Canadian federal election - 2015

[DL]

I knew there must have been some, and was secretly hoping you would give me a list. Still though, it is rather short compared to the other parties.

Is it? I honestly can't think of all that many pro athletes in Canadian politics period. Not from any party.

[Hatman 🍁]

It's strange that Canada never took to cricket, unlike the other Dominions...

We did! As I said, it was the most popular sport in Canada in the 19th Century.

I knew there must have been some, and was secretly hoping you would give me a list. Still though, it is rather short compared to the other parties.

Is it? I honestly can't think of all that many pro athletes in Canadian politics period. Not from any party.

There's quite a few actually: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Canadian_sportsperson-politicians

There's not many NDPers on that list. (probably the only one's on the list were the one's you named that I just added [FTR it appears it wasn't Mad Dog who ran for the NDP, it was his brother Paul who ran])

[Hatman 🍁]

In the end, the NDP did nominate (acclaimed) the cricket player, KM Shanthikumar. Not sure how well known he can possibly be, but I found his cricket bio here: http://www.espncricinfo.com/canada/content/player/23857.html

Next up: The Liberals will hold their nomination meeting in Hull-Aylmer, Quebec tomorrow. There are three candidates looking to take back this former Liberal stronghold: Former Gatineau mayor Yves Ducharme, former national Young Liberals president Greg Fergus and Gatineau city councillor Maxime Tremblay. On Sunday, the NDP nominated the riding's incumbent, Nycole Turmel (former interim leader). Interestingly, Tremblay and Turmel have already faced off against each other, as they were in a very close city council race in 2009, with Tremblay winning by 96 votes.

[Krago]

I'm surprised baseball Hall-of-Famer Fergie Jenkins isn't on that list.  He finished a poor third for the Ontario Liberals in Windsor-Riverside in the 1985 provincial election.  My friend has stories about trying to prep him for all-candidate debates.

[Hatman 🍁]

I'm surprised baseball Hall-of-Famer Fergie Jenkins isn't on that list.  He finished a poor third for the Ontario Liberals in Windsor-Riverside in the 1985 provincial election.  My friend has stories about trying to prep him for all-candidate debates.

Good one, I've added him. Yet another athlete to not run for the NDP. Was he a particularly bad candidate? I'm surprised at how poorly he did, considering he is one of the best Canadian baseball players ever.

[DL]

In 1972 the Liberals ran former NHL player Dick Duff against NDP incumbent Arnold Peters in Timiskaming. Peters beat him by a big margin.

I suspect that some former pro-athletes are used to a lot of adulation and and are narcissistic so there is an attraction to politics as a post sports career possibility. If you are someone who just likes the idea of being popular and you don't actually believe in anything then the Liberal Party will be your natural home since you don't have to think too hard about anything. You can just smile and tried to cash in on fame and just try to be all things to all people (kinda like the current leader of the Liberal Party but i digress). Interestingly while a number of pro athletes have run for public office in canada - they have not been particularly successful. The one exception is Ken Dryden

[Hatman 🍁]

Surprisingly, the Liberals selected the least well known candidate in Hull-Aylmer, Greg Fergus. His campaign did seem well organized, and was probably Trudeau's favourite. Still a big deal defeating a former mayor and a sitting city councillor.

Fergus I assume is an Anglo, but he was raised in Montreal. His parents are from the Caribbean (not sure of which island). This may hurt him in the riding, which despite the name, is still a majority francophone (especially Hull).

Tonight, there are two nomination meetings:

-The NDP will re-nominate the incumbent MP in Vaudreuil-Soulanges, QC, Jamie Nicholls. The Tories have already nominated their 2011 candidate in the riding, lawyer Marc Boudreau.
-The Liberals will nominate by acclamation army reservist Harjit Singh Sajjan in Vancouver South, BC. This was the race where there was quite some controversy, where Liberal members of the Sikh community protested the disqualification of their favoured candidate  businessman Barjinder Singh Dhahan. Sajjan has been backed by the World Sikh Organization, and backers of Dahan are claiming the Liberals have been "hijacked" by the WSO. The Tories have already nominated the incumbent MP in this riding, Wai Young.

[Nichlemn]

What happens in the event of a Conservative minority? Especially if NDP+Liberal form a clear majority, and especially if the Liberals win the popular vote. Do we revert to pre-2011 status quo or is a Liberal/NDP coalition formed?

[Hatman 🍁]

Coalition is a dirty word in Canadian politics, so that's not going to happen. If the Liberals finish 2nd but win the popular vote, you may see an Ontario 1985-style pact between the Liberals and NDP. Otherwise, Harper would probably resign as Prime Minister, and we'll be back to the polls as soon as we have a new Prime Minister.

[DL]

I know that hard core conservative supporters think "coalition" is a dirty word, I see no evidence that today in 2014/15 the rest of the population has a problem with parties forming a coalition. In fact I think they rather like the idea of parties working together

[Nichlemn]

I know that hard core conservative supporters think "coalition" is a dirty word, I see no evidence that today in 2014/15 the rest of the population has a problem with parties forming a coalition. In fact I think they rather like the idea of parties working together

Well, the Conservatives did gain a lot of support in 2008 when the last coalition was floated. But I think a lot of that was due to a) it including the Bloc and b) being held so soon after an election despite never being mentioned there.

[You kip if you want to...]

I know that hard core conservative supporters think "coalition" is a dirty word, I see no evidence that today in 2014/15 the rest of the population has a problem with parties forming a coalition. In fact I think they rather like the idea of parties working together

Look over to here in the UK to see why Coalition's terrible for trust in politics.

[RogueBeaver]

My guess is that there would be a short interval while leadership changes, then another election within a year or so. No Ontario 1985. Besides, a Grit minority would look to whichever party is most helpful. That could be Tories or NDP depending on the issue.

[DL]

I know that hard core conservative supporters think "coalition" is a dirty word, I see no evidence that today in 2014/15 the rest of the population has a problem with parties forming a coalition. In fact I think they rather like the idea of parties working together

Look over to here in the UK to see why Coalition's terrible for trust in politics.

Then again in Australia anytime the "right" forms government it is inevitably "the Coalition" meaning the Liberal and National parties - and no one in Australia seems at all troubled by that.

[politicus]

I know that hard core conservative supporters think "coalition" is a dirty word, I see no evidence that today in 2014/15 the rest of the population has a problem with parties forming a coalition. In fact I think they rather like the idea of parties working together

Look over to here in the UK to see why Coalition's terrible for trust in politics.

Then again in Australia anytime the "right" forms government it is inevitably "the Coalition" meaning the Liberal and National parties - and no one in Australia seems at all troubled by that.

The main reason the coalition doesn't work in the UK is that its a coalition of unequal partners where the LibDems allow themselves to be pushed around. If they had used their central position to say: "if we don't get this through, we will just switch to Labour", then the balance of power would have been quite different.

An NDP/Liberal coalition with the two parties being of relatively equal size could probably work. The problem is that you will likely get a Liberal landslide and a weak NDP, which is a terrible starting point - with the weaker party on the fringe and the stronger in the center. Most functional coalitions are either between equal partners or a big party in alliance with one or two smaller centrist parties.

[RogueBeaver]

Another Liberal nomination kerfuffle, this time in Brandon-Souris, but much more muted than others.

Agreed w/Kheiriddin.

[RogueBeaver]

Libby Davies retiring next year.

[DC Al Fine]

I know that hard core conservative supporters think "coalition" is a dirty word, I see no evidence that today in 2014/15 the rest of the population has a problem with parties forming a coalition. In fact I think they rather like the idea of parties working together

Look over to here in the UK to see why Coalition's terrible for trust in politics.

Then again in Australia anytime the "right" forms government it is inevitably "the Coalition" meaning the Liberal and National parties - and no one in Australia seems at all troubled by that.

Of course, the Coalition has effectively been one party for quite some time now. Not like the Liberals and NDP who've spent 100 years campaigning against each other and have a bunch of marginal seats that they could lose to the other partner.

[Nichlemn]

I know that hard core conservative supporters think "coalition" is a dirty word, I see no evidence that today in 2014/15 the rest of the population has a problem with parties forming a coalition. In fact I think they rather like the idea of parties working together

Look over to here in the UK to see why Coalition's terrible for trust in politics.

Then again in Australia anytime the "right" forms government it is inevitably "the Coalition" meaning the Liberal and National parties - and no one in Australia seems at all troubled by that.

The main reason the coalition doesn't work in the UK is that its a coalition of unequal partners where the LibDems allow themselves to be pushed around. If they had used their central position to say: "if we don't get this through, we will just switch to Labour", then the balance of power would have been quite different.

An NDP/Liberal coalition with the two parties being of relatively equal size could probably work. The problem is that you will likely get a Liberal landslide and a weak NDP, which is a terrible starting point - with the weaker party on the fringe and the stronger in the center. Most functional coalitions are either between equal partners or a big party in alliance with one or two smaller centrist parties.

The LibDems can't credibly switch to Labour (although they could force a new election) because Labour + LibDems is short of a majority.

Also, I don't really see what's wrong from a democratic perspective that the big party "pushes" the small party around. Shouldn't the big party get a lot more say?

[politicus]

I know that hard core conservative supporters think "coalition" is a dirty word, I see no evidence that today in 2014/15 the rest of the population has a problem with parties forming a coalition. In fact I think they rather like the idea of parties working together

Look over to here in the UK to see why Coalition's terrible for trust in politics.

Then again in Australia anytime the "right" forms government it is inevitably "the Coalition" meaning the Liberal and National parties - and no one in Australia seems at all troubled by that.

The main reason the coalition doesn't work in the UK is that its a coalition of unequal partners where the LibDems allow themselves to be pushed around. If they had used their central position to say: "if we don't get this through, we will just switch to Labour", then the balance of power would have been quite different.

An NDP/Liberal coalition with the two parties being of relatively equal size could probably work. The problem is that you will likely get a Liberal landslide and a weak NDP, which is a terrible starting point - with the weaker party on the fringe and the stronger in the center. Most functional coalitions are either between equal partners or a big party in alliance with one or two smaller centrist parties.

The LibDems can't credibly switch to Labour (although they could force a new election) because Labour + LibDems is short of a majority.

Also, I don't really see what's wrong from a democratic perspective that the big party "pushes" the small party around. Shouldn't the big party get a lot more say?

I wasn't speaking from a democratic point of view, but from a practical. Coalitions work when all parties in them have some leverage. Either because they are of roughly equal strength or because the weaker party (or parties) has the (credible) ability to switch sides.

[RogueBeaver]

As I said earlier, there's no need for a coalition. All you need is confidence and supply while shopping different things to different parties as required - as has always been the case in minorities. For one thing in a 2015 minority situation at least one leader, most likely two, will be exiting.

[EPG]

The Lib Dems are a particularly poor case because their appeal as a centre party under FPTP rests on winning each of the other parties' voters in different kinds of constituency, they have no broad social base that they can reward with targeted measures and that will continue to back them with money or votes like trade unions, businesses, immigrants, pensioners, etc., and targetting narrow social bases, like liberal parties in Europe do, can't work under FPTP; it is hard to reward your voters when it is unclear what they want from you and when you won many of them on a permanently-oppositional basis.

In a sense, coalition is a commitment mechanism to bolster low-trust minority governments. I don't trust you to keep supporting my big party, or to take account of my small party's interests, so everyone chooses their own ministers to run some departments and everyone loses out if the plan fails.

The NDP could do OK as a coalition party or minority supporter if they keep labour on board (and govern well).

[politicus]

The Lib Dems are a particularly poor case because their appeal as a centre party under FPTP rests on winning each of the other parties' voters in different kinds of constituency, they have no broad social base that they can reward with targeted measures and that will continue to back them with money or votes like trade unions, businesses, immigrants, pensioners, etc., and targetting narrow social bases, like liberal parties in Europe do, can't work under FPTP; it is hard to reward your voters when it is unclear what they want from you and when you won many of them on a permanently-oppositional basis.

Last time I checked Britain was part of Europe

[EPG]

LOL. Yes, let us say that from now on Europe is defined by PR electoral systems, and Britain and France are an off-shore entente atlantique.

[Hatman 🍁]

The NDP could do OK as a coalition party or minority supporter if they keep labour on board (and govern well).

I think most in the labour movement in this country would be positively giddy about the possibility of a coalition.