« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

Today, the Canadians vote

Hopefully, they will keep the Conservatives

Today, Canadians vote. In the last election, the Conservative Party of Canada (CPC) achieved a minority government (meaning the largest block in parliament without having a majority), their first victory since the disastrous election of 1993 when the Progressive Conservatives went from an outright majority to 2 seats.

Prime Minster Stephen Harper’s government, elected in February 2006, has been the longest serving minority government in the history of Canada. The basic dynamic has been that the Liberal Party of Canada (LPC, the centrist party whose supporters are primarily students, government employees, and big business), has been financially bankrupt and low in the polls. If they ever brought down the government, the subsequent elections would have been a disaster for them. So they abstained on every budget vote, spending vote, or issue of serious policy (taxes, Afghanistan, etc.) This has resulted in an election in which the LPC, the historic party of government is coming into this election very weak.

Polls coming into today look like about an 8-point lead for the CPC over the LPC. The polls suggest that the CPC will end up with about 130 of 308 seats, while the LPC will end up with around 80. This is down nearly 20 for the LPC. The Bloc Quebecois (the Quebec seperatists) are likely to get in the mid-50s. While this is not really progress for the CPC or Harper, this is a problem for the LPC.

Read on after the jump for details about what to watch tonight.


First, the rules are sometimes in the CPC’s favor because there are constituency elections and the left is split, while there is only one party on the right. The left is split between the LPC, the Greens, and a socialist New Democratic Party (backed by labor unions). To win a seat, the CPC candidate only needs a plurality. In many seats (ridings), if one of the parties on the left would drop out, it is likely that the left would win.

Second, the map is highly regionalized. It is looking like the CPC is going to clean up out west. It is possible that the LPC will lose every seat west of Ontario, the largest province, which means mostly losing seats in British Columbia. The west will be split between the CPC and the NDP. In Quebec, there is a 3-way race between the Bloc, the CPC, and the LPC, in that order. This is a historic shift, but it is likely that the CPC and the LPC will lose seats in Quebec regardless. In Ontario, the CPC is ahead of the LPC by a small number of points. The things to watch in Ontario are if the CPC wins any ridings in Toronto or if we pick up seats in “the 905″, a suburban area near Toronto. Finally, in Atlantic Canada (the English speaking provinces east of Quebec), it is unclear what will happen. There aren’t a lot of ridings, but the CPC could make some real progress. Tonight, you want to watch to see if the CPC does indeed clean up out west (meaning BC, because it will dominate the prairie provinces), how much it stops the bleeding in Quebec, how much we pick up in Ontario, and if we make any progress in the Atlantics.

Third, how Stephane Dion, the leader of the LPC, handles the loss. If the LPC loses badly, he will be under pressure to resign. There are not good procedural mechanisms for taking out the leader of the party in the LPC (much like the British Labour Party, which is aching to remove Gordon Brown).

Fourth, vote totals matter tonight. Going into this election, the LPC was several million in debt. After the election, each party gets approximately $1.75 per vote to replenish party coffers. The LPC probably had to spend $20-30m total in additional debt. If they have a low vote total, their funding problem can begin to be quite acute. The details of their constituencies and Canadian campaign finance law will make it very hard for the LPC to replenish their coffers to anything like an operative level. Meanwhile, the CPC has millions in the bank because they have learned direct mail techniques from American conservatives and online fundraising techniques from American liberals.

It is possible that something could pop tonight. There could be a last-minute swing to the LPC because of strategic voting. The Greens could decide that keeping the Tories out is more important than winning a seat in Parliament.

It is also possible that LPC voters may not turn out in Ontario. They don’t like Stephane Dion, the party leader from Quebec, who has a lot of trouble speaking English. This would likely be catastrophic for the LPC, perhaps beginning a process that would destroy it over time. This would result in a left-right style two-party system that could usher in a long period of conservative dominance. (because the left would stay split in Quebec, but the right-leaning parts of the LPC would break towards the CPC) This is a long-term strategic objective of both the NDP and the CPC.

COMMENTS

  • birdmojo

    Now, my in-laws are PEI hippies so this statement may be wishful thinking on their part.

    Of course, it may be accurate.

    They point out that this election is being called at the last possible minute that the conservatives would have a shot at winning it. If they had the election in 2008, the Liberal Party would pick up votes on Obama’s coattails.

    Take that for what it’s worth.

  • Herodotus

    .

  • Flagstaff

    Sorry, off topic, but only way to get out a bulletin.

    • Neil_Stevens

      Keep on topic in the future please. If everyone made their bulletin an exception, then we’d have a mess in the comments section.

      thank you.

      • Flagstaff

        It wasn’t much of an interview, as it turned out.

        BTW, congratulations on getting the site running so smoothly. I was looking for an opportunity to say that to you. It now seems to be everything you wanted it to be.

        Knock on wood, and I hope that doesn’t jinx us.

        • Neil_Stevens
  • Republicanuck

    At least if my vote counts. Let me outline some of the similarities and differences between the voter experience here in Canada, and your own in the USA. One of the things we haven’t seen up here in Canada is any hint of the massive voter fraud that is going on courtesy of ACORN in your country. In addition, our MSM still seem to have some sense of balance – while certainly liberal in their bias, they don’t overtly shill for the left and frequent gaffes from all sides are fairly reported. Another big difference is that we in Canada don’t actually get to vote four our Prime Minister – all we can vote for is our local MP which is sort of the equivalent of a US Congressman, but with far less influence and far less political independence. Our Senate is an appointed rather than an elected body, although our Conservative PM (Stephen Harper) would like to change that, it cannot be done without an amendment to our virtually unamendable constitution. That’s just as well, since our Senators (the appointed ones, not the NHL Team) are virtually all senile and rarely awake from their slumbers. (The NHL Senators, on the other hand, are noted only for going back to sleep during the playoffs.)

    That said, if worse comes to worst come Nov. 5 and Barickistan becomes more & more intolerable, Canada is a pretty good place to live and an influx of Republican refugees would help ensure Conservative power up here in the Great White North for generations to come.

    • jgebo

      This is the first I have heard that one…classic!

      How’s the health care up there? A friend of mine just moved to TX from Canada a month ago…was really happy to be away from that mess (National Healthcare system)…any chances the conservatives can do anything to fix that?

      • Republicanuck

        OK, our health care system is not the greatest, but it’s universal and basically allows every Canadian equal time on the waiting lists and doesn’t depend on whether you’re employed or not. There are things that aren’t covered (like prescription drugs) but if you do have supplemtary coverage through an employer you’re pretty much home free and you don’t have to pay an arm and a leg to an insurance company to get it. The flip side is that the arms and legs are payable to the government at both the federal and provincial levels in the form of higher taxes, so choose your poison. We do have doctor and nursing shortages across the country (they tend to emigrate South – wonder why?), and I think one of the political parties is pushing the line that 5 million Canadian families can’t find a family doctor, which sounds about right but there are a lot of walk-in clinics (McMedicine, anyone?) and you don’t really hear reliable and verifiable stories about a lot of people dying in the streets, despite what our own socialists (any party other than Conservative) would have you believe.

        • Elizabeth

          Thanks for the info, Republicanuck. I grew up in Canada, but I’ve been living in the US my entire adult life. I haven’t been paying much attention to the politics up there of late, so it’s good to hear the Conservatives are doing so well.

          Could you tell me if there’s been much in the way of a public outcry over the restrictions on free speech coming out of the various human rights tribunals? I heard about the outcome of the Mark Steyn / Macleans trial — it sounded like they actually would have preferred a decision against them so they could have fought the underlying law rather than just the one particular case. Was the whole thing receiving much press and/or discussion?

          • Republicanuck

            There was a fair bit of coverage of the story and the underlying issues – certainly from Maclean’s and CTV/Global. I sensed less so from the CBC (Commie Broadcast Corporation), but who’s surprised. There was also a fair bit of public ire surrounding the revelation that under Canada’s system, Human Rights complainants’ legal costs are provided gratis by the state, whereas defendants are on their own and not entitled to legal aid of any kind. The Human Rights industry’s chief lesson to be taken from this is likely to think twice about taking on major media figures and corporations in a position and with the financial & legal wherewithal to defend themselves, but beyond that I don’t see any political will at any level or in any party to slay this particular hydra. I think the blurbs below from Mark’s website hawking “The Tyranny of Nice” says it best.

            To Wit:
            “In an important sense, Canada, one of the oldest continuous constitutional democracies on the planet, is no longer a free society. Oh, I don?t mean there are jackboots goosestepping through Cornwall, and razor wire along the 49th parallel. If there were, even the most lobotomized multiculturalist drone might notice. But I do mean that, in its determination to enforce a dubious government-mandated ?niceness?, key elements of the Canadian state have taken a jackhammer to the cornerstone of a free society: freedom of expression, freedom of ideas, freedom of belief, freedom to engage in the whole messy rough?n?tumble of vigorous debate that distinguishes open societies from lesser, stunted, insecure ones…”
            - Steyn’s introduction to The Tyranny Of Nice
            “As many readers will know, Mark spent much of 2008 embroiled in spurious hate-crime cases brought by the Canadian Islamic Congress with the aid of their stooges at the Canadian, Ontario and British Columbia “Human Rights” Commissions. In a characteristically robust read, Kathy Shaidle and Pete Vere tell the story of the Maclean’s suits, the Alberta government’s investigation of Ezra Levant, and other ludicrous cases brought by Canada’s diseased “human rights” apparatus. From the “human right” of fast-food employees not to wash their hands after using the toilet to the “human right” of drunken lesbians to heckle stand-up comedians, Shaidle and Vere present a riveting portrait of Canada’s kangaroo courts, their assault on liberty, and the lessons they offer for America and other countries. It’s a great read, and includes a special introduction by Hatemonger Steyn himself. And don’t forget, when you order from SteynOnline, the Hatemonger will be happy to autograph it to you or your loved one. Or hated one.”

  • Menlo

    Why do I get the feeling this is like the UK where all parties would be the equivalent of Democrats?

    If Canada has any “conservative” party, it has obviously had negligible influence in the nation.

    Their courts make the US judiciary, including Ruth Bader Ginsburg, seem restrained. Unfortunately, I don’t know if that can last under Obama. I have the feeling Obama will find their appeal to so-called “human rights” (which always seem to apply to a select group of humans) attractive.