Canada General Discussion: Trudeau II

[136or142]

Ok, thanks. I saw an article that said something about it, but I didn't think it sounded too realistic.

Calling early elections is just about the stupidest decision a politician can make in a Westminster system.

In any case, Notley's already nixed the idea.

Alberta's political centrists are attempting to consolidate around the Alberta Party ahead of the 2019 election. Alberta Together, a new centrist PAC being run by Stephen Mandel (former Edmonton Mayor) and Katherine O'Neill (until recently, President of PC Alberta) hosted a cross-party meeting of centrists in Red Deer yesterday, during which 83% of attendees voted in favour of the Alberta Party as the best vehicle to present a credible centrist option in 2019.

What's the point? The only way a non right wing party is going to win is with a divided right or a catch-all non Conservative Party. And the NDP is the best vehicle for that, it certainly is very centrist (at least compared to where the NDP is usually in other jurisdictions).

There are quite a number of people who see the NDP as being too fiscally irresponsible (due to year-over-year deficit projections of $10 billion or more even with optimistic oil price projections, the fact that they're on course to rack up $70 billion of debt, the fact that AB has already seen five credit downgrades, etc.), but also don't want to vote for a hard-right Kenney-led party. In other words, the appetite seems to be there for a fiscally conservative, socially progressive party.

On a related note, how are the Liberals doing? Basically moribund or do they have serious plans for a comeback attempt in 2019?

The AB Liberals just wrapped up a leadership race, where former ALP Executive Vice President David Khan beat former LPC candidate (and provincial PC member until Kenney won) Kerry Cundal, 54% to 46%. Cundal was running on a platform of centrist unity, while Khan wants to keep the ALP alive as a distinct party. Khan's planning on running candidates in all 87 ridings in 2019, but I personally don't see the ALP as being in a good position strategically. They only have around 2,000 members (almost half of whom essentially voted to unite-the-centre), are only polling at around 5%, and are likely looking at their only MLA retiring at the next election.

I can certainly appreciate the 'stocker shock' at the size of the deficits under the NDP government.  But, I think this new 'centrist' party, if it emerges, needs to be made to deal in specifics.  If it wants to cut spending, they need to detail precisely what spending cuts they would make.  If they reply to a question on this with 'reduce waste and make efficiencies' they should not be regarded as a serious political party.

I also am aware that Alberta pays its public servants more than in other provinces and that the NDP is currently in the process of negotiating new contracts that involve 0% wage increases over the life of the contract.  So, if the answer from this new party is 'we would legislate wage rollbacks to the public service'  I think that is a responsible government response to the deficits, but I think Albertans should be aware of that when voting in 2019.

[136or142]

Ok, thanks. I saw an article that said something about it, but I didn't think it sounded too realistic.

Calling early elections is just about the stupidest decision a politician can make in a Westminster system.

In any case, Notley's already nixed the idea.

Alberta's political centrists are attempting to consolidate around the Alberta Party ahead of the 2019 election. Alberta Together, a new centrist PAC being run by Stephen Mandel (former Edmonton Mayor) and Katherine O'Neill (until recently, President of PC Alberta) hosted a cross-party meeting of centrists in Red Deer yesterday, during which 83% of attendees voted in favour of the Alberta Party as the best vehicle to present a credible centrist option in 2019.

What's the point? The only way a non right wing party is going to win is with a divided right or a catch-all non Conservative Party. And the NDP is the best vehicle for that, it certainly is very centrist (at least compared to where the NDP is usually in other jurisdictions).

There are quite a number of people who see the NDP as being too fiscally irresponsible (due to year-over-year deficit projections of $10 billion or more even with optimistic oil price projections, the fact that they're on course to rack up $70 billion of debt, the fact that AB has already seen five credit downgrades, etc.), but also don't want to vote for a hard-right Kenney-led party. In other words, the appetite seems to be there for a fiscally conservative, socially progressive party.

On a related note, how are the Liberals doing? Basically moribund or do they have serious plans for a comeback attempt in 2019?

The AB Liberals just wrapped up a leadership race, where former ALP Executive Vice President David Khan beat former LPC candidate (and provincial PC member until Kenney won) Kerry Cundal, 54% to 46%. Cundal was running on a platform of centrist unity, while Khan wants to keep the ALP alive as a distinct party. Khan's planning on running candidates in all 87 ridings in 2019, but I personally don't see the ALP as being in a good position strategically. They only have around 2,000 members (almost half of whom essentially voted to unite-the-centre), are only polling at around 5%, and are likely looking at their only MLA retiring at the next election.

I can certainly appreciate the 'stocker shock' at the size of the deficits under the NDP government.  But, I think this new 'centrist' party, if it emerges, needs to be made to deal in specifics.  If it wants to cut spending, they need to detail precisely what spending cuts they would make.  If they reply to a question on this with 'reduce waste and make efficiencies' they should not be regarded as a serious political party.

The Alberta Party, which appears to be the likely vehicle for centrist unity, has been the only opposition party to release shadow budgets each year since the NDP got in. Here is their 2017 shadow budget.

The Alberta Party plan operating expense by ministry are on page 22.  It's basically a 'flexible freeze' but it calls for a nearly $100 million cut in spending on seniors and housing, a small cut in health spending and a freeze on spending for children's services.  It's honest as far as it goes, but those are obviously things the NDP would focus on.

[136or142]

I don't think this has been mentioned before, Andrew Scheer named Alain Rayes, M.P for Richmond-Arthabaska as his Quebec Lieutenant.  Not a surprise that the higher profile Gerard Deltell was passed over given that he endorsed, I believe, Erin O'Toole, but not sure were this leaves Maxime Bernier.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/alain-rayes-andrew-scheer-quebec-1.4177190

[136or142]

Steven Fletcher expelled from Manitoba P.C caucus
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/steven-fletcher-expelled-from-caucus-1.4185892

[136or142]

The Alberta Party, if it wants to be seriously effective, needs to ally with the Liberals and the Redford wing of the Progressive Conservatives.

You mean the hilariously corrupt one?

I believe I was rather clearly referring to her ideology.

Isn't her ideology corruption, though?

Well, she had a faction backing her. The centrist one.

In general it is disingenuous to claim her ideology was 'corruption', because corruption knows no one political ideology.

She was no more or less corrupt than Ralph Klein.

[136or142]

It's Julie Payette. So, at least they got the profession correct.

Sorry, maybe I'm uninformed lol, but who's the "they" you're referring to??

John Ivison specifically. RB posted an article on the last page by him claiming Chris Hadfield was going to be the next GG.

John Ivison can be thoughtful and fair minded, but, at the end of the day he is a conservative partisan hack.

[136or142]

First poll on Federal politics since the Khadr settlement.  From Nanos weekly tracking

Liberals: 40% +3
Conservatives: 33% +3
NDP: 14% -3
Green 6% -?

https://twitter.com/niknanos/status/885921613757255680

This isn't too much of a surprise to me.  

I think:
1.The Liberals have regained some of the 'left wing' credentials by having the courage to settle with Khadr.  This explains the Liberal increase and the NDP decrease (caveat of reading too much into small shifts in support based on any poll let alone a tracking poll.)

2.The Conservatives have firmed up their support, however

While in that one poll 71% of Canadians expressed disapproval with the Khadr settlement, that poll also showed that most Canadians had a more nuanced position (something like 60% also said he should have been tried as a child soldier.)

So, while 71% of Canadians expressed disapproval, it doesn't surprise me that the actual OUTRAGE! over this was from the usual suspects of the 30-33% of conservative Canadians who seem to be OUTRAGED! over nearly everything.  To me, this was also evident from the letters to the editor in newspapers expressing this OUTRAGE! as these letters were pretty much all either idiotic or misinformed, which suggested to me anyway, that they must have been written by conservatives (and Conservatives.)


On the matter of the NDP leadership, I would also suspect that the lower the NDP support is, the more likely Niki Ashton will win the leadership, however, that would also depend on how many left establishment type New Democrats stick with the party and vote in the leadership race (obviously they are all individuals but I would tend to think that union executives including executives of union locals, as well as charity organization managers and executive directors, academics and left leaning professionals would all be less likely to support Niki Ashton.)

[136or142]

Any hot takes on the Trudeau Rolling Stone cover/"Why can't he be our President" lolness?

horribly cringeworthy. My favourite part is when they called the RCMP the "Royal Canadian Mountain Police"

Oh FFS

The Situation back in the Jersey Shore days bragged that he 'brought home a girl from Canadia'.

Mike and Justin probably have comparable IQs.

I'd take Prime Minister Justin Trudeau over Scheer Stupidity any day.

[136or142]

NDP MP Pierre Nantel says he might leave the NDP and sit as an indie, losing faith in federalism and NDP's willingness to recognize this province as distinct.

Pierre Nantel used to be artistic director or something for Cirque Du Soleil.  Hasn't the movie 'It' showed us never trust a clown or a person who works with clowns?   (Sorry)

As to the issue itself, I can't understand why this is such a complicated thing: secularism, oui, enforced secularism, non.

[136or142]

RIP: Grit MP Arnold Chan (Scarborough-Agincourt) has died at 50.

Very sad, such a young age.  In terms of by-elections this should probably stay with the Grits although the Tories surprisingly did better in 2015 than 2011, one of the few ridings this happened but still would be shocked if they picked it up.  Nonetheless at this point probably best to remember him and worry about the by-election later. 

I would assume the Conservatives did better in 2015 in that riding because Chan was already in poor health.

[136or142]

No, the Chinese are trending Conservative. It could very well be a close race.

Not in Richmond, British Columbia.

[136or142]

This seems a bit out of whack with other polls http://poll.forumresearch.com/post/2782/federal-horserace-september-2017/ so probably a rogue poll although maybe picking up on a trend.  We shall find out with the next round of polls.  Although I've noticed in general Conservatives tend to do best on the IVR polls while online polls the worst and CATI somewhere in between.  I am guessing perhaps age demographics as IVR polls skew heavily towards older voters while online are more skewed towards younger.  That being said Trudeau's approval is only -4 which is better than most premiers including one's who have successfully been re-elected and Scheer is largely unknown making those numbers even more questionable.

I've found Forum is pretty good when it comes to final polls, but definitely in between elections they've had a lot of weird ones that didn't make sense, but no way of knowing whether they were right or not as you can only accurately compare final polls to actual results as opposed to midterm ones.  If this were the numbers on October 20, 2019 then maybe it would be a sign something big is going to happen, but two years out from an election, probably doesn't mean a whole lot.  Off course the Liberals would be silly to assume they have the election in the bag and likewise the Tories would be silly to think winning in 2019 will be easy (the odds of them winning even with this poll are still fairly low although not zero).

Yes, this would be a 13% swing from their poll from last month, which is a bit hard to believe, though not actually outside the realm of statistical possibility. 

I don't have any evidence regarding this, but while Forum certainly does have a solid track record of their final election polls which was reported by the one outlet that I read who reported on this poll, I wonder if Forum doesn't spend a great deal more money on their final pre-election survey than they do on their other polls.

I've written before that Forum is perfect for the sensationalist mainstream media:  not only are their polls cheap which means less cost for the media, but they sometimes produce wild swings like this poll, which the media loves to breathlessly report on.  Of course, it also can't be discounted that this poll is accurate.

[136or142]

This seems a bit out of whack with other polls http://poll.forumresearch.com/post/2782/federal-horserace-september-2017/ so probably a rogue poll although maybe picking up on a trend.  We shall find out with the next round of polls.  Although I've noticed in general Conservatives tend to do best on the IVR polls while online polls the worst and CATI somewhere in between.  I am guessing perhaps age demographics as IVR polls skew heavily towards older voters while online are more skewed towards younger.  That being said Trudeau's approval is only -4 which is better than most premiers including one's who have successfully been re-elected and Scheer is largely unknown making those numbers even more questionable.

I've found Forum is pretty good when it comes to final polls, but definitely in between elections they've had a lot of weird ones that didn't make sense, but no way of knowing whether they were right or not as you can only accurately compare final polls to actual results as opposed to midterm ones.  If this were the numbers on October 20, 2019 then maybe it would be a sign something big is going to happen, but two years out from an election, probably doesn't mean a whole lot.  Off course the Liberals would be silly to assume they have the election in the bag and likewise the Tories would be silly to think winning in 2019 will be easy (the odds of them winning even with this poll are still fairly low although not zero).

How were things looking electorally for Jean Chretien halfway through his 1st term in 1995? We're the PC's or  Reform in any reasonable striking distance? I guess things may have looked artificially bad, as this would have been during the lead up to the Quebec independence referendum.

The Chretien era Liberals tended to poll really well (like 50-55%) most of the time before coming down to earth during election campaigns.

I think that was much more the case in 1997 than in 2000 when the Liberals were clearly surprised by the ferocity of the attacks from the opposition parties, and even more so, by having to respond to these attacks that were coming at them from various sides of the ideological spectrum as the Progressive Conservatives made a comeback under Jean Charest in the Atlantic Provinces and somewhat in Quebec.

In that election, the Progressive Conservatives were set to make a much bigger comeback in Quebec, but the one province Chretien was an expert in campaigning in was Quebec and he used some underhanded campaign tactics himself to reduce the P.C vote to the point where the P.Cs only won five seats. 

I forget what Chretien did, but with that and with the Reform Party under Preston Manning running his 'not just Quebec politicians anymore' advertisement that was correctly interpreted as 'no more Quebec politicians anymore,'  the 1997 election wasn't one that the main parties could exactly be proud of.

[136or142]

Chretien had a much bigger lead than Trudeau did mind you he faced a much more divided and weaker opposition.  The PCs got 2 seats in 1993 and NDP 9 seats so neither could realistically win the next election while the BQ only ran in Quebec and the Reform Party may have won more seats than the NDP has now, but their vote was heavily concentrated in the Western provinces thus they would have needed a much bigger uniform swing to topple the government.

Interestingly enough Nanos sort of confirms Forum at least directionally although not to degree (I find Forum is good at picking up trends, but tends to exaggerate shifts).  Last week Liberals had a 10.9 lead (40.9 to 30%) while this week it is only six points (38.5% to 32.5%) and Nanos is a four week rolling poll so this week's numbers were probably even tighter.  Still it's two years away and I suspect if the Liberal's own internal polls paint as bad a picture they will make changes.  Off course their tax fight might be more about distracting the upcoming NDP leadership race hoping to drive down the NDP vote thus why they are playing up the class warfare and it seems to be working considering the NDP polling numbers.  Yes it may be costing them some Red Tory and Blue Liberal votes, but perhaps they figure they will win those back on something else or if they paint Scheer as an extremist that group will hold their nose and vote Liberal even if unhappy.

I don't think the Liberals meant to have the elimination of these small business tax breaks as 'class warfare.'  That seems to be an argument entirely from small business groups themselves as well as from the Conservatives.  The Liberals themselves clearly seem to have been taken by surprise at the charges leveled against them by the effected small businesses as well as the breathtaking dishonesty these small business groups are employing.

[136or142]

https://www.usnews.com/news/world/articles/2017-10-01/canadian-sikh-politician-is-new-leader-of-federal-new-democrat-party

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Cue the comparisons to Barack Obama in three, two, one...

Americans may compare Singh to Obama, but I think most Canadians who are familiar with Singh compare him to former NDP leader Jack Layton in terms of his rhetoric and to Prime Minister Justin Trudeau in terms of his youth and charisma (Layton was also charismatic, and I think Singh's charisma is more comparable to Layton's personally in that they're both kind of pleasantly goofy.)

[136or142]

I was able to find some pretty rare footage of different Canadian election nights. I watched 93,97,2000, 2004 on C-SPAN. I was trying to find 1993 coverage for years on YouTube with no luck.


2004 https://www.c-span.org/video/?182468-1/canadian-election-night-coverage

2000 https://www.c-span.org/video/?160814-1/canadian-election-returns

1997 https://www.c-span.org/video/?c3342938/1997-canadian-election

1993 https://www.c-span.org/video/?51860-1/canadian-election-special

It's probably pretty embarrassing to admit, but I have some election returns (CBC, CTV) on video tape.

[136or142]

Proposed cabinet changes
1.Drop Bill Morneau (you're fired biggest loser, get off the island)
2.Move Jim Carr from Natural Resources to Finance (steady performer with a business background)
3.Move Navdeep Bains from Industry (old name) to Natural Resources
4.Move Marc Garneau from Transport to Industry
5.Promote Kevin Lamoureux to Transport
6.Promote Celina Caesar-Chavannes to Small Business and Tourism (Currently held by Bardish Chagger who is also the Government House Leader)

[136or142]

Proposed cabinet changes
1.Drop Bill Morneau (you're fired biggest loser, get off the island)
2.Move Jim Carr from Natural Resources to Finance (steady performer with a business background)
3.Move Navdeep Bains from Industry (old name) to Natural Resources
4.Move Marc Garneau from Transport to Industry
5.Promote Kevin Lamoureux to Transport
6.Promote Celina Caesar-Chavannes to Small Business and Tourism (Currently held by Bardish Chagger who is also the Government House Leader)

Since finance requires experience, I would promote Ralph Goodale or Scott Brison to it as both are veterans in the house of commons and have strong finance backgrounds.  Obviously keep Chrystia Freeland in foreign affairs as that will be a difficult profile with NAFTA talks and so as one of the stronger performers you want to keep him there.

1.Carr has been an M.P for two years now.

2.From 1992 to 1997, Carr was on the editorial board of the Winnipeg Free Press. In 1998, he became president and CEO of the Business Council of Manitoba,[4] an organization which he co-founded.

[136or142]

Proposed cabinet changes
1.Drop Bill Morneau (you're fired biggest loser, get off the island)
2.Move Jim Carr from Natural Resources to Finance (steady performer with a business background)
3.Move Navdeep Bains from Industry (old name) to Natural Resources
4.Move Marc Garneau from Transport to Industry
5.Promote Kevin Lamoureux to Transport
6.Promote Celina Caesar-Chavannes to Small Business and Tourism (Currently held by Bardish Chagger who is also the Government House Leader)

Since finance requires experience, I would promote Ralph Goodale or Scott Brison to it as both are veterans in the house of commons and have strong finance backgrounds.  Obviously keep Chrystia Freeland in foreign affairs as that will be a difficult profile with NAFTA talks and so as one of the stronger performers you want to keep him there.

Brison is a deficit hawk, won't work and Goodale was terribly incompentent as finance minister under Martin.

Considering how strongly the economy is growing I don't think a deficit hawk would be too big a problem and a balanced budget before 2019 would be a pleasant surprise and make it more difficult for the Tories to pull over the Blue Liberals they need to win.  Now if the economy tanks that is a different story, but I suspect even Brison would be fine with a deficit if we go into recession.  The idea of a large deficit may have had some logic when our economy was struggling to reach 1% growth but makes little sense at 3% growth.

People like balanced budgets in abstract, but I don't think a governing party ever lost an election for having a deficit. 

[136or142]

Alberta Party Leader Greg Clarkhas resigned as Leader in order to trigger a leadership race. It appears that the hope is that this leadership race will generate excitement around the Alberta Party, attracting new members and donors, in the wake of Kenney's election as UCP leader. Clark has said that he may run in this leadership race, but that he is undecided as of yet. He will, however, definitely be staying on as MLA for Calgary-Elbow, and will be running for re-election in 2019.

So he's triggering a leadership race, and (probably) running in it, not because he's in trouble, but because he wants to add members? That's kind of lame.

Is this also part of the 'unite the center' movement?

[136or142]

Alberta Party Leader Greg Clarkhas resigned as Leader in order to trigger a leadership race. It appears that the hope is that this leadership race will generate excitement around the Alberta Party, attracting new members and donors, in the wake of Kenney's election as UCP leader. Clark has said that he may run in this leadership race, but that he is undecided as of yet. He will, however, definitely be staying on as MLA for Calgary-Elbow, and will be running for re-election in 2019.

So he's triggering a leadership race, and (probably) running in it, not because he's in trouble, but because he wants to add members? That's kind of lame.

Is this also part of the 'unite the center' movement?

Can't see a political movement in Canada adopting that spelling.

Now I don't speak any English, just American without tears.

[136or142]

[the Conservative Party doesn't have that many populists in their ranks (hence why Leitch didn't do well), but they there are lots of populists who vote Conservative.

Yeah, the Conservatives are a pretty "orthodox" small-"c" conservative party. 

Kellie Leitch was a pretty dreadful populist though.  She had no charisma whatsoever and came across as reading Trump talking points from a teleprompter.

Kevin O'Leary didn't fully catch on either.

[136or142]

An interesting enough year end interview between hack Post Media Columnist John Ivison and Conservative Party leader Andrew Scheer.  

Andrew Scheer, in my opinion, continues to show his Scheer Stupidity by largely answering questions with vague references:  "I believe the problem with Liberals is that they don't care about the results of their policies, they just care about the intentions that they show.  They wrap themselves up in emotion about sending a signal about what they care about. The effects of their policies are usually terrible but they try to gloss over that."

No doubt this answer is partly inspired by the growing view that the Justin Trudeau Liberal government addresses a good number of issues through symbolism, but my guess is if Scheer had been asked which of these policies resulted in terrible effects he would have looked like a deer caught in the headlights.

Or, Andrew Scheer answers with right wing platitudes: "Here's what the Conservative Party stands for.  It's based on greater individual freedom of belief and a trust in free people making free decisions in a free market, not government control and government deciding things."

Interestingly, Ivison did test Scheer on this with a question about a specific government policy: does Scheer support the new law to ban (or limit) advertising to those under 13?

Scheer "I'll be voting against that bill.  I don't believe the government needs to help me the parent.  I can do that."

I wonder what outgoing Premier Brad Wall would say to Scheer about that:

Brad Wall:
“We’re a free-enterprise party. We believe in markets. But we also have to respect that Saskatchewan people aren’t really interested in ideology … they’re interested in results and they’re also interested in a government reflecting their priorities.”

I could be wrong, but I think most parents will be glad to see the result of having these sorts of advertisements banned, recognizing, unlike Andrew Scheer, that companies that heavily market to young children aren't dealing with adults capable of providing informed consent, which is actually an important principle for the proper workings of free markets.  Edit to add: this legislation is actually the work of Conservative Senator Nancy Greene Raine.

Of course, both Scheer and Wall are in opposition to the carbon tax.  

Finally, and I thought most interesting is Scheer's view of what Trump and the Republican Party are doing in the United States:  'At the same time, our biggest trading partner is trying to make its economy more competitive."

Recognizing that, of course, both Conservatives and blue Liberals would likely be in support of the lowering corporate tax rate especially those as (nominally) high as 35%, it certainly is interesting that Scheer regards the U.S adding an additional $100-150 billion a year to its deficit as well as gutting environmental and consumer regulations as making 'its economy more competitive.'

I think there is no question that Andrew Scheer Stupidity is completely in over his head. Nice smile though.

[136or142]

As an addendum:  what strikes me as the most clear in that interview and from seeing Scheer's leadership in the Commons during the last session, is Scheer has a clear philosophical direction when it comes to economics despite his reliance on vague generalities and right wing platitudes:  he is essentially a 'small government' U.S Republican.

A hack like Ivison is clearly mostly impressed with Scheer's platitudes of 'fighting for the average person and not being an elitist'  (refreshingly, at least in the published interview, Scheer, to his credit did not use the words 'elite' or 'elitist' even once)  but it is clear that Scheer's platitudes of being 'an average person' (unlike Prime Minister Justin Trudeau)  and fighting for 'freedom' are straight from the U.S Republican Party buzz word playbook.

Scheer's economic policies are clearly 'freedom for corporations.'  This is most evident in his party's opposition to the small business tax changes that took away benefits from the wealthiest small business owners and professionals, his opposition to the carbon tax, his opposition to banning advertising aimed at those under 13, and his apparent belief that gutting environmental and consumer regulations make "an economy more competitive."

[136or142]

It's a bit late, but CRA's quarterly Atlantic Canada poll was released in December:

Nova Scotia
Liberal: 38% (-7)
Tory: 29% (nc)
NDP: 27% (+5)

New Brunswick
Liberal: 47% (nc)
Tory: 28% (-4)
NDP: 11% (-1)
Green: 9% (+2)

Newfoundland
Liberal: 44% (+4)
Tory: 33% (nc)
NDP: 19% (-5)

Prince Edward Island
Liberal: 37% (-8)
Tory: 28% (+4)
Green: 25% (+7)
NDP: 11% (-1)

Obviously the PEI result is most interesting but who knows how that translates into seats. PEI is a crapshoot. Otherwise nothing too crazy.

I guess nothing came of the 2 Nova Scotia NDP executives resigning their positions.