Federal NDP Leadership 2017 & Butts

[August1991]

Thinking like Butts:

If the Sikh guy wins the NDP leadership, the NDP will lose seats in Quebec. (He's no Layton; In French Canada, such open-minded voters choose QS anyway.)

Indeed, if the Sikh guy wins, the NDP will be reduced to urban, multicultural ridings.

======

So, I reckon that Gerald Butts hopes that the Sikh guy wins the federal NDP.

According to Butts, if the NDP chooses the guy with a turban, Trudeau Jnr will keep the nationalist Quebec vote. And so, his guy can play as left/right as he wants in English-Canada.

 

Edited September 11, 2017 by August1991

[August1991]

Scheer?

Uh, regionalism aside....

The only way that a federal Conservative can win is if the Liberals/NDP split the leftist vote.

About 35% of all potential voters pay no taxes. So, these recent debates about small business taxes, indeed any discussion of taxes, fall largely on deaf ears. The federal Liberals and the federal NDP now appeal to voters who pay no taxes - if they can get them to vote.

To win, in Canada, Scheer must hope that a cool guy in a turban and a cool guy with a family name - split the clueless vote.

 

 

Edited September 11, 2017 by August1991

[Michael Hardner]

You may be right, but the analysis is a sad example of how politics works today.  Even the top planners think this way.

I believe that if any of the 3 candidates had good ideas then they could win.  But the parties don't think that, so they nominate symbols.

[Hydraboss]

Canadian politics has always been about regionalism.  If you hate Alberta, you get elected in Ontario.  If you hate Ontario, you get elected in Alberta.  If you hate Alberta and Ontario, you get elected in BC.  If you give away free money, you get elected in the Maritimes.

Canada is a zero-sum game and the guys pulling the political strings know that.

 

Pareto efficiency.

[Michael Hardner]

3 minutes ago, Hydraboss said:

If you hate Alberta, you get elected in Ontario.

Nobody in Ontario politics talks much about Alberta.  Ontarios are aloof and oblivious about regionalism which is just as bad really.

[Hydraboss]

Really?  Watch what happens when any party puts an Albertan at the helm.  Remember the whole "Harper is from Alberta!" ranting that hit the Toronto Star, etal?  Care to make a bet that the same thing happens to Scheer because, well, he's not from Kwebek or Ontario?

We do the exact same thing out here to anyone from the Middle of the Universe.

[Michael Hardner]

7 minutes ago, Hydraboss said:

Care to make a bet that the same thing happens to Scheer because, well, he's not from Kwebek or Ontario?

I'm pretty sure people don't know him or where he's from.

 

8 minutes ago, Hydraboss said:

Remember the whole "Harper is from Alberta!" ranting that hit the Toronto Star, etal? 

Yes, fair enough.  I could say that it's more about angling on environmental policies but I remember Chretien's jab at Alberta too.... Still, I think it's hyperbolic to say "If you HATE Alberta".  But you provided a good example so good on you.

[Hydraboss]

"Hate" in this case is appropriate.  In the same way that people "hate" a certain brand of coffee or "hate" anything in broad terms...."I just hate the oil business".

Nobody in your part of the world knows where Scheer is from....yet.  As we get closer to election time, you can be sure the rhetoric will ramp up...comparisons to Harper, Manning and Wall will be all the rage.  The media will play the fact that he's from Saskatchewan as an anti-east thing.  Ideas won't matter - the election will be based on the same things it always has:

Are Canadians ready to get rid of Trudeau yet?

Are there still enough hand outs being given to "me"?

[PIK]

I have a feeling canadians will be looking for substance and not style the next time. A Lot of canadians feel burned by trudeau. Take away the vagina vote and the pot heads ,he is done.

[Michael Hardner]

4 minutes ago, PIK said:

Take away the vagina vote

So... take away 1/2 the voters and he's done ?  I'm not defending him, as I think he's fluff, but the potheads and women are two huge demographics.

[Argus]

8 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

Nobody in Ontario politics talks much about Alberta.  Ontarios are aloof and oblivious about regionalism which is just as bad really.

I disagree. The attitude among Ontario elites is similar to what was expressed by Justin Trudeau several years ago, when he said that Canada works best when the leadership is from Quebec. The direct quote

"Canada isn't doing well right now because it's Albertans who control our community and socio-democratic agenda. It doesn't work,"

Lagace then asked Trudeau if he thought Canada was "better served when there are more Quebecers in charge than Albertans?"

Trudeau replied: "I'm a Liberal, so of course I think so, yes. Certainly when we look at the great prime ministers of the 20th century, those that really stood the test of time, they were MPs from Quebec... This country - Canada - it belongs to us."

Ontario politicians don't say that openly, not being as crass and ignorant as Trudeau was, but they  feel the same way, that only when Ontario is in charge, or failing that Quebec, is the moon in its proper orbit and all is right with the nation.

[Zul-Fiqar786]

Jagmeet Singh will not only win the NDP leadership race hands down, he has a very good shot at becoming Prime Minister and forming an NDP government some time down the road (not necessarily in 2019 since Trudeau is doing a fine job). As for Quebec, they keep proving how irrelevant they are. The rest of us Canadians are sick of Quebec and their stupid ‘special’ treatment. If I was in charge of the NDP the first thing I’d do is rescind the ridiculous Sherbrooke Declaration. Jagmeet Singh is the only one who can re-energize the party, the other three candidates are unimpressive and uninspiring, especially Caron and Angus. Ashton is too much of a radical leftist feminist and has zero prospects in a national setting.

[August1991]

On 9/11/2017 at 9:45 PM, Zul-Fiqar786 said:

... As for Quebec, they keep proving how irrelevant they are. The rest of us Canadians are sick of Quebec and their stupid ‘special’ treatment. If I was in charge of the NDP the first thing I’d do is rescind the ridiculous Sherbrooke Declaration. Jagmeet Singh is the only one who can re-energize the party....

Zul-Fiqar786 (admittedly suspended), you have made me google "Sherbrooke Declaration".

Quebec, irrelevant? You don't know people, history.

I strongly disagree.

====

Agreed - with Trudeau Jnr, name-brand, no tax, "cool-guy", multi-culture mantra - in 2019, federal Liberals will win. 

Edited September 14, 2017 by August1991

[August1991]

On 9/11/2017 at 6:23 AM, Michael Hardner said:

You may be right, but the analysis is a sad example of how politics works today...

Huh?

Even the top federal Liberal thinkers think this way.

Justin Trudeau is changing the federal tax law because 1) Morneau thinks the change is "just" and 2) his "advisor" is saying that to do so, moves the federal Liberals to the Left

Outside of Quebec, a voter has three choices:

1) Progressive Left, someone else pays

2) Cool progressive Left, someone else pays

3) Conservative right, higher taxes

In Quebec, a voter has two choices:

1) Someone who speaks intelligibly

2) A foreigner with a turban

====

Make no mistake, Trudeau is at 40% in the polls. The federal Liberals will get more in the next general election.

And this has nothing to do with what Americans call "racism".

Edited September 14, 2017 by August1991

[Michael Hardner]

6 hours ago, August1991 said:

Huh?

Even the top federal Liberal thinkers think this way.

That doesn't make it 'not sad'.  Voting on image ignores the underlying operational realities of government, i.e. what things cost, and what services are being provided.  If governments don't manage, then eventually there will be a comeuppance.

My answer is for politicians to realize that image marketing leads us down a bad road, and for them to encourage publics who will monitor and engage in a knowledgeable way.  It's not in the Liberals' interest to do this as they live in image marketing.

[August1991]

Quote

Near the end of his time in the Senate — capping a parliamentary career that spanned 38 years, eight months and nine days — Allan MacEachen was looking to hire researchers to go through his collected papers in preparation for a memoir. Peggy Butts, a Liberal senator from Nova Scotia, forwarded the name of her nephew Gerald, then a young graduate of McGill University, now Prime Minister Justin Trudeau's closest adviser. Gerald Butts and another researcher spent a year going through what he recalls as 5,700 boxes of documents, writing eight- to 10-page essays on the significant themes of MacEachen's time in Ottawa. "I got a crash course in the second half of the 20th century in Canada in that job," Butts says. An autobiography has never been published. But Butts came away with a reading of MacEachen's political career.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/allan-maceachen-parliament-analysis-wherry-1.4287861

The CBC! 

Michael, you're so naive.

====

Gawd, I hate this forum's editing software. Greg, it's 2015 - as our current PM says.

 

Edited September 16, 2017 by Charles Anthony
fixed mal-formed quote

[blackbird]

On 9/13/2017 at 9:44 PM, August1991 said:

Huh?

Even the top federal Liberal thinkers think this way.

Justin Trudeau is changing the federal tax law because 1) Morneau thinks the change is "just" and 2) his "advisor" is saying that to do so, moves the federal Liberals to the Left

Outside of Quebec, a voter has three choices:

1) Progressive Left, someone else pays

2) Cool progressive Left, someone else pays

3) Conservative right, higher taxes

In Quebec, a voter has two choices:

1) Someone who speaks intelligibly

2) A foreigner with a turban

====

Make no mistake, Trudeau is at 40% in the polls. The federal Liberals will get more in the next general election.

And this has nothing to do with what Americans call "racism".

Good grief!  I hope you're wrong about 40% in the polls.

Rex Murphy has an excellent opinion piece on the National Post website called "For Trudeau, governing is entirely about sweet words, not action".   I think this describes him to a tee.  He made many promises that he did not keep in the election campaign.  We know what some of them were.  So it amazes me that he still has 40% in the polls.  Shows how gullible a large part of the electorate is.  They probably never pay attention to what is happening after they cast their ballot.

[-TSS-]

On 11.9.2017 at 5:24 PM, Hydraboss said:

Canadian politics has always been about regionalism.  If you hate Alberta, you get elected in Ontario.  If you hate Ontario, you get elected in Alberta.  If you hate Alberta and Ontario, you get elected in BC.  If you give away free money, you get elected in the Maritimes.

Canada is a zero-sum game and the guys pulling the political strings know that.

 

Pareto efficiency.

Are you saying that Canada is an artificial country and many of the current provinces would be better off as independent countries of their own?

[Michael Hardner]

10 hours ago, August1991 said:

The CBC! 

Michael, you're so naive.

 

You're completely unclear here, with another non-sequitur.  What about my comment on the 'sad' state of political image management can be called 'naive' ?  It doesn't follow to call such an observation 'naive'.  Then you post some excerpt that doesn't seem to have anything to do with the topic.

We really need to work on communication.  I would love to have a discussion but it feels like 2 different conversations.

My take:

You correctly characterize politics as candidates who are basically cultural outlines getting votes, ie. the cool guy, the Seikh guy.  I said that the state of affairs is 'sad'.  You respond by saying 'Huh ? Even the top Liberals think this way', which doesn't address my comment in any way.   I point that out, then you say I'm naive and quote some out-of-context CBC article.

WTF, Auguste.  Let's have a conversation, or not.

[Hydraboss]

20 hours ago, -TSS- said:

Are you saying that Canada is an artificial country and many of the current provinces would be better off as independent countries of their own?

I think of it this way:  Canada is one part EU and one part UN.

EU - We use a common currency.  Some pseudo-council (our federal government) lays out what they feel are important policies on law, immigration and taxation and not all provinces agree (too bad for you, Mr Province but here's your carbon tax so we can feel good on the world stage).

UN - As a group of "countries", completely dysfunctional and useless.  We fight among ourselves constantly, none of us particularly liking all the others, but no matter what individual provinces decide as a group - here comes one of the ones with a permanent "veto" (Ontario or Kwebek) to impose their views on the rest.

Any country this large is artificial.  Look at the US - the United STATES of America.  Ask the Maritime provinces why they don't just drop their individual provincial names and go with "Maritimes".  Canada as an entity is about as unreal as you can get.

As for whether or not "many of the current provinces would be better off"........ Alberta separatist, remember?

[-TSS-]

That's a good analogy.

So, Ottawa is like Brussels, Toronto is like Berlin and Montreal is like Paris.