• Moderators, please send me a PM if you are unable to access mod permissions. Thanks, Habsy.

New Canadian Politics Thread

Altair said:
Canada, on a whole, did it during the 2015 election.

The NDP and Liberals were tied or close throughout the entire election. Then the NDP broke in Quebec, their numbers started to drop and then the trend started to happen nationally once the Liberals looked like the only party capable of beating the Conservatives.

The shift started a week and a half ago in Ontario, the same message should have been received from the electorate. NDP the only ones who can beat ford, the Liberal vote should have collapsed to 12-15 percent, the NDP should have been up around 42, enough to eke out a win. But for some reason they have stalled in the mid 30s and will lose out baring a drastic shift in the next 48 hours.

FPTP should have worked here to keep ford out same way it worked in 2015 to get harper out, but for some reason, it isn't. And it's not like there is significantly less information about individual ridings now than in 2015. There is simply less movement.
Click to expand...

The NDP in most cases don't have the overall support to win elections. They've proven it time and time again.

At some point they need to look in the mirror and adjust.

They can't use the "Liberal lies" or "Strategic voting" excuse this time. This election is in their lap and they're still gonna lose.

The NDP kinda sucks.
 
BeLeafer said:
Live telephone polling is not great methodology for political polls these days. First, the quality of interviewers is garbage because no one will pay for good interviewers. It also increases social desirability bias a good deal, as people are much less likely to be honest about their voting intention with a live person if they think it's not socially acceptable (this is why, all firms using live interviewers got the Rob Ford election way wrong).

I'm not arguing for other firms or polls. I think most of them are garbage. The live phone polling likely has the advantage of at least being probability-based, although I wouldn't be surprised if Pollara reuses bought lists for sample.
Click to expand...

Don't think anyone uses 100% live calls anymore for a lot of these reasons, but there are other problems with IVR or internet-only (mainly, they just spam out requests so people don't care about telling the truth as much). But mostly, I felt I should defend it since my brother used to work there and ran most of their political polling for a time :p
 
The NDP does suck, but they're about to get 35-36% or more of the popular vote. That it's "inefficient" is more a problem with the system than it is their current support level.
 
Altair said:
Yeah, I like ranked ballot as well, but you know that it would kill the conservative party for a election cycle or two which will lead to those angry individuals being disillusioned with the electorate system
Click to expand...

Or maybe it will force a shit party to develop better ideas than "Tax cuts!!!"
 
CaptainBolduke said:
The NDP in most cases don't have the overall support to win elections. They've proven it time and time again.

At some point they need to look in the mirror and adjust.

They can't use the "Liberal lies" or "Strategic voting" excuse this time. This election is in their lap and they're still gonna lose.

The NDP kinda sucks.
Click to expand...

Yeah, this election really shows it. They have every possible chance to break for them, and they simply can't get past the 36% or so mark that they need. I mean, the Liberal brand is strong enough that it simply can't fall too much lower than the 18% or so they're at now, the Greens always draw their 3-5% but never more, so even though 60%+ of the electorate is on the "left", the NDP just can't get to the 40% mark they would need to win.

I'm really surprised that they never mentioned anything about electoral reform this time around. Their only realistic chance is to bring in some sort of proportional system, and just know that they'll forever live in coalitions. If you're flexible enough, they could potentially swing around enough to nearly always be the power broker between the Libs and PCs.
 
there are obvious problems with party lists determining who your MPs are, but I don't see any other way to not entirely ignore the popular vote (as is the case in FPTP) without moving too far away from having local representation.

I would also be open to a ranked ballot, but that is because I think I'm pretty centrist and the ranked ballot favours moderation.
 
LeafGm said:
MMP is garbage.

I can't stand the idea of a system where you have "elected" officials getting their jobs not on the basis of anyone voting directly for them, but because they're on a party list.

Ranked balloting has always seemed like the best option to me. Everyone still gets directly elected by the voting public, and it makes "strategic voting" obsolete.
Click to expand...

MMP is basically the best of both worlds

you elect your local MLA/MP then the PR part is "add on" to make it proportional

of course most people just for the party anyway and not the local candidate

ideally they just get rid of political parties
 
worm said:
MMP is basically the best of both worlds

you elect your local MLA/MP then the PR part is "add on" to make it proportional

of course most people just for the party anyway and not the local candidate

ideally they just get rid of political parties
Click to expand...

Freedom of association kind of prevents any attempt to kill political parties.
 
Wayward DP said:
there are obvious problems with party lists determining who your MPs are, but I don't see any other way to not entirely ignore the popular vote (as is the case in FPTP) without moving too far away from having local representation.

I would also be open to a ranked ballot, but that is because I think I'm pretty centrist and the ranked ballot favours moderation.
Click to expand...

Yeah, every system has issues. One I saw that was kind of interesting was Dual-member proportional. Basically each riding is twice as large as now, top person in each riding is elected, and the 2nd place gets elected by some complicated process to get the most popular 2nd place candidates but assigned proportionally. So the overall is proportional, but you're still voting for local candidates and parties can't just stack party hacks on the top of a list who aren't responsible for any constituents.
 
CaptainBolduke said:
The NDP in most cases don't have the overall support to win elections. They've proven it time and time again.

At some point they need to look in the mirror and adjust.

They can't use the "Liberal lies" or "Strategic voting" excuse this time. This election is in their lap and they're still gonna lose.

The NDP kinda sucks.
Click to expand...

NDP are just not a brokerage party like the liberals and cons
 
LeafGm said:
MMP is garbage.

I can't stand the idea of a system where you have "elected" officials getting their jobs not on the basis of anyone voting directly for them, but because they're on a party list.

Ranked balloting has always seemed like the best option to me. Everyone still gets directly elected by the voting public, and it makes "strategic voting" obsolete.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure how you introduce a measure of proportional representation without party lists. But it sounds as though you are okay without any PR elements in our democracy.

I mean I prefer full FPTP to full PR, but I do think there are deficiencies in the system as is that could be remedied by MMP. without much in the way of harm really too.
 
MindzEye said:
Or maybe it will force a shit party to develop better ideas than "Tax cuts!!!"
Click to expand...

Yeah, the party would be dead for a election cycle or two. Then they would eventually shift to the left and more or less become the fiscally conservative twins of the liberals. The fringe of their party probably splinters off and becomes it's own party, and in the end the middle gets rather crowded.
 
UWHabs said:
Don't think anyone uses 100% live calls anymore for a lot of these reasons, but there are other problems with IVR or internet-only (mainly, they just spam out requests so people don't care about telling the truth as much). But mostly, I felt I should defend it since my brother used to work there and ran most of their political polling for a time :p
Click to expand...

Transparency is good thing. I run a research firm but we do not do political polling or even consumer research (or rather very little of it). I did, however, design the one poll that got the Rob Ford election right (which was IVR, btw)! IVR is an excellent tool if used properly. Online is mostly garbage, not because it's online but rather because they are almost all recruited using non-probability techniques that end up populating them with professional respondents.
 
UWHabs said:
Yeah, every system has issues. One I saw that was kind of interesting was Dual-member proportional. Basically each riding is twice as large as now, top person in each riding is elected, and the 2nd place gets elected by some complicated process to get the most popular 2nd place candidates but assigned proportionally. So the overall is proportional, but you're still voting for local candidates and parties can't just stack party hacks on the top of a list who aren't responsible for any constituents.
Click to expand...

in theory that sounds promising but seems waaaaay too complex. and that also doubles the size of Parliament (which if nothing else is expensive)

I agree though that there is no perfect system. all will have assets and faults.
 
Wayward DP said:
there are obvious problems with party lists determining who your MPs are, but I don't see any other way to not entirely ignore the popular vote (as is the case in FPTP) without moving too far away from having local representation.

I would also be open to a ranked ballot, but that is because I think I'm pretty centrist and the ranked ballot favours moderation.
Click to expand...

why?

party lists are known in advance

it is not much different than parachute candidates or the nomination process or hell even the leadership (party leader, cabinet, etc)
 
Wayward DP said:
I'm not sure how you introduce a measure of proportional representation without party lists. But it sounds as though you are okay without any PR elements in our democracy.

I mean I prefer full FPTP to full PR, but I do think there are deficiencies in the system as is that could be remedied by MMP. without much in the way of harm really too.
Click to expand...

we are talking about MMP like the way Germany does it right?

this is the middle ground between FPTP and PR
 
The solution to the highly disproportionate balance of vote weight is not just to go proportional representation. They could keep fpp and rebalance the ridings to better reflect population numbers. That would be a huge improvement over what we have now from a representation pov.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top