Canada 2011 Official Thread

[Holmes]

Natural gouverning party... psh, by all means. It was that stupid sense of self-entitlement that helped tank the Liberals. Then again, there's no one in the whole country with a bigger ego or sense of self-entitlement than Harper. However, many Canadians are willing to just close their eyes and block their ears when it comes to Harper's corruption, contempt and incompetence while holding every other party in a higher scope of scrutiny. So maybe.

[Foucaulf]

Just read an interesting analysis of the recent election -to summarize, it is stating that because of westward population shifts, growth of suburban riders, and the changes in the economy from one based on manufacturing to the service sector, the Conservative Party is set to become the natural governing party of Canada in the 21st century -just as the Liberals were the natural governing party of the 20th century.

But that's not the thesis. This is:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I think Coyne is a bit premature, because if Ontario is known for one political thing it's that it swings wildly between parties. I don't see Ontario this time as anything more than it was when it elected Mike Harris, and again. Ontario is not "joining" the West as it is "collaborating with" them. In the West Ontario sees the future of the Canadian economy - driven by resources and foreign investment. Ontario has no opinions on whether that is a good thing, but for now it wants a piece of the action.

Coyne implies that, having forged this alliance, Harper has reached maximum power. But Harper is equally tied between the demands of these two regions. The Conservative majority does not represent an Atlantic Charter as it does a Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact.

Harper will have his hands full tugging Calgary and Toronto together. It's up to the opposition to stab him in the chest (metaphorically speaking).

[Hash]

I love how the idiot journalists now think they can be all smart and 'intelligent' in making grand predictions of the type. While part of the Purgatory majority comes from their superior organization and true inroads, a lot of it is pure luck from unfortunate vote splitting. I don't think anything in these results indicate the Purgs becoming a 'natural governing party'. Might be wrong, but certainly I'm not going to write an article about it like those overpaid journalists with too much time on their hands.

[redcommander]

Hasn't Harper been a supporter of restricting immigration to Canada since he became Prime Minister? It's interesting that his positions on the issue didn't hurt him or his party, but the party has been much more focused on winning various ethnic groups to their cause compared to their counterparts south of the border. In fact maybe Republicans should look at the Conservative Party as a case study on how to be more successful in future elections, considering the Liberal Party dominated minority and ethnic pockets of the nation throughout the 90's.

[Teddy (IDS Legislator)]

Immigration is much higher under Harper than before.

[2952-0-0]

Just read an interesting analysis of the recent election -to summarize, it is stating that because of westward population shifts, growth of suburban riders, and the changes in the economy from one based on manufacturing to the service sector, the Conservative Party is set to become the natural governing party of Canada in the 21st century -just as the Liberals were the natural governing party of the 20th century.

After an election there are always those overpaid pundits who can write whatever they want without consequence. Just five weeks ago those same pundits were proclaiming that the NDP was sure to wither into oblivion, Ignatieff's campaign was about to catch fire, and that the Bloc can be assured of coasting to another 45-50 seats based on anti-Harper sentiment.

[Teddy (IDS Legislator)]

http://www.ridingbyriding.ca/2011/03/26/680 Back in March I was examining what an NDP government would look like.

Perhaps they should pay me.

[redcommander]

Immigration is much higher under Harper than before.

The policy platform of the Conservatives seems somewhat vague on it, but from what it does say, it seems in favor of reducing immigration overall. Are there stats out there that contradict what the Tories claim?

[Foucaulf]

Immigration is much higher under Harper than before.

The policy platform of the Conservatives seems somewhat vague on it, but from what it does say, it seems in favor of reducing immigration overall. Are there stats out there that contradict what the Tories claim?

A quick look at Citizenship and Immigration Canada's website yields some statistics.

Comparing trends from 2006 (beginning of Harper mandate) to 2009 (last year with available info)

-Gross number of permanent residents (not yet citizens, but eligible for government benefits) took a dip at the beginning of Harper's mandate, but has passed 2006 figures by 2009. That said, the number began declining in 2005, but recovered recovery from 2007 onwards.

-With the Canadian population obviously growing faster than the growth of permanent residents, permanent residents as a percentage of Canada's population dropped from 0.8% to 0.7%.

-The number of "economic immigrants" - meaning anything from immigrants beginning to work in Canada to rich immigrants that classify as "investors" - has fully recovered. That number as a percentage of all PRs has risen from 55% to 61%.

-The percentage of "Family class" immigrants - those reuniting with their families - has dropped from 28% to 26%. Refugees as a percentage fell from 12.9% to 9.1%.

-The number of "temporary residents", though, has gone nowhere but up: up 24% from 2006. There was a lull for "humanitarian cases" in 2007, but that is overshadowed by the great influx of foreign workers.


Of course, both of you are right - more foreigners are coming to Canada, but less of them are staying.

[Teddy (IDS Legislator)]

So, individuals coming here to do hard work has increased, but old family members who may not know english has decreased?

Frankly, even moderates would be happy with this.

[Volrath50]

A beautiful quote from my idiot MP:

GalipeauOrleans Royal Galipeau   
       
    100 volunteers out there today! «Le ciel est bleu; l'enfer est rouge.» Look at those beautiful blue signs. #elxn41 #orleans

Thanks, Royal, I'll make sure to die in hell.

To be fair, he didn't make up that phrase, it's a quote from Maurice Duplessis, IIRC. It's probably not wise to quote a premier remembered as one of the most corrupt in Canadian history, but making an historical reference is, at least, a bit less sinister than randomly saying something like that.

[Hash]

A beautiful quote from my idiot MP:

GalipeauOrleans Royal Galipeau   
       
    100 volunteers out there today! «Le ciel est bleu; l'enfer est rouge.» Look at those beautiful blue signs. #elxn41 #orleans

Thanks, Royal, I'll make sure to die in hell.

To be fair, he didn't make up that phrase, it's a quote from Maurice Duplessis, IIRC. It's probably not wise to quote a premier remembered as one of the most corrupt in Canadian history, but making an historical reference is, at least, a bit less sinister than randomly saying something like that.

I know he didn't make it up, it is a catchphrase of the reactionary theocratic era in Quebec in the 1800s and was the clergy's non-committal way of saying to don't vote Liberal.

[mileslunn]

A beautiful quote from my idiot MP:

GalipeauOrleans Royal Galipeau   
       
    100 volunteers out there today! «Le ciel est bleu; l'enfer est rouge.» Look at those beautiful blue signs. #elxn41 #orleans

Thanks, Royal, I'll make sure to die in hell.

To be fair, he didn't make up that phrase, it's a quote from Maurice Duplessis, IIRC. It's probably not wise to quote a premier remembered as one of the most corrupt in Canadian history, but making an historical reference is, at least, a bit less sinister than randomly saying something like that.

I know he didn't make it up, it is a catchphrase of the reactionary theocratic era in Quebec in the 1800s and was the clergy's non-committal way of saying to don't vote Liberal.

    A dumb quote to make, but it is true that the Catholic Church did often say that when endosing the Union Nationale.  In fact prior to 1960, Quebec was arguably one of the most conservative provinces whereas today it is one of the most left leaning.  By the same token the strength of the Catholic church may have also contributed to Quebec's more leftist political culture.  Rugged indivdualism never really took off in Quebec like it did in English Canada, so essentially the government and unions replaced the Catholic church in terms of roles.

[Teddy (IDS Legislator)]

I know it's been a little while, but, I wanted to present this:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/election-results/
which shocked me at how professional and easy-to-understand it is. So many options, nice graphics, and colours, etc. It really summarizes the results better than anywhere else that I've seen.

[Smid]

Don't know if this is the best place but couldn't think of anywhere better, other than starting a new thread.

Nanos has released a poll showing the Liberals back in second place nationally.

[RogueBeaver]

I haven't changed my mind since May: Liberals will regain OO in '15. Hopefully.

[mileslunn]

Too early to tell.  The problem with either party winning is there are large chunks of the country where they are not competitive.  My bet all along has been that the Liberals and NDP will eventually merge much like the PCs and Alliance did.  Probably not before the next election, but I do think by 2019 they will be one party.