"Barbaric Cultural Practices"
October 2, 2015 1:01 PM   Subscribe

"The Conservative government is not afraid to defend Canadian values." Welcome to the home stretch of the Canadian election!

Despite muzzling scientists, establishing the Trans Pacific Partnership and the problems that will cause, the Tories have picked truly the most important election issue of all: the niqab.
posted by Kitteh (225 comments total) 18 users marked this as a favorite
 
Fuck Harper.

Also, if you want to see some hilarious/sarcastic trolling of this horrible Conservative party and this sickening agenda. Please click, follow, and join in on the #BarbaricCulturalPractices hashtag. Feel free to send your sarcastic tweets to @pmharper and @CPC_HQ
posted by Fizz at 1:04 PM on October 2, 2015 [9 favorites]


One of the professors at the Faculty of Law I work at just published a paper on the Zero Tolerance for Barbaric Cultural Practices Act. It's a terrific analysis of the Act.
posted by Shepherd at 1:08 PM on October 2, 2015 [3 favorites]


I posted this over in the Blue Rodeo thread, but it's more relevant here:

Andrew Coyne: To uncover or not to uncover — why the niqab issue is ridiculous

Worth noting: "It was a ridiculous issue when the numbers of women involved were thought to be in the dozens. It is a more ridiculous issue now that it has been confirmed the actual number of women to have been refused citizenship for failing to uncover since 2011 when the policy was introduced is … two."
posted by Capt. Renault at 1:09 PM on October 2, 2015 [9 favorites]


Andrew Coyne: To Uncover or not to Uncover - why the niqab issue is ridiculous


Whatever else the election of 2015 will be remembered for, it will be remembered as the election in which thousands of votes — the fate of parties, perhaps — turned on the question of whether a handful of religiously observant women should be required to uncover their faces to take the oath of citizenship.

Or rather, since they have always been obliged to uncover their faces to take the oath — in a private room, just before the ceremony — and since no one objects to this requirement, the question before this great nation is whether it is sufficient to uncover their faces before the oath, or whether they should also be required to uncover while reciting it.

That, in a nutshell, is the niqab issue. It was a ridiculous issue when the numbers of women involved were thought to be in the dozens. It is a more ridiculous issue now that it has been confirmed the actual number of women to have been refused citizenship for failing to uncover since 2011 when the policy was introduced is … two.

posted by nubs at 1:10 PM on October 2, 2015 [2 favorites]


Are you a 2nd class citizen? 38% of you are. In 15 years that number will be 48%.

I'm one of the 38% (Can/UK). Guess I need to play it safe in the new Canada.
posted by bonehead at 1:10 PM on October 2, 2015


#PeopleLikeNenshi
posted by nubs at 1:13 PM on October 2, 2015 [4 favorites]


Maybe not entirely on-topic, but it's interesting to see how the media are eager to push the idea that it is once again a two-party CON/LIB race as we enter the final phase. This was the first election I can remember where they couldn't get away with almost entirely sidelining coverage of the NDP; it seems like they're desperate to get back to familiar narratives.
posted by sevenyearlurk at 1:14 PM on October 2, 2015 [4 favorites]


This relates to the passage of Bill C-24, Strengthening Canadian Citizenship Act.

If you've got a criminal record and even the possibility of a second citizenship, you are at risk of being decitizened and deported.

With bill C-51 allowing, for example, environmental protesters to be branded so, the Government can right now, legally, deport what only a few months ago would have been lawful civil protesters.
posted by bonehead at 1:15 PM on October 2, 2015 [1 favorite]


I wonder if the tip line will be as well manned as the EI line where it is not unusual to be denied queuing because the wait time in the queue is estimated to be over an hour.
posted by Mitheral at 1:24 PM on October 2, 2015 [3 favorites]


I literally did a double take when I heard the phrase "barbaric cultural practices" on Radio One earlier this afternoon. It was rapidly followed by an audible "go fuck yourselves, Tories."
posted by Kitteh at 1:25 PM on October 2, 2015 [4 favorites]


The amount of racist pandering is starting to freak me out a little. What the hell is going on?
posted by pmv at 1:26 PM on October 2, 2015 [15 favorites]


There is nothing more barbaric than zero tolerance.
posted by srboisvert at 1:28 PM on October 2, 2015 [9 favorites]


This revoking Canadian Citizenship thing is such a farce and a show. Despite the fact that there it will in no way make us safer from real (assumed for the sake of argument) terrorists, why are we trying to dump our problems onto other countries? What happened to taking care of our own issues? And that is beyond the scariest thing- that it's just too much power any government to have as per what bonehead said above. I would trust any government with that power, much less this one.

To me it seems like a policy created to our worst qualities- of wanting to punish, hurt, and exclude people. It just feels ugly. Just like taking health care away from refugee claimants. What's the point? Disincentive more people from coming here by hurting the ones who are here.

So many apparently decent people vote for these guys and it's just maddening.
posted by beau jackson at 1:31 PM on October 2, 2015 [2 favorites]


What the hell is going on?

I suspect that it's the handiwork of that Australian spin doctor who specializes in wedge issues along racial divides. It wasn't too long after he showed up that Steve let slip his 'Old Stock Canadians' bit, which started us down this reprehensible road.

And it looks like it's working. Steve couldn't have been in a worse place after we saw that picture of the dead refugee kid on the beach, and now he's in the lead.
posted by Capt. Renault at 1:33 PM on October 2, 2015 [16 favorites]


"If you've got a criminal record and even the possibility of a second citizenship, you are at risk of being decitizened and deported."

This is insane. Someone born in Canada is a Canadian. Full stop.

It makes me want to scream that everyone in this country is obsessed with shallow issues like clothing and doesn't seem to care about far more frightening things the government is doing.
posted by Kevin Street at 1:33 PM on October 2, 2015 [17 favorites]


It was rapidly followed by an audible "go fuck yourselves, Tories."

CBC is going a bit blue this election cycle, eh?
posted by Panjandrum at 1:34 PM on October 2, 2015 [1 favorite]


Citizenship revocation, particularly for a born citizen with only attributed-not-actual dual citizenship with some other country, will eventually be struck down by the courts. So will the niqab ban. But that's all years away, and who cares about that if you can use a fake issue for your political benefit in the here and now?

I almost feel sorry for the government lawyers who know they have a stinker of a case, but have to try and sell it anyway.
posted by Capt. Renault at 1:40 PM on October 2, 2015


Please, please tell me Canadians are better than this. I don't want to have to leave my country, but this stuff scares me. And no, I don't wear a niqab.
posted by rpfields at 1:42 PM on October 2, 2015 [3 favorites]


The NDP voted against the Zero Tolerance for Barbaric Cultural Practices Act in the House while the Liberals under Justin Trudeau have said that while they agree with the legislation in principle, its name could be considered offensive to people who hail from regions where these practices are common.
For those who have been labouring under the misapprehension that white cats and black cats are different in anything but style.
posted by klanawa at 1:45 PM on October 2, 2015 [6 favorites]


The problem there is really isn't anywhere to flee or go to that isn't tainted by Islamophobia these days.
posted by Kitteh at 1:45 PM on October 2, 2015 [3 favorites]


I don't want to have to leave my country

Where do you think you are going to go?
posted by Steely-eyed Missile Man at 1:48 PM on October 2, 2015 [5 favorites]


Also, if you want to see some hilarious/sarcastic trolling of this horrible Conservative party and this sickening agenda. Please click, follow, and join in on the #BarbaricCulturalPractices hashtag.

By doing that, you're just rehashing their talking points and letting them control the conversation. Do you really think they haven't anticipated the backlash? You're playing right into their hands.
posted by Crane Shot at 1:48 PM on October 2, 2015


I keep thinking, "you've got to be kidding, who'd fall for that?" And yet. I am so disappointed in Canadians.
posted by cotton dress sock at 1:50 PM on October 2, 2015 [2 favorites]


Poor Canada. But with its close proximity to the United States...it was bound to succumb to irrationality.
posted by notreally at 1:55 PM on October 2, 2015 [1 favorite]


I'm already hearing Canadian friends saying they're moving south if Harper gets his majority government... which sure is looking likely now. Nice job on cannibalizing each other, Canadian leftist parties.
posted by dw at 1:59 PM on October 2, 2015 [2 favorites]


yeah i remember fondly the day they let all of us across the border so we could elect Stephen Harper as President of Canadian Congress or whatever.
posted by indubitable at 1:59 PM on October 2, 2015


Much like the Republicans back home, the Tory government doesn't give two shits about women except as tools for their political rhetoric.
posted by Kitteh at 2:07 PM on October 2, 2015 [4 favorites]


I'm already hearing Canadian friends saying they're moving south if Harper gets his majority government... which sure is looking likely now.

I haven't seen any polls that suggest a majority Conservative government is likely. Have you?

Nice job on cannibalizing each other, Canadian leftist parties.

When I've heard people on the left say they want a multi-party system they never seem to envision the possibility that things might end up like this.
posted by grouse at 2:18 PM on October 2, 2015


I'm already hearing Canadian friends saying they're moving south if Harper gets his majority government... which sure is looking likely now.

Um,

1) Much as with Americans saying I'M MOVING NORTH IF (Obama|Dubya|Hillary) WINS, #shitthatneverreallyhappens

2) What "south" are they going to move to where these kinds of issues aren't contentious, Brazil? It's surely not the U.S.
posted by delfin at 2:27 PM on October 2, 2015 [1 favorite]


Ha - Moving to the US! Yeah, just like all us liberals in the states moved to Canada. Not gonna happen, or at least not a huge exodus. Maybe a few here and there.

That said, I was looking up the NDP's history on Wikipedia, and...

Can it be said that the NDP got a bit greedy in 2006, thinking it could handle more than it could, forced a vote against Martin and thus let Harper/Tories get in, and those bastards are burning everything to the ground? Was it a mistake of the NDP to go against the Liberal party? I mean, I'm sure Lib isn't that great, but Harper is straight up fucking evil.
posted by symbioid at 2:28 PM on October 2, 2015 [2 favorites]


Nice job on cannibalizing each other, Canadian leftist parties.

I try really hard to not be frustrated with purists who vote with their hearts no matter what the polls or riding history are like, but rarely succeed. It just doesn't make any sense to me for them to do that given our first-past-the-post system.
posted by cotton dress sock at 2:33 PM on October 2, 2015 [1 favorite]


Because I find it hard to imagine that there's anything the Liberal party can do that is as bad as what we've got.
posted by cotton dress sock at 2:36 PM on October 2, 2015


It makes me want to scream that everyone in this country is obsessed with shallow issues like clothing and doesn't seem to care about far more frightening things the government is doing.

Two friends of mine are a Canadian and American couple - one of the things they've observed these days is that a lot of attempts to discuss how bad things are with the government and Canadian society seems to be met with "yeah but we're not as bad as AMERICANS" and the conversation shuts down from there. As if slightly being better than your neighbor to the south allows you to ignore whatever is going on currently.
posted by Karaage at 2:48 PM on October 2, 2015 [4 favorites]


I had occasion to speak to Peter MacKay's campaign manager about this election a couple of months ago. He was of the opinion that Harper would have a hard time surviving even a minority win, that the conservative base voters we beginning to become disaffected. Now things change, and this guy has not always picked the winning side before, but it was interesting to hear how close to the surface the knives were, at least in eastern Canada.

He was bang-on the mark predicting the rise of Trump, interestingly enough. He thought the Rob Ford model of outrage politics was primed to take off both here and in the US, at least in the conservative base. This was a month or two before Trump threw his hat in. I think that's exactly what Harper is doing now as well, and what that Australian is doing for him, re-engaging the core conservative voters.
posted by bonehead at 2:51 PM on October 2, 2015 [2 favorites]


Yuck. The strategic voting argument (which is actually not strategic at all) rears it's ugly head again.

The Liberals and the NDP should cooperate with one another after the election but each fight their own battles prior to it. Anything less is both anti-democratic and has a huge potential to backfire as any halfhearted campaigning will demoralize volunteer and undermine GOTV efforts. True for Greens as well.

At various occasions, both leaders have said they won't do coalition. But they've also said they wouldn't prop up the CPC. They'll have to do one - I think it will be the first.
posted by Kurichina at 2:58 PM on October 2, 2015 [1 favorite]


Citizenship revocation, particularly for a born citizen with only attributed-not-actual dual citizenship with some other country, will eventually be struck down by the courts.... But that's all years away, and who cares about that if you can use a fake issue for your political benefit in the here and now?

Happening right now, like today: Tories move to revoke citizenship of convicted terrorist born in Canada

Saad Gaya is not a nice guy, he was convicted of conspiracy to murder, but he's solely a Canadian citizen, and only has the possibility of Pakistani citizenship by descent through his parents.
posted by bonehead at 3:00 PM on October 2, 2015 [7 favorites]


Please Canada do not vote Harper back in because of a piece of fabric. Don't be that narrow minded.
posted by Gwynarra at 3:01 PM on October 2, 2015 [2 favorites]


> Please, please tell me Canadians are better than this

Speaking from deep inside Ford Nation... Ask me on Oct 20.
posted by Artful Codger at 3:07 PM on October 2, 2015 [2 favorites]


Can it be said that the NDP got a bit greedy in 2006, thinking it could handle more than it could, forced a vote against Martin and thus let Harper/Tories get in...

I think simple exhaustion of 13 years of Liberal government is a much more accurate explanation for the Conservative entry into power than last-minute NDP 'greed'.
posted by Capt. Renault at 3:07 PM on October 2, 2015 [4 favorites]


But they've also said they wouldn't prop up the CPC. They'll have to do one - I think it will be the first.

My current prediction is that if Steve has a minority, that the Grits and NDP will both be content to let it ride for a year or so, and then try with the voters again. There's too much animosity between the two to support the other and let that one take the laurels.
posted by Capt. Renault at 3:10 PM on October 2, 2015


So many apparently decent people vote for these guys and it's just maddening.

I occasionally read the comments section on news stories (I know, I know) and I am always struck by how an overwhelming majority of commenters declaring their support for Mr. Harper seem to have only slogans and tired wordplay to demonstrate why their is the better choice: "The LIEberals tell you that..." "We can't afford Tommie the Commie..." "ABC = Always Be Conservative."

The few family and friends whom I have had occasion to discuss this stuff with in more detail seem curiously reluctant to address uncomfortable facts: the most diehard Tory I know is a gay man my own age who looks at Harper saying on the campaign trail saying he will introduce legislation defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman; Harper, who has never recanted these views publicly, Harper who belongs to a church that believes in biblical inerrancy and the imminent return of Jesus Christ to Earth, Harper who must logically believe my friend to be an abomination and by his nature unworthy of the same rights and freedom as Mr. Harper -- he looks at this and says that things have changed a lot since he made that speech and Harper hasn't reopened the gay marriage debate since then (after a free vote in 2006), except for that one time they did it accidentally. When asked what he does like about the Conservatives, he has only a few platitudes and slogans. In contrast, many of the people I know who support the other parties can offer very articulate reasons for why they feel as they do, even if do not necessarily agree with the particulars.

tl;dr: Conservative voters are not necessarily stupid but goddamn are lot of stupid people Conservatives.
posted by ricochet biscuit at 3:16 PM on October 2, 2015 [11 favorites]


Can it be said that the NDP got a bit greedy in 2006, thinking it could handle more than it could, forced a vote against Martin and thus let Harper/Tories get in, and those bastards are burning everything to the ground? Was it a mistake of the NDP to go against the Liberal party?

I'm not sure I really follow this. In 2006 Paul Martin fell to a vote of no confidence, but at the time the NDP were the 4th party with only 19 of 308 seats. The motion of no-confidence passed 171-133, so strictly speaking the NDP were not much of a factor at all, let alone getting greedy. It was the Conservatives (then offical opposition) and the Bloc, with their 53 seats that would have driven that.

I'm not sure why the NDP is always getting framed as the spoilers and the irrational "conscience vote" here. The "culture of entitlement" seems alive and strong. The Liberals are only now starting to get their shit together under Trudeau as a viable party once again. Jack Layton almost single-handedly turned the NDP's fortunes around since 2006, and yes a lot of that was at the expense of the Liberals who were in complete disarray for a number of years. They then capitalized on Quebec's abandonment of the Bloc and became the opposition. During that election, Liberal supporters were crying foul about "strategic voting", with a strong implication that people should have voted Liberal. I'm not sure why that would be the case when they were pacing to be the third party.

So I would say don't blame the NDP. Both Orange and Red can share in some blame here. Trudeau came out firing against the NDP from the outset which is a strategy I will basically never forgive him for. These parties need to work together for the bigger picture here and if they can't form a coalition and leave Harper in charge again, frankly they should both leave this to the adults going forward.
posted by Hoopo at 3:16 PM on October 2, 2015 [10 favorites]


My sister sent me an article saying there was a loophole in the law barring expats from voting...as long as you're the kind of expat who can afford a plane ticket to do it: "Long-term expats can vote in person at an advance poll or on election day in the riding they lived in before leaving Canada."

If I thought my vote would make a difference I'd consider it, but bloody Calgary always goes blue.

Last week I asked a cousin who was visiting down here if she knew how her brother-in-law, who described himself as "independent" last time we talked politics, was going to vote. "I was so mad!" she said, "He says all the bad stuff that's been in the media about Harper is all lies. I have to find an article I read recently so I can send it to him, I mean, he's a Christian like me! but hah not like me, and it explains the bad things Harper's done to the things Christians are supposed to take care of, the environment and poor people and the marginalized..."

Please post a link, anybody who's read an article like that, and I'll send it along. I suppose the in-law would just dismiss it as more lies, but it might make my cousin feel better.
posted by cybercoitus interruptus at 3:16 PM on October 2, 2015 [1 favorite]


The problem with a coalition government is that it inevitably means one party drives the car and the other is locked in the trunk. Look what happened to Nick Clegg and his Liberal Democrats in Britain. After five years of enabling the Tories their party name has become a dirty word you wouldn't use in polite company.
posted by Kevin Street at 3:17 PM on October 2, 2015


the Tories have picked truly the most important election issue of all: the niqab.

To be fair, you really don't know what is under there. Currently The Man In The Blue Suit has Stephen Duffy, Patrick Brazeau, the vanished long-form census, a cheque for $90,000, 1200 missing and murdered aboriginal women, the vote to get Canada out of the Kyoto Protocol, sixteen gutted research libraries, two prorogations, a finding of contempt for Parliament and about a dozen blank RSVPs to First Ministers' conferences all cleverly concealed under his. (Dunno if we count Dean Del Mastro, the ethics spokesman who went to jail, as being under there)
posted by ricochet biscuit at 3:40 PM on October 2, 2015 [10 favorites]


Anything less is both anti-democratic

But the system itself isn't set up for the kind of democracy true believers long for. Does the idea of strategic voting alienate people, I guess it does. I don't have an answer to that criticism, other than, Harper and his party are just the fucking worst, let's just get him/them out and actively work towards proportional voting after that. Are voting patterns predictable, depends on the riding. My last riding went either red or blue (for decades), and generally supported socially conservative issues. I'd have loved to have voted for another party, but would have considered myself negligent if I did.
posted by cotton dress sock at 3:41 PM on October 2, 2015 [1 favorite]


Nice job on cannibalizing each other, Canadian leftist parties.

The Liberal Party is not leftist. It is liberal, in the classic sense of the term. The NDP is not liberal. It is nominally a social democratic party, although a lot of that got thrown out the window in an effort to move to the centre.

The NDP has more in common with the Conservatives than with the Liberals. The NDP and the Conservatives are both populist parties, meaning many policies are reactionary rather than strategic or visionary, and are designed to appeal to a populist and unreflective base.

Maybe it's because I'm from BC - reliably provincial NDP ridings often vote Conservative federally. Nanaimo has more in common with Etobicoke than St. Paul.
posted by Nevin at 3:42 PM on October 2, 2015 [7 favorites]


I think it's likely at this point that the Conservatives will score at least a minority. I haven't seen any riding-by-riding breakdowns though of the latest polls. It's one thing to say that overall it's 32-31-27 or whatever, but Canadian elections are won at the local level, not according to national polling.
posted by Nevin at 3:43 PM on October 2, 2015


*proportional representation. so tired right now, sorry
posted by cotton dress sock at 3:47 PM on October 2, 2015


My current prediction is that if Steve has a minority, that the Grits and NDP will both be content to let it ride for a year or so, and then try with the voters again. There's too much animosity between the two to support the other and let that one take the laurels.

Why Tories Don't Need a Majority to Keep Power in 2016, and Beyond
posted by Nevin at 3:56 PM on October 2, 2015 [1 favorite]


I'm in Quebec and will be watching the debate on TVA tonight. I fully expect every other word out of Duceppe and Harper's mouths to be niqab. They have nothing to lose and everything to gain. At a family dinner last weekend my partner was blue in the face trying to convince her family - mother, father, brothers, sisters and various husbands and wives that this was not a major issue. Voices were raised, much passion was heard and zero members of the family were convinced. In their minds the niqab has become this vast feminist issue. "Our foremothers fought for the right..." Even my really not feminist brother in law suddenly presents himself as Betty Frieden on this issue. It's ridiculous but it is totally working in this province.

Many Québécois have no problem voting their hearts and passions. Witness the separatist parties and the orange wave of the last election. I hope Mulcair can hold his own tonight and that Trudeau doesn't make any fumbly mistakes in French. I think my partner (and many Québécois) are harder on him because he is supposed to be a francophone via his father and therefore is given little of the leeway afforded to the anglophone leaders. For my part, like many other Canadians, I'm watching the way the wind blows. My riding was part of the orange wave last time but if it looks like it's turning red this time I'll be jumping on that bandwagon. Whatever I can do to get the blue team out of there.
posted by Cuke at 4:07 PM on October 2, 2015 [7 favorites]


If Harper wins, I'm moving to Cuba. Or putting Cuban heels on my shoes. The future is impossible to know.
posted by the uncomplicated soups of my childhood at 4:32 PM on October 2, 2015 [1 favorite]


It's going to totally suck if those goons win, that's for sure. But I thought the NDP was peaking early. It's probably one of the reasons why Harper decided to make this election campaign so long.

Mulcair is remarkable for a couple of reasons: his fairly green caucus has displayed remarkable discipline. There have been few gaffes. It makes you wonder how Mulcair does it as a leader... some of the same tendencies as Harper, perhaps?

And Mulcair also managed to rebrand the NDP as a centrist choice. That may have been a bad choice because I can't quite understand why I am supposed to vote for the NDP. I don't know what they stand for.

I will of course be voting NDP in my riding of Victoria. The NDP candidate here is light years more qualified than the other main contender, a Green candidate. The Greens are super strong on southern Vancouver Island, but the sanctimony combined with the half-baked wackiness of the party is super off-putting.
posted by Nevin at 4:41 PM on October 2, 2015


 The NDP and the Conservatives are both populist parties, meaning many policies are reactionary rather than strategic or visionary, and are designed to appeal to a populist and unreflective

And what makes the Liberals stand apart? I mean, what was visionary about voting for Bill C-51? To some extent they're all playing the same game.
But I do think that there is a fundamental difference between the Harper Conservatives and the other parties. Trudeau and Mulcair could both be decent leaders. I'd welcome some kind of coalition if it rid us of Harper.
posted by beau jackson at 7:48 PM on October 2, 2015 [1 favorite]


The NDP has more in common with the Conservatives than with the Liberals. The NDP and the Conservatives are both populist parties, meaning many policies are reactionary rather than strategic or visionary, and are designed to appeal to a populist and unreflective base.
I can't understand why you keep repeating this ridiculous canard.

The tendency of western, conservative ridings to flop back and forth between Conservative and NDP is more a function of the profound idiocy (in the Athenian and modern sense) of the electorate in those areas than anything to do with the parties themselves. It is also, obviously, indicative of the division of loyalties. If you're gun-loving free-market religious bigot who hates Muslims and First Nations (I grew up there -- I know whereof I speak), the NDP is pretty clearly not your party. Now, what if you belong to a union?

Anyway, when the Conservatives elect their first Libby Davies, you let me know.
posted by klanawa at 10:23 PM on October 2, 2015 [5 favorites]


Dangerous game Harper is playing, given how recently a similar strategy backfired on the PQ. Must be trying to hit that sweet spot between "I'm not a bigot" and "reasonable accommodations."

And what makes the Liberals stand apart?

I can only offer my personal, somewhat uninformed opinion on this, but I have typically voted Liberal because I don't feel they're as ideological as the other parties. They blow with the wind (within a range I'm comfortable with) and otherwise seem to generally reflect the attitudes of the Canadian people (by which I mean the ones I'm usually around). They sway rather than hold firm on some things I'd rather they didn't (e.g. BIll C-51), but they usually come around. I'm considering the NDP this time in part because Mulcair was formerly a Liberal (I'll check the polls before my strategic vote). Mind you, I'm an anglophone Quebecer born and raised, so you could show me a video of the Liberal party killing puppies with hammers and I'd still probably vote for them.

For what it's worth, I can't stand Harper and his policies, but I I don't feel the man is bigot. It's sad that he's hooking his horse to the same xenophobic wagon the Pequistes did (also, providing the tactic fails, hilarious), but that strikes me as more politics as usual rather than "I actually believe this." Which is also what I think about Marois but, boy, did I laugh myself to sleep that night.
posted by Maugrim at 10:53 PM on October 2, 2015


More.

Ugh.
posted by rpfields at 2:44 AM on October 3, 2015 [1 favorite]


Canada came down with a serious illness on May 2nd, 2011. In two weeks we'll know if it was fatal.
posted by The Card Cheat at 6:27 AM on October 3, 2015 [1 favorite]


> These parties need to work together for the bigger picture here and if they can't form a coalition and leave Harper in charge again, frankly they should both leave this to the adults going forward.

Yeah, both of them seem to think this is their best chance to grab the brass ring and have been going to town on each other as hard as they can, a strategy that (surprise!) seems to be working in Harper's favour. In the last English debate Mulcair and Trudeau barely engaged with Harper at all because they were too busy going after each other. The NDP and Liberals couldn't even be bothered to pull their candidates in ridings where they had no chance of winning, which only increases the chances of centre-left splits where the Conservative coasts in by a few percentage points or less.
posted by The Card Cheat at 6:45 AM on October 3, 2015 [4 favorites]


Populist doesn't equal reactionary. Populism at it's heart is anti-elitist and movement based. The Liberals and the old school Conservatives have very long historical roots with elites prior to universal franchise and this influences their culture. The NDP and the former Reform Party are populist, and developed in opposition to those elites ("Mouseland" is a perfect encapsulation of this sentiment). This is why I'm comfortable in the NDP (although sometimes more so than other times) but never would be in either the Liberals or the Conservatives.

The Conservatives are now a curious creature, because the old style party ate the populist one for the sake of electoral convenience. Some of the old Reform supporters still thing their party is the one running things in the new CPC (I had a curious conversation with one who insisted the CPC had a one-member-one-vote arrangement to elect their leader and still wouldn't believe it wasn't so, even when I pointed to their own document that explained the point system). Some feel that they can just keep their mouth shut and one day their "turn" will come (but if it didn't come when the CPC had a majority, when will it?) I think when the CPC minority result happens (my current prediction) we'll see these factions in the party (so-con, libertarian, populist, western, eastern, progressive conservative, maybe Red Tory) all start talking again.

It is this same reason, that although a coalition, if designed and negotiated correctly could work, a formal merger or electoral arrangement between the Liberals and NDP wouldn't work. The Liberals values and history are about managing the people for their own good (this is why supporting Bill C-51 isn't strange for them) and NDP is (despite increasing strains) still primarily member-based and bottom up. I donate and volunteer for my NDP candidate in Edmonton (it also helps that I like the candidate more than the party ATM, and we had a contested nomination a year before the election). I would not be able to do so for a Liberal. It might work in the short term, but you'd have a dysfunction left-ish version of the CPC. No, thanks.
posted by Kurichina at 6:58 AM on October 3, 2015 [2 favorites]


I can't stand Harper and his policies, but I don't feel the man is bigot.

In that case, he's worse than a bigot. He's using bigotry to appeal to a crowd of voters who have been taught over the past few years that Muslim immigrants and niqab-wearers are a direct threat to Canada. There was a giant button waiting to be pushed to activate that sentiment, and Harper pushed that button because he knew that it would help him get re-elected, with full knowledge of the ensuing damage to our pluralist democracy. Or do people think he doesn't know the difference?
posted by sneebler at 7:16 AM on October 3, 2015 [11 favorites]


Populism is opposed to establishmentarianism. It's a political cousin of activism. It's not left-right, though it does tend to come from the edges. Tommy Douglas was populist, but so also was Eli Manning.
posted by bonehead at 7:18 AM on October 3, 2015 [1 favorite]


Do you mean Preston Manning?
posted by Kurichina at 7:20 AM on October 3, 2015 [1 favorite]


Him too. Meant Ernest Manning, his father.

Just had my first cup of coffee, sorry.
posted by bonehead at 7:38 AM on October 3, 2015 [1 favorite]


If we elect that fucker again, I will no longer be all "Fuck Harper", but "Fuck Canada". I had thought we were a far, far better nation than this.

>I don't want to have to leave my country

Where do you think you are going to go?


If this country continues down the Harper path, there will be a lot of countries to choose from, because Canada will be just as shit as any of them. Might as well choose one that doesn't have winter.
posted by five fresh fish at 8:15 AM on October 3, 2015 [6 favorites]


Populist doesn't equal reactionary.

I probably should have said "reactive." The Conservative "policies" are basically a response or reaction to their base. There's no leadership, no vision. I would argue the NDP is the same, especially with economic policy. I'm a little biased I suppose. I once worked for an NDP candidate who helped write the 2006 NDP economic platform. He was a former economist in the banking sector, and the theme was "prosperity & justice" and it was visionary. He lost of course. His replacement (NDP economic lead) had all sorts of weird zany idea: kill NAFTA, raise tariffs blah blah blah.
posted by Nevin at 8:24 AM on October 3, 2015


(And fwiw I am not at all a fan of populism. I am a fan of leadership)
posted by Nevin at 8:48 AM on October 3, 2015


> I had thought we were a far, far better nation than this.

Well, we were (in some ways), but..."You won't recognize Canada when I'm through with it."
posted by The Card Cheat at 8:54 AM on October 3, 2015 [1 favorite]


*sings while cradling his head in his hands*

"On the fity-seventh day of the election, my true love gave to me...

Stephen Duffy, Patrick Brazeau, the vanished long-form census, a cheque for $90,000, 1200 missing and murdered aboriginal women, the vote to get Canada out of the Kyoto Protocol, sixteen gutted research libraries, two prorogations, a finding of contempt for Parliament and about a dozen blank RSVPs to First Ministers' conferences

...and a niqab in a pear tree!"
posted by mandolin conspiracy at 9:50 AM on October 3, 2015 [2 favorites]


Nevin, disagree - just read that speech The Card Cheat linked to. Harper's intensely ideological, and *certainly* has a (nightmarish) vision, he's only playing his base to get there.
posted by cotton dress sock at 9:58 AM on October 3, 2015


And/or review his systematic dismantling of our civic institutions.
posted by cotton dress sock at 10:01 AM on October 3, 2015 [2 favorites]


This is insane. Someone born in Canada is a Canadian. Full stop

NO! Someone granted Canadian citizenship is a Canadian. Full stop.
All citizenships are equal under the constitution. It doesn't and shouldn't matter where you were born.
posted by rocket88 at 10:04 AM on October 3, 2015 [7 favorites]


Someone granted Canadian citizenship is a Canadian. Full stop.

That Trudeau was willing to go to the mat for this principle is very heartening and will make me feel better about my strategic vote that way (if it comes down to that).
posted by mandolin conspiracy at 10:11 AM on October 3, 2015 [1 favorite]


Harper is not playing to his base on this issue. He's trying to destroy the Orange Wave in Quebec, and he's having significant success.
posted by clawsoon at 11:08 AM on October 3, 2015 [2 favorites]


Here's a graph showing the orange dive in Quebec.
posted by clawsoon at 11:16 AM on October 3, 2015 [1 favorite]


The amount of racist pandering is starting to freak me out a little. What the hell is going on?

What's going on is that Canada is a profoundly racist country. The Conservative/Bloc/Liberal position is wildly popular, supported by over 80% of Canadians. We're that not enough, consider the naked discrimination against First Nations Canadian citizens by police and medical services. Our purported multiculturalism is often more propaganda than reality.

Canadians support racist policies. Canadians support warlike policies (it's been a long time since we were serious about committing to peacekeeping). Canadians support prioritizing short term economic gain over environmental destruction, which is why we are per capita among the world's worst greenhouse gas emmitters.

It's not an anomaly that Conservative and right-Liberal views are likely to dominate the next parliament. That's a democratic result, an expression of the preferences of most Canadians. Canada's reputation as a morally good country is increasingly undeserved.
posted by justsomebodythatyouusedtoknow at 11:32 AM on October 3, 2015 [9 favorites]


If those tendencies existed, which they of course did, they've been whipped up into a toxic milkshake by a certain fascist. (And I know that word gets thrown around a lot, but I really feel it's appropriate in this instance.)
posted by cotton dress sock at 11:36 AM on October 3, 2015 [1 favorite]


NO! Someone granted Canadian citizenship is a Canadian. Full stop.
All citizenships are equal under the constitution. It doesn't and shouldn't matter where you were born.


All citizenships are equal, but what is granted may (in theory) be taken away. A birthright can never be taken from you.
posted by Kevin Street at 1:26 PM on October 3, 2015


what is granted may (in theory) be taken away.

Which is exactly the sentiment behind the Conservatives' current plan, and one which would make my Canadian citizenship second class. This is a very personal issue for me, and one that could change my status in the only nation I've known as home.
When I was granted citizenship it was non-revokable under the law of the land, and still is. It also granted me full rights and privileges of every other citizen. Why should that change?
posted by rocket88 at 1:49 PM on October 3, 2015 [5 favorites]


I can't say I'm thrilled when I see someone in a niqab in downtown toronto. It's my kneejerk reaction. But I realize that there is all sorts of discrimination against women and really, 99.999999% of the instances of discrimination against women in Canada have nothing to do with the niqab. Besides, I see women in niqab driving by themselves and think, "Fantastic. These women are fully participating in society" [I'm not trying to sound patronizing, but unlike what Harper and cronies would have us believe, women wearing the niqab aren't automatically under Taliban style oppression. The niqab is just a symbol that a government who cares very little about women in general is using to scratch at our racist tendencies under the guise of women's rights. I was listening to CBC radio the other night and one of the guests said about the niqab 'issue'] "It's not a dogwhistle, it's a foghorn"
posted by biggreenplant at 1:55 PM on October 3, 2015


Keep in mind that the guy they want to take citizenship away from was born in Canada.
posted by clawsoon at 2:31 PM on October 3, 2015 [1 favorite]


What's going on is that Canada is a profoundly racist country.

Indeed.
posted by Nevin at 2:36 PM on October 3, 2015 [1 favorite]


A birthright can never be taken from you.

There is literally nothing that cannot be taken from you. Not your citizenship, not your life, not even your memories. Nothing at all.
posted by Steely-eyed Missile Man at 2:55 PM on October 3, 2015 [3 favorites]


The Elections Canada help line is so wonderfully helpful, it's amazing. Though wow, it's a huge pain to vote with someone in the same riding but a different polling station. (My polling stations are a nice close walk from where I live. The riding office is downtown in a place that is very difficult to find parking at, and my grandmother doesn't walk well.)

I'm really annoyed at my riding which has swung back red for a shitty parachuted candidate who doesn't have much to do with this area. (I'm not a huge Trudeau fan, but I could have voted for a different candidate.)
posted by jeather at 4:20 PM on October 3, 2015


What's going on is that Canada is a profoundly racist country.

Canada is a polite racist country. We really want to think of ourselves as nice people, but it doesn't quite always work in reality.
posted by ovvl at 6:29 PM on October 3, 2015 [2 favorites]


When I was granted citizenship it was non-revokable under the law of the land, and still is. It also granted me full rights and privileges of every other citizen. Why should that change?

It shouldn't change, and almost certainly cannot change with our constitution. I was thinking of people who are deported, but I guess those cases involve people who haven't yet been granted citizenship, or who obtained it in some illegal manner.

No, you're absolutely right and I was mistaken. There's no circumstance where the government can take away your citizenship once it's been legally granted.
posted by Kevin Street at 7:42 PM on October 3, 2015


Have to side with Nevin here, the Liberals are NOT a left party.

And its vote splitting for some, but it really depends on your issue.

If you, like me, think the most important issue is C51, well the Liberals voted on that. They won't repeal it. They talk about more parliamentary oversight. Oversight for allowing the CSIS to violate the charter of rights? Detention without charge? Sorry, I just can't advocate that anyone vote for a party that voted for this, even if they did propose amendments.

Because of C51 I gave up talk of splitting the vote and voting strategically for the Liberals.

I have other concerns about the Liberals (I don't like their environmental policy when compared to either Green or NDP, their policy on women is very thin compared to the NDP, where is the plan for ending poverty?, and frankly, when I hear Trudeau talk about the economy I come away convinced he couldn't explain his own three talking points) and I think I could set all these aside to heave Steve, but I can't on C51.
posted by chapps at 9:13 PM on October 3, 2015 [4 favorites]


Re Barbaric Cultural Practices, this was voted in by the Libs and Cons, but the NDP did speak in favour of some parts. I looked into the debates a bit today on Open Parliament and it was quite interesting.

Seems there were presentations from various cultural communities to a committee looking at the bill, and they were supportive of the bill's intent, but said the way the legislation was set up could actually cause harm to victims of said practices (forced marriage, polygamy, child marriage). The NDP advocated for amendments to address these concerns, but these failed, so they voted opposed.

The Liberals may well have supported those amendments too, I was reading some NDP MP's address before it passed, but the Libs ultimately voted in favour.

I am still unclear what practices are now illegal that weren't illegal before; if none, if this is just about supporting the existing laws with better practices and services, I don't see a merit in passing a bill that simply makes new moves to address already-illegal practices in a way that could harm victims.
posted by chapps at 9:26 PM on October 3, 2015 [1 favorite]


Here's a graph showing the orange dive in Quebec.

Bummer. Although I guess it always looked less to me like Quebec was voting for NDP as it looked like Quebec was voting against the others. It was never going to be easy to hold on to.
posted by Hoopo at 10:06 PM on October 3, 2015


Came across this on Twitter:

The stoking of xenophobia to mask an absence of platform distinction may be the ugliest thing I've seen in 25 yrs of covering cdnpoli.
posted by mandolin conspiracy at 10:24 PM on October 3, 2015 [2 favorites]


The NDP has more in common with the Conservatives than with the Liberals. The NDP and the Conservatives are both populist parties, meaning many policies are reactionary rather than strategic or visionary, and are designed to appeal to a populist and unreflective base.

Could you please stop parroting this utter nonsense? By your definition, all parties are populist. There are actual and stark differences between the federal NDP and the federal CPC.

As for the niqab thing.. what drives me fucking bonkers is that the recitation of the oath is strictly ceremony anyway--all new citizens must also sign a paper copy of the oath. So let any person wear a niqab if they want, and ensure a female clerk/whoever does this is available to sign the copy with. Done and done. Ugh.
posted by feckless fecal fear mongering at 12:45 AM on October 4, 2015 [7 favorites]


Well, yes, there's a whole bunch of options for reasonable accommodation, but that direction was rejected.
Allowing Ms. Ishaq to swear her oath among women resolves the conflict.
But in 2011, citizenship and immigration minister Jason Kenney, rejecting the advice of his own legal advisers, took that choice away. Ministry e-mails cited in court show he spurned accommodation and made public removal of the niqab obligatory.
posted by frimble at 1:04 AM on October 4, 2015 [3 favorites]


the recitation of the oath is strictly ceremony anyway

It isn't. It's the legal moment at which one becomes a citizen. Right or wrong, that's the way our law works. There's a provision that if the clerk administering the oath during the ceremony see someone not reciting the oath, the clerk is required to readminister it. There are a few exceptions for disability, but that's it. If an applicant is capable, they are required to take it to become a citizen.

The niqab accommodation is an easy, legal fix, vanishingly rare anyway, and demonstrates how much of a dog whistle this really is.
posted by bonehead at 9:36 AM on October 4, 2015 [1 favorite]


Look at this is way: you don't need to be literate in French or English to get citizenship.
posted by bonehead at 9:54 AM on October 4, 2015


the orange dive in Quebec

Yeah, I have relatives in Quebec, and their ability to be moved by this issue is not a surprise. What's surprising is how quickly this garnered Harper support in the rest of Canada.

The Card Cheat, thanks for the link to Harper's speech. I did spend some time looking for the "you won't recognize Canada when I'm through with it" quote last week, and I can't find it. It's not part of the speech it's associated with, and I couldn't find a real source anywhere. It's interesting because the quote is so widespread, but did he really say that? I expect that everyone who's heard it isn't planning on voting for Der Harperator anyway...
posted by sneebler at 11:44 AM on October 4, 2015


Can some legal type explain how asking a woman to remove her niqab during the ceremony doesn't contradict the Charter of Rights and Freedoms?
posted by peppermind at 12:05 PM on October 4, 2015


It does, and courts will throw it out as soon as there is someone with standing to litigate the issue I suspect. As with so much that fuckHarper does, it's blatantly unconstitutional and won't survive a single court challenge. See also C51 (and that very unconstitutionality is why I will bleed from my eyeballs before voting Liberal ever again). The only point of these bills is to rile up the base, not to actually enact laws.
posted by feckless fecal fear mongering at 12:13 PM on October 4, 2015 [4 favorites]


If the Canadian populace is find enough and malicious enough to fall for this, then we've got the Prime Minister we deserve
posted by peppermind at 12:43 PM on October 4, 2015 [2 favorites]


What if only a minority of the Canadian populace falls for this? But due to first-past-the-post, and Harper's various efforts to decrease voter turnout, Harper still ends up in power. Do the majority of non-dumb, non-malicious Canadians somehow "deserve" to live under his thumb for a few years? What about people who can't vote? Do they "deserve" it?

Isn't the whole point of having a Charter of Rights and Freedoms that everyone deserves basic rights no matter what politicians are voted into office?
posted by grouse at 1:40 PM on October 4, 2015 [5 favorites]


Worth noting that Harper has never walked back from these comments. What he says there is still in the party platform. As grouse points out, the Charter is key here. Its interpretation by the Supreme Court vis-a-vis marriage rights is a long-done deal. But the Conservatives have, to this day, kept that item in the party platform - a wink wink, nudge nudge to people to say "We might not be able to do this, but we still agree with you."

As pointed out upthread, Jason Kenney was given the option by his advisors to find a reasonable accommodation on the vanishingly small number of instances (two since 2011) where a woman wearing the niqab was taking the oath. Rather than doing so, he put this in the campaign quiver so it could be fired off if they needed a cynical wedge issue. And here we are.
posted by mandolin conspiracy at 2:37 PM on October 4, 2015 [3 favorites]


The only thing that gives me hope these days is when my father, who is highly fiscally conservative (and voted for Mike Harris), repeatedly calls Harper a "fascist."
posted by mandolin conspiracy at 2:46 PM on October 4, 2015 [3 favorites]


What are the odds of C-51 being repealed or at least amended with a PC majority? Is there any bill or policy that can't be addressed one way or another, with outcomes other than a PC majority? How do we got those outcomes?
posted by cotton dress sock at 3:45 PM on October 4, 2015


Not to nitpick, but there is no federal PC (Progressive Conservative) party any more. They merged with the far-right Reform Party to become the (somehow even further right) Conservative Party of Canada (CPC).
posted by rocket88 at 4:34 PM on October 4, 2015


Nitpick away, I appreciate the correction.
posted by cotton dress sock at 4:46 PM on October 4, 2015


The trick now that everyone is pissed at Harper for shitting on the table is to move away from it and to talk about anything else. The economy. The environment. Our big dreams.
posted by five fresh fish at 10:48 PM on October 4, 2015


And it happens again: Muslim convert attacked while wearing niqab in Toronto
posted by frimble at 5:10 AM on October 5, 2015


> And here we are.

So far - fingers crossed - it doesn't seem to be moving the needle much. The Cons have been pretty stable in the polls for a long time, but the Liberals seem to be gaining voters from the NDP. It looks like the predictions that a lot of ABC voters were waiting to see which party had the best chance of toppling the Cons before making up their mind might have been true.
posted by The Card Cheat at 6:32 AM on October 5, 2015




My current prediction is that if Steve has a minority, that the Grits and NDP will both be content to let it ride for a year or so, and then try with the voters again. There's too much animosity between the two to support the other and let that one take the laurels.
Also, the NDP and Liberals will have to replenish their war chests before jumping back into the electoral ring again.
posted by milnews.ca at 8:47 AM on October 5, 2015 [1 favorite]


> What are the odds of C-51 being repealed or at least amended with a PC majority?

Zero. Less than zero. They would probably go back and make it even worse.
posted by The Card Cheat at 9:10 AM on October 5, 2015 [1 favorite]


I had a sad conversation last night. My mom apparently thinks people who wear a niqab are "scary" and "people could be doing anything under there" (seems to be talking about burqas I think?) and that "our society doesn't do this". And my lifelong loyal Conservative-voting stepfather is voting NDP. Which is kinda cool! But when I asked why I found out he's apparently doing it because he doesn't think the Conservatives have a chance to win in his riding--he doesn't prefer the NDP over the Liberals or Conservatives. It's like he just wants to be on the winning team in his riding, which is NDP by a large margin, as if there's a prize for guessing right or something. Ugh. I know they're getting old but I was not prepared for an Old Glory Robot Insurance moment.
posted by Hoopo at 9:19 AM on October 5, 2015


Zero. Less than zero. They would probably go back and make it even worse.

Right, and what are the odds of that with the minority Liberal government that would happen if we all just #votedtogether?
posted by cotton dress sock at 9:47 AM on October 5, 2015


At different times Trudeau has said he'd repeal "parts" of it and/or that he'd repeal it altogether...my guess is he'd find a way to just tinker with it but let the bulk of it stand as is.
posted by The Card Cheat at 9:56 AM on October 5, 2015 [2 favorites]


With a strong NDP presence in opposition (if not exactly leading), those amendments could be significant.
posted by cotton dress sock at 10:01 AM on October 5, 2015


And some Tories might go rogue.
posted by cotton dress sock at 10:05 AM on October 5, 2015


Danny Williams is one again sharing his opinion regarding who NOT to vote for.
posted by beau jackson at 12:59 PM on October 5, 2015 [3 favorites]


Heh, I came here just now to post a comment with the Danny Williams link. I was gonna say, "He's far from perfect, but I got three words for ya: Danny Fuckin' Williams."
posted by mandolin conspiracy at 1:58 PM on October 5, 2015


The word 'borderline' seems wrong.
posted by feckless fecal fear mongering at 2:56 PM on October 5, 2015 [4 favorites]


The TPP, which the Libs signal they favour (kind of?) has some problems for internet privacy, according yo Open Media. The NDP are pushing that onto the agenda now , in addition to milk and cars. Vice has a pretty unflattering interview with trudeau suggesting he will expand "canada's NSA".
No idea how many people vote based on this but I'm sure the NDP are hoping it reopens and reaffirms the c51 concerns with the liberals. It's going to be a wild two weeks.
posted by chapps at 11:52 PM on October 5, 2015


"Federal court rejects Ottawa's bid to suspend niqab ruling" by Sean Fine, in the Globe and Mail:
The Conservative government’s bid to stop a Muslim woman from wearing a face veil while taking the oath of citizenship appears to have failed, after the Federal Court of Appeal refused to suspend its ruling from last month that the government’s policy is illegal…

The appeal court’s ruling, the third defeat in a row for the federal government on the case, had a strongly dismissive tone. The court said that while it took no position on whether the government was raising an important issue – which must be shown if a court is to grant a stay of a ruling – Ottawa did not even come close to meeting the second requirement, that there would be “irreparable harm” if Ms. Ishaq were able to wear her niqab while taking her oath.

The government had argued that its policy on the niqab was not mandatory but merely a guideline for citizenship judges. If that is the case, “how can one raise a claim of irreparable harm?” Justice Johanne Trudel wrote, joined by two other Federal Court of Appeal judges.
posted by grouse at 6:46 AM on October 6, 2015 [3 favorites]


The appeal court’s ruling, the third defeat in a row for the federal government on the case, had a strongly dismissive tone.

And all for fewer than two cases per year. We should invite Danny Williams out to Alberta for a visit.
posted by sneebler at 7:03 AM on October 6, 2015 [1 favorite]


Harper government partnered with industry group fighting CRA

And as an aside, can I use the Barbaric Cultural Practices tip line to report the government for making the election this long?
posted by nubs at 8:07 AM on October 6, 2015 [2 favorites]


Somebody in my Facebook feed suggested trolling this "barbaric cultural practices" snitch line by calling up and reporting that Catholics are eating and drinking human flesh and blood.
posted by The Card Cheat at 8:15 AM on October 6, 2015 [5 favorites]


I'm sad to see the Conservative still polling relatively strongly and Islamophobic wedge politics working so well, even at this time when there is unprecedented public support and real action on sponsoring and welcoming Syrian refugees. I suppose it's our worst and best on display at once. Hopefully a change in government can help foster the good side a little more.
posted by beau jackson at 10:00 AM on October 6, 2015


Tory caucus member Brad Mutt (Mississauga-Streetsville) -- previously newsworthy for miming shooting then-Liberal leader Bob Rae and also bringing to the attention of the House a scandalous example of voter fraud he witnessed (but then confessed he had totally made up) -- muses about using C-24 to strip Thomas Mulcair of his citizenship.

In the Mulroney years, I used to dislike the PCs for cribbing from Reagan. The CPC seems to be copying out some banana republic playbook.
posted by ricochet biscuit at 1:12 PM on October 6, 2015 [3 favorites]


I came across this story in the CBC comments somewhere; first I've heard of Harper's possible involvement in a pro-apartheid organization dedicated to preventing Mandela's release. If it's true, I just am out of words for that creature.
posted by cotton dress sock at 2:14 PM on October 6, 2015


If you google "northern foundation" you'll find a thesis work from, iirc, U of Lethbridge that goes into detail. In short, yes, Harper was hanging with white supremacists, radical libertarians, and other low scoundrels and scum. Quelle surprise.
posted by five fresh fish at 4:30 PM on October 6, 2015 [2 favorites]


Tory caucus member Brad Mutt (Mississauga-Streetsville)

Meanwhile, the Conservative candidate in the neighbouring Mississauga - Malton was dropped by the CPC today when he defended an editorial he wrote earlier this year entitled "Is it wrong for a homosexual to become a normal person?" From the CBC article:
At a rally in the riding on Sept. 8, Conservative Leader Stephen Harper appeared on stage with Grewal and praised his work.

"I can tell you this: through his newspaper and radio show, he urges all those who come to this country to embrace the values of freedom, democracy, of tolerance, and respect, the things that make our country such a great place to live," Harper told the audience.
Across the country, former Conservative MP John Cummins (Delta - Richmond East) explained to CBC today that the missing and murdered aboriginal women are to blame for "putting [themselves] at risk."
posted by ricochet biscuit at 5:51 PM on October 6, 2015


Niqab ban for public servants would be considered, says Stephen Harper

Great. A solution to a problem that doesn't fucking exist.
posted by mandolin conspiracy at 5:57 PM on October 6, 2015 [5 favorites]


I'd also like to ban public servants from having serpents on their heads that turn you to stone when you look at them. Just in case.
posted by jeather at 6:06 PM on October 6, 2015 [6 favorites]


A solution to a problem that doesn't fucking exist.

If I ever run as a candidate for the Rhinos, I would like to borrow that slogan.
posted by nubs at 7:30 PM on October 6, 2015 [2 favorites]


In short, yes, Harper was hanging with white supremacists, radical libertarians, and other low scoundrels and scum

I believe the preferred nomenclature is "old stock Canadians."
posted by nubs at 7:33 PM on October 6, 2015 [5 favorites]


Niqabs of/du Canada.
posted by maudlin at 9:01 PM on October 6, 2015 [2 favorites]


ISideWith.com now has a Canadian version. Few things have filled me with the same quiet, inchoate rage as seeing "niqab" under "election issues."

(You agree with the Conservative party on ... no major issues.) Didn't need a quiz to tell me that.

I cannot wait to cast my advance ballot this weekend.
posted by invokeuse at 11:18 PM on October 6, 2015


Sheema Khan: Fifty years in Canada, and now I feel like a second-class citizen:
My first voting experience was momentous, for I helped to keep the country together in the 1980 Quebec referendum. I did the same during the nail-biter of 1995.
posted by mandolin conspiracy at 6:08 AM on October 7, 2015


> (You agree with the Conservative party on ... no major issues.)

I was down with them getting rid of the penny. So that's one thing in nine years.
posted by The Card Cheat at 8:37 AM on October 7, 2015 [3 favorites]


If I ever run as a candidate for the Rhinos, I would like to borrow that slogan.

I hereby waive any and all intellectual property rights to said slogan. Go forth and campaign.
posted by mandolin conspiracy at 8:41 AM on October 7, 2015


I'm sure glad Harper's banging on about that home renovation tax credit. By the end of this election campaign I will have punched clear through every square inch of drywall in our place.
posted by mandolin conspiracy at 8:44 AM on October 7, 2015 [6 favorites]


Today in Barbaric Cultural Practices Minute, conservative candidate James Cumming (Edmonton Centre) tells a law professor if he dislikes C-24, he should renounce his heritage.
posted by ricochet biscuit at 12:32 PM on October 7, 2015 [4 favorites]


The thing Canadian politicians need to understand is that I can be fucked-over in far nicer climates. Canada needs to offer a compelling reason to stay here.
posted by five fresh fish at 1:03 PM on October 7, 2015 [1 favorite]


Today in Barbaric Cultural Practices Minute, conservative candidate James Cumming (Edmonton Centre) tells a law professor if he dislikes C-24, he should renounce his heritage.

Okay, that's it. We're down to the studs here and my knuckles are sore.*




*Not a double entendre, I promise.
posted by mandolin conspiracy at 1:03 PM on October 7, 2015 [2 favorites]


Hey, but on the bright side, the Tories have solved the oil spill problem!
posted by fimbulvetr at 8:44 AM on October 8, 2015 [1 favorite]




Hey, but on the bright side, the Tories have solved the oil spill problem!

I'm sure I could source a tanker truck or two, if she'd care to demonstrate this on her front lawn.
posted by bonehead at 10:00 AM on October 8, 2015




Wow, used to be that Macleans could be counted on to support pretty much anything Harper did. If he's losing Macleans....
posted by The Card Cheat at 11:57 AM on October 8, 2015


That oil spill comment is just unbelievable. But then again, we have a cabinet minister (former Minister of State for Science and Technology) who doesn't believe in abortion (against his religion) and is perfectly happy to accuse one of the opposition leaders of being in favour of female genital mutilation.
posted by sardonyx at 6:38 PM on October 8, 2015


Hey, but on the bright side, the Tories have solved the oil spill problem!

The subhead on the linked story mentions her riding, which I had hitherto overlooked:
Tory candidate Sabrina Zuniga says ground will absorb oil spills
Ex-science teacher is running in Toronto's Spadina-Fort York riding against Adam Vaughan and Olivia Chow
For the benefit of those from beyond the Toronto mediasphere, a Tory running against Chow and Vaughan in Spadina-Fort York is metaphorically on a scale with RC Cola's aims to become the best-selling cola in the world. It is charming, if nothing else.
posted by ricochet biscuit at 7:52 PM on October 8, 2015 [3 favorites]


Well the good news is she is an ex-science teacher.
posted by Mitheral at 9:16 PM on October 8, 2015 [1 favorite]




Canada is so bad I'm repeatedly agreeing with Andrew Coyne.
posted by chapps at 11:55 PM on October 8, 2015 [2 favorites]


Don't worry. Coyne's still wrong about many things, like transit.
posted by maudlin at 12:40 AM on October 9, 2015 [4 favorites]


Squirrel!, Peter Watts
And if my hopes have been raised and dashed in the past— if, for example, I begin to take heart in the Tories’ occasional inability to ram through whatever rights-corroding Bill they’ve introduced this week, only to discover how many Canadians actually believe that “if you’re not a terrorist you have nothing to fear“— well, that’s the price I pay for being a perennial optimist. And when the writ was dropped this past summer, the polls gave me such cause for hope. Recession and senate scandals and endless corruption all seemed to be taking their toll. The NDP— the NDP!— was leading in the polls, and the Conservatives were sinking like a bag of shit to the bottom of a swamp. Maybe we weren’t the brightest bunch of vertebrates on the planet, thought I; but if we’re not quite smart enough to turn against the guy who’s been beating us with a stick after five years, at least we seem to be catching on after nine. So I dared to hope again.
Look at us now. Just look at us now:
...
What caused the turnaround? The niqab. A bit of cloth draped across the face in deference, apparently, to the demands of one of our more prudish Sky Fairies.
posted by the man of twists and turns at 11:59 AM on October 9, 2015


That Watt's article is great.
[He's not the only one noting those new cheap flights to Iceland as they fret about polls, etiher. Stay and fight, my conscience whispers, but truly my heart is getting weary.]
posted by chapps at 11:27 PM on October 9, 2015


On the other hand, students at my university had the chance to vote in advance polls in any riding on campus from Monday - Thursday this week. They were lined up all the way out the building, waiting for hours. HOURS. The undergraduate student society delivered them juice boxes and doughnuts and encouraged them to stay in line. No one was budging.

High turn out--and turn out that is stubborn and refuses to leave when they meet an understaffed polling station-- is my biggest source of hope.
posted by chapps at 11:40 PM on October 9, 2015 [3 favorites]


Ditto here. They set up the advance polling station close to my office yesterday, and I was heartened to see a line much of the time. I think few of them were students (this is a community college) but every single chalkboard in the hallways is covered with a giant VOTE! message. I'm only disappointed that the student association couldn't find anyone to come to my class and give their Get Out the Vote message before advance polls.
posted by invokeuse at 7:30 AM on October 10, 2015


The Public Radio International / BBC / WGBH program The World covered the niqab issue on Friday, the day on which Zunera Ishaq was finally able to take her citizenship oath while wearing her niqab.
posted by XMLicious at 2:39 AM on October 11, 2015


Apparently a few people in Newfoundland and Quebec have gone to the polls in costume to mock the non issue.
posted by peppermind at 7:16 AM on October 11, 2015 [2 favorites]


850 000 people have already voted in advance polls. (I'm going Tuesday).
posted by feckless fecal fear mongering at 9:39 AM on October 11, 2015


Just returned from our advance poll (I prefer the French bureau de vote par anticipation, as it seems more fitting).

We got there just as it was opening at noon. There was already a lineup of a dozen people. Given that this is a holiday weekend, that was encouraging.
posted by mandolin conspiracy at 9:43 AM on October 11, 2015


Actually, the advance polls being open through a long weekend is probably making it easier for people to vote.
posted by mandolin conspiracy at 9:47 AM on October 11, 2015


Up to 1.6 million advance votes after 2 days, and that's without counting Sunday (today) and Monday yet. Historical note: 2011 saw 2.1 million advance poll votes over 4 days.

fffs, if you're going Tuesday, that would have to be at the EC office for your riding. Monday is the last day for actual advance polls. This page says that the deadline to vote at your riding's office is 6 PM Tuesday, October 13, so I wouldn't leave it too late.

I'll repeat that for everybody's sake (because I forgot the cutoff myself and it needs emphasizing):

IF YOU CAN'T VOTE ON ELECTION DAY,

THE LAST DAY YOU CAN VOTE IS TUESDAY OCTOBER 13, [the last Tuesday before an election]

ONLY AT THE ELECTIONS CANADA OFFICE FOR YOUR RIDING [find it here]

AND THE OFFICE CLOSES AT 6 PM.

posted by maudlin at 4:36 PM on October 11, 2015 [2 favorites]


(Correction: 2011 had only 3 advance voting days, so that was a rate of 700k per day, while this year's rate is 800k per day so far.)
posted by maudlin at 5:09 PM on October 11, 2015


ta, maudlin.
posted by feckless fecal fear mongering at 5:31 PM on October 11, 2015


Voted, waited about 5minutes, line of three people.
Seemed it was their first lull, mid shift.
Encouraged by 35% increase in advance voting. If that keeps up we'll have the highest turn out ever.
Had thanksgiving dinner with friends and it turned out we had all voted in advance, or were going tomorrow. I guess the broadbent institute got it right with the can't wait video.
posted by chapps at 10:21 PM on October 11, 2015


I voted yesterday and for me, too, it was about a 5 minute wait. I am extremely encouraged by all the "just voted!" status updates on my Facebook feed.

Elections Canada says advance voter turnout is up by 16% (through Sunday)
posted by invokeuse at 6:35 PM on October 12, 2015


Looks like my expectations about the voter ID process may have been too optimistic. There are scattered reports that Elections Canada workers at polling stations, and even first line staff on the phone, seem to think that photo ID is required to vote. NOPE.

Government issued photo ID with your name and address (driver's license, provincial ID card, etc.) can function as your sole proof of identity, but you can also consult a very long list of ID alternates to provide two pieces of ID with your name (with or without photo). One of these pieces of ID must include your current address. If you don't have any acceptable document with your address on it, you can swear an oath backed up by another registered voter at that polling station. See here for the voter ID rules.

If you hear anyone in or near the voting line or at the poll itself claim that photo ID is needed, speak up. Be prepared to call your local riding office or even the EC main line (1-800-463-6868) if needed.
posted by maudlin at 6:49 PM on October 12, 2015 [6 favorites]


I am extremely encouraged by all the "just voted!" status updates on my Facebook feed.
Me too. I also saw two twitter trends making me happy this weekend...
#MuslimVoteWeekend and #RocktheIndigenousVote
Full of vote selfies of energized voters.
I knew that there has been low first nations vote turnout previously (and lots of debate about sovereignty vs voting) but I did not know what the Muslim Voters Weekend campaign said
.. That 40% of Muslims didn't vote, so I guess the flip side to race baiting is that it can wake the wrong dragon.
posted by chapps at 10:10 PM on October 12, 2015 [1 favorite]


We can expect the Conservative campaign to release a stinking humongous bald-faced lie this week. It's a standard Lizard of Oz tactic. I hope it disgusts Canadians to the point of actionable outrage.
posted by five fresh fish at 11:02 PM on October 12, 2015


An expat friend of mine went back to Vancouver to vote and was turned away twice, and had to get assistance from Let All Canadians Vote before finally being allowed to vote.
posted by grouse at 5:28 AM on October 13, 2015 [3 favorites]




Thanks nubs.

I believe that Harper, like his Reform progenitors, will use any tactic that promises to help re-elect the CPC, so I'm not surprised that Harper would appear with the Fords in that Etobicoke circus. Don't underestimate the local clout of the Fords. Rob is back (from purgatory and cancer) as a city councillor, the one role he has proven successful in, and he still has a loyal and active base.

Stinking bald-faced lie alert:
[the Conservatives are running a] series of ads in the ethnic media saying Justin Trudeau will put brothels in neighbourhoods [and] a repeated statement they'd cancel pension income splitting for seniors
The Conservatives are also claiming Trudeau's government would sell marijuana to minors.

(All of the above claims are untrue, if anyone is interested)
posted by Artful Codger at 2:06 PM on October 14, 2015


As soon as I see a party saying something in ads aimed at an ethnic minority that is not being said in ads being run in English in French, I know they are lying. It is a despicable tactic.
posted by nubs at 2:34 PM on October 14, 2015 [2 favorites]


Soft on drugs, eh?
posted by mandolin conspiracy at 5:01 PM on October 14, 2015


There's some really ugly stuff about Ford in the new book from Towhey. I don't know if it's enough to remove Harper's death-grip on them this weekend, though.

(I have my doubts that Towhey could take such detailed notes -- with exact times noted -- in the middle of the night. Then again, he appeared to think it was more important to record Rob's explicit threats to shoot his wife instead of, you know, calling 911.)
posted by maudlin at 5:06 PM on October 14, 2015


I'd be unsurprised if Towhey started recording the calls from Ford along the lines of "Nobody's gonna believe this shit."

Towhey liked everything about Ford except the drugs, so I don't want to give him any credit, but I'm still going to read that book. The thing is, just when it seems that we've more or less heard it all about Ford, plus or minus some finer details...ho-lee shit.

This is where Jan Wong's "Who is Renata Ford?" seems really prescient...

So is the media discreet, or merely cowardly? You be the judge: a rumour has been circulating for months now about the infidelity of a high-level political wife in Ottawa, possibly involving a female RCMP officer. And yet not a whiff has made it into print (until now).

Wong's referring to Laureen Harper, there, FWIW.

On the evening of March 26, the day of Renata’s 911 call, Ford stood holding Stepha­nie in the doorway of his mother’s home. A Star reporter asked if Renata was OK. “Yeah, everything’s fine. No problems here,” said Ford.

What she had right in that piece is just how goddamned creepy it is that Renata Ford appeared to be a ghost. And, of course, that the abuser is answering all the questions.

There is some deep, dark shit that's gone down in that house and everyone knows it...but exactly what is not so much a matter of public record, beyond some police reports and "I know a cop who says that..." Towhey, sycophantic slug though he may be, may shed a little more light on it.

But apparently, as of this writing, Harper's still going to do the thing with the Fords on Saturday. Shitbirds of a feather, flocking together...
posted by mandolin conspiracy at 7:51 PM on October 14, 2015




Oh, and fuck Harper for giving this abusive thug and his cro-mag brother the stage yet again. They crave this sort of validation.
posted by mandolin conspiracy at 8:04 PM on October 14, 2015 [1 favorite]


You would think a conservative Prime Minister running for re-election wouldn't solicit support of buffoonish gangster. You'd be wrong.

This Jeet Heer guy doesn't know much about Stephen Harper, does he?
posted by grouse at 8:07 PM on October 14, 2015 [4 favorites]


...giving this abusive thug and his cro-mag brother the stage yet again.

The Harper election machine was solidly behind Rob Ford's mayoral run. Any (mathematically electable) conservative is a good conservative in their eyes.

I heard this morning (CBC Radio) that their Poll Tracker analyst is currently predicting that most of the greater Toronto area could go red (Liberal) in this election. So Harper has to use every lever he has, including sucking up to the Fords.
posted by Artful Codger at 5:13 AM on October 15, 2015


This Jeet Heer guy doesn't know much about Stephen Harper, does he?

Well, I'll never tire of what a Google image search comes up with when you look for "Dean Del Mastro handcuffs."
posted by mandolin conspiracy at 8:57 AM on October 15, 2015 [3 favorites]


Towhey is a piece of shit; he was perfectly happy to climb aboard the Gravy Train Express and stay there for as long as it was professionally advantageous for him to do so.

That said, it makes me happy to see Harper reduced to kissing the Fords' butts, because it must mean he's in trouble, or at the very least playing defence instead of offence with less than a week to go. Imagine how much he must have hated sucking up to those two fuckups.
posted by The Card Cheat at 10:30 AM on October 15, 2015 [1 favorite]


I hope he did. I hope it was like that moment from the Wire where Carcetti is clued into what being the mayor is like - being handed big silver bowls full of shit that you have to eat with a smile. But I think that a career politician has learned how to do that without even noticing anymore; the gag reflex is gone and you'll swallow anything to win.

As much as I hope the Cons are in trouble, I wouldn't discount their dark magic.
posted by nubs at 11:14 AM on October 15, 2015 [2 favorites]


I wouldn't discount their dark magic.

Oh, to be a fly on the wall in Harper's office at the moment.

"David? I've tried everything. I hired your court wizard, 'the John Dee of racism' you called him. But I'm still looking at a minority. I need to perform the rite."
"Do I have to do it in front of my future cabinet?"
"I guess it's a fair price to pay for power."
"What do you mean, 'After you're done with the pig...'"
"Oh dear God, man. That's just sick. But I guess it's a fair price to pay for power."
"Hail the Moonchild and may it reign a thousand years to you too, David."
posted by frimble at 11:34 AM on October 15, 2015 [3 favorites]


I was thinking more of their ground game and ability to get out the vote, but...yeah, that too.
posted by nubs at 12:29 PM on October 15, 2015


"Neither Crosby nor Textor are there. Nor staff. We don’t do bit-part politics.”

The rats are fleeing.
posted by bonehead at 1:42 PM on October 15, 2015 [2 favorites]


Crosby and Textor: "We were unable to source a buffer large enough to polish this turd."
posted by mandolin conspiracy at 2:45 PM on October 15, 2015 [3 favorites]


I won't feel better til the next Harper radio ad is him going ".....Aaaaaaah, fuck it, I'm outta here."
posted by Artful Codger at 2:50 PM on October 15, 2015 [1 favorite]


I just saw the new Hazel McCallion Liberal ad tonight. It was brilliant, and a strategy the party should have adopted before. Even when she's out of power, that woman is a force, whether you agree with her politics or not.
posted by sardonyx at 4:10 PM on October 15, 2015 [2 favorites]


the new Hazel McCallion Liberal ad

WOW. Brilliant indeed.

I'm starting to feel better...
posted by Artful Codger at 4:19 PM on October 15, 2015


I won't feel better until the election results are in, and maybe not even then. I still can't shake the fear that the national averages won't matter as much as vote-splitting, etc. that will result in a bunch of Conservative victories in various ridings by a couple of percentage points, like a team that wins the World Series by winning four games by one run and losing the other three by a combined total of 36.
posted by The Card Cheat at 6:42 AM on October 16, 2015 [2 favorites]


I've got the same fear. It's looking likely in our new riding here in the Kootenays where they split an NDP stronghold riding in two and added each half to Con stronghold ridings. (Can you say Gerrymandering?)

The Conservative is polling at 35%, which is 2 points higher than the NDP candidate. There's a big debate in town about strategic voting, which in my opinion is a no-brainer. If you want the Greens to actually get a candidate in, vote NDP so they can get rid of FPTT, then vote Green in the next election. Last poll I saw had greens at 11%.

Plus all of Harper's getting out the vote, shady election law changes, and illegal robocalls could change the results, like it did last election.
posted by sauril at 9:37 AM on October 16, 2015


As an Albertan, I am somewhat bemused at the fact that Trudeau will spend Sunday campaigning here. Leaders in our province the last day? Never happens. Someone on Twitter has mused that it means that the internal polling for Ontario must be showing some interesting signs.

But this is going to be close. Given that we won't be under media blackout any longer, Monday should be interesting to follow.
posted by nubs at 10:07 AM on October 16, 2015


Is it looking like there are going to be some non-Tory Alberta ridings? (Outside Edmonton anyway). I'd just assumed it would be a sea of blue like always, despite the last provincial election. The memories of the NEP are still close enough at hand for most I used to know when I lived there.
posted by sauril at 10:24 AM on October 16, 2015


The Globe and Mail endorses the Conservative Party (but says Stephen Harper should resign). I can't even.
posted by grouse at 10:56 AM on October 16, 2015 [3 favorites]


Hm. This an improvement on the Globe's endorsement.
posted by mandolin conspiracy at 10:56 AM on October 16, 2015


I can't even.

Since we're out of punchable drywall surface area, the ceramic ovenware is next.
posted by mandolin conspiracy at 10:58 AM on October 16, 2015


#OtherGlobeEndorsements

Face but not palm
Head out on the Highway but not Looking for Adventure....

(credit to @theturner)
posted by sauril at 10:59 AM on October 16, 2015


Born to be wild, but inclined to behave.
posted by mandolin conspiracy at 11:00 AM on October 16, 2015


Looks like Margaret Wente picked the wrong week to stop sniffing glue.
posted by bonehead at 11:08 AM on October 16, 2015 [4 favorites]


The funniest one though has to be this:

The Edmonton Journal (a postmedia paper) endorsement : The choice, still, is Harper.

One of the editorial staff, on Twitter: And yes. Before you ask, this was a decision made by the owners of the paper. As is their traditional prerogative.

The editorial, out today, is linked in small type more than halfway down the front page, below several other columns and opinion pieces.
posted by bonehead at 11:13 AM on October 16, 2015 [1 favorite]


I saw this morning on the news that the polls show that the racist dog-whistle in Quebec worked and the Tories have pulled ahead there, which, if true, is unsurprising but still surprising, if you know what I mean.
posted by Kitteh at 11:13 AM on October 16, 2015


Is it looking like there are going to be some non-Tory Alberta ridings? (Outside Edmonton anyway).

Yeah, there are a few ridings in Calgary that are in play - Calgary Confederation, Calgary Centre and Calgary Skyview. Once you get outside the two major cities, though, it looks pretty blue.
posted by nubs at 11:34 AM on October 16, 2015


Oh gawd (emphasis mine):

Rob Ford ‏@TorontoRobFord 1h
Monday I'm voting for fiscal responsibility, a strong economy, & a leader that will save Canadians 000's of dollars - @pmharper #elxn42
posted by nubs at 11:46 AM on October 16, 2015 [2 favorites]


ZERO'S OF DOLLARS!!!

C'mon Calgary Centre, my old riding!!
posted by sauril at 11:56 AM on October 16, 2015


The Conservative Campaign Makes for tired Television

Over all, it’s as if the Harper government is like a television show that has been allowed to go on two seasons too long. At this point, half the producers and several of the lead actors have been fired – some weren’t testing well with the audience at home, others seemed to have flamed out and are currently under police investigation – many of the original cast mates have quietly opted to move on to other things and, in classic television style, the show seems to have run out of ideas, and has begun to resort to gimmicks...

...So, they went with the Ford brothers and stayed with the ka-ching. Even though in this, our age of “insert or tap your card,” that sound is a near-perfect metaphor for “out of touch with contemporary economic realities.”

posted by nubs at 1:19 PM on October 16, 2015


In which Andrew Coyne's column is spiked at the last minute.

Palace intrigue at Postmedia!
posted by mandolin conspiracy at 2:24 PM on October 16, 2015 [1 favorite]


When asked by CANADALAND if Coyne has in fact resigned, either as an editor as a columnist, a senior Postmedia employee answered with a question:

"What time is it?"



Dun dun dun...
posted by nubs at 2:28 PM on October 16, 2015


Jeet Heer is tweeting as if Coyne is gone:

Jeet Heer ‏@HeerJeet 1 minute ago
I wonder where Coyne will end up at: Vice or Buzzfeed? (14 Great Quotes from J.S. Mill).
posted by nubs at 2:47 PM on October 16, 2015 [1 favorite]


And with this I'll leave the thread alone for a bit:

Hope Not Fear
posted by nubs at 2:48 PM on October 16, 2015 [3 favorites]


"The Edmonton Journal (a postmedia paper) endorsement : The choice, still, is Harper."

(╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻
posted by Kevin Street at 3:05 PM on October 16, 2015 [2 favorites]


The mainstream press - Postmedia, Globe, etc - has all gone for Harper. That's a decision made by the owners/publishers (as has always been the tradition). But now that there's very few making that decision, it creates an echo chamber that is incredibly obvious. Happened in the Alberta election, and it got roundly mocked in social media and there was a degree of resentment engendered.
posted by nubs at 3:13 PM on October 16, 2015


It's just that I spend a lot of money subscribing to that paper, so the blatant propaganda is particularly galling there.
posted by Kevin Street at 3:17 PM on October 16, 2015


A former editor of the Globe and Mail provides a different editorial.
posted by nubs at 3:19 PM on October 16, 2015 [3 favorites]


That Globe and Mail endorsement is just a turd of a column on every level. If you are going to endorse the Cons, at least, ya know, endorse them. Shit or get off the pot so to speak. Preferably get off the pot. I'm getting tired of Canada being shat on. End overly scatological comment.
posted by Cuke at 4:30 PM on October 16, 2015 [1 favorite]


The Jays are playing Monday night. I'm a little concerned with how that will affect the vote.
posted by peppermind at 3:27 AM on October 17, 2015 [1 favorite]


I'm reminded that these are the same ding-dongs at the Sob and Flail that endorsed a Hudak minority in the last Ontario election. I wonder what they put in the coffee in their Never-never. Some of the Ford's pixie dust no doubt.
posted by bonehead at 5:20 AM on October 17, 2015


I think the Jays game will almost certainly depress turnout to an unknown degree, especially in the GTA, but it's impossible to say which party, if any, this will have the greatest impact on.

I get depressed by the idea that anyone would skip voting to watch a baseball game, but in this as in so many other things, there is the world we wish we lived in and the one in which we actually reside.
posted by The Card Cheat at 6:41 AM on October 17, 2015 [1 favorite]


I'd be surprised if the game prevents people from voting but perhaps I'm naive.
posted by beau jackson at 12:02 PM on October 17, 2015




If Harper's acceptance of the Ford Bros. endorsement doesn't reek of clammy, sweaty desperation, I don't know what does.

Doug Ford claims Justin Trudeau isn't fit to hold office because he smokes pot, and has also said that he's considering a run for the leadership of the Conservative Party if Harper doesn't win this election.
posted by orange swan at 8:28 PM on October 17, 2015


Nothing like hanging with the literal Sopranos family. I have always suspected that a lot of drug and gangster money flowed through our politicians. It's a staggeringly huge business, every bit as big as any other in Canada. It's got to be spent on politics. I mean other things, too, but also… politics and politicians.
posted by five fresh fish at 10:02 PM on October 17, 2015


Etobicoke Dealers
posted by The Card Cheat at 6:27 AM on October 18, 2015


Strangely, the pro-Harper memes and posts I am seeing are never about his record, but instead promote fear as to what the Liberal party *might* do if they win. Why do you suppose that is?
posted by orange swan at 11:30 AM on October 18, 2015


Because after ten years in power, he should be running on what he's actually done--e.g. for the economy--instead of promising what he will do.

Harper is literally trying "these are not the droids you're looking for."
posted by feckless fecal fear mongering at 1:13 PM on October 18, 2015 [1 favorite]


« Older peer-to-peer   |   Quantum of Solace Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments