Does Paul Martin deserve your vote?

January 21, 2006 9:28 AM

39th General Electionon Monday January 23rd. Weekend open thread. [Link goes to Elections Canada information page]
posted by angrybeaver (33 comments total)

Cheer up, little beaver. What could possibly go wrong?
posted by Balisong at 9:31 AM on January 21, 2006

What could go wrong? NDP supporters could run to the Liberals instead of voting their convictions.
posted by angrybeaver at 9:34 AM on January 21, 2006

What could go wrong?

posted by anthill at 9:40 AM on January 21, 2006

What could go wrong? NDP supporters could run to the Liberals instead of voting their convictions.

Ooh, that's opening up a big ole' can of worms. Good luck with this thread!

Personallly, I am lucky enough to be in a riding where it doesn't matter what I vote - Conservatives could put a monkey in a suit and still will overwhelmingly - so I get to vote my convictions. I don't know what I would do if I was in a contested riding though.

I am very excited about scrutineering on monday though, although most of that excitement probably comes from my association of scrutineer with buccaneer. Yar!
posted by arcticwoman at 9:44 AM on January 21, 2006

This is a tough one. The Liberals certainly have plenty of flaws, but the Conservatives haven't necessarily shown themselves as being fit to govern.

The irony, I suppose, is that many of the people who will vote Liberal will do so because of a classically conservative distrust of rapid change.

A slightly longer discussion
posted by sindark at 9:44 AM on January 21, 2006

For the benefit of our non-Canadian friends... Meet Canada's next prime minister, Stephen Harper.



Terrified? No, why would we be terrified?
posted by 327.ca at 10:04 AM on January 21, 2006

I get to vote my convictions, too, because most of the geriatric population in this valley have their heads lodged so far up their asses they can see their tonsils.

I am very angry that our population is going to punish the Liberals by prostituting ourselves to the Americans. What a stupid fucking move.
posted by five fresh fish at 10:05 AM on January 21, 2006

Thank you Liberal party for letting it come to htis. I blame you entirely.
posted by Space Coyote at 10:10 AM on January 21, 2006

I have the choice between voting for Hedy Fry (moron), Svend Robinson (duplicitous thief) and a Conservative guy. I think I'm going to have to go with the Conservative guy. And I join Space Coyote in giving the Liberal party a big thank you for being so fucking corrupt and stupid.
posted by Turtles all the way down at 10:15 AM on January 21, 2006

I already mailed in my vote 2 weeks ago. So I just get to sit back and watch as the whole fiasco go down... unfortunately I won't know the results till I get up Tuesday morning! :(
posted by antifuse at 10:17 AM on January 21, 2006

Don't worry Canada. You'll soon be able to look fondly back at the good times of peace and prosperity and wonder how you were all duped into giving it all away, too.
posted by Balisong at 10:19 AM on January 21, 2006

How is punishing the Liberal party == prostituting ourselves to the Americans? Certainly Paul Martin and the Liberals have not done anything to defend Canada against American interests other than cheap anti-Americanism.
posted by angrybeaver at 10:19 AM on January 21, 2006

At least the Liberals will allow the possibility to be punished.
If there is one lesson that can be learned from America, is that conservitives will not allow themselves to be punished, or told what to do, or take advice, or be held accountable, or give a shit if you don't like it.
posted by Balisong at 10:27 AM on January 21, 2006

I have the choice between voting for Hedy Fry (moron), Svend Robinson (duplicitous thief) and a Conservative guy.

I was parked on Davie St. a couple of weeks ago and watched Hedy Fry with two sign-waving campaign workers trying to press the flesh. No one wanted to talk to her!

I'd vote for Svend if I lived in his riding, regardless of the conviction. I remember how he stood up for Sue Rodriguez and, as someone who believes in the right to die with dignity, I feel like I owe him.

I couldn't vote Conservative under any conditions. The reasons are endless: Stockwell Day as our next Foreign Minister, non-support for Kyoto or the environment, tax breaks for the wealthy, barely-disguised ties to all manner of fundamentalist, right-wing, neocon causes, etc., etc. Remember: when you vote Conservative, you get the whole ball of wax.

And I too join Space Coyote in giving the Liberal party a big thank you for being so fucking corrupt and stupid.
posted by 327.ca at 10:29 AM on January 21, 2006

How is punishing the Liberal party == prostituting ourselves to the Americans? Certainly Paul Martin and the Liberals have not done anything to defend Canada against American interests other than cheap anti-Americanism.

Great, now I'm going to argue against a Canadian icon, albeit an angry one. Despite Martin's showmanship of being anti-american, his cabinate does still bring about an independent policy that doesn't immedialtey fall in line with the United States (softwood lumber and the oil sands, missile defense etc.). With Harper, the baby, the bath water, even the similac will be tossed out in an attempt to bring about closer American relations.
posted by phyrewerx at 10:33 AM on January 21, 2006

Personallly, I am lucky enough to be in a riding where it doesn't matter what I vote - Conservatives could put a monkey in a suit and still will overwhelmingly - so I get to vote my convictions. I don't know what I would do if I was in a contested riding though.

Same here, though the problem with strategic voting is I don't think a lot of people really understand where and why it is or isn't useful.

I'm also curious how Layton's "Lend us your vote" strategy works out. It sort of ridiculous, it as if the NDP is saying "don't give us your vote, just lend it to us, it's almost like you're not really voting for us."
posted by bobo123 at 10:34 AM on January 21, 2006

I've linked to it in comments before, but in case anyone hasn't seen it, here's the Strategic Voting Calculator.

There are fewer ridings than one might think where strategic voting might be effective.
posted by Space Coyote at 10:38 AM on January 21, 2006

We need a change. No doubt about that. Trouble is, the Conservatives are blisteringly stupid. The hate the Gays, think the drug war is working, would have put us in Iraq, don't think believe global warming is happening, and is loaded with religous nuts.

This is a problem.

It's too late, but frankly I kinda wish the NDP would win a minority government. They wouldn't last long, but could probably bring in some truly progressive legislation before being turfed... possibly by the Conservatives who would have to move further to the centre.

Man oh man Canadians are fucking stupid. We actually have the US as an example of what a conservative government does, and people would still vote for them. Wow.

Too bad the Bloc isn't a national party. I'd probably vote for them.
posted by Rusty Iron at 10:48 AM on January 21, 2006

*weeps quietly in the corner*

Fortunately, I live in Libby Davies' riding, and therefore have no decision to make. Libby's my hero, and reminder that sometimes people go into politics for all the right reasons.

The words "Prime Minister Harper" stick in my throat like a sideways-lodged chicken bone.
posted by jokeefe at 10:48 AM on January 21, 2006

Btw... the Harper graphic with the thing in his pants rocks. I've always thought Canadian political tomfoolery online wasn't up to the same standards as American stuff, but that actually made me feel weird. Nice work.
posted by Rusty Iron at 10:50 AM on January 21, 2006

The latest electoral predictions: Seats (% of national vote)

Liberals: 94 (31%)
Conservatives: 128 (42%)
New Democrats: 28 (17.8%)
Greens: 0 (4.4%)
Bloc Quebecois: 57 (11.2%)
Other: 1 (1%)

If % of votes directly equalled seats, the predicted results would be:

Liberals: 95
Conservatives: 129
New Democratic: 55
Green: 14
Bloc Quebecois: 34
Other: 3

To me, the most interesting thing about this is how, while the two major parties would be relatively unaffected by a switch to proportional representation (PR), it would really hurt the Bloc (who must benefit from the first past the post system) and really help the Greens and New Democrats. All the more reason to support PR, in my opinion.

Taken from: sindark.com, vote predictions from democraticSPACE.com
posted by sindark at 10:55 AM on January 21, 2006

We actually have the US as an example of what a conservative government does, and people would still vote for them. Wow.

Let's at least remember that in America Harper's Conservatives would be considered moderate Repubs or even fit comfortably in with Democrats. We're not talking about electing a Bush doppelganger here.

Yes, I'm trying to talk myself down.
posted by jokeefe at 10:56 AM on January 21, 2006

The Liberal is going to be elected in my riding no matter what else is true, so I'm going to vote for a fringe party.
posted by clevershark at 10:57 AM on January 21, 2006

sindark writes "To me, the most interesting thing about this is how, while the two major parties would be relatively unaffected by a switch to proportional representation (PR), it would really hurt the Bloc (who must benefit from the first past the post system) and really help the Greens and New Democrats. All the more reason to support PR, in my opinion."

I doubt the Conservatives will be pushing very hard for this when there's little in it for them.
posted by clevershark at 10:59 AM on January 21, 2006

phyrewerx:

The trouble with Martin's anti-american showmanship is that it alienates the people to the south of us and makes them less willing to talk to us on a number of issues.

There has been no resolution on the softwood lumber issue despite repeated NAFTA and WTO rulings; Martin put on a show for missile defense for the Canadian people and then signed an agreement allowing NORAD to use Canadian soil for missile defense; and as for Kyoto, the Liberals are not living up to our committments while bashing the Americans for not being part of the agreement.

Why would Harper give everything to the Americans? I see him as more willing to work to defend Canada's best interests.
posted by angrybeaver at 11:01 AM on January 21, 2006

Sorry, because of a rounding error, the second half of that list is wonky. It should have been:

Liberals: 87
Conservatives: 115
New Democratic: 55
Green: 14
Bloc Quebecois: 34
Other: 3

Total: 308

posted by sindark at 11:02 AM on January 21, 2006

NOW magazine in Toronto had a feature last week on strategic voting, and how it's actually pretty stupid in most cases. In fact, in the last federal election, strategic voting byt NDP and/or Liberal supporters actually put Conservatives into office.

Vote your conscience. Please. Unless you're voting Conservative, in which case 'conscience' is a term without meaning. (I kid because I love).
posted by dirtynumbangelboy at 11:07 AM on January 21, 2006

My riding of St. Boniface in Manitoba has a very proud and vocal french-speaking community, and yet the Conservatives are running an anglophone. Yet, somehow, he is within striking distance of taking the riding away from long-time encumbent Raymond Simard.

The Liberals have completely cocked this one up, for lack of a better phrase. Paul Martin, meet Kim Campbell.

I can only hope that after a few years of Harper pandering to the US and selling out every social program we love, that voters will realize that punishing the Liberals is not worth the price they paid.

Me? I'll vote NDP or Green. So basically, without PR, my vote doesn't count anyhow.
posted by WinnipegDragon at 11:08 AM on January 21, 2006

VOTE STRATEGICALLY! here is my preference in order of preference. (Please visit SUNDAY MAGAZINE tomorrow AM for the complete list of our British Columbia Candidate recommendations):
1-liberal minority with NDP as coalition partner
2-conservative minority with NDP as a coalition partner.
4-liberal-conservative grand coalition
5-liberal majority
6-conservative majority

NOTE: both conservative majority and liberal majority will join the war on Iran. That's why they need to be avoided more than any other option
posted by sundaymag at 11:08 AM on January 21, 2006

Ok, I still can't see how a minority conservative government will work. Suppose they win 42% of the seats. How do they govern? Do they form a coalition? With who? Who else would support their policies and legislation?
posted by Zetetics at 11:09 AM on January 21, 2006

Encumbent? ME MAKE NEW WORD! Incumbent. Sorry 'bout that.
posted by WinnipegDragon at 11:10 AM on January 21, 2006

Why would Harper give everything to the Americans? I see him as more willing to work to defend Canada's best interests. this is nothing but delutional rambling of a part operative, or a complete idiot, or both.

Harper (and more or less Martin) are USA boys. look at their position on things. Harper is USA fifth column and has been since day. Go tell this fables to those ignorant enough to buy them.
posted by sundaymag at 11:13 AM on January 21, 2006

Minority governments in Canada tend to be amazingly progressive. It requires dialogue and co-operation in setting the legislative agenda instead of one party dominating the issues.

The NDP would likely support the Conservatives on accountability; the NDP/Bloc/Liberals would be able to keep the Conservatives from going paleocon; and the Conservatives would have to keep their wilder fringe elements in check.

The Liberals provided a classic example of how not to run a minority government in the last Parliament.
posted by angrybeaver at 11:14 AM on January 21, 2006