HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > Non-Sports > Political Discussion - "on-topic & unmoderated"
Political Discussion - "on-topic & unmoderated" Rated PG13, unmoderated but threads must stay on topic - that means you can flame each other all you want as long as it's legal

Canadian Politics IV

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
03-31-2013, 07:56 AM
  #301
Defensive Forward
Registered User
 
Defensive Forward's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 570
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Puck View Post
Offhand I prefer Howard Beale's quick analysis to Fish's on that graph, yet things (as usual) are probably more complicated than that.

I don't think the Liberal Party is more left-leaning, as the NDP have siphoned off voters on the Liberal left flank and the CPC on the right; IMHO the Liberals stay at center.

I would love to see that graph by jurisdiction to make more sense of it. I don't think the left-right analysis is the only thing at work here.

Two main narratives in the last election were how the Bloc voters in Quebec (not all separatists) moved to the NDP, and how Ontario voters reacted with the CPC running up side victories there in multi-party contests (from Liberal leakage to both sides mainly to CPC for now). Harper is still the 'favorite son' out West but the CPC have lost ground in Atlantic Canada (but the seat counts there have less weight).

In the next election, 2 parties will have new leaders. The NDP have most to lose in Quebec (to the Bloc) and the CPC in Ontario with different election narratives at play, not to mention that strange 'strategic voting' equation that is going on more and more in people's heads.
Its broken down by province here: http://www.threehundredeight.com/

Defensive Forward is offline  
Old
03-31-2013, 08:17 AM
  #302
Puck
Ninja
 
Puck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Ottawa
Country: Tahiti
Posts: 8,606
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadian Flash View Post
Its broken down by province here: http://www.threehundredeight.com/
Ahh, thank you.

Puck is offline  
Old
03-31-2013, 09:32 AM
  #303
Puck
Ninja
 
Puck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Ottawa
Country: Tahiti
Posts: 8,606
vCash: 500
The jurisdictional breakdown provides more info but it's a tad disappointing that they had to include Alberta with Saskatchewan and Manitoba. You might as well paint Alberta blue again in the next election, but the large Alberta data presence makes it impossible to gauge possible shifts in the other two.

I see more growth potential for the Liberals and Greens in BC if right-leaning voters in coastal or urban areas defect. The NDP resistant vote might go Liberal and Green if the CPC's pipeline policies hurt them. But the die-hard Conservatives are the most stubborn lot and less likely to vote for second parties anyway.

That huge red portion in the Ontario Conservative pie should worry Conservatives there. I think the CPC will hang on to their safe rural ridings but will risk losing their urban gains back to the Liberals in the next election. We'll see how the NDP and Liberals duke it out there on the left side. Trudeau will appeal to the left more than Ignatieff did, Garneau would have, and as much as Rae (who never got a chance).

In Quebec, the narrative is how many Bloc voters defect back to the Bloc or stay with the NDP. Trudeau will keep Montreal and West Quebec.

For an ABC voter (anyone but conservatives), the good news is, it doesn't look like there is anyplace for the CPC to grow. The bad news is, they can still cling to power if voter sentiments don't shift enough.

Puck is offline  
Old
03-31-2013, 10:31 PM
  #304
thome_26
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,854
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to thome_26
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Moose View Post
Canada lost more than the Muslim vote, as you call it.
I didn't actually use the phrase you have attributed (which implies some kind of a racial/ethnic aspect). I'm curious, what phrase could I have used so as to have avoided the 'as you call it' comment? Would 'Member states of the OIC' suffice?

Quote:
Anyway, it is funny how their stance regarding Israel is a matter of principle, while the relationship with China has become more "complex".
One matter is complicated by economics, the other is not. Why does that amuse you? Or are you saying that what you deem funny isn't actually a plain, cold, hard fact?

__________________
http://hfboards.com/forumdisplay.php?f=160 - the Unofficial HF Political board
thome_26 is offline  
Old
03-31-2013, 10:55 PM
  #305
thome_26
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,854
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to thome_26
Quote:
Originally Posted by Puck View Post
The jurisdictional breakdown provides more info but it's a tad disappointing that they had to include Alberta with Saskatchewan and Manitoba. You might as well paint Alberta blue again in the next election, but the large Alberta data presence makes it impossible to gauge possible shifts in the other two.
One thing to note about Saskatchewan. The redrawing of the ridings in Saskatchewan has become a bit of a contentious issue with the CPC wanting to maintain urban/rural ridings where the others seem to want urban specific seats and rural specific seats.

I think this is a big mistake for the NDP. If their goal is ever to win Saskatchewan (as opposed to picking up one or maybe two seats) they would be aided by having urban votes swamp rural votes in Saskatchewan. Their whole approach to this situation tells me they don't seriously view Saskatchewan (I'm not as familiar with the situation in Manitoba, but I'm assuming the circumstances are similar) or the Prairies as a place where they aspire to win more seats. To me. this doesn't make any sense as if any other federal party actually made a meaningful investment of time and money, they could probably turn the CPC dominance on the eastern half of western Canada into a legitimate battleground (and we're talking almost 30 seats).

Quote:
For an ABC voter (anyone but conservatives), the good news is, it doesn't look like there is anyplace for the CPC to grow. The bad news is, they can still cling to power if voter sentiments don't shift enough.
How often do we see majority governments (of any stripe, at any level) where there's much growth potential?

thome_26 is offline  
Old
03-31-2013, 11:01 PM
  #306
Concordski
Knockoff Jets FTW
 
Concordski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 6,842
vCash: 663
Quote:
Originally Posted by thome_26 View Post
One thing to note about Saskatchewan. The redrawing of the ridings in Saskatchewan has become a bit of a contentious issue with the CPC wanting to maintain urban/rural ridings where the others seem to want urban specific seats and rural specific seats.

I think this is a big mistake for the NDP. If their goal is ever to win Saskatchewan (as opposed to picking up one or maybe two seats) they would be aided by having urban votes swamp rural votes in Saskatchewan. Their whole approach to this situation tells me they don't seriously view Saskatchewan (I'm not as familiar with the situation in Manitoba, but I'm assuming the circumstances are similar) or the Prairies as a place where they aspire to win more seats. To me. this doesn't make any sense as if any other federal party actually made a meaningful investment of time and money, they could probably turn the CPC dominance on the eastern half of western Canada into a legitimate battleground (and we're talking almost 30 seats).
It's worked on the provincial level for the Dippers; the Manitoba NDP has been practically guaranteed 20 more years in government because of district boundaries being divided between Winnipeg vs Everything Else.

Concordski is offline  
Old
03-31-2013, 11:31 PM
  #307
Johnnywhite
Registered User
 
Johnnywhite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: White Hart Lane
Posts: 3,176
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DanielBryanRoleModel View Post
It's worked on the provincial level for the Dippers; the Manitoba NDP has been practically guaranteed 20 more years in government because of district boundaries being divided between Winnipeg vs Everything Else.
Or more factually by winning the election both by FPTP & popular vote...continually.

Johnnywhite is offline  
Old
04-01-2013, 12:17 AM
  #308
DoyleG
Mr. Reality
 
DoyleG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: YEG--->YYJ
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,077
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnnywhite View Post
Or more factually by winning the election both by FPTP & popular vote...continually.
No, he's correct.



Should be noted that the NDP doesn't seem to care about the prairies because the NDP doesn't seem to operate in the ways the federal branch want. The exception being Alberta, but the party there has been stuck in low gears in the province for more than a generation.

DoyleG is offline  
Old
04-01-2013, 06:55 AM
  #309
Puck
Ninja
 
Puck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Ottawa
Country: Tahiti
Posts: 8,606
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by thome_26 View Post
One thing to note about Saskatchewan. The redrawing of the ridings in Saskatchewan has become a bit of a contentious issue with the CPC wanting to maintain urban/rural ridings where the others seem to want urban specific seats and rural specific seats.

I think this is a big mistake for the NDP. If their goal is ever to win Saskatchewan (as opposed to picking up one or maybe two seats) they would be aided by having urban votes swamp rural votes in Saskatchewan. Their whole approach to this situation tells me they don't seriously view Saskatchewan (I'm not as familiar with the situation in Manitoba, but I'm assuming the circumstances are similar) or the Prairies as a place where they aspire to win more seats. To me. this doesn't make any sense as if any other federal party actually made a meaningful investment of time and money, they could probably turn the CPC dominance on the eastern half of western Canada into a legitimate battleground (and we're talking almost 30 seats).



How often do we see majority governments (of any stripe, at any level) where there's much growth potential?
I'm pretty sure the CPC is following a riding boundary strategy that's in their interests and the NDP oppose it in their interest. I'm guessing the CPC see a plurality of votes wasted in rural ridings that could go to better use in urban ridings where races might be closer.

As for growth, if the CPC expects to lose n number of seats because the coalitions they built in the last election are weak or not solidly loyal (e.g. in Ontario), then it would be a good idea to look for land elsewhere. It's cooked in Quebec right now (tried but lost), Maritimers aren't happy with your hardline on UI or transfer payments, we'll see what happens out West (especially BC and Saskatchewan).

The CPC had built coalitions on alienation, religion, anti-gun control, and good alternative govt based on Adscam remembrance but how long will that last one last (especially when the CPC are behaving no better or worse than others). Growth based on the immigration strategy was a good one. Not sure about economic growth based mostly on resource development. People want good jobs at home or in the city, not up North or in pioneer communities. A Grand Nord resource strategy wasn't a home run for Charest in Quebec recently either.


Last edited by Puck: 04-01-2013 at 07:29 AM.
Puck is offline  
Old
04-01-2013, 10:47 AM
  #310
rebel diamond
Registered User
 
rebel diamond's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Toronto
Country: Trinidad and Tobago
Posts: 5,045
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Howard Beale View Post
I found this quite interesting, it shows who supporters of the various parties prefer as their 2nd (and 3rd, 4th) choices.

The 308 calculated how this would effect an election if an instant runoff system was used.

This is the result based on only the "first choice" responses from the poll:


Which turns into this if you use an instant runoff to reach 50%:


The obvious result is that the Conservatives have a really hard time putting away the ridings in which they're leading, ceding about 20 to each of the NDP and Liberals, which results in an NDP minority government. It also puts another nail in the Bloc coffin, pretty much reaffirming that with the NDP polling as highly as it is in Quebec there is no viable separatist party. The article also notes that the Green seat(s) that aren't Elizabeth May's are probably just flukes of the sample size, but that she wins hers handily.

rebel diamond is offline  
Old
04-01-2013, 11:17 AM
  #311
thome_26
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,854
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to thome_26
Quote:
Originally Posted by DanielBryanRoleModel View Post
It's worked on the provincial level for the Dippers; the Manitoba NDP has been practically guaranteed 20 more years in government because of district boundaries being divided between Winnipeg vs Everything Else.
What has worked for them is that they have won the popular vote. Provincially, they probably could have won more seats in southern-rural Manitoba had they used some of the majority votes in Winnipeg they racked up to help create plurality in the surrounding areas.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Puck View Post
I'm pretty sure the CPC is following a riding boundary strategy that's in their interests and the NDP oppose it in their interest. I'm guessing the CPC see a plurality of votes wasted in rural ridings that could go to better use in urban ridings where races might be closer.
I'm not saying that parties aren't trying to push for their interest. What I'm saying is I think the NDP are being short sighted about this. If they're ever going to win a majority of seats in Saskatchewan they would be aided by having some urban votes swamp rural votes.
Quote:
As for growth, if the CPC expects to lose n number of seats because the coalitions they built in the last election are weak or not solidly loyal (e.g. in Ontario), then it would be a good idea to look for land elsewhere. It's cooked in Quebec right now (tried but lost), Maritimers aren't happy with your hardline on UI or transfer payments, we'll see what happens out West (especially BC and Saskatchewan).

The CPC had built coalitions on alienation, religion, anti-gun control, and good alternative govt based on Adscam remembrance but how long will that last one last (especially when the CPC are behaving no better or worse than others). Growth based on the immigration strategy was a good one. Not sure about economic growth based mostly on resource development. People want good jobs at home or in the city, not up North or in pioneer communities. A Grand Nord resource strategy wasn't a home run for Charest in Quebec recently either.
We all do it, but you seem particularly prone to having what you want to see influence what you expect to see.

That you think the CPC won a majority government by simply appealing to a bunch of fringe interest groups also speaks more to your political bias than your acumen for political evaluation. The simple fact is, the CPC won their majority by getting a lot of typical suburban folk to vote for them (primarily in Ontario). Frankly, to think that adscam had any kind of significant impact on the suburban results in Ontario is downright silly.

Harper won because he was viewed as the best option for fiscal/economic management. Whether he is or isn't is an entirely different topic. But the simple truth is that the perception is what won the 2011 election. If the CPC can maintain that perception they probably win another majority next time around.

thome_26 is offline  
Old
04-01-2013, 11:26 AM
  #312
thome_26
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,854
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to thome_26
Quote:
Originally Posted by rebel diamond View Post
The 308 calculated how this would effect an election if an instant runoff system was used.
I'll never understand how people seem to ignore the basic reality that fundamentally altering electoral system wouldn't mean things wouldn't also change politically. Electoral math is never as simple as 1+1=2 unfortunately (something the CPC got to learn first hand after the merger).

Everything from the people, the policies, the messaging, etc would shift (for each party) in order to respond to the new circumstances.

It is like saying how they keep score in hockey isn't fair and that 1/10 of a goal should be awarded for every shot on net then wanting to retroactively apply that standard to games already played. It really doesn't mean anything and would be nonsensical as obviously such a dramatic change (and I would argue such a change as I'm mentioning here would be less of a fundamental shift that the change to the electoral system being proposed) would fundamentally alter the approach to the game.

thome_26 is offline  
Old
04-01-2013, 12:20 PM
  #313
rebel diamond
Registered User
 
rebel diamond's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Toronto
Country: Trinidad and Tobago
Posts: 5,045
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by thome_26 View Post
I'll never understand how people seem to ignore the basic reality that fundamentally altering electoral system wouldn't mean things wouldn't also change politically. Electoral math is never as simple as 1+1=2 unfortunately (something the CPC got to learn first hand after the merger).

Everything from the people, the policies, the messaging, etc would shift (for each party) in order to respond to the new circumstances.

It is like saying how they keep score in hockey isn't fair and that 1/10 of a goal should be awarded for every shot on net then wanting to retroactively apply that standard to games already played. It really doesn't mean anything and would be nonsensical as obviously such a dramatic change (and I would argue such a change as I'm mentioning here would be less of a fundamental shift that the change to the electoral system being proposed) would fundamentally alter the approach to the game.
True, but since the poll asked for party preferences I think the gist of it is probably still valid. I mean, sure I wouldn't put any credence in the specific numbers, but I think the point remains that the Tories are at this point not the 2nd choice of most Canadians that aren't already in their camp, which would hurt them in most proposed changes to our electoral system. You're right though, it's not as simple as saying the CPC will lose if we bring in preferential balloting.

rebel diamond is offline  
Old
04-01-2013, 12:41 PM
  #314
Free Torts
Registered User
 
Free Torts's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Surrey, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,236
vCash: 883
Send a message via MSN to Free Torts


This is hilarious. ping: Wetcoaster's cut+paste about Dix.

Free Torts is offline  
Old
04-01-2013, 01:07 PM
  #315
Concordski
Knockoff Jets FTW
 
Concordski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 6,842
vCash: 663
Quote:
Originally Posted by thome_26 View Post
What has worked for them is that they have won the popular vote. Provincially, they probably could have won more seats in southern-rural Manitoba had they used some of the majority votes in Winnipeg they racked up to help create plurality in the surrounding areas.
Except they could lose the popular vote by as much as like 6 points and still win because of their strength in Winnipeg.

Concordski is offline  
Old
04-01-2013, 07:22 PM
  #316
Howard Beale
Registered User
 
Howard Beale's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 1,373
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fish on The Sand View Post
Isn't that saying the same thing I just did? The liberal centrists have obviously flocked to the Conservatives, leaving behind the left-leaning liberals, hence why the modern Liberal party is much more to the left than it has traditionally been.
The distinction is that I don't think the Liberal Party has shifted left, as you seem to. Your explanation for the NDP becoming the 2nd choice of Liberals is to a leftward-shift by the Liberal Party, whereas I attribute that to the Conservative's highly divisive tactics and policies (obviously there are many other factors, but this is a simplified assessment).

I think that some centre and centre-right voters went Conservative last election (not most of them, but enough to give the Conservatives their 40%). However it seems that many have gone back, as indicated by ThreeHundredEight's polling saying that the Conservatives are currently at 31.4%, Liberals are at 28.3%, and NDP are at 26.4%. And of that 28.3%, which includes some centre-right voters who voted Conservative last election, it appears that most of the Liberals prefer the NDP over the Conservatives. That should be worrying for Conservatives, because it means they have an uphill battle if they want to approach their previous 40%.

Howard Beale is offline  
Old
04-01-2013, 10:56 PM
  #317
The Moose
Registered User
 
The Moose's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 5,240
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by thome_26 View Post
I didn't actually use the phrase you have attributed (which implies some kind of a racial/ethnic aspect). I'm curious, what phrase could I have used so as to have avoided the 'as you call it' comment? Would 'Member states of the OIC' suffice?
What?! All I was saying was that Canada lost more than the vote of Muslim countries. I really did not mean anything nefarious by "as you call it".

Quote:
Originally Posted by thome_26 View Post
One matter is complicated by economics, the other is not. Why does that amuse you? Or are you saying that what you deem funny isn't actually a plain, cold, hard fact?
So the "plain, cold, hard fact" is that posturing a principled attitude is trumped by economic conveniences. Yes, I find it amusing when I hear Harper talking about principles. Probably his base doesn't.

The Moose is offline  
Old
04-01-2013, 11:13 PM
  #318
Fish on The Sand
Untouchable
 
Fish on The Sand's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Nanaimo
Country: Canada
Posts: 48,844
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Howard Beale View Post
The distinction is that I don't think the Liberal Party has shifted left, as you seem to. Your explanation for the NDP becoming the 2nd choice of Liberals is to a leftward-shift by the Liberal Party, whereas I attribute that to the Conservative's highly divisive tactics and policies (obviously there are many other factors, but this is a simplified assessment).

I think that some centre and centre-right voters went Conservative last election (not most of them, but enough to give the Conservatives their 40%). However it seems that many have gone back, as indicated by ThreeHundredEight's polling saying that the Conservatives are currently at 31.4%, Liberals are at 28.3%, and NDP are at 26.4%. And of that 28.3%, which includes some centre-right voters who voted Conservative last election, it appears that most of the Liberals prefer the NDP over the Conservatives. That should be worrying for Conservatives, because it means they have an uphill battle if they want to approach their previous 40%.
The policies of Stephane Dion and Bob Rae and the like are indisputably further to the left of the Chretien/Martin regime. I don't really see how that is up for debate at this point. The Chretien/Martin supporters certainly didn't jump ship for the NDP I can tell you that.

Fish on The Sand is offline  
Old
04-01-2013, 11:24 PM
  #319
thome_26
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,854
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to thome_26
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Moose View Post
What?! All I was saying was that Canada lost more than the vote of Muslim countries. I really did not mean anything nefarious by "as you call it".
My apologies. I read your comment as if you were trying to dismiss what I was saying by implying that my point was nothing but some kind of Islamaphobia.

Quote:
So the "plain, cold, hard fact" is that posturing a principled attitude is trumped by economic conveniences. Yes, I find it amusing when I hear Harper talking about principles. Probably his base doesn't.
So if one is not pure in their principles, they should abandon them all together? There is no winning with somebody with that perspective. Whatever way Harper goes on China you'll hate him for it (accomodating he's unprincipled, critical he's ignorant & foolish). That you are some how trying to tie a seeming inconsistency on one hand to another aspect of Harper's foreign policy implies, to me, that you actually have very little to say of substance about his foreign policy.

thome_26 is offline  
Old
04-01-2013, 11:38 PM
  #320
thome_26
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,854
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to thome_26
Quote:
Originally Posted by Howard Beale View Post
whereas I attribute that to the Conservative's highly divisive tactics and policies (obviously there are many other factors, but this is a simplified assessment).
Of course you do. Never mind that it is tough to remember the last time there was this much stability and contentment with the federation...

Quote:
I think that some centre and centre-right voters went Conservative last election (not most of them, but enough to give the Conservatives their 40%). However it seems that many have gone back, as indicated by ThreeHundredEight's polling saying that the Conservatives are currently at 31.4%, Liberals are at 28.3%, and NDP are at 26.4%. And of that 28.3%, which includes some centre-right voters who voted Conservative last election, it appears that most of the Liberals prefer the NDP over the Conservatives. That should be worrying for Conservatives, because it means they have an uphill battle if they want to approach their previous 40%.
I don't know why I bother, but I will. Looking at three different percentage points tells next to nothing of the story. One has to understand to what extent particular 'big tents' are stretched to their capacity.

Is there a person here who actually thinks the NDP can gobble up 1/3 of the centrist vote (or about 10% points) while holding on to their base? The fact that the CPC presently garners so few of the 'second choice' nods is in large part due to them being the incumbent government. That was always the question about the conservative movement since the break-up of the Mulroney coalition. Harper moved the party further to the centre while maintaining his core supporters.

Who here thinks Mulcair can move the NDP to a position where he keeps the Libby Davies and welcomes the Scott Brison/John McCallum type of Liberals?

Point being, some hurdles are tougher to jump than others.

thome_26 is offline  
Old
04-01-2013, 11:59 PM
  #321
Concordski
Knockoff Jets FTW
 
Concordski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 6,842
vCash: 663
Quote:
Originally Posted by thome_26 View Post
Of course you do. Never mind that it is tough to remember the last time there was this much stability and contentment with the federation...



I don't know why I bother, but I will. Looking at three different percentage points tells next to nothing of the story. One has to understand to what extent particular 'big tents' are stretched to their capacity.

Is there a person here who actually thinks the NDP can gobble up 1/3 of the centrist vote (or about 10% points) while holding on to their base? The fact that the CPC presently garners so few of the 'second choice' nods is in large part due to them being the incumbent government. That was always the question about the conservative movement since the break-up of the Mulroney coalition. Harper moved the party further to the centre while maintaining his core supporters.

Who here thinks Mulcair can move the NDP to a position where he keeps the Libby Davies and welcomes the Scott Brison/John McCallum type of Liberals?

Point being, some hurdles are tougher to jump than others.
It's worked for the Democrats in the US. We have a cross-section from people like Libby Davies to people well to the right of Scott Brison. It makes it hard sometimes to deal with people but it generally works when shared interests are focused on.

Concordski is offline  
Old
04-02-2013, 12:01 AM
  #322
The Moose
Registered User
 
The Moose's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 5,240
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by thome_26 View Post
So if one is not pure in their principles, they should abandon them all together? There is no winning with somebody with that perspective. Whatever way Harper goes on China you'll hate him for it (accomodating he's unprincipled, critical he's ignorant & foolish). That you are some how trying to tie a seeming inconsistency on one hand to another aspect of Harper's foreign policy implies, to me, that you actually have very little to say of substance about his foreign policy.
I certainly didn't express my oppinion very well. I don't deny that situation with China is complex. What I find amusing is that, for conservatives, economics is the only issue that can complicate a matter of principles. Thus, China situation is complex, but Israel is very simple.

The Moose is offline  
Old
04-02-2013, 12:29 AM
  #323
thome_26
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,854
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to thome_26
Quote:
Originally Posted by DanielBryanRoleModel View Post
It's worked for the Democrats in the US. We have a cross-section from people like Libby Davies to people well to the right of Scott Brison. It makes it hard sometimes to deal with people but it generally works when shared interests are focused on.
Profoundly different political system and culture.


(oh, and not just different, but inferior too... concerning the political systems)

thome_26 is offline  
Old
04-02-2013, 12:40 AM
  #324
thome_26
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,854
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to thome_26
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Moose View Post
I certainly didn't express my oppinion very well.
I shouldn't have been so defensive.

Quote:
I don't deny that situation with China is complex. What I find amusing is that, for conservatives, economics is the only issue that can complicate a matter of principles. Thus, China situation is complex, but Israel is very simple.
Even the way you phrase this is dismissive. How important is it to the future of Canada that we get a non-permanent seat on the security council by appealing to elements that most people would actually agree are undesirable?

How important is it that economic relations with China aren't developed?

I, personally, wish that Harper & Canada were able/had the clout to encourage the rest of the western world & liberal democracies to consistently, constantly, and loudly denounce the communists in the PRC. For every bit of progression toward liberal democracy, we can concurrently increase trade & ties. For ever regression, we should be prepared to pull back on the reins. However, we have put short term profit ahead of liberalism, democracy, human rights, and even free trade market economics (engaging with the Chinese is not being supportive of free trade).

This is something I personally am considerably conflicted about as I also believe that Chinese freedom, democracy, and human rights can and will increase with their economic development. However, I question to what extent this is true when dealing with a government like the PRC communists. I think as a Chinese middle class grows, the PRC will decreasingly rely upon western markets. As they rely upon our markets less, our potential to influence will be reduced.

Long story short, if I cut Harper some slack on China, it isn't because I'm on Team Blue it is because I personally am conflicted about the issue. I have pretty strong opinions on what I think would be best, but I also recognize that it is probably an unrealistic expectation. There is no shortage of people in the same predicament as I am. It is extremely annoying to be, essentially, deemed a mindless partisan due to this philosophical quandary.

thome_26 is offline  
Old
04-02-2013, 07:05 AM
  #325
Puck
Ninja
 
Puck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Ottawa
Country: Tahiti
Posts: 8,606
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by thome_26 View Post
I shouldn't have been so defensive.



Even the way you phrase this is dismissive. How important is it to the future of Canada that we get a non-permanent seat on the security council by appealing to elements that most people would actually agree are undesirable?

How important is it that economic relations with China aren't developed?

I, personally, wish that Harper & Canada were able/had the clout to encourage the rest of the western world & liberal democracies to consistently, constantly, and loudly denounce the communists in the PRC. For every bit of progression toward liberal democracy, we can concurrently increase trade & ties. For ever regression, we should be prepared to pull back on the reins. However, we have put short term profit ahead of liberalism, democracy, human rights, and even free trade market economics (engaging with the Chinese is not being supportive of free trade).

This is something I personally am considerably conflicted about as I also believe that Chinese freedom, democracy, and human rights can and will increase with their economic development. However, I question to what extent this is true when dealing with a government like the PRC communists. I think as a Chinese middle class grows, the PRC will decreasingly rely upon western markets. As they rely upon our markets less, our potential to influence will be reduced.

Long story short, if I cut Harper some slack on China, it isn't because I'm on Team Blue it is because I personally am conflicted about the issue. I have pretty strong opinions on what I think would be best, but I also recognize that it is probably an unrealistic expectation. There is no shortage of people in the same predicament as I am. It is extremely annoying to be, essentially, deemed a mindless partisan due to this philosophical quandary.
All that and no mention about oil?

On China, the Tiananmen Square had hardly been cleaned up that people in the West saw their leaders (political and economic), and media do a quick re-shuffle on the obvious principled 'lip service'. While I agree it was probably best to keep 'engaging' China, we've obviously gone way beyond that. While it was quite evident to most that the business sector wouldn't live up to the previous anti-communist rhetoric, the biggest voice in the business sector (along with the anti-communist hawks) still harping on Russia and China was the oil sector. Bemused liberals figured that for 'oil' it wasn't so much about HR or democracy but energy geopolitics. For instance, Cheney was ridiculed for going to the 'Stans dictatorships at the time and railing against undemocratic Russia (Putin wouldn't let US oil interests drill in Siberia). The biggest Democracy concern of course in this case meant freedom to drill. China is also a global energy competitor.

It was easier for Harper in his neo-con and oil dogma bubble to rail on Communist China. I was still surprised because it wasn't in-line with so many other business interests. I saw a huge opening there for Liberals to step in (to paint Harper negatively with other business interests), but they didn't; the rest of the CPC still managed to skate with competing business interests (perhaps because of their corporate tax cut dogma?) and mostly because business didn't really believe his hardline on China. I didn't. As soon as oil interests in Alberta needed China for diversification, Harper cut the rhetoric. So have other garrulous conservatives. Just one more 'dissonance' disorder to live with I guess.

Puck is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:34 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.