Ontario 2018 election

[toaster]

I'm still not 100% convinced about Etobicoke North being an easy win for the PCs.  It's one of the safest Liberal seats Federally and provincially.  If Wynne can convince Shafiq Qaadri to run again, I think it will be the closest of the 3 leader seats.  The Ford brothers have campaigned for the Conservatives (and PCs) with the local candidate election after election here, and it never seemed to make a difference.  Would be something if the PCs win the election, but Ford loses this seat. You can bet Liberal MP Kirsty Duncan (who got over 60% of the vote in the last federal election in the riding) will be campaigning alongside Qaadri (or the eventual nominee).

[toaster]

If no clear alternative for Ford presents itself, I do expect an NDP + LIB coalition in the event there is a Ford-led minority government.  I don't think the Forum poll provided seat projections, but with those numbers, the NDP and Libs would likely have about the same number of ridings.

[toaster]

Perhaps this is a Very American Question, but given that (after a quick glance, so forgive me if I'm off here) the ONDP Shadow Cabinet has seemingly allocated most of the major portfolios to has-beens/retreads from the Hampton-era - Why are Bisson and Tabuns still there, por ejemplo? - might Gurratan run for leadership as a freshman assuming that Horwath resigns?

Pretty sure the entire ONDP caucus has a shadow position.  And Bisson is Horwath's right hand man, he gave her the leadership victory when he supporter her after failing off the ballot in their leadership election.  I expect him to stay on in an important role as long as he is there alongside Horwath.  Tabuns is also now the only MPP from Toronto for the ONDP, so I would hope he would have an important role so show the city that Andrea hasn't abandoned the progressive-left side of the NDP.

[toaster]

Where is the mention of getting rid of the Catholic schools?  Where is the housing program for young people trying to buy their first home (like the downpayment program they have in BC)?  Where is UNIVERSAL post-secondary education?

We should be moving away form these "for low income" or "if your employer doesn't provide it" programs to universal programs.


Not a "left" plan at all, IMO. 

[toaster]

Where is the mention of getting rid of the Catholic schools?

Getting rid of Catholic schools require amending the Constitution, which the Federal won't do unless there is a general consensus (like there was in Québec and Newfoundland).

All other provinces that got out of it were able to do it.  If Ontario wanted out of the business of being discriminatory, and fully funding these schools, they could do it.

Andrea Horwath's message to young Gay francophones (who can't work openly in a Catholic system): I think you should only have access to 20% of teaching jobs.  That's the message I'm getting anyway. 

[toaster]

Where is the mention of getting rid of the Catholic schools?

Getting rid of Catholic schools require amending the Constitution, which the Federal won't do unless there is a general consensus (like there was in Québec and Newfoundland).

All other provinces that got out of it were able to do it.  If Ontario wanted out of the business of being discriminatory, and fully funding these schools, they could do it.

Andrea Horwath's message to young Gay francophones (who can't work openly in a Catholic system): I think you should only have access to 20% of teaching jobs.  That's the message I'm getting anyway.  

The solution is to ban gay hiring discrimination there.

Which essentially makes them non-catholic.  Most of the Catholic schools (particularly in areas of the GTA like Peel) are filled with non-catholics.  So why even have them?

The other thing that I take issue with is when people point to Johny Tory's PC party, and say "look it was a disaster then with what he proposed".  Yeah, it was a disaster because the PCs wanted to EXPAND funding of religious schools, which most Ontarians are against. The opposite, wouldn't you think, would get the opposite reaction (i.e., favourable).

The fact that this exists in 2018, in Ontario, is upsetting.
Again, the issue is more pronounced on the French side, where some 80% of the jobs in most areas with Catholic schools.  It's outrageously discriminatory towards Muslim, Sikh, Atheist, etc, Francophones more than anyone, as the French public boards are so small.
Again, Andrea Horwath is saying loud in clear: I think Muslim francophone teachers don't deserve as many job opportunities as Catholic Francophones for jobs (actually only 1 out of every 5).   Or you're a francophone Sikh family, your child will have to travel across town an hour on a bus to get to a French public school, even though there is a French-Catholic school across the street.  But the catholic family next door, your kids won't have to take an hour-long bus ride.   If people don't see that as discriminatory, than we have a larger problem in this province than we may have though.

[toaster]

Where is the mention of getting rid of the Catholic schools?

Getting rid of Catholic schools require amending the Constitution, which the Federal won't do unless there is a general consensus (like there was in Québec and Newfoundland).

All other provinces that got out of it were able to do it.  If Ontario wanted out of the business of being discriminatory, and fully funding these schools, they could do it.

Andrea Horwath's message to young Gay francophones (who can't work openly in a Catholic system): I think you should only have access to 20% of teaching jobs.  That's the message I'm getting anyway.  

The solution is to ban gay hiring discrimination there.

Which essentially makes them non-catholic.  Most of the Catholic schools (particularly in areas of the GTA like Peel) are filled with non-catholics.  So why even have them?

The other thing that I take issue with is when people point to Johny Tory's PC party, and say "look it was a disaster then with what he proposed".  Yeah, it was a disaster because the PCs wanted to EXPAND funding of religious schools, which most Ontarians are against. The opposite, wouldn't you think, would get the opposite reaction (i.e., favourable).

The fact that this exists in 2018, in Ontario, is upsetting.
Again, the issue is more pronounced on the French side, where some 80% of the jobs in most areas with Catholic schools.  It's outrageously discriminatory towards Muslim, Sikh, Atheist, etc, Francophones more than anyone, as the French public boards are so small.
Again, Andrea Horwath is saying loud in clear: I think Muslim francophone teachers don't deserve as many job opportunities as Catholic Francophones for jobs (actually only 1 out of every 5).   Or you're a francophone Sikh family, your child will have to travel across town an hour on a bus to get to a French public school, even though there is a French-Catholic school across the street.  But the catholic family next door, your kids won't have to take an hour-long bus ride.   If people don't see that as discriminatory, than we have a larger problem in this province than we may have though.

Toaster, I'm on mobile, so you'll have to forgive me for not breaking out the paragraphs of your post/my response into seperate quotes.

1) Large numbers of non-Catholics putting their kids in Catholic schools indicates to me that the Catholic schools are providing something that parents want that they don't feel they are getting out of secular schools, whether it's quality of education, morals or something else. For example one of my good friends attended Catholic schools near Hamilton despite being raised Evangelical. He told me that it's semi common for Evangelicals to send their kids to Catholic schools due to the relative lack of secularism. To remove funding is removing options for parents who are dissatisfied with a uniform, secular public system. It's an indicator that there is a segment of parents who are dissatisfied with the public system and a good reason IMO to expand funding to additional groups, both secular and religious.

2) I don't think it follows that opposition to the Tory proposal necessarily indicates the opposite would be positively received. Ontario is about 30% Catholic at least nominally and by your own admission, many non-Catholic students attend Catholic schools. That indicates a large constituency that would have some degree of attachment to Catholic schools (even for non-religous reasons). The NDP would presumably need to win some of those votes to form government.

Oryxslayer had it right; it's not a relevant issue, and the political calculus isn't there for the NDP to make it one. You'd do well to avoid the mistake of my socon peers of confusing principal with popularity.

3) I don't think anyone denies it's discrimination, but politics isnt working out laws from first principles. Progressive governments in Ontario and Alberta are restricting the right to peaceful protest. It sucks and I complain incessantly about it, but I get why progressives are doing it and why the Tories aren't putting up a big fight: Sometimes discrimination is popular.

Just seeing this now, sorry for my late reply.  I think non-catholic parents "choose" the catholic school based purely on geography (as was mentioned above) - and I am speaking in terms of elementary here.  By high school (even middle school), students are likely making the choice.  It's a huge problem in the Francophone community.  It divides the community, and puts unreasonable hardship on non-catholic Franco-ontariens more than anyone else.  As a non-catholic Francophone who worked with a French public board in Northern Ontario, there were about 20 jobs posted at the Catholic board for every 1 permanent posting at the public board. And the fact that the union (AEFO) covers both systems (French public and French Catholic teachers), makes it difficult to get union support in fighting the discriminatory system.  

It just doesn't make sense, particularly in smaller communities that can't support 4 different schools.  You end up with schools with classes split between 4 grades.  You have schools (like in Iroquois Falls) where one building houses three schools (Iroquois Falls Secondary, Ecole Publique l'Alliance, and Ecole catholique l'Alliance.  With three different Principals I might add.  Makes no sense.  I support having different French and English boards (and is why I don't support the Green's position on this), but not catholic.  A leader needs to stand up for what is right, or she should go to Muslim families and say to their face "I don't think you deserve funding for a school system for your religion, but I do for your neighbours who are catholic".  Because every year this continues, that is what they are supporting.

[toaster]

This is what, 3 in a row, that have the NDP in the 27-28% range?  As soon as the NDP solidifies its position as the alternative, which I expect is happening now, I expect (like what happened with the federal Layton orange wave), they will only go up. 

[toaster]

I'm surprised Ottawa Centre is one of the top 4 safest Liberal seats in the province.  I think the last provincial election had a lot of would-be NDPers (Glebe progressives) voting Liberal to stop Hudak's right wing reform, but with Wynne as unpopular as she is, I'm not sure that is going to happen again. 

[toaster]

Finally confirmed, incumbent Liberal MPP for Etobicoke-North, Dr Shafiq Qaadri, is running again (against Ford).  I actually think this will be quite close, given how this is strong Liberal terrirotiy provincially and federally (Kirsty Duncan won with over 60% of the vote federally not too long ago).

[toaster]

I don't think this is as true in Canada as it is in the US.  Definitely doesn't follow with the downtown Toronto latte crowd, or the union workers in Timmins or Sudbury.  And in fact, there have been surveys that show that once modest-income earners in Canada hit 65+ then end up being more "progressive" (i.e., understand the need for subsidies to keep them afloat).

I also don't think it's that people get more conservative as they age, it's that every generation that comes next is much more liberal, so they "appear" more Conservative. 

[toaster]

Why is the Green Party on the Economic left there?  They are much further right than either Liberals or NDP on that front, with wanting to privatize weed sales and all

[toaster]

Why is the Green Party on the Economic left there?  They are much further right than either Liberals or NDP on that front, with wanting to privatize weed sales and all

Not wanting a government monopoly on weed does not make a party right wing. In fact, getting out of the business of selling weed frees up a lot of money for the government to spend on social programs.

The revenues expected (and what we see in Ontario on liquor sales) are much higher when a monopoly is maintained, not to mention the good union jobs these agencies create.  And it's more left wing (i.e., closer to socialism) to have government run businesses.  The Greens want Galen Weston (and mom and pop shops) profiting off my vices. 

[toaster]

Why is the Green Party on the Economic left there?  They are much further right than either Liberals or NDP on that front, with wanting to privatize weed sales and all

Not wanting a government monopoly on weed does not make a party right wing. In fact, getting out of the business of selling weed frees up a lot of money for the government to spend on social programs.

Are you claiming the government can't make a profit with having a monopoly selling weed? 

I realize you're likely arguing that the government would make more money taxing it than being in the retail business itself, but, at least in British Columbia, the government seems to have done a good job with liquor stores (beer and wine can now be sold privately, separate from bars and restaurants of course.)

I only know so much about this because I don't drink alcohol, but the government run stores seem to get a fair deal of praise.

The government can make a profit selling weed, but I think if they weren't in the business, they'd make more money off of the taxes, and they wouldn't have to spend money running the Cannabis Control Board (or whatever they're going to call it).

Perhaps this is 'unsocialist' of me (I do have a bit of a libertarian streak), but I don't think the government should be running unessential businesses. Especially when it comes to vices, I think it's very puritanical.

I wouldn't say it's libertarian, I would say it's pro business/capitalism, or for lack of a better term, on the right fiscally.  Even if the government lost money on the sale of cannabis (which they won't, once the system is up and running), it brings a large number of good unionized jobs with it, instead of a few at the top taking in all the profit.  It doesn't really matter to me if it's Galen Weston or Mom & pop shops, I fundamentally disagree with a few people making large profits when we could share the wealth (and the jobs) across a larger group of people (i.e., employees), and help expand that shrinking middle class. The government can also re-invest the profits into healthcare, education, and infrastructure.  Or we can put that money towards new houses for the ultra rich.

[toaster]

I also think the momentum will keep up, and I'm thinking a minority NDP government at this point.

[toaster]

I'm guessing those 905 numbers have an over-sampling of Brampton numbers?  I can see the NDP sweeping Brampton (and possibly Mississauga-Malton) but can't see them winning in the rest of Mississauga or places like Vaughan, Ajax, or Thornhill.

[toaster]

Re: Willowdale and Etobicoke-Lakeshore, they are similar in that they both have a ton of new condo buildings and new residents which could be a big factor in changing the voting patterns.  With the right candidate, I think the NDP could have won, but I don't think either nominated strongly.

[toaster]

Steven Del Duca is one of the most overrated politicians around in my opinion.  He strikes me more as someone who just got lucky, not a respected Sorbara/Bevilacqua type figure.  

The way that man speaks, in the holier than thou attitude really turns people off from politics.  Speaks down to people who don't agree with him.  Can't stand that man. 

[toaster]

Yard signs in Toronto especially are not really indicative of support in a riding. Most people living in condos/apartments (without a lawn) tend to be younger, and vote Liberal or NDP.

[toaster]

When I started watching the press conference I honestly thought she was going to endorse the NDP.  She started talking about how much she loves the province, and I thought she was going to say she puts that ahead of her own interest.  But then she went on to paint the NDP as extreme as Doug Ford is, which is not the case.  It's always politics with her, everything is calculated.  Anyway, now that she's conceded I do think it will make a lot of the Lib/NDP fencers to go NDP.  I just don't hope Liberals use this as a bargaining chip in the future to say "Well, we let you win because we conceded".  No, you would have only won 2 seats anyway.

[toaster]

NDP close in Etobicoke Lakeshore?

[toaster]

Andrea has added a stop in Etobicoke-Lakeshore.  Guess she thinks they have a shot here!

[toaster]

Voted.  

I still think it's going to be tight, and that many would-be Liberal voters change their minds last minute (and don't admit it publicly or to pollsters), which helps put the NDP above.

My (somewhat hopeful) prediction:
NDP- 57
Lib - 5
Green - 1

PC - 61