"That won't fly here" - political attitudes to elections

[Teddy (IDS Legislator)]

When the Queensland LNP elected a "leader" who is not sitting in the Legislature, there was great controversy. We, Canadians, were confused.

Such things have happened before, and when they do, we get a member of the legislature to stand aside so the Leader can earn a seat. As well, the Leader, upon becoming Leader, is Leader.

Apparently, Queenslanders said they won't fly here. The new "leader" is called the "Election Team" head, and, any thought of one of his members standing aside would cause great controversy.

On a similar note, the New Zealanders over in the NZ2011 thread, thought I was insane when I asked why National would run in a seat they don't want to win. I guess that won't fly there either.

I'm curious if we could get together all these sorts of things to compare and contrast.

Another example: in the UK it is not that uncommon for someone to run in an area where they, not only do not live, but have no connection. Here in Canada that sort of thing would draw attention, especially if it's off in some other province.

In Canada it's not uncommon for the party leader to hand pick some candidates for some reasons (IE increasing the number of women in winnable seats) but somehow I don't think that'd fly in some other countries.

In the US it is normal and in fact standard for a party to not run in seats they can not win. In Canada, the UK, Australia, and NZ, that is not the case.


Anyone else have any examples?

[Хahar 🤔]

Another example: in the UK it is not that uncommon for someone to run in an area where they, not only do not live, but have no connection. Here in Canada that sort of thing would draw attention, especially if it's off in some other province.

Tommy Douglas and Stockwell Day both sat for ridings in British Columbia, so I'm not so sure about that.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Another example: in the UK it is not that uncommon for someone to run in an area where they, not only do not live, but have no connection. Here in Canada that sort of thing would draw attention, especially if it's off in some other province.

Tommy Douglas and Stockwell Day both sat for ridings in British Columbia, so I'm not so sure about that.

Douglas, of course, sat for two completely different ridings in BC.

A recent example of a senior Canadian politician representing somewhere they had no connection to originally would be the bastard child of Dracula and Milhouse currently living in the signature of Our Man In Timmins.

[Antonio the Sixth]

In France, candidates who have absolutely no connection to the places are picked by the party, to run - not only in parliamentary elections, but in mayoral ones sometimes ! Backroom deals between and inside parties decide candidacies, without any kind of public consultations. Sometimes, when parties really go to far, there might be "dissident" candidacies.

[afleitch]

People with no connection standing in seats? Happens all the time. Tom Greatrex, MP for Rutherglen and Hamilton West is an obvious example as, to be fair are people like Sir Malcolm Rifkind.

[You kip if you want to...]

Yeah, "parachuting" into safe seats isn't just common place in the UK, it's expected.

Infact, I don't think any of the 3 party leaders had prior involvement in their constituencies, although I guess that's to be expected with them all being from the SPAD culture.

[Teddy (IDS Legislator)]

It's one thing for a leader to find a random seat, it's another for a random to do it.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Infact, I don't think any of the 3 party leaders had prior involvement in their constituencies, although I guess that's to be expected with them all being from the SPAD culture.

Cameron grew up fairly near his constituency (in western Berkshire), so, perhaps surprisingly, counts as comparably local. I've no idea whether he was exactly parachuted into his constituency or not, actually and have never really bothered to check. It's obviously possible, but he might have just picked it in the ambitious politician spots a golden opportunity way.

Miliband has no connections to the Donny area, but lived in Leeds for four years as a child and seems to have a strong attachment to Yorkshire (including, alas, support for Leeds United and apparent hero worship of Geoff Boycott). He was also most definitely not parachuted into the constituency; he wasn't even a clear favourite for the nomination.

Clegg, though, has no connections to his constituency that I'm aware of and was pretty clearly parachuted in. As an MEP he had represented the LibDem's East Midlands seat.

Interestingly, both Brown and Blair were local to their constituencies, Brown especially. Thatcher and Callaghan were rather obviously not local to their constituencies, but were not parachuted in either. Wilson was actually semi-local to Huyton (he lived on the Wirral as a teenager) and wasn't parachuted (gaining Ormskirk in 1945, moving to the new Huyton - which included parts of Ormskirk - after unfavourable boundary changes in 1950). So the last genuinely parachuted PM was Alec Douglas-Home, and there were unusual circumstances with that, to put it mildly.

[Teddy (IDS Legislator)]

Having a "Quebec Lieutenant" is a Canadian thing, of course. I'm not aware of other nations that do this sort of thing with geographic or ethnic groups.

[Hash]

In France, candidates who have absolutely no connection to the places are picked by the party, to run - not only in parliamentary elections, but in mayoral ones sometimes ! Backroom deals between and inside parties decide candidacies, without any kind of public consultations. Sometimes, when parties really go to far, there might be "dissident" candidacies.

It isn't extremely common in France, but yes, I think it's rare in other countries to have local election candidates/mayoral candidates handpicked by the party and placed in random places. Most often the parties do it to placate allies (George Sarre, an MRC bigwig, was dropped into some rural Creuse constituency instead of Paris in 2007) or for gender/ethnic minority stuff. In the more extreme cases, it backfires badly.

[Middle-aged Europe]

In 2009, Frank-Walter Steinmeier specifically moved to a safe SPD district in Brandenburg so that he could finally win a Bundestag seat. The second criteria for choosing the district: Geographically, it's pretty close to Berlin, so he doesn't have to travel too long. Of course, he had no prior connections to the state of Brandenburg whatsoever.

[Hatman 🍁]

It's more common in Toronto for MPs to represent ridings where they don't live. For example, Bob Rae lives in Parkdale-HP but represents Toronto Centre.

[bgwah]

The Green carpetbagged to BC, did she not?

Obviously this is pretty rare in the U.S... Hillary Clinton & RFK managed to do it in NY, I guess. And of course Dennis Kucinich considered moving to Washington!

[Teddy (IDS Legislator)]

I don't to stifle discussion, but is there anything OTHER than carpetbagging that is different between our systems?

[MaxQue]

In 2009, Frank-Walter Steinmeier specifically moved to a safe SPD district in Brandenburg so that he could finally win a Bundestag seat. The second criteria for choosing the district: Geographically, it's pretty close to Berlin, so he doesn't have to travel too long. Of course, he had no prior connections to the state of Brandenburg whatsoever.

Well, "safe", he won only by 5%.

Earl, living in a part of the city and being elected in another isn't really a problem. Ridings are artificial, as long you are from the general area or have a link to the area, that's good.

[Foucaulf]

Listing some Canadian peculiarities:

—Resistance to coalition governments. Apart from Borden's Union Government that collected dissident Liberals, no coalition government has formed on the federal level. Provincially, the only coalitions since Confederation were Liberal-Conservative ones in PEI, Ontario and BC*, and a Conservative-Progressive one in Saskatchewan.
—Party leadership elections determined by party members alone.
—Increasing distaste for Question Period (Question Time for the Brits)
—Numerous provincial political parties independent from their federal namesakes.
—Choosing a diverse set of cabinet ministers, and appointing viceroys of ethnic descent.

*The coalition in BC was the only one during the 20th Century.

More to come later, maybe another post for China.

[Middle-aged Europe]

In 2009, Frank-Walter Steinmeier specifically moved to a safe SPD district in Brandenburg so that he could finally win a Bundestag seat. The second criteria for choosing the district: Geographically, it's pretty close to Berlin, so he doesn't have to travel too long. Of course, he had no prior connections to the state of Brandenburg whatsoever.

Well, "safe", he won only by 5%.

Well, if we count only fully free and fair elections, 2009 was the SPD's worst election result since, um, 1932 I think... winning by 5% is still pretty good under such circumstances.

Bottomline is, the SPD had won this district in every election since 1990 and that's why Steinmeier chose it.

[Antonio the Sixth]

About France.

—Resistance to coalition governments. Apart from Borden's Union Government that collected dissident Liberals, no coalition government has formed on the federal level. Provincially, the only coalitions since Confederation were Liberal-Conservative ones in PEI, Ontario and BC*, and a Conservative-Progressive one in Saskatchewan.

Well, in France everything is made particular by the fact that presidential elections determine most political balances. Technincally, France has had minority governments (the socialist governments from 1988-93 for example), but the logic is pretty much bipolarized. On the right, you have the UMP and its centrist whore which always govern together, and on the other side the PS and its few allies (radicals, communists and greenies) are basically a permanent coalition since 1997 and the "plural left", even though there's nothing official and each party runs its own candidate for presidency.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

For a long time, PS First Secretaries were elected by the party's institutions, which themselves were elected by the party members through "motions" (which are basically a list for the party's Congress). In 2008, as no majority was found, the election was sent back to the members who elected their secretary using the same system as for the prez election.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Nobody cares about "les question au gouvernement" unless something shocking happens during them which the media report. Has anybody ever cared ? I doubt it.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

That would be absolutely unthinkable in France.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

There are a few ministers "issus de la diversité", as we (stupidly) say. They are usually figureheads who get fired as soon as they try to do their job seriously.

[Vosem]

In the United States, to be elected to any significant position in a state, you not only have to live there, but you have to have lived there for some amount of time. Standards are pretty low - generally, if it looks like you'll probably win, you're allowed (Romney-Massachusetts 2002 and Clinton-New York 2000 are some prominent examples), but once you pick a state, you're basically stuck there. Recent attempts to switch states have provoked backlashes; the last successful incidence was Texas-New Mexico in the 1960s; the last between two states that didn't border that didn't border each other was in the early 1900s, though I forget details in both cases.

Even though it's legal, in the United States, living in one part of a state and running in another is frequently politically detrimental (though once you've been elected the effect usually goes away).

[DL]

FYI there was also an NDP/Liberal coalition in Saskatchewan 1999 to 2003.