny them altogether.
--------------------
NDP Federal Convention Ottawa 2018: A random assortment of Prots and Trots.
Posts: 7646 | From: Peterborough, Upper Canada | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
The NDP blew it when they tried to straddle the centre and it seemed Liberals were left of them.
--------------------
Out of this nettle, danger, we pluck this flower, safety.
\_(ツ)_/
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Og: Thread Killer
Ship's token CN Mennonite
# 3200
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sober Preacher's Kid:
Spin and positioning are not inherently bad things, all parties have them and do them. What I do take issue with is to deny them altogether.
My issue with the NDP and the Tory reaction to that election is encapsulated in that statement.
The underlying assumption is that the people were hoodwinked. A LOT of people do not appreciate being told they are not taking the election process seriously. Frankly, I find that talk demeans the vast majority of voters who take voting seriously and do look at all possible options.
This is a losing approach.
--------------------
I wish I was seeking justice loving mercy and walking humbly but... "Cease to lament for that thou canst not help, And study help for that which thou lament'st."
Posts: 5025 | From: Toronto | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sober Preacher's Kid
Presbymethegationalist
# 12699
|
Posted
Og, I work in the customer service industry. "Positioning" as it is called is what I do every day.
Now, on two examples, pot legalization and electoral reform, we have two clear examples of Liberal positioning where those in favour of both could hear what they wanted to hear, without the Liberals actually saying it or actually committing to anything, as was highlighted in the previous thread.
Electoral Reform is even more egregious as I don't believe the Liberals have ever intent on carrying it out.
And you are shocked that there is gambling at this establishment?
--------------------
NDP Federal Convention Ottawa 2018: A random assortment of Prots and Trots.
Posts: 7646 | From: Peterborough, Upper Canada | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stetson
Shipmate
# 9597
|
Posted
quote:
Many of Mr. Trudeau's campaign pledges were unmistakable appeals to NDP dogwhistles. Vote Reform was the biggest, gender equality was another. "It's 2015" right? No, it's a naked and unmistakable appeal to the NDP's Waffle/New Left end.
What got me about that was that he initially "balanced" the cabinet by appointing women to positions that weren't actually cabinet-level, and when he got called on that trick, he upped those jobs to the cabinet positions. And the applause started up again. As if he didn't know he was being duplicitious in the first place.
quote:
Spin and positioning are not inherently bad things, all parties have them and do them.
Basically, yeah, and sometimes they get away with it, and sometimes they don't. Mulroney got off scot-free for saying "The issue of free-trade was settled in 1911". George H.W. Bush didn't do so well with "No new taxes!!"
So far, JT has managed to glide his way through various ethically murky situations, but it remains to be seen whether his luck and skill will hold out.
Posts: 6574 | From: back and forth between bible belts | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Og: Thread Killer
Ship's token CN Mennonite
# 3200
|
Posted
Ur missing the point.
The NDP lost not because the Liberals were not listened to.
Again and again, we have seen this in Ontario where every single opposition party since Harris won the first time, baring the Libs in 2003, have
run on the idea that the Emperor has no clothes and if only people realised reality...etc. etc. - and lost.
Let me put it more bluntly
You
were
not
liked
Admit that and move on and hammer the Libs on your points on not coming through on the promises. But, to keep talking as if the people were hoodwinked is pointless.
--------------------
I wish I was seeking justice loving mercy and walking humbly but... "Cease to lament for that thou canst not help, And study help for that which thou lament'st."
Posts: 5025 | From: Toronto | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stetson
Shipmate
# 9597
|
Posted
quote:
Let me put it more bluntly
You
were
not
liked
Yeah, obviously. But that's not mutually exclusive of saying that the Liberals engaged in duplicitous politics.
And, yes, if politicians peddle BS, and some voters buy that BS, than those voters were hoodwinked.
Protectionists who voted for Mulroney thinking "Well, he SAID free-trade was a settled issue, so obviously, we can trust him to keep his word" were duped. As were people who voted either Liberal or NDP in the last election under the assumption that Trudeau or Mulcair were being forthright about the LAV deal. (Not that most voters were thinking of that issue, but among those who were, they were duped.)
I'm sorry if all this offends anyone's Vox Populi Vox Dei sentiment, but it's just simple logic.
Now, it could be that some people don't care if they were duped, and come next election, if marijuana is still illegal, they'll just think "Oh well, these issues are complicated, I'm sure the Liberals will legalize it if they get re-elected". If so, all the more power to the Liberals, and I'm glad those voters have found a party they think they can trust.
I would say that they're probably not the sharpest knives in the drawer, though.
[ 10. May 2016, 15:11: Message edited by: Stetson ]
Posts: 6574 | From: back and forth between bible belts | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Soror Magna
Shipmate
# 9881
|
Posted
I'm utterly, totally, completely sick and tired of the NDP snatching defeat from the jaws of victory, both federally and provincially. They lost Saskatchewan and Manitoba, FFS, and they couldn't beat the BC Socreds, after 10 years of lies and unconstitutional acts. The more they campaign, the worse they do, and if Mulcair couldn't hang on to all those seats and convince Quebecois that niqabs are not the end of the world, he doesn't deserve to be Prime Minister. It's time to burn the whole thing down and start over. Put May and Mulcair on an iceberg, and get rid of anyone who knows more than the chorus of Solidarity Forever.
--------------------
"You come with me to room 1013 over at the hospital, I'll show you America. Terminal, crazy and mean." -- Tony Kushner, "Angels in America"
Posts: 5430 | From: Caprica City | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Knopwood
Shipmate
# 11596
|
Posted
I want to bring the CCF back.
Posts: 6806 | From: Tio'tia:ke | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stetson
Shipmate
# 9597
|
Posted
Soror Magna wrote:
quote:
They lost Saskatchewan and Manitoba
Well, in fairness, they HAD been in power in Manitoba for 17 years straight, a pretty amazing stretch by almost any non-Alberta standard. The law of averages alone would have dictated that they were due for an ouster.
But Saskatchewan, yeah, I dunno. Maybe I'm just over-dramztizing things, because of the whole "Birthplace Of Canadian Social Democracy gives rise to the New Face Of Right-Wing Hegemony" motif, but things do seem pretty dire in that province.
quote:
and if Mulcair couldn't hang on to all those seats and convince Quebecois that niqabs are not the end of the world, he doesn't deserve to be Prime Minister
Well, you know, there is only so much a guy can do about unshakable cultural convictions. If you've ever listened to the kind of people who rant on about what I will euphemistically call "immigration issues", there is just NO budging them from those viewpoints. They've got it in their head that turbans/veils/niqabs/whatever are the biggest threat imaginable to our way of life, and that's all there is to it. If there are as many people like that in Quebec as is commonly reported, there probably wasn't a lot Mulcair Mulcair could say that would have changed their minds.
That said, I'm still agnostic as to whether or not those issues were as big a factor in Quebec as is often assumed.
[ 10. May 2016, 16:19: Message edited by: Stetson ]
--------------------
I have the power...Lucifer is lord!
Posts: 6574 | From: back and forth between bible belts | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Knopwood
Shipmate
# 11596
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Stetson:
Soror Magna wrote:
quote:
and if Mulcair couldn't hang on to all those seats and convince Quebecois that niqabs are not the end of the world, he doesn't deserve to be Prime Minister
Well, you know, there is only so much a guy can do about unshakable cultural convictions. If you've ever listened to the kind of people who rant on about what I will euphemistically call "immigration issues", there is just NO budging them from those viewpoints. They've got it in their head that turbans/veils/niqabs/whatever are the biggest threat imaginable to our way of life, and that's all there is to it. If there are as many people like that in Quebec as is commonly reported, there probably wasn't a lot Mulcair Mulcair could say that would have changed their minds.
That said, I'm still agnostic as to whether or not those issues were as big a factor in Quebec as is often assumed.
I think a lot of the frustration in NDP circles was because Trudeau's identical position on the niqab didn't seem to hurt in him QC, unshakable or not.
Posts: 6806 | From: Tio'tia:ke | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stetson
Shipmate
# 9597
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Knopwood:
quote:
Originally posted by Stetson:
Soror Magna wrote:
quote:
and if Mulcair couldn't hang on to all those seats and convince Quebecois that niqabs are not the end of the world, he doesn't deserve to be Prime Minister
Well, you know, there is only so much a guy can do about unshakable cultural convictions. If you've ever listened to the kind of people who rant on about what I will euphemistically call "immigration issues", there is just NO budging them from those viewpoints. They've got it in their head that turbans/veils/niqabs/whatever are the biggest threat imaginable to our way of life, and that's all there is to it. If there are as many people like that in Quebec as is commonly reported, there probably wasn't a lot Mulcair Mulcair could say that would have changed their minds.
That said, I'm still agnostic as to whether or not those issues were as big a factor in Quebec as is often assumed.
I think a lot of the frustration in NDP circles was because Trudeau's identical position on the niqab didn't seem to hurt in him QC, unshakable or not.
Well, that's the thing that, for me anyway, calls into question the whole narrative of the niqab hurting the NDP in Quebec. Why didn't it hurt Trudeau?
--------------------
I have the power...Lucifer is lord!
Posts: 6574 | From: back and forth between bible belts | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Stetson:
Soror Magna wrote:
quote:
They lost Saskatchewan and Manitoba
Well, in fairness, they HAD been in power in Manitoba for 17 years straight, a pretty amazing stretch by almost any non-Alberta standard. The law of averages alone would have dictated that they were due for an ouster.
But Saskatchewan, yeah, I dunno. Maybe I'm just over-dramztizing things, because of the whole "Birthplace Of Canadian Social Democracy gives rise to the New Face Of Right-Wing Hegemony" motif, but things do seem pretty dire in that province.
The Sask NDP hasn't had a decent leader since Lorne Calvert. Lingenfelter and Broten were not up to the challenge. Broten couldn't even win his own seat, and looked careless in approving candidates who had to be pulled because of prior misconduct.
But the biggest enemy of the Sask NDP is Brad Wall. He is able to charm in ways that made Broten look juvenile and shrill before the election. About the same way Trudeau made Mulcair look.
The real foundational problem for the NDP in Sask is that it allied itself with organized labour both federally and provincially. This alienated the largest group of employed people in Sask - the self employed and those employed by small business, which means in Sask terms, less than 10 employees. This includes farmers. And even though most people aren't farmers any more, the cultural overlay of a little guy (Tommy Douglas channelled him) cooperatively with neighbours and not will big labour-big government, can't stomach the pandering to the vested lobby of entitled unionists. Though the Crown corporations are safe for the moment.
--------------------
Out of this nettle, danger, we pluck this flower, safety.
\_(ツ)_/
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sober Preacher's Kid
Presbymethegationalist
# 12699
|
Posted
As a union organizer heading an active campaign, that's a little much, no prophet.
--------------------
NDP Federal Convention Ottawa 2018: A random assortment of Prots and Trots.
Posts: 7646 | From: Peterborough, Upper Canada | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
No it isn't, it's what I'm hearing in Sask. It just explains the lack of NDP support in Sask. The Ont and federal situations are different.
The Manitoba and Alberta situations are entirely different provincially.
--------------------
Out of this nettle, danger, we pluck this flower, safety.
\_(ツ)_/
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Og: Thread Killer
Ship's token CN Mennonite
# 3200
|
Posted
FWIW, I see from Paul Wells that the Electoral Reform committee is to be announced tomorrow. Terms of reference already announced via Commons order papers. Report due December 1st of this year.
Trudeau mentioned in the presser last week that "one party insists on a referendum and another insists on a certain outcome". The first is fact - the Tories hate the idea and know darn well that no reform would pass a referendum as the media hates it just as much. The second bit is full on spin about the NDP. He's trying to paint the NDP as dogmatic and the Liberals as the party "that listens". Classic centrist strategy. If the NDP picks a nice enough leader next time, unlikely that strategy will work.
--------------------
I wish I was seeking justice loving mercy and walking humbly but... "Cease to lament for that thou canst not help, And study help for that which thou lament'st."
Posts: 5025 | From: Toronto | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Og: Thread Killer
Ship's token CN Mennonite
# 3200
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Stetson:
...Well, that's the thing that, for me anyway, calls into question the whole narrative of the niqab hurting the NDP in Quebec. Why didn't it hurt Trudeau?
The Niqab thing might have caused people who were parking their vote to reconsider who they were voting for.
The Liberal position on this had been clear for years. The NDP - not so much as seen by a few wayward utterances.
The larger narrative in Quebec was a desire for change had people comparing the NDP and the Libs - the swing in the rest of Canada was obvious enough that enough people in Quebec decided to get in on that change too.
The bigger question is who will people in Quebec want next time.
[ 11. May 2016, 02:34: Message edited by: Og: Thread Killer ]
--------------------
I wish I was seeking justice loving mercy and walking humbly but... "Cease to lament for that thou canst not help, And study help for that which thou lament'st."
Posts: 5025 | From: Toronto | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stetson
Shipmate
# 9597
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sober Preacher's Kid:
As a union organizer heading an active campaign, that's a little much, no prophet.
Thing is, the NDP has been formally aligned with the labour movement since its founding in 1961, yet the Saskatchewan party enjoyed a total of roughly two decades in power after that.
So, I'd wonder what changed in the last few years to get people so excised about the NDP-union connection. Was there some sort of Winter Of Discontent period under Calvert?
[ 11. May 2016, 14:41: Message edited by: Stetson ]
Posts: 6574 | From: back and forth between bible belts | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stetson
Shipmate
# 9597
|
Posted
Hmm. Looks like I used the word "excised" incorrectly in the above post. But why do I have it in my head that it can mean something like "angry"? Is there another word with that meaning that sounds the same?
--------------------
I have the power...Lucifer is lord!
Posts: 6574 | From: back and forth between bible belts | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Nick Tamen
Ship's Wayfaring Fool
# 15164
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Stetson:
Hmm. Looks like I used the word "excised" incorrectly in the above post. But why do I have it in my head that it can mean something like "angry"? Is there another word with that meaning that sounds the same?
Yes—exercised.
--------------------
The first thing God says to Moses is, "Take off your shoes." We are on holy ground. Hard to believe, but the truest thing I know. — Anne Lamott
Posts: 2833 | From: On heaven-crammed earth | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stetson
Shipmate
# 9597
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Nick Tamen:
quote:
Originally posted by Stetson:
Hmm. Looks like I used the word "excised" incorrectly in the above post. But why do I have it in my head that it can mean something like "angry"? Is there another word with that meaning that sounds the same?
Yes—exercised.
Thanks. I was thinking that might be it, but had only a vague memory of hearing the word used that way.
--------------------
I have the power...Lucifer is lord!
Posts: 6574 | From: back and forth between bible belts | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Stetson:
So, I'd wonder what changed in the last few years to get people so excised about the NDP-union connection. Was there some sort of Winter Of Discontent period under Calvert?
No, it wasn't Lorne Calvert (who BTW is the principal of St Andrews College, University of Saskatchewan now. It's a United Church seminary. He is a great guy, and a fine piano player.)
A brief history of Sask politricks. Grant Devine's Progressive Conservative gov't nearly bankrupted the province (as conservatives oftens seem wont to do). The NDP under Roy Romanow, followed by Calvert fixed it. With difficulty. That former PC party had a number of its leading people jailed for fraud. The Liberals fell part after they turfed one leader Linda Haverstock and next leader Jim Melenchuk agreed to support the Calvert minority gov't. So there wasn't any organized opposition to the NDP. Then Sask began the resource boom where low quality oil (full of sulphur and heavy) and potash became highly priced commodities. At the same time the dregs of Liberals and PCs formed the Saskatchewan Party, following a similar path that got Harper into the PM office.
The outflow of people from the province reversed with the boom (Sask had about 1 million people since the 1920s and was beyond prior levels). These people had high wages and no real connection to the historical urban-NDP, rural-conservative (in whatever stripe) split, such that city-based resource workers and miners, and all of the associated employment, were now voting differently than other urban voters. Plus there was a influx back from Alberta, Ontario, B.C, Nfld, and also from abroad, lots of UK, Polish, Irish, Ukrainian, Fillipino, East Indian, mainland Chinese – almost all trades people, not union. We'd never seem this since the mini-boom in the 1960s.
Historically, the provincial civil service, health and crown corporations could be counted on to vote NDP. Unionized, good benefits, high pay. But progressively these sectors have declined, and the highly paid resource workers who worked contract to contract replaced them. Thus, a major demographic and economic shift. Booming housing market, lots of vehicle sales, runs on vacation properties and hot holidays. Extreme affluence. I mean crazy , People even were leaving union jobs for self employment and contract work because of high pay.
Now we're in a slump with the bottom falling out of the oil, and China not buying potash, with the Sask Party afraid to release a budget before the April 04 election. We can only hope they don't try to sell off crown corps to balance the budget.
--------------------
Out of this nettle, danger, we pluck this flower, safety.
\_(ツ)_/
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Soror Magna
Shipmate
# 9881
|
Posted
Ironically, having a union job is now seen as a sign of privilege, and union workers are lazy, spoiled hothouse flowers who couldn't make it in the real world. The fact that sectors like government, health care and education are still highly unionized reinforces the notion that unionized employees are part of the elite, not the real working class. So while the NDP can still call on unions for volunteers, they may be doing more harm than good.
--------------------
"You come with me to room 1013 over at the hospital, I'll show you America. Terminal, crazy and mean." -- Tony Kushner, "Angels in America"
Posts: 5430 | From: Caprica City | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Soror Magna
Shipmate
# 9881
|
Posted
Follow-up: I'm on holidays this week, and a neighbour - self-employed or on commission all his life, who cannot afford to retire - asked me, "Do you have the whole week off? What kind of job is that?" I replied, "I've worked there for over 25 years!" Answer: "So what?"
--------------------
"You come with me to room 1013 over at the hospital, I'll show you America. Terminal, crazy and mean." -- Tony Kushner, "Angels in America"
Posts: 5430 | From: Caprica City | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Augustine the Aleut
Shipmate
# 1472
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Og: Thread Killer:
quote:
Originally posted by Stetson:
...Well, that's the thing that, for me anyway, calls into question the whole narrative of the niqab hurting the NDP in Quebec. Why didn't it hurt Trudeau?
The Niqab thing might have caused people who were parking their vote to reconsider who they were voting for.
The Liberal position on this had been clear for years. The NDP - not so much as seen by a few wayward utterances.
The larger narrative in Quebec was a desire for change had people comparing the NDP and the Libs - the swing in the rest of Canada was obvious enough that enough people in Quebec decided to get in on that change too.
The bigger question is who will people in Quebec want next time.
My little bit of anecdotology to add to this was that after the election, while in Montréal on a cultural improvement expedition, I had a few people telling me that the NDP were considered to be "soft nationalists" and had been expected to waffle on the niqab issue-- when they didn't, BQ and Conservatives moved in to the gap. Voters had expected the Liberals to take the stance which they had, as they were identified as the ethnic party anyway ("le parti for pour les autres,"-- the party for the others). Mr Mulcair, knowing the likely electoral costs, held to his position and I think that 4-7 seats were lost on this point of principle.
Passing through Montréal yesterday on my way back from godless Florida, I quite by happenstance ran into a defeated NDP candidate of my acquaintance, who told me that she had experienced some similar sentiments, although it far from told the entire story. She sad that, after her defeat, she was overwhelmed by constituents saying that they had not voted against her at all, but they were uncomfortable with what they had read about Muslims in France. Pointing out that this was not what was on the ballot in front of them was perhaps superfluous. Before my eggs arrived, I reminded her that after Stanley Knowles had been defeated in 1958, he had lots of apologies from supporters saying that they had voted for the Conservatives to teach the Liberals a lesson and that it was nothing about him at all-- they wanted him to know of their strong personal support for him. Logic, I noted, was not always a strong point with voters but Stanley returned to Winnipeg North Centre for the next 22 years.
Posts: 6236 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stetson
Shipmate
# 9597
|
Posted
Augustine wrote:
quote:
My little bit of anecdotology to add to this was that after the election, while in Montréal on a cultural improvement expedition, I had a few people telling me that the NDP were considered to be "soft nationalists" and had been expected to waffle on the niqab issue-- when they didn't, BQ and Conservatives moved in to the gap. Voters had expected the Liberals to take the stance which they had, as they were identified as the ethnic party anyway ("le parti for pour les autres,"-- the party for the others). Mr Mulcair, knowing the likely electoral costs, held to his position and I think that 4-7 seats were lost on this point of principle.
So, in other words, there was a certain segment of Quebec voters for whom the niqab was an important enough issue to make them entertain voting NDP when they thought the NDP might be anti-niqab, but not important enough to stop them from voting Liberal(rather than BQ), even though they knew the Liberals were adamantly pro-niqab, when they concluded that there might be advantages(*) to voting Liberal?
It's plausible, I guess, but I'm still kinda having trouble wrapping my head around the logic.
(*) For example, getting in on the majority government when it was clear how the ROC was voting.
Posts: 6574 | From: back and forth between bible belts | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sober Preacher's Kid
Presbymethegationalist
# 12699
|
Posted
The NDP's particular problem, and success, was to distinguish between social-democracy and nationalism/separatism. For various reasons those two had become fused at the hip in Quebec politics, even though they have little to do with each other in terms of policy needs. PKP was the manifestation of this at the provincial level; he was so unpopular the unions that the union/PQ special relationship is essentially at an end.
Quebec's unions have realized that at the federal level especially, they have a ready friend in the NDP, far more than they ever had in the Bloc.
With 16 seats in Quebec at present, that base is no going away.
--------------------
NDP Federal Convention Ottawa 2018: A random assortment of Prots and Trots.
Posts: 7646 | From: Peterborough, Upper Canada | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Augustine the Aleut
Shipmate
# 1472
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Stetson:
Augustine wrote:
quote:
My little bit of anecdotology to add to this was that after the election, while in Montréal on a cultural improvement expedition, I had a few people telling me that the NDP were considered to be "soft nationalists" and had been expected to waffle on the niqab issue-- when they didn't, BQ and Conservatives moved in to the gap. Voters had expected the Liberals to take the stance which they had, as they were identified as the ethnic party anyway ("le parti for pour les autres,"-- the party for the others). Mr Mulcair, knowing the likely electoral costs, held to his position and I think that 4-7 seats were lost on this point of principle.
So, in other words, there was a certain segment of Quebec voters for whom the niqab was an important enough issue to make them entertain voting NDP when they thought the NDP might be anti-niqab, but not important enough to stop them from voting Liberal(rather than BQ), even though they knew the Liberals were adamantly pro-niqab, when they concluded that there might be advantages(*) to voting Liberal?
It's plausible, I guess, but I'm still kinda having trouble wrapping my head around the logic.
(*) For example, getting in on the majority government when it was clear how the ROC was voting.
.
If you get into the weeds of the riding-by-riding results, the NDP vote faded in out-of-Montreal ridings and was picked up by BQ and Conservatives as much as by the Liberals-- the fade was the greater the closer to Québec City. Remember that the margins we are speaking of are fairly thin-- I believe 25 Québec MPs were elected with a third of the vote cast or less!!! Half of these 25 were NDP losses to the other parties (equally between the Conservative, Liberal and Bloc).
One of my pollster contacts told me that the fade was entirely in the final ten days of the campaign. It was an anti-niqab vote and electors largely went back to their pre-Orange Crush preferences, as far as that could be discerned. Like Stetson, he shook his head at electors who, voting against the niqab, voted for Liberals (who with the NDP were not anti-niqab)-- he thinks that it might be an inclination to the younger Liberal leader upon whom they were projecting all sorts of things.
At the Metropolis conference in Toronto in March, Andrew Griffith presented a paper on Muslims and diversity as a 2015 campaign issue, praising Mulcair for his stance, but making it clear that it was key to significant losses in Québec for the NDP. He analyzed the (no longer insignificant) Muslim vote-- apparently a year ago about a third of Canadian Muslims were Conservative supporters, up from about 20% in 2011; but in the exit polls in 2015, researchers were "unable to find a statistically useful sample of Muslim Conservative supporters." Griffiths wonders if the Conservatives did not, through their niqab strategy, sacrifice a solid and growing vote block to pick up a few seats in Québec and try to solidify their support in the 905 belt.
Posts: 6236 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Og: Thread Killer
Ship's token CN Mennonite
# 3200
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Augustine the Aleut:
At the Metropolis conference in Toronto in March, Andrew Griffith presented a paper on Muslims and diversity as a 2015 campaign issue, praising Mulcair for his stance, but making it clear that it was key to significant losses in Québec for the NDP. He analyzed the (no longer insignificant) Muslim vote-- apparently a year ago about a third of Canadian Muslims were Conservative supporters, up from about 20% in 2011; but in the exit polls in 2015, researchers were "unable to find a statistically useful sample of Muslim Conservative supporters." Griffiths wonders if the Conservatives did not, through their niqab strategy, sacrifice a solid and growing vote block to pick up a few seats in Québec and try to solidify their support in the 905 belt.
Maybe the outer 905 belt was held onto by this. But, the barbaric practices thing coupled with the demonisation of Muslims doomed them in Peel Region. I suppose they were trying to hold onto things but they've lost the inner ring of 905 seats until they prove themselves no longer xenophobes. Given who is going to be running for the leadership, I suppose Chong or the fog upon memories that is Doug Ford are the only hope.
--------------------
I wish I was seeking justice loving mercy and walking humbly but... "Cease to lament for that thou canst not help, And study help for that which thou lament'st."
Posts: 5025 | From: Toronto | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Augustine the Aleut
Shipmate
# 1472
|
Posted
Og: Thread Killer writes:
quote:
Maybe the outer 905 belt was held onto by this
Well, it wasn't. The Conservatives got 9 seats and the Liberals 25, most of which were Liberal gains. Apparently their strategists, somehow not having read the demographic data from this area, thought otherwise, somehow thinking it was Ford Nation, neglecting that local argot refers to Bramptonpur, Multan, and Richmondgarh.
Posts: 6236 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Og: Thread Killer
Ship's token CN Mennonite
# 3200
|
Posted
About Ford Nation and diversity, it is actually highly diverse, including a lot of people with low incomes who live in large apartment blocks. Even after Rob gets caught saying racist things, people stuck with him.
Not sure Doug gets the same fervour but if he runs, Doug Ford is going to try to faux-Trump his way to being President of Canada without being so obviously racist.
--------------------
I wish I was seeking justice loving mercy and walking humbly but... "Cease to lament for that thou canst not help, And study help for that which thou lament'st."
Posts: 5025 | From: Toronto | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Augustine the Aleut
Shipmate
# 1472
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Og: Thread Killer:
About Ford Nation and diversity, it is actually highly diverse, including a lot of people with low incomes who live in large apartment blocks. Even after Rob gets caught saying racist things, people stuck with him.
Not sure Doug gets the same fervour but if he runs, Doug Ford is going to try to faux-Trump his way to being President of Canada without being so obviously racist.
This is a point which some of my leftier-than-I friends sometimes miss. Concerns over instability, crime, education, and garbage collection override identity issues. A racist fool (not identifying anyone in particular) who can provide solutions will have the support of a very broad selection of the population. And people who believe themselves to be on the outside will identify with someone who is deemed an outsider.
Doug Ford doesn't have the same folksiness (IMHO) as did his late brother and his French is nonexistent; the circumstances no longer exist in which a unilingual party leader can operate.
Posts: 6236 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stetson
Shipmate
# 9597
|
Posted
Augustine wrote:
quote:
This is a point which some of my leftier-than-I friends sometimes miss. Concerns over instability, crime, education, and garbage collection override identity issues. A racist fool (not identifying anyone in particular) who can provide solutions will have the support of a very broad selection of the population.
And from what I recall, the "racism" indictiment against Ford was based on what many would consider pretty thin gruel. I think the only three things ever conclusively pinned on him were...
A. He said that "orientals work like dogs".
B. He said that Toronto should stop accepting immigrants for a period of time.
C. He imitated a West Indian accent at a burger joint.
First to last...
A. As an ESL teacher, I can report that, at least in Korea, many people see nothing wrong with the use of the English word "oriental" to mean people from East Asia. I usually explain to my students why it's now considered offensive(ie. it dates from an era when racist sentiment was considered acceptable, and is these days mostly used by people who still do consider it at least partially acceptable), but even I have to concede that, in a literal sense, it means nothing more sinister than "someone from the east", just as the totally acceptable "westerner" means "someone from the west".
And yes, praising the work ethic of immigrant groups is a form of prejudice. But it's an observable fact that lots of people like to hear their own group complimented, and counter-critiques of "model minority racism" are usually delivered through a fog of academic jargon rarely heard outside of grad seminars, let alone during an election campaign.
B. The immigration moratorium WAS pretty bizarre, given that no city in Canada has the right to impose those kinds of rules. But I suspect that's actually one of the reasons he got away with it, since his immigrant supporters(along with everyone else) probably realized there was no way it was gonna happen.
And there was at least one ad(of murky provenance) assuring immigrant voters that Ford's xenophobia was all just an act to get the white vote...
(link deleted for racy ads: google "Who is behind the anti-gay Tamil radio ad?")
C. According to some linguists interviewed in the media after the story broke, Ford's Jamaican patois was actually pretty authentic, which might indicate that he spends more time socializing with Jamaicans than do a lot of the white progressives who were outraged on behalf of Jamaicans.
Not that I would doubt Ford had some pretty hidebound views on race, immigration, and related issues, just that the evidence presented in the press as being ironclad would probably not seem all that persuasive to people who were ready to back Ford for other reasons.
[ 16. May 2016, 15:00: Message edited by: Stetson ]
Posts: 6574 | From: back and forth between bible belts | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Knopwood
Shipmate
# 11596
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Stetson:
A. As an ESL teacher, I can report that, at least in Korea, many people see nothing wrong with the use of the English word "oriental" to mean people from East Asia.
Indeed, it's via ship contacts that I learned such scruples are unique to North American mores. In Britain, I gather, it's still standard for East Asians, while "Asian" (unqualified) connotes South Asian or Middle Eastern.
quote:
Originally posted by Stetson:
C. According to some linguists interviewed in the media after the story broke, Ford's Jamaican patois was actually pretty authentic, which might indicate that he spends more time socializing with Jamaicans than do a lot of the white progressives who were outraged on behalf of Jamaicans.
Several of my anarchist friends, while they consider all candidates protectors of ruling-class interests and wouldn't vote, took an even dimmer view of what they saw as middle-class white liberal pearl-clutching at Ford's association with brown, low-income drug users.
[ 16. May 2016, 22:25: Message edited by: Knopwood ]
Posts: 6806 | From: Tio'tia:ke | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Augustine the Aleut
Shipmate
# 1472
|
Posted
FWIW, the late mayor's patois sounded authentic enough to me (as a former visitor to Saint Anne's hills and the maroon country) that I referred to my patois panel who agreed that his vocabulary was bad but his accent needed work. Given that coherence was not essential to the context, there was no marking under that heading.
Knopwood makes a fair point about the frisson-frenzied pearl-clutching over his patois vulgarities, although I think that his comments about his married life were grossly inappropriate-- however, a medical friend wonders if he might not have been self-medicating for his then-undiagnosed illness at that point, and his irrationality might have had that as its origin.
Posts: 6236 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stetson
Shipmate
# 9597
|
Posted
Knopwood wrote:
quote:
Several of my anarchist friends, while they consider all candidates protectors of ruling-class interests and wouldn't vote, took an even dimmer view of what they saw as middle-class white liberal pearl-clutching at Ford's association with brown, low-income drug users.
Yes, there was a subset of left-wingers, usually, like your friends, on the far left or at least outside the social-democratic mainstream, who thought the whole Ford panic was way overblown, and even defended him against what they regarded as police harassment.
It should be stated that at least some of Ford's opponents weren't much more progressive than he was. The guy who took over Ford's duties after he had been stripped of his powers was one of the main architects of the Megacity, which many people blamed for the ascension of Ford in the first place.
And I'm pretty sure that Ford is far from being the only politician who has ever indulged in cocaine while in office. Though unlike most of them, he obviously lacked discretion, hanging out in crack dens etc.
Posts: 6574 | From: back and forth between bible belts | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Og: Thread Killer
Ship's token CN Mennonite
# 3200
|
Posted
Please no revisionism on Rob Ford
He was a racist, sexist homophobic jerk as the Toronto Sun even said.
--------------------
I wish I was seeking justice loving mercy and walking humbly but... "Cease to lament for that thou canst not help, And study help for that which thou lament'st."
Posts: 5025 | From: Toronto | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Augustine the Aleut
Shipmate
# 1472
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Og: Thread Killer:
Please no revisionism on Rob Ford
He was a racist, sexist homophobic jerk as the Toronto Sun even said.
I was trying to be polite about him but you are quite right. If he had been decent, he would have resigned immediately that his drug use and his inebriety-in-office hours was known. Two journalist friends inform me that his drug use and his alcoholic excess was well-known in Toronto well before his election; this was further confirmed to me by a retired teacher from his ward. He should not have run, he should not have been supported by prominent people who knew better, and he should not have been elected, and he should not have continued in office.
Posts: 6236 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sober Preacher's Kid
Presbymethegationalist
# 12699
|
Posted
Power is a far more intoxicating thing that most drugs.
Even in hole-in-the-wall riding associations. ![[Disappointed]](graemlins/disappointed.gif)
--------------------
NDP Federal Convention Ottawa 2018: A random assortment of Prots and Trots.
Posts: 7646 | From: Peterborough, Upper Canada | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Knopwood
Shipmate
# 11596
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Augustine the Aleut:
Two journalist friends inform me that his drug use and his alcoholic excess was well-known in Toronto well before his election
Discretion seems to be the Canadian journo way. I'm still dying to know who Mark Bourrie's "drunken Governor General" was.
Posts: 6806 | From: Tio'tia:ke | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stetson
Shipmate
# 9597
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Knopwood:
quote:
Originally posted by Augustine the Aleut:
Two journalist friends inform me that his drug use and his alcoholic excess was well-known in Toronto well before his election
Discretion seems to be the Canadian journo way. I'm still dying to know who Mark Bourrie's "drunken Governor General" was.
Or the name of the "prominent hockey analyst" who allegedly shared a drug dealer with Ford.
[ 17. May 2016, 14:20: Message edited by: Stetson ]
Posts: 6574 | From: back and forth between bible belts | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Augustine the Aleut
Shipmate
# 1472
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Knopwood:
quote:
Originally posted by Augustine the Aleut:
Two journalist friends inform me that his drug use and his alcoholic excess was well-known in Toronto well before his election
Discretion seems to be the Canadian journo way. I'm still dying to know who Mark Bourrie's "drunken Governor General" was.
The only Toronto-resident former GGs are Roland Michener and Adrienne Clarkson, so make your choice.
In my former RL of the two hardest-drinking politicians I encountered, one was an extraordinarily effective minister and parliamentarian and a complicated and devout RC; the other was incoherent and pitied and despised by those he encountered.
I had observed John Turner on occasion but his drinking was of the two martinis at lunch sort, reflecting his generation and class. My late boss always took wine with lunch, which had him labelled by his (same party) opponents' staff as a heavy drinker-- he drank in a European manner and a bottle of wine could disappear at an extended dinner.
I knew several assistants who were unable to function without a ration but whose drinking only became noticeable to an observer after 12 hours or so of consumption. Given the long hours and their youthfulness (also known as immaturity), bars were among the few social venues available.
What reporters never commented on was the use of cocaine by parliamentarians, particularly bad among Conservative and Bloc MPs in the 90s and 00s. Friends who were waiters and bartenders during that period identified almost a dozen snorters for me. It should be said that its use was very common in Ottawa at the period, to the point that younger RCMP friends would not go to parties at all except those held by others in the force.
Posts: 6236 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stetson
Shipmate
# 9597
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Og: Thread Killer:
Please no revisionism on Rob Ford
He was a racist, sexist homophobic jerk as the Toronto Sun even said.
Well, yes, but when a racist jerk somehow manages to attract what was by most accounts a not-insignificant portion of the POC vote, I don't think it's just an exercise in revisionist apologia to speculate on why that might have been.
Augustine filled in part of the picture, by pointing out that Ford addressed everyday bread-and-butter issues with competence. And I was trying to fill in the other half by arguing that his public racism was probably not severe enough, and likely not central enough to his platform, to cancel out the positives, as far as many of his POC constituents were concerned.
As for the Toronto Sun, I'm not sure how seriously I would take their denunciations, even in a "Well, if his own allies are saying this, it must be true" sort of a way.
Assuming I've got the date correct(couldn't load the whole page), that article was written well after the substance-abuse allegations first came to light. So I doubt it's a coincidence that the Sun finally got around to moralizing about his bigotry AFTER his personal foibles had made him toxic both to the city of Toronto and the conservative brand.
Here is what the Sun had to say about Ford back in 2010, before the gawker video, but AFTER his comments about a ban on immigrants, the work habits of "orientals", and how we don't need to worry about AIDS because only gays and addicts get it.
--------------------
I have the power...Lucifer is lord!
Posts: 6574 | From: back and forth between bible belts | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stetson
Shipmate
# 9597
|
Posted
Augustine wrote:
quote:
What reporters never commented on was the use of cocaine by parliamentarians, particularly bad among Conservative and Bloc MPs in the 90s and 00s.
Yeah, you see, this is why I had some difficulty getting TOO outraged about Rob Ford's cocaine indulgences.
Like I said, I realize there's a bit of a difference between, on the one hand, discreetly buying cocaine from a guy in an upscale bar, and, on the other, getting yourself videotaped in a crack house puffing on the titular substance with a bunch of known gangsters. But, still, if we're gonna say, "Elected officials shouldn't do cocaine", I think that's pretty much a non-negotiable, not something about which there can be degrees of disapproval.
But, like I say, Ford was dumb enough to get caught, so he's the one who got put up in the stockades.
--------------------
I have the power...Lucifer is lord!
Posts: 6574 | From: back and forth between bible belts | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stetson
Shipmate
# 9597
|
Posted
Speaking of drugs...
Canada's marijuana legalization flouts three UN drug conventions
This is something that should pose a dilemna for hardcore Liberal supporters, but probably won't.
The reason it should is that part of the whole Liberal persona this time around is that, under them, Canada will be a nation that upholds international co-operation and multilateralism. The whole "Canada is back" schtick.
But if they legalize pot, they're flipping a big middle-finger to every other signatory of those agreements. And the escape-clause of withdrawing from the treaties doesn't really cut ice, since there isn't much point to saying you're going to uphold the treaties you've signed, if you then turn around and say you have the right to pull out at any time. (Unless you convince everyone else to abandon the treaties as well, which likely won't happen in this case.)
But the reason I think it won't create much of a dilemna for Liberal supporters is because a lot of them aren't going to analyze things that deeply, since both "free the weed" and "respect treaties" sound cool on a surface level.
--------------------
I have the power...Lucifer is lord!
Posts: 6574 | From: back and forth between bible belts | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
It's the assisted death issue that has more of my attention than the marijuana issue, and it is coming up sooner.
While I am befuddled about the process between the Supreme Court and Parliament with this, I was amused to sleepily infer from the clock alarm wake-up news in my pre-conscious 6 o'clock mind that the Senate may have to have to deal with both. Such that my brief thought was of both pot smoking for senators followed by assisted death for the chamber.
--------------------
Out of this nettle, danger, we pluck this flower, safety.
\_(ツ)_/
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Caissa
Shipmate
# 16710
|
Posted
My gut feeling is that if the proposed legislation is not amended, it will be eventually struck down by the SCC.
Posts: 972 | From: Saint John, N.B. | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Og: Thread Killer
Ship's token CN Mennonite
# 3200
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Stetson:
But if they legalize pot, they're flipping a big middle-finger to every other signatory of those agreements. ...
Given most of those signatories are trying to figure out how to get out of the "whacky tabacky is evil" business, shouldn't be much blowback on this at all.
Canadians are for this. Time to move on.
--------------------
I wish I was seeking justice loving mercy and walking humbly but... "Cease to lament for that thou canst not help, And study help for that which thou lament'st."
Posts: 5025 | From: Toronto | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
