The Americanization of Canadian Politics

[August1991]

Years ago, I had a chat with an American friend. We were discussing American presidential elections and specifically the election of 1988 when Dukakis lost. (Remember the head in the tank ad... )

In 1989 or 1990, Dukakis, ex-Democratic Presidential candidate, ex-Governor of Massachusetts, was in Canada, Ottawa or Toronto, and on the front pages of Canadian newspapers. And I recall, my American friend said: "You Canadians don't understand America. In America, he's a loser. He lost. No one cares about Dukakis. In Canada, when you have an election, the other guy doesn't lose. He leads the opposition. He's still important. But in America, he's a loser."

======

To his credit, Stéphane Dion remained in the House as an MP. So did John Diefenbaker. Michael Ignatieff was a tourist. I reckon Mulroney, Chretien and Martin Jnr have large egos - such is the Americanization of Canadian federal politics.

Harper? If I were Stephen Harper, I would keep my seat in the House of Commons - like Winston Churchill did.

Edited March 5, 2016 by August1991

[nerve]

He's not a lawyer what else is he going to do? Retire on a 20 year pension he said he wouldn't take? He will probably wait for his daughter to graduate before quiting politics in Ottawa unless he gets another job in Ottawa, it just makes sense. If she is 17 now then that is the end of this year or next. Not sure if she graduates this June or next. Outside of that, his loyalty to his consituents in Calgary would see him complete the term, likely perhaps before retiring since both his kids will be in University most likely. Which is a perfect time to retire on a 25 year parliamentary pension.

I'm betting though he is comfortable in Stornoway. Oh right he's not the leader of the opposition my bad.

Does he even have a house in Calgary anymore?

Edited March 5, 2016 by nerve

[bush_cheney2004]

Gov. Dukakis went on to finish his term in 1991, long after his failed 1988 presidential bid. He was the longest serving Massachusetts governor in history, and remained active in state politics afterwards, so hardly a loser. I agree...."You Canadians don't understand America."

Edited March 5, 2016 by bush_cheney2004

[Topaz]

Gov. Dukakis went on to finish his term in 1991, long after his failed 1988 presidential bid. He was the longest serving Massachusetts governor in history, and remained active in state politics afterwards, so hardly a loser. I agree...."You Canadians don't understand America."

Does ANY country understand the USA..even some Americans don't understand its government but the internet is opening the eyes of people around the world how corrupt this country is.

[Argus]

This topic title makes no sense given the OP. Whether ex PMs staying the House or not hardy reflects on whether Canadian politics is 'americanized'.

Now if you want to talk about how the congeniality which once ruled has faded away, as it has in the US, and the rancor, distrust and disrespect between the let and right have grown, then I would tend to agree. I would also agree that, as in the US, parties have a more narrow interest than once. The Democrats and Republicans once embraced a much wider array of the political spectrum. There were some pretty liberal Republicans and some darn conservative Democrats. No more.

We've seen somewhat the same sort of thing in Canada, where the left wing parties have basically expelled anyone who doesn't have hard core left wing ideological beliefs. Thus the Conservatives remain the only centrist party.

[SpankyMcFarland]

One good thing about Canada is we have not been stuck with two parties for 150 years. It's a serious problem down south now.

[bush_cheney2004]

One good thing about Canada is we have not been stuck with two parties for 150 years. It's a serious problem down south now.

There are actually many political parties in the US....more than in Canada. Not a problem at all.

[SpankyMcFarland]

There are actually many political parties in the US....more than in Canada. Not a problem at all.

It is a big problem. When did another party win the Presidency? You have two perpetual ruling parties. Other parties have a very difficult time winning elections down there owing to the way in which elections are organized. That's primitive. It's like having two ancient companies in the country that make everything.

Dump the Electoral College, a bizarre anachronism, and take a long look at FPTP.

Edited March 8, 2016 by SpankyMcFarland

[bush_cheney2004]

It is a big problem. When did another party win the Presidency? You have two perpetual ruling parties. Other parties have a very difficult time winning elections down there owing to the way in which elections are organized. That's primitive. It's like having two ancient companies in the country that make everything.

Dump the Electoral College, a bizarre anachronism, and take a long look at FPTP.

No....we like "primitive" with no monarch please. How many Greens or Dippers have become Prime Minister ?

That's why we will never see a topic titled "The Canadianization of American Politics".

Dump the Queen.

[August1991]

Gov. Dukakis went on to finish his term in 1991, long after his failed 1988 presidential bid. He was the longest serving Massachusetts governor in history, and remained active in state politics afterwards, so hardly a loser. I agree...."You Canadians don't understand America."

I suppose that explains why Dukakis was in Canada after 1988 - he came as Governor of Massachusetts. But I think my American friend had it right: we view a losing politician as still a somebody. In the US, Mitt Romney is like his father: a loser.

It seems to me very wasteful to have someone run around the country for months and months, organize bunches of people, raise money, learn how to do all that stuff - and then, to mix metaphors, send them out on an iceberg as if they were sliced pastrami.

[August1991]

This topic title makes no sense given the OP. Whether ex PMs staying the House or not hardy reflects on whether Canadian politics is 'americanized'.

Harper, like Dion and Mulroney, know alot about politics and how Canada works. I think they're not "losers" and should stick around.

Now if you want to talk about how the congeniality which once ruled has faded away, as it has in the US, and the rancor, distrust and disrespect between the let and right have grown, then I would tend to agree.

I would refer to that rather as the Canadianization of American politics. The viciousness of Canadian politics, akin to a Jesuit seminary, is legendary.

====

Argus, make no mistake. We elected our first Roman Catholic PM in the 1890s, and then we elected our first French-speaking PM a few years later. Can you imagine the vicious (my side; your side, Team A vs Team B ) things that were said at the time?

In the US context, Scott Adams, the Dilbert guy, has a point about persuasion and identity politics. But he barely understands what he is talking about in the broader world.

Edited March 8, 2016 by August1991

[Bryan]

There are actually many political parties in the US....more than in Canada. Not a problem at all.

The two main parties run the electoral system without outside oversight, the whole game is rigged so as to never allow a third option a real chance. When Ross Perot got even a little bot of traction, they tightened things up even more to make sure that even that didn't happen again.

How many Greens or Dippers have become Prime Minister ?

A Reformer did. And the NDP made it to second place. Those kinds of things could never happen the way the US system is set-up -- it's institutionalized corruption.

[bush_cheney2004]

The two main parties run the electoral system without outside oversight, the whole game is rigged so as to never allow a third option a real chance. When Ross Perot got even a little bot of traction, they tightened things up even more to make sure that even that didn't happen again.

False...I helped to elect a Reform Party governor in 1998. Ross Perot actually did quite well compared to some of the laughable results for Canada's Green Party. The history of U.S. state and federal politics is more complicated than just Republicans and Democrats.

A Reformer did. And the NDP made it to second place. Those kinds of things could never happen the way the US system is set-up -- it's institutionalized corruption.

Two different forms of government....nice try. Second place is for losers.

[bush_cheney2004]

I suppose that explains why Dukakis was in Canada after 1988 - he came as Governor of Massachusetts. But I think my American friend had it right: we view a losing politician as still a somebody. In the US, Mitt Romney is like his father: a loser.

It depends on the politician...Jimmy Carter was humiliated in 1980 but bounced back as a "human rights" somebody. John McCain remains a powerful senior senator from Arizona. Michael Ignatieff scurried back across the border to obscurity at Harvard. The comparison is apples and oranges.

Edited March 8, 2016 by bush_cheney2004

[August1991]

It depends on the politician...Jimmy Carter was humiliated in 1980 but bounced back as a "human rights" somebody. John McCain remains a powerful senior senator from Arizona. Michael Ignatieff scurried back across the border to obscurity at Harvard. The comparison is apples and oranges.

B_C, you've crossed the Shirley Valentine line:

"They feel they have to take over the conversation. I mean, I mean with most fellas if you say something like, like my favorite season's autumn, they go oh, oh, my favorite season's spring and then you've got 10 minutes of them talkin' about why they like spring and you weren't talkin' about spring, you were talkin' about autumn. So what do you do? You talk about what they want to talk about. Or you don't talk at all. Or you wind up talking to yourself."

Edited March 8, 2016 by August1991

[Smoke]

Things went downhill around 1993 when the Liberals started modeling their campaign and attack ads using the methods of their hero, James Carville. That's when the dirty politics really started.

[SpankyMcFarland]

False...I helped to elect a Reform Party governor in 1998. Ross Perot actually did quite well compared to some of the laughable results for Canada's Green Party. The history of U.S. state and federal politics is more complicated than just Republicans and Democrats. Two different forms of government....nice try. Second place is for losers.

When was the last President from another party? The US is no longer a model to follow when it comes to political systems.

[August1991]

Buried in the report:

The NDP and the Conservative parties voted against the motion in a poll that saw former prime minister Stephen Harper among the first MPs to cast a nay vote.

CBC

======

To me, the definition of a civilized state is the peaceful transfer of State power between opponents.

[bush_cheney2004]

When was the last President from another party? The US is no longer a model to follow when it comes to political systems.

The United States doesn't follow other political systems, and it never has to incessantly worry about being "Canadianized".

[SpankyMcFarland]

The United States doesn't follow other political systems, and it never has to incessantly worry about being "Canadianized".

It's more than 150 years, isn't it, to answer my own question. The US is PRI with two wings.

[bush_cheney2004]

Canadian politics is subject to the larger but same anti-Americanism described in the usual way, like this:

“The Last Acceptable Prejudice? Anti-Americanism in US–Canada Relations”

http://davidbmacdonald.com/sites/default/files/2014%20Ar%20-%20anti-americanism%20acsanz%20journal.pdf

[bush_cheney2004]

It's more than 150 years, isn't it, to answer my own question. The US is PRI with two wings.

Depends....President Gerald Ford was not elected with a single party vote.

[SpankyMcFarland]

Depends....President Gerald Ford was not elected with a single party vote.

Ah, now. You're scraping the barrel there.

Ford was a decent skin, though - a guy with integrity. Probably not madly egotistical enough for the top job.

[Lerxst]

It is a big problem. When did another party win the Presidency? You have two perpetual ruling parties. Other parties have a very difficult time winning elections down there owing to the way in which elections are organized. That's primitive. It's like having two ancient companies in the country that make everything.

Dump the Electoral College, a bizarre anachronism, and take a long look at FPTP.

I was a registered member of the Green Party down here. We won 0 elections. We were cut out of nearly every race due to insider politics and ridiculous criteria for nominations. We have a delegate system in the primaries that excludes anyone not of the 2 major parties and "flunks out" anyone in those parties who fails to garner enough votes. We have televised debates hosted by one of the two major parties, with little regard given to any of the third parties.

As of 2105, I'm now a Democrat because this messed up system won't allow me to vote in the primaries/caucus unless I am one. Bernie Sanders is an Independent that had to run as a Democrat in order to be "taken seriously" and have access to the same resources as the others in order to be on equal ground.

Our 2 party system is the reason most of us aren't represented by the very government that should be representing us. No, we are not "okay" with it, when most of us are given no voice in our own government.

God help Canada if you ever go down this path!!

[BC_chick]

One good thing about Canada is we have not been stuck with two parties for 150 years. It's a serious problem down south now.

Other than my orange team's short stint as opposition, when exactly have we had a viable choice between team blue and red?