Trudeau Popularity - or not. Nanos research

[TacticalTea]

Remember Andrew Scheer? No? Yeah, worst CPC leader in a while, cause he got the driver's seat after 14 rounds. Milquetoast consensus does not actually equal leadership. We elect governments to lead, not just represent.

FPTP already ensures a government that alternates from left to right every 8-12 years, and balanced representation of all regions, not just cities.

Last thing we need is a PR system that gives even more power to the Party / PMO, or ranked choice that guarantees Liberal governments forever, occasionally swapping with NDP.

If we want to take power away from the winning party / PMO, there are much better axes of reform available, like the Senate or the separation of powers.

 

[Spencer100]

Remember Andrew Scheer? No? Yeah, worst CPC leader in a while, cause he got the seat after 14 rounds. Milquetoast consensus does not actually equal leadership. We elect governments to lead, not just represent.

FPTP already ensures a government that alternates from left to right every 8-12 years, and balanced representation of all regions, not just cities.

Last thing we need is a PR system that gives even more power to the Party / PMO, or ranked choice that guarantees Liberal governments forever, occasionally swapping with NDP.

If we want to take power away from the winning party / PMO, there are much better axes of reform available, like the Senate or the separation of powers.

Also I think reform in the parties themselves would go a long way. I would start there. No big laws needs needed, no constitution problems.

Start by just removing the need of the leader to sign off on riding members choices to run. By removing that one thing change could be great.

 

[YZT580]

Also I think reform in the parties themselves would go a long way. I would start there. No big laws needs needed, no constitution problems.

Start by just removing the need of the leader to sign off on riding members choices to run. By removing that one thing change could be great.

and couple it with free votes with the exception of budget issues disallowing the habit of leaders to designate other issues as non-confidence

 

[Brad Sallows]

As I said it's not a perfect system (and what system is?) but what it prevents is the splitting of votes between two candidates that are broadly most preferable by the majority of the voters resulting in the least popular of the three candidates being elected.

For example "Party A" and "Party B" are both roughly on the same side of the political spectrum while "Party C" is on the opposite side of the spectrum.

On election day the results are:

Party C - 32% of the vote
Party A - 30% of the vote
Party B - 28% of the vote

So in our current FPTP system the candidate for Party C wins the election with 32% of the popular vote. While the two parties on the opposite side of the political spectrum between them earned 58% of the popular vote.

Now let's hypothetically say that the vast majority (say 80%) of the last place party's voters would far prefer Party A over Party C because they are much closer in their political outlook. So under the ranked ballot system with no single party receiving over 50% of the vote Party B is dropped from the count with 80% of their supporters picking Party A as their 2nd choice and 20% picking Party C as their 2nd choice.

The results would look something like this:

Party A - 30% of vote + 22.4% 2nd choice votes from Party B (.8 x 28%) = 52.4%
Party C - 32% of vote + 5.6% 2nd choice votes from Party B (.2 x 28%) = 37.6%

Party A wins the riding with a majority of ranked preference of 52.4% of voters.

Again, certainly not a perfect solution but better than a system where a candidate can win with the plurality of the votes but be strongly opposed by the majority of the voters in their riding.

What you're describing is just the whinging of people who want to vote their choice AND somehow cast an "anybody but X" vote at the same time.

What I see is that "C" was the first choice of more voters. Whether or not "A" and "B" voters each prefer the other rather than "C" is irrelevant.

 

[Kirkhill]

Another course of action that appeals to me is to treat parliament like a jury and elect members for one single six year sentence. Replace 1/3 of the house every two years.

If the government's bureaucrats want to get things done then they will have to make their case to a bunch of members acting as jurors and the Speaker of the House will let them know if his House agrees with them.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Another course of action that appeals to me is to treat parliament like a jury and elect members for one single six year sentence. Replace 1/3 of the house every two years.

If the government's bureaucrats want to get things done then they will have to make their case to a bunch of members acting as jurors and the Speaker of the House will let them know if his House agrees with them.

I like it.

 

[Lumber]

Another course of action that appeals to me is to treat parliament like a jury and elect members for one single six year sentence. Replace 1/3 of the house every two years.

If the government's bureaucrats want to get things done then they will have to make their case to a bunch of members acting as jurors and the Speaker of the House will let them know if his House agrees with them.

Questions:

1. Are you doing away with political parties?
2. Who makes up the government? Is it still drawn up from Parliament or are you going US style where the executive is unelected (other than the PM/PRes?)
2. Who's actually drafting legislation? Parliament, or the government and they just "show it" to parliament?

 

[Kirkhill]

Questions:

1. Are you doing away with political parties?
2. Who makes up the government? Is it still drawn up from Parliament or are you going US style where the executive is unelected (other than the PM/PRes?)
2. Who's actually drafting legislation? Parliament, or the government and they just "show it" to parliament?

Details. TBD.

 

[Kirkhill]

This map is worth a look today.

https://338canada.com/map.htm

 

[SeaKingTacco]

This map is worth a look today.

https://338canada.com/map.htm

If the trendline continues (trendlines do not have to continue in politics…), the Liberals are not just facing defeat in the next election, they are facing near destruction.

 

[rmc_wannabe]

This map is worth a look today.

https://338canada.com/map.htm

The fact that Kingston and the Islands is a toss up (having been a LPC stronghold for 50+ years) is definitely a downward trend...

 

[Kirkhill]

If the trendline continues (trendlines do not have to continue in politics…), the Liberals are not just facing defeat in the next election, they are facing near destruction.

Near as I can figure the only parts of their coalition that are holding strong are the Sikhs and the Chinese.

 

[SeaKingTacco]

Near as I can figure the only parts of their coalition that are holding strong are the Sikhs and the Chinese.

An interesting intersection of ethnicity…

 

[SeaKingTacco]

Did you see Charlie Angus’ riding in Timmins-James Bay?

He used to solidly command that riding. Now, he is in deadheat with the CPC.

Bet you he is ”thrilled” with the NDP stand on gun control…

 

[Remius]

The fact that Kingston and the Islands is a toss up (having been a LPC stronghold for 50+ years) is definitely a downward trend...

I doubt it course corrects unless they change the leader and take a new approach.

 

[DBNSG]

I doubt it course corrects unless they change the leader and take a new approach.

The trend line away from the Liberals happens to coincide with Guibaults dream come true of harsh Carbon taxes around July 01.
Guibault seems to have this weird veto power over the Canadian economy and economic policy. I think he should be in jail but my Burger King crown only has so much power

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

Maybe the Queen of Canada could act here. She is not too busy these days in Saskatchewan.

 

[Remius]

The trend line away from the Liberals happens to coincide with Guibaults dream come true of harsh Carbon taxes around July 01.
Guibault seems to have this weird veto power over the Canadian economy and economic policy. I think he should be in jail but my Burger King crown only has so much power

I would argue that while that is a likely factor, I trace it a lot closer to when PP adopted a more softer approach to convincing moderates that he would be a viable alternative.

 

[Kirkhill]

I would argue that while that is a likely factor, I trace it a lot closer to when PP adopted a more softer approach to convincing moderates that he would be a viable alternative.

I would argue that wedge politics eventually results in a pile of splinters with nothing solid to hold a wedge.

Eventually you piss-off everybody. I think that is what the Liberals have achieved.

 

[dapaterson]

If the trendline continues (trendlines do not have to continue in politics…), the Liberals are not just facing defeat in the next election, they are facing near destruction.

Last time that happened, two elections later the Conservatives were reduced to two seats.