News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
 8.4K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 39K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 4.7K     0 

The trouble with bringing the nation closer together federal policy-wise is that regional interests simultaneously want national buy in and decentralization at the same time. The Liberals tend to favour centralization or harmonization as do I; however, this raises fears of national power and wealth concentration. Fears that I would argue are legitimate.

The problem if anything is that we have a scale-issue that have evolved over time (from a predominately rural to predominately urban country in the context of a globalized information economy). Provinces are almost an anachronism.

As to fears of wealth concentration - only the national level of government has redistributive powers to make a difference nationally on that issue. Decentralization leads to precisely the opposite outcome - and I'd argue is one reason why we are dealing with the headaches as a nation right now.

AoD
 
Last edited:
Most ridings are urban. Conservative Party should be asking the question of why their platform doesn't appeal to urbanites outside of Alberta and Saskatchewan. Even Manitoba where the Conservatives are popular, they were nearly shut out of Winnipeg, the major population centre and where most of Manitoba's ridings are.
They are really a North American anomaly. Cities with more than a million residents generally don't vote Conservative. Even Dallas and Houston are pretty solidly blue. Yet Calgary, and often Edmonton too, buck this trend.
 
Last edited:
Conservatives with hardly any seats in eastern Canada, only a few rural seats. It's become too much a Western Canada party.

You can see same with Bloc with no urban seats. Most of their seats are rural.

The two parties campaign so much based on division, us vs. them, that is what happens.

I will never vote Conservative as long as they continue to be Western Canada's Bloc.
 
However Justin Trudeau liberals lost a million votes compared to the last election and I dont think he can ever win those votes back.

The issue is conservatives have a problem in urban areas but frankly I can't see how the Liberals can ever win a majority government again if the bloc holds in Quebec and western Canada is pretty much anti liberal.

Pretty much I think we're stuck in the minority territory zone for quite some time now.

Frankly the conservatives Focus has to be it's the win those Suburban areas around major cities.

Like it makes zero sense how conservatives can't win a riding like kitchener Conestoga or Burlington and such. They need to really self evaluate there.


Like at worst they should have picked up 10 seats in Ontario lol
 
Conservatives with hardly any seats in eastern Canada, only a few rural seats. It's become too much a Western Canada party.

You can see same with Bloc with no urban seats. Most of their seats are rural.

The two parties campaign so much based on division, us vs. them, that is what happens.

I will never vote Conservative as long as they continue to be Western Canada's Bloc.


Lol the liberal campaign was all about us vs them as well.


That is why we got a regional result and less then a third of the vote.


It's why I voted ndp as I felt libs and Tories fought nasty as hell this time.
 
Last edited:
Well arguably the Conservatives should be able to at least approach the results of the last Ontario election. But to be shut out of Peel? Lose Milton? They should be able to win places like North/West Van (Reform did!).
 
....frankly I can't see how the Liberals can ever win a majority government again if the bloc holds in Quebec.

The Bloc does not appear to have been elected on the basis of sovereignty/nationalism; but rather by way of supporting Bill 21 and opposing pipelines.

I don't expect there to be any pipeline issue after this election. TMX will or won't happen and that will be the end for new pipelines for a generation, or longer.

Bill 21 will depend on what happens in the courts and any Federal or provincial responses.

If the Quebec courts strike down the bill; I think Quebecers will be fine w/it.

If it goes to the Supreme Court that will be more of a source of friction, should the court strike the law down.

I frankly expect the secularization bill to slowly whither. Support is much lower among younger Quebecers and amongst urban and post-secondary educated Quebecers.

The natural shifts of time will likely erode the bill if nothing else; and the Liberals in Quebec (still the 2nd largest party) provincially, have to oppose it since their base on the Island of Montreal does.

Short of a CAQ dynasty the law is unlikely to last 10 years anyway; but I suspect it may be neutered before then.

At which point the BQ slides back into irrelevancy. Or so I would hope.
 
As a member of the NDP I am flabbergasted how Jagmeet thinks he can stay on as leader. I can see him being dumped at the next national convention where there is a required leadership review.

Realistically despite holding the balance of power, the NDP lost 15 seats and dropped to 4th place. That is not something to be proud of and honestly it is a major step backwards for the party. He may think he can stay on as leader but this is proof that he was a bad choice from the start. There were more than a few people who thought voting him in as leader was a bad idea and this is the proof.

The funny thing is I told people he would not win in Quebec or the West or in Atlantic Canada. They only won 1 seat in each of the three and only in traditional NDP strongholds.

If the NDP want to win in the next election whenever that may be, they need to toss Jagmeet to the curb.
 
Like it makes zero sense how conservatives can't win a riding like kitchener Conestoga or Burlington and such. They need to really self evaluate there.

Makes sense to me. What exactly do they have to offer these regions?

Seriously. Look at the Conservative platform. If you can even remember any of it, there's not much for anybody but Alberta's energy sector.

Lol the liberal campaign was all about us vs them as well.

Name one signature Conservative promise other than cutting the carbon tax, without looking it up.

Doubt you can. Because beyond that, all Scheer can be remembered for was "Trudeau bad. Me not Trudeau."

Trudeau had the benefit of incumbency. He didn't have to propose new policy. He got to defend his record. And so every attack on Scheer also mentioned his record, which only served to remind voters of his accomplishments.

Every election is "us vs. them". But there's an art to delivering those attacks. And it's not one Scheer has mastered. He comes off as angry antsy Albertan teen, not a Prime Minister-in-waiting. Just look at his concession speech. Sheesh.
 

Knives out!

Y'know, I was whimsically thinking of who they could nominate as his replacement--by out-Jagmeeting Jagmeet...


 
Seriously. Look at the Conservative platform. If you can even remember any of it, there's not much for anybody but Alberta's energy sector.

Also the reason why they were the last to announce it, on a Friday before Thanksgiving. They didn't want it to be about voting for them if you are anywhere else but AB/SK - they want you to be voting against the Liberals. The thing is - the longer they get caught in the AB/SK angst (and playing cozy with the whole wexit thing), the less they will be able to do the big tent - why would *anyone* want to vote for a party that is basically an English-speaking BQ? And also realistically how much influence would any party members outside AB/SK have over the policy direction of the party?

Like given what JK and Moe had been threatening, how convincing do you think they'd be as bridge-builders (which they weren't even pretending to be)? Quebecois speak French, and had a long history predating Confederation. What's AB/SK's argument?

AoD
 
Last edited:

Back
Top