Okay here goes...first let me explain Canada in a nutshell, at least from
how I understand it and if there are any Canadians here, please correct me
if I am wrong.
Canada has five parties at the federal level that compete in elections:
Conservatives, Liberals, the NDP, the Bloc, and the Greens. The Conservatives
are their right-wing party, led by Stephen Harper, or as I like to call him, Canada's
George W. Bush. Like the old Republicans, they once had a Rockefeller Republican
wing - called the "Red Tories" - but they have also died out for the most part.
Conservatives rehash and repeat the same Republican catchphrases - "lower taxes"
and "smaller government" and like the Republicans want more deregulation,
decentralization, and privatization. I guess there really is not a lot of difference
between a Conservative and a Republican.
The Liberals are kinda like the Clintonite free-traders - they are liberal - meaning
classical laissez-faire on economic issues, but they have a diverse caucus. They
championed balanced budgets, reduced social programs, and they also gave
gays the right to marry (although some Liberals voted against it). The Liberal
platform in recent years has included lowering taxes for low income earners,
banning handguns and semi-automatic rifles, increased military spending, and
introducing a national childcare program.
Now in Canada, there are three parties on the left:
The Bloc Quebecois is a party in Quebec that wants it to be sovereign (and
I'm presuming, a sovereign nation?). Since it can only be competitive in Quebec,
it must be as broad a party as possible, but its main ideologies are left-wing
nationalism and social democracy. The Bloc is supported by organized labor
and more conservative rural voters. This makes it sound like us Hillary primary
voters, but we didn't want Pennsylvania to separate from the country, lol.
I guess Quebec shares a similarity to Texas, or perhaps "the South", in that
it has such a unique regional identity that there is a feeling that it is so different
from the rest of the country that maybe it should break away.
The NDP is the second very progressive party (ultraprogressive, perhaps) and
it believes in democratic socialism - it has populist and agrarian roots. Although
it is secular, it shares a heritage with the Christian left. The NDP would be the
true home for American progressives since it advocates all of it what it cares
about: sweeping environmental protection, national water safety standards,
increasing corporate taxes, expanded high-quality public transportation,
public health care including dental and prescription drugs, gender equality,
GLBT rights, workers' rights, a living wage, peacekeeping, humanitarian aid,
ending the War on Drugs, legalizing recreational drugs, and renegotiating NAFTA
(all of this from Wikipedia).
Think of a traditional NDPer like a progressive from Maine, Minnesota, or Montana
as opposed to the traditional Liberal, which would be from a Democrat from
Massachusetts or New York. The NDP appeals much more to the rural Western
provinces - like Manitoba, Saskatchewan, and the Yukon.
The fifth main party is the Greens, which are seeing a rise in their membership,
thanks to the candidacy of Elizabeth May, who is the party leader. The Greens
are exactly what they sound like - a party that passionately cares about the
environment. Keep in mind that in Canada, EarthCare is more like a religious belief
than one of twenty issues that get discussed at the presidential debate. The
Greens, under May's leadership, try their best to appeal to both the left and the
right, and it has become something of an umbrella party for anyone that supports
a green economy. (Another interesting thing about May is that she leans more
toward the pro-life side than pro-choice.)
The thing I love about Canada is their fresh, cleaner look in campaigning and
marketing - take a look at the Green Party website -
http://www.greenparty.ca/.
Very user-friendly.
So, to Americanize Canada, we'd have to unite the factions - Canadians would
certainly loathe a two-party system, but you would have a much more
polarized, in my view, political culture than with the four-party Parliament,
since there would be only TWO choices. The NDP, Bloc, and Greens would
almost all join the Democratic Party, as would the Liberals. This leaves the
Conservatives all of the right for themselves, and so they would be the
Republican Party.
Canada has no President and only a Prime Minister. They have a Senate,
but it is not like ours. They have a House of Commons, which is more like
our House. Their Senate is proportional, like their House is.
Canada's parliamentary system makes the leader of the party that wins
the most seats in the House of Commons (sometimes that is a plurality,
other times a majority) the Prime Minister. Therefore, if we were Canada,
Nancy Pelosi would be our first female Prime Minister. Our last
Prime Ministers would then be Jim Wright, Tom Foley, Newt Gingrich,
and Dennis Hastert. Imagine Tom Foley or Newt Gingrich as Presidents
and you get closer to what it's like in Canada.
In Canada, the House districts are called ridings, and they have names,
not numbers. So in Canada, PA-11 (which is the district in Pennsylvania
that has old Coal Country in it) could be called "Coal Country." Paul
Kanjorski, who is PA-11's representative, would become a member of
Parliament. So in Canada, he would be Paul Kanjorski, MP for Coal
Country.
What I did was take the Canadian riding elections in 2008
and transformed them into two-party elections by uniting the fractured
left against the Conservatives/Republicans.
In 2008, the Conservatives won 143 seats out of 308 (that is 46%
of the House chamber). The Liberals won 77, the Bloc won 49,
the NDP won 37, and Independents won 2. Combining the progressive
parties' totals we get 163 seats, twenty seats more than the
Conservatives. Together, the centre-left parties now hold 53% of the
chamber.
But we're not done yet. Many of the Conservatives won their ridings
with less than 50% of the vote, and in many cases, the races were
split 34-33-33, 25-25-25-25, and even closer, between the five parties.
So here, after some tedious work, are the new results of the Canadian
House of Representatives through Americanization:
Newfoundland and Labrador would then have a very Democratic delegation.
All 7 seats over a 65% majority.
Prince Edward Island has an all-Democratic four-seat delegation, with the 4th
district being a Democratic-leaning swing seat.
Nova Scotia is a Democratic stronghold with 11 seats. Only the 3rd district
and 11th districts are swing seats. The 4th is won by an Independent.
New Brunswick is the most conservative state in Atlantic Canada.
Seven of its ten seats are held by Democrats, but more than half
of them are swing seats, making New Brunswick a real battleground
state.
Quebec has 75 seats and of those 75 seats, only 2 of these seats
are held by Republicans, 1 is held by an Independent, and the rest
(72) are held by Democrats.
Ontario has 106 seats. The Republicans hold 19 of them while
the Democrats hold the rest (87).
Nunavut has one seat and that is 65% Democratic.
Western Arctic (Northwest Territories) has one seat and that is 60% Democratic.
Yukon has one seat and that is 67% Democratic.
Manitoba has 14 seats and 7 of these are held by Republicans and
7 are held by Democrats. This gives Manitoba a balanced delegation,
making it a true swing state.
Saskatchewan also has 14 seats. 10 of these seats were won by
Republicans and in most cases in lopsided landslides. The other
4 were won by Democrats.
Alberta, of course, is also like Texas (I know I said Quebec was like
Texas, but culturally Alberta is more Texas). Albertans too have
a very distinct regional identity and a lot of them wear cowboy hats.
Alberta has 28 seats and of these 26 are very Republican, while 1
is a tossup and 1 leans more Democratic (this is in urban Edmonton).
This seat is kind of like Salt Lake City in Utah.
British Columbia has 36 seats, and the most of any state outside
of Ontario and Quebec. 13 are Republican and 23 are Democratic.
There is no presidential election in Canada but if there were, we
could say that the total vote shares for the party statewide show
likely support for a party's presidential candidate.
In BC, the vote was 54-45, Democratic.
In AB, the vote was 65-33, Republican.
In SK, the vote was 54-46, Republican.
In MB, the vote was 51-49, Democratic.
In ON, the vote was 60-39, Democratic.
In QB, the vote was 74-22, Democratic.
In NFL, the vote was 82-17, Democratic.
In PEI, the vote was 63-36, Democratic.
In NB, the vote was 60-39, Democratic.
In NS, the vote was 67-26, Democratic.
In NU (Nunavut), the vote was 65-35, Democratic.
In NWT, the vote was 61-38, Democratic.
In Yukon, the vote was 67-33, Democratic.
Nationwide, the presidential vote is 61-38. And this would be in
2008, what was considered to be a "Conservative year". Pretty amazing!
The 2008 election in Canada would have been like the 1964 U.S.
presidential election.
In other words, 61% of the population in Canada voted AGAINST
Stephen Harper. And yet he seems to think he has a mandate. lol.
Okay, Now let's discuss this all. Any thoughts...anyone?
