Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
October 19, 2017, 02:26:44 am
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Please delete your old personal messages.

  Show Posts
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 ... 54
26  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / International Elections / Re: Ontario 2018 election on: October 16, 2017, 02:01:07 pm
No doubt NDP and Liberals have differences but until you look into the details they seem similar or at least moving in the same direction.  I think the real danger is some on the left are so sick of the Liberals so they will vote NDP while others are so terrified of the Tories they will vote Liberal to keep the Tories out.  The PCs real advantage is so far at least they don't seem to be scaring away the Blue Liberals and Red Tories and when you have those two on side you have 40% meaning unless either the Liberals or NDP completely implode you have a PC government.  The NDP has a core base of 15% while PCs are around 30% so essentially if the Liberals implode you need over 2/3 to go NDP to push them ahead.  Certainly possible but not easy.  The one thing the NDP does have in their favour is a whole generation of Ontarioans either weren't born or too young to remember the Rae years at the same time those old enough to remember are more likely to vote.  While an NDP win is what they would like, I think the odds are fairly slim although to be fair Howarth is in a better position that Notley was 8 months before the Alberta election so surprises can happen.  The more realistic possibilities for the NDP are as follows:

1.  Liberals get reduced to a minority so the NDP holds the balance of power
2.  PCs win a majority, NDP comes in second meaning with no Trudeau like person in the wings waiting for the Liberals, the NDP will probably form government once people tire of the PCs.

A third possibility but actually I think would be bad for the NDP is the PCs win a minority.  There will be a lot of pressure for them to join up with the Liberals to stop the PCs, but considering how unpopular the Liberals are, this will just tie them to the Liberals and likely result in a PC landslide the following election.
27  General Politics / International General Discussion / Re: Why do some conservatives like the NDP? on: October 16, 2017, 11:28:12 am
Yes primarily for two reasons. One is self-interest though.

1. Tory support fluctuates between 30 to 40 percent so the better the NDP does the better their chances at winning since any NDP votes gained will likely come at the expense of the Liberals not Tories, thus vote splitting.

2. Even if they disagree with the NDP, most see them as a principled party whereas they see the Liberals as opportunists with no principles and just do whatever they think will win instead of sticking to their principles like the NDP do.

3. Because the NDP loses most of the time I find NDP supporters aren't as hostile to Tories, they just disagree with them whereas a lot of Liberal supporters truly hate Tories and see them as bad people so a lot of Tories can get along with NDP supporters at a personal level whereas the hatred between the Liberals and Tories goes beyond political and is also personal too as much like the US many believe on both sides those supporting the other are truly bad people.

Nonetheless attitudes are somewhat regionalized too.

Atlantic Canada: Since most people are centrists (most Tories here are Red Tories and NDP third way types) there is much less partisan animosity than elsewhere in the country.

Quebec: They don't follow the traditional left-right politics and so not sure what attitudes are there.

Ontario: What I said above applies there most as the NDP can win enough to votes to have impact, but asides from 1990 provincially and never federally, they never win outright so the better the NDP does in Ontario, the better the Tories usually do as the votes they gain generally only hurt the Liberals.

Manitoba/Saskatchewan: Since the NDP is the main opposition provincially I think you will find Tories are more likely to dislike both equally

Alberta: A few years ago what I said was true, but today I think the right hates both with a passion.  The amount of hatred towards both Notley and Trudeau in Alberta is very strong.  Likewise since more lean right than left in Alberta usually progressives coalesce behind one party so most progressives vote NDP provincially and Liberal federally.

British Columbia: Depends on what type of Tories.  The hard right ones as mentioned above, but the moderate right tend to hate the NDP more as the NDP has won provincially multiple times and the BC Liberals who are their main opponents are a coalition of both Liberals and Conservatives thus since they work together provincially they don't tend to dislike the Liberals as much.  Within the Liberals federally, some still hate the Tories as the progressive federal Liberals generally vote NDP provincially, it is only the Blue Liberals who go BC Liberals and in fact many of them hate the BC Liberals more as they consider them being dishonest in their name.
28  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / International Elections / Re: German Elections & Politics on: October 15, 2017, 08:30:57 pm
It looks like the Red-Green fell just shy of a majority.  Interestingly enough unlike recent German elections it looks like more people voted for parties on the left than right.  I also noticed using constituencies only SPD got a majority so has anyone in Germany ever raised the idea of switching to first past the post or Alternative vote (AV or known as ranked ballots) as both produce majorities and stabilities or is it most European countries so entrenched the idea whatever percentage of votes a party gets they should get that many seats and the idea of deviating from them just doesn't fly with voters even if less stability.
29  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / International Elections / Re: Alberta Municipal Elections: October 16, 2017 on: October 15, 2017, 08:26:43 pm
I think municipal elections are harder to predict due to lower turnout and lower response rate.  I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if Nenshi loses, but nor would I be surprised if he is re-elected.  I've found also by-election or riding polls are often wildly off too.  Provincial and federal polls tend to have a better track record for being accurate.

I've found that as well, but it's interesting that Calgary would be much harder to poll at an overall municipal level when it essentially has the same population as Manitoba, and provincial polling in places like that seem to do better. Could simply be a function of the party system at a provincial level, I suppose.

I think you hit the nail on the head when you said party system.  Every party has a certain core vote that will vote for them no matter what while you have a swing vote who are only open to two parties and so whichever of the leaders or platforms they like better or dislike the least they go for.
30  General Politics / Economics / Re: Is forced taxation necessary to raise revenue? on: October 15, 2017, 12:51:46 am
Unfortunately it is necessary as it wouldn't be possible to raise the money necessary for a civil society.  Voluntary taxation might work if you were on an island country of only 1,000 people, but not in a large advanced one.  Perhaps if you lived in the Pitcairn Islands you could rely on voluntary taxes, but not in most modern countries.
31  General Politics / Economics / Re: Opinion of Keynesian Economics on: October 15, 2017, 12:50:18 am
The idea in itself is sound, but generally works horribly as most governments only follow Keynesian partially not fully.  Otherwise they run deficits during a recession, but continue to run them during growth.  Keynesian says you spend more during recessions to stimulate the economy, but cut back during growth however governments very rarely do the latter thus why it often hasn't worked well.  If they followed it fully instead of partially it would work well.
32  General Politics / Economics / Re: Post Your Economic Platform Here on: October 15, 2017, 12:47:12 am
It is unworkable. The consumption tax is just crazy to implement. How the hell do you waive off the tax for some low income people? Are they supposed to be 2 prices? How do they check every sale & ensure that person deserves the tax waive off?

Also, there will be  huge leakages with this kind of thing. Indirect taxes are easy to collect & a small tax can net huge revenue & are almost impossible to avoid - Which is why govt all over the world like it. But this kind of thing has probably not been done & is likely impossible to implement.

That is easy to do, you have a sales tax rebate for low income individuals.  You estimate how much a typical low household would pay a year in sales tax and send a rebate cheque at the end of every year.  In Canada we have a GST rebate for low income individuals so that would achieve the same goal at a much lower cost.  It might not bring it to exactly zero, but would average out close to it.
33  General Politics / Economics / Re: Post Your Economic Platform Here on: October 15, 2017, 12:44:58 am
- Consumption/sales tax of 9.9%, with an exception for those making below $25,000 a year
- Taxes: 28.4(+10.0) cents per gallon and 39.4(+15.0) cents per gallon for diesel fuel
- Raising federal minimum wage to $10.10
- Hickenlooper-Kasich for two years, then Healthy Americans Act
- Negotiate sanctions on China until they put pressure on North Korea to release political prisoners and liberalize, presenting a united front with Japan, South Korea, Indonesia, India, Russia, Brazil, the United Kingdom, Canada, Mexico, and the European Union
- https://budget.house.gov/uploadedfiles/wydenryan.pdf
- Support further foreign aid to Rojava, Peshmerga, and the Syrian National Council, as well as consider temporary aid to Tahrir al-Sham to weaken Assad($20 billion)
- Free trade agreement with the United Kingdom, India, Australia, Indonesia, Japan, South Korea, Canada, Mexico, Brazil, France, Germany, Israel, Ireland, Argentina, and (hopefully) all of the European Union

Income Taxes:
1: 0%
2: 5%
3.0: 27%
3.5: 30%
4: 33%
5: 35%
6: 37.5%
7.0: 39.5%
7.25: 42.5%
7.5+: 44.5%
(All hikes equal on the respective and corresponding brackets of married couples, single people, etc.)
- Cut all welfare besides food stamps and HUD funding
- Guarantee basic income of up to $20,000, as a supplement for other income(if there is any), and for those who make below that and work above it, they will continue to receive $5,000->$3,000->$1,000 in a three year period after they cross the line of $20,000 per year; states are encouraged to give further funding of a basic income
- Increase NASA budget to $184,000,000,000
- Carbon tax on companies and company/business transportation

What do you guys think of these modifications? I'm thinking of adding suggested reforms for education...

Agree with most except income taxes.  Also would add cut corporate taxes to 25% (US has highest corporate tax rate in OECD) while get rid of the loopholes as some corporations pay nothing and others the high rate, so tax everyone at 25%.  Income taxes I would reduce to three brackets and a fourth temporary high bracket until the budget is balanced and would be lowered until it disappears.  Also state and municipal income tax deductions from federal taxes would end so total taxation would not change that much.

Bottom at 10%
Middle at 25%
Top at 35%

For the top it would go down in low taxed states, but would be up in high taxed states.  In California the top rate is now 47.6% whereas under this it would be 48.3%.  The reason is the top rate is 13.3% but is tax deductible so it is not now 39.6% + 13.3% but rather (100 - 13.3)*.396 = federal rate + state rate.
34  General Politics / Economics / Re: Post Your Economic Platform Here on: October 15, 2017, 12:35:07 am
For Canada mine are


- Raise the GST back to 7%
- Introduce a revenue neutral carbon tax
- Bring in an AMT whereby those making over 100K must pay minimum 25% tax, 30% tax for over 200K and 35% for over 500K and this would be for the combined federal + Provincial, not federal alone.
- Maintain our corporate tax rate as long as it is not in the top 10 highest in the OECD, but lower if the combined federal + Provincial puts us in the top 10
- Reduce the number of brackets to 3 with the following rates: Lowest at 13%, Middle at 20% and highest at 29%.  These would be federal only but essentially those in the lowest if you include provincial would pay between 18.05% to 24% depending on province and highest would pay between 43.7% to 50% depending on province.
-  Introduce a lower corporate tax rate of 10% in economically depressed areas such as Atlantic Canada to encourage more firms to open there.
-  Put a 49.9% cap on the top rate so if provinces raise rates enough it pushes the combined rate over 50%, a lower federal rate would be paid.  Otherwise no person would ever pay over 50% in taxes.
-  Raise the minimum threshold for taxation gradually until it hits 20K so the first 20K is tax free
-  Do a trial on GAI in a few communities and implement nation wide if it works.


- Maintain spending increases at or below Inflation + economic growth + population growth
-  For every new program implemented, axe one existing one.
- Focus spending on priorities such as infrastructure, health care, military, and poverty reduction while cut spending elsewhere.
-  Regular audits of all departments and automatic pay deductions for any cabinet minister who spends above allotted budget.
-  In Union negotiations, any savings the unions can find, they will get a raise at half that.  So if they find 5% savings, they get an additional 2.5% bonus in raises.
-  No deficits except during recessions and once recession ends, develop a scheduled plan to return the budget to balance.
-  All surpluses will be split 1/3 for new spending, 1/3 for tax cuts, and 1/3 for debt reduction.
- Reduce overlap by staying out of spending in areas of provincial jurisdiction or municipal and instead transfer tax points.

Economic Growth

- Ensure the Canada's tax levels remain competitive with both G7 and OECD levels.
- Reduce red tape to make Canada an attractive place to do business.
- Sell government assets that serve no purpose and encourage pensions to invest or be part owners in infrastructure including P3's
- End Canada Post monopoly and privatize before it becomes redundant
- Work with Atlantic provinces to expand universities and have them specialize in areas.
- Create clusters of excellence and specialization in different areas similar to Silicon Valley
- Reduce regulatory regime for resource extraction and pipelines so as to encourage growth in the resource sector.
- Give bonus points under the immigration points system for immigrants who wish to settle outside the large cities like Australia does to encourage more development in underdeveloped areas while reduce strain on real estate market in large centres.
- Increase immigration in the economic class while cut immigration levels under the family class.
- Make it easier for immigrants to come who wish to start their own business.
- Make it mandatory to show proficiency in either English or French to get citizenship so as to encourage immigrants to learn one of the official languages.
-  Repeal or revise the Canada Health act to allow a parallel private system to ease the burden on the public system.
-  Study the feasibility of high speed rail in the Quebec-Windsor corridor and if economic benefits exceed costs than proceed in building.  Also try to use a P3 BOOT model (Build own operate and transfer) so as to racking up debt and transferring costs to private sector.
- Privatize Airports
-  Gradually raise the retirement age to 70 so as to keep OAS costs under control and allow for enhanced CPP payouts without raising premiums (No premium rises in CPP).  Make an exemption for those in manual labour and who are physically unable to work to 70 to retire earlier.
-  Expand free trade agreements including implementing CETA, trying to restart the TPP and failing that open free trade talks with Japan.  Start free trade talks with both Mercosur, Andean Community, ASEAN Countries (if TPP cannot be resurrected) and India.  Free trade talks with China but use extreme caution.  Begin Free trade talks with the UK once it leaves the EU unless it remains part of the customs union and try and have the free trade agreement as close as possible to CETA.

35  General Politics / Economics / Re: Which of these countries are "developed"? Which of them are "developing"? on: October 15, 2017, 12:14:35 am

Czech Republic
South Korea

Israel and South Korea are definitely developed countries.  South Korea's GDP now surpasses Spain and is close to Italy while Israel is ahead of Italy and barely behind Japan and France.  South Korea though is a relative newcomer but nonetheless a developed one.

Czech Republic, Estonia, Greece, Latvia, Slovakia, and Slovenia all meet the IMF definition of developed countries so I would consider them borderline developed countries, but still developed.

Chile, Hungary, and Poland are still considered developing by the IMF but they are also right on the borderline so you could probably make a strong argument either way.

Turkey and Mexico are definitely developing, although upper middle income.  Their GDP's are similar to Brazil, Romania, Russia, and Malaysia which are also generally seen as developing and below that of Argentina which is usually considered a developing.  In fact even China is not that far behind Turkey and Mexico and could surpass them in the next decade depending growth.  Likewise Venezuela had a higher per capita GDP than both until their recent troubles (now it is much lower for obvious reasons).
36  General Politics / Economics / Re: Next Recession on: October 15, 2017, 12:09:08 am
Tough to predict, but my best guess is 2019.  Could come late next year at the earliest will could be as late as the spring of 2021.  If you are Trump you are hoping for the latter as usually presidents when the recession hits or close to it lose.
37  General Politics / Political Debate / Re: Which party is more conservative? on: October 15, 2017, 12:06:59 am
Depends.  On issues of immigration AfD is definitely further right although the GOP under Trump is increasingly aligning with them.  But on economic policies I would say GOP is further right as I don't believe AfD favours dismantling Germany's social safety net which is far more generous than the US so it depends on the issue.  In comparing German to US politics, I would put as follows:

AfD - Like the Trump Republicans

FDP - A modified version of the Libertarians otherwise your William Weld types or perhaps your more market oriented Democrats

CDU/CSU - Most like the Blue Dog Democrats and perhaps historically aligned with the GOP, but very few like them are left.  They would be closest to types like Lincoln Chaffee, Arlen Specter, and Jim Leach who all eventually left the GOP.  Otherwise they would be like the Rockefeller Republicans or Eisenhower ones.

SPD - Similar to the Progressive caucus in the Democrats and somewhat like Bernie Sanders too.

Greens - Similar to Ralph Nader and Jill Stein

Die Linke - Like your Marxists you find on university campuses but few elsewhere.  Would be like a Noam Chomsky led party, even Bernie Sanders would be too centrist for them.
38  General Politics / Political Debate / Re: Are private schools fundamentally lower quality education compared to public? on: October 15, 2017, 12:01:53 am
Private schools should be abolished and I look forward to Corbyn's Labour government doing so.

Has Corbyn actually promised this?  This is absolutely nuts, but wouldn't surprise me considering how far left Corbyn is.  Also no guarantee Corbyn will be the next PM.  I give him a 50% chance of being PM in the future and a 50% not.  Not in that he loses the next election or the government lasts to 2022 and being 73 he doesn't stick around that long as that would put him at 83 if he served two terms.
39  General Politics / Political Debate / Re: Are private schools fundamentally lower quality education compared to public? on: October 15, 2017, 12:00:33 am
Some might be, but those that are will probably not last long.  If you can get free education in the public school, why would you bother to pay extra if the quality is inferior.  You only pay extra when you can get it free if you believe it will be better.  Now some individual private schools do offer inferior education, but they generally go out of business quickly.
40  General Politics / Political Debate / Re: Should anthropogenic global warming denial become a criminal offense? on: October 14, 2017, 11:57:11 pm
Absolutely not.  People should have the right to believe whatever they want.  If you think they are wrong, more free speech is the solution, not silencing opponents.  Also while the evidence overwhelmingly points to climate change as real, it is not 100%, rather over 95%.  What if someone does some research and the results show it is not changing or natural, banning this would discourage them from publishing it whereas if allowed they would publish it and others could review it and point out any errors or adjust predictions.  Finally what defines climate change denial, does saying climate change is happening but will be less severe than predicted qualify?  This is a dangerous road to go down and something you get in dictatorships not liberal democracies.
41  General Politics / Political Debate / Re: Pro's and Con's: Single-Payer Healthcare on: October 14, 2017, 11:54:16 pm

 - Everybody gets access to care free of charge, no bankruptcies over medical fees and the poor don't avoid treatment due to fear of costs.
- Can reduce total costs due to economies of scale.
- Since one doesn't have to buy health insurance it means more disposable income elsewhere.  Yes taxes are higher but taxes unlike health insurance are progressive so rich pay more than the poor and the poor are more likely to spend each extra dollar in the economy


- Due to rationing leads to long waiting times for non-life threatening treatments
- Less innovation and research.
- Means higher taxes or less spending elsewhere
42  General Politics / International General Discussion / Re: Bigger threat in your opinion? on: October 14, 2017, 11:51:00 pm
I would say North Korea as they have nukes and with Trump trying to provoke them I fear some tweet by Trump might push them over the top to do something stupid.  Kim Jong Un is crazy but I don't think we do anything unless provoked.  Trump should stop using twitter to do diplomacy.
43  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / International Elections / Re: Canadian by-elections, 2017 (next event: Vancouver City Council: Oct 14) on: October 14, 2017, 11:49:34 pm
Definitely not a good night for Vision Vancouver so while still a year away, it does seem Gregor Robertson may face greater headwinds although it still seems more voted left than right but split on the left.  Turnout 8.02% is pathetic.  BTW I voted despite the fact I had to drive in to the city as I am staying on Bowen Island for the next few weeks to do some dogsitting.
44  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / International Elections / Re: Canadian by-elections, 2017 (next event: Vancouver City Council: Oct 14) on: October 14, 2017, 10:21:37 pm
Steve Kent (MHA for Mount Pearl North) has resigned. One of the few PC held seats in the province, so should be an easy hold for the Tories.

True enough and also the Newfoundland Liberals have seen their popularity take a pretty big hit since the last election.  Whether it would be enough to defeat them or not is tough to say, but they've fallen enough much like the Saskatchewan Party that you would expect the PCs to not only hold what they have but pick up any marginal seats too. 
45  General Politics / International General Discussion / Re: Who will replace Theresa May as Conservative leader? on: October 14, 2017, 10:06:46 pm
A lot depends on how you define 'marginal'. Rochester and Strood, for example, is certainly winnable in a good election for Labour but would be Tory in an average election (the Tory majority in Medway - the predecessor seat - was about the same in 1992 as it is now). A few in that area (the Thanets for example) actually look more rosy for Labour than they did in 1992.

In Kent, Dover is probably the most marginal but still would take a very big swing.  Mind you it does seem when seats in Kent go Labour they tend to swing much more heavily than the country as a whole and likewise against when they go Conservative.  For example I don't think many thought Canterbury was winneable going into the last election.  That being said they have a large university with a young population which probably tipped it in favour whereas I am not sure if any other Kent constituencies have favourable demographics.  I think the coastline from Shoreham to Hastings is probably where the Labour in the Southeast should aim to sweep asides from Caroline Lucas' constituency and Lewes and Eastbourne (the Liberal Democrats are the main challenger in those two).  In many ways there isn't a huge string of constituencies in any area they can win, rather it is getting Scotland in the central belt to swing behind them while elsewhere picking up another 30-40 seats in various marginals.  A few areas I can think of though is Lancashire seems to have a lot of marginal ones with only a few safe for each party so trying to pick up most but not all of the remaining Tory ones is one place.  Another thing I've noticed is if Labour wins usually you can drive from Nottingham to Liverpool going only through Labour constituencies provided you take a detour going from Nottingham to Sheffield (there are still some holes there) and then Sheffield to Liverpool (you couldn't do that in 2010 or 2015, but can in 2017) only passing through Labour constituencies.  West Midlands is a big problem as Labour got a favourable swing but in all the wrong areas.  The biggest were central Birmingham which was already solidly Labour or the southern rural areas which they were never going to win anyways.  In the Birmingham suburbs and Stoke on Trent, there was a strong swing towards the Tories.
46  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / International Elections / Re: Ontario 2018 election on: October 14, 2017, 09:55:23 pm
Rumours didn't involve doing anything to anyone, but having "competitions" with interns.

... that is appalling.

Honestly, though, I fear he'll get in on the 'throw the bums out' ticket.

He is a bachelor and I think in today's world as long as it was consensual few will really care.  Only if non-consensual would it matter and we would probably have heard about it by now.

As for him winning, the Liberals have been in power for 15 years, Wynne's approval rating is under 20% so there is a strong desire for change.  Also Ontario has a long history of alteration whereby which party is in power at Queens Park is the opposite as in Ottawa.  Last provincial election we still had a Conservative government federally whereas now we have a Liberal one.  The NDP could ride the desire for change, but they seem to be largely invisible as well as the PC's have a much stronger base so they start out before picking up any swing voters at a much higher level thus making their path to power easier.  While Brown is not exactly that strong, he has done a good job at staying away from the hard right stuff that has sank the party in past elections so he is definitely favoured to win but far from certain.  In addition the Liberals are running to the left on an NDP like platform ($15/hour minimum wage, free prescription drugs for under 25, free tuition for low income families, rent controls) so if you want change of players not policy then yes NDP is where you go, but want a change in both, then it is the PC's.  The only big difference is the NDP wants to buy back the shares sold for Hydro One, but even though almost 80% opposed the sale of Hydro One, buying it back is a fairly low priority never mind would probably drive the debt up too.
47  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / International Elections / Re: New Zealand Election 2017 on: October 14, 2017, 09:50:35 pm
I know this may sound a little silly, but how about one side agreeing to allow Winston Peters to be prime-minister but whichever party he forms a coalition with would get most of the cabinet posts.  This will probably due to his age be his last election so allow him to go out on a high note while whichever party he partnered with would still largely drive the agenda.
48  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / International Elections / Re: Alberta Municipal Elections: October 16, 2017 on: October 14, 2017, 09:49:10 pm
I think municipal elections are harder to predict due to lower turnout and lower response rate.  I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if Nenshi loses, but nor would I be surprised if he is re-elected.  I've found also by-election or riding polls are often wildly off too.  Provincial and federal polls tend to have a better track record for being accurate.
49  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / International Elections / Re: Icelandic Snap Election, 28th Oct 2017 on: October 14, 2017, 09:47:31 pm
Seems the SDA has jumped a fair bit while the Left-Green Movement is stalling.  Do any here think a centre-right coalition is still possible or does it look like a centre-left one is a foregone conclusion?
50  General Politics / International General Discussion / Re: Who will replace Theresa May as Conservative leader? on: October 13, 2017, 05:02:45 pm
I think it is questionable that May was more right wing than David Cameron.  Maybe on Brexit, immigration and social issues although she did vote in favour of gay marriage.  On economic issues she seemed more centrist as she favours a living wage, refused to ruled out raising taxes for the rich although unlike Corbyn it would be a last resort, talked about doing more on reducing inequality.  If you read the Tory manifesto it looks far more like something you would see from the Democrats than the GOP.  Even here in Canada, it is the type the old Progressive Conservatives would have put up, not the current Conservatives who are more right wing.  Also the total right wing vote went down in 2017 as lets remember UKIP got almost 14% in 2015 while 2% in 2017 so if you take the Tories + UKIP vote, it was 50% in 2015 while 44% in 2017. 

As for Corbyn's ideas, it is true raising taxes on the rich is popular as is the case in every country, but the danger is many wrongly assume it will hit the middle class as well thus why even though polls show taxing the rich is popular, politicians are generally reluctant to run on this.  Renationalization may seem popular, but the cost is the biggest barrier.  Otherwise most Brits believe privatizing Utilities, Royal Mail, and Rail was a mistake, but undoing it is not easy.  In addition much of the swing towards Labour was in the large urban centres.  If you look at the coal fields in the North, Labour didn't gain much and Tories gained more.  Traditional Labour constituencies like Copeland, Walsall North, Stoke on Trent South, Middlesbrough South and East Cleveland, Ashfield, and Derbyshire Northeast were all lost while in Newcastle under Lyme, Dudley North, Stoke on Trent North, Penistone and Stocksbridge, Barrow in Furness, and Bishop Auckland Tories came a lot closer than they normally do to winning them.  Never mind there were many constituencies Blair won where Corbyn was not competitive such as along the Channel line in Kent which went for Blair as recently as 2005 but Corbyn lost by 20 points or much of Staffordshire which Blair dominated but Corbyn lost badly.  In many ways Labour has the same problem as the Democrats in the US, they are running up the margins in the big cities, but struggling in the hinterlands.

Sadiq Khan maybe more your liberal cosmopolitan type, but that would appeal to millennials just as much as Corbyn and it wouldn't scare older voters as much.  Justin Trudeau unlike Corbyn was able to win/be competitive in the hinterlands (whether he holds those seats in 2019 is a different story) and wasn't largely confined to the large urban centres (although they were strongest there) and he was progressive but not as radical as Corbyn.
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 ... 54

Login with username, password and session length


Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines