[Canada] Canadian Politics Redux

[Grey Fox]

"Some form of empathy"

You are very nice. Couillard is a asshole doctor, he has no empathy towards any other humans.

allright, I was being generous and polite

I guess doctors found ways to insulate themselves from the plight of their patients, so as not to burn out by seeing patients with advanced cancers coming into their office and dying a few months later.  That does not translate well for a Prime Minister.

Yeah, they do. Plus the public is insane to deal with on a grand scale. My co-workers son is a family doctor, in the same day he got accused of being unresponsive, impolite & very emphatic from both side of the coin because he reminds his patients that they don't have to use the private lab on site to do their blood test; they can go to any hospital.

Side Moose : "I'm not poor"
Side Queen : "Oh that's so nice, I can really use not paying 600$ for these tests"

[crazy canuck]

I believe these estimates to be on the generous side of things. 

You will understand when I say I find the scientists estimates to be more persuasive.

What did I tell you?
https://www.care2.com/causes/arctic-permafrost-is-melting-70-years-sooner-than-predicted.html

Yeah, looks like the estimates of having until 2030 were overly optimistic.  It makes the coming election cycles in the world all that much more important.  We don't have much time to act left.

[crazy canuck]

See my edit.  You are thinking about politics as they were before everyone got their news through social media.

I think social media makes large shifts even less likely, not more.  Social media is self-selecting and self-referential.  I can tell you that the odds of anything popping up on my Facebook feed that is supportive of the Liberals or NDP is astonishingly small.  I say that not as a boast - it's just how FB's algorithm works considering who my FB friends are and the posts I have interacted with in the past.  Personally I will go out and read websites with views different from my own - but that stuff never shows up on my FB feed.

The thing that makes elections unpredictable is not the old foggies who still use facebook or read websites.  If that were the case you would be correct.   Its all about snap chat, instragram and to a much lesser extent twitter - or so my boys tell me. 

[Barrister]

See my edit.  You are thinking about politics as they were before everyone got their news through social media.

I think social media makes large shifts even less likely, not more.  Social media is self-selecting and self-referential.  I can tell you that the odds of anything popping up on my Facebook feed that is supportive of the Liberals or NDP is astonishingly small.  I say that not as a boast - it's just how FB's algorithm works considering who my FB friends are and the posts I have interacted with in the past.  Personally I will go out and read websites with views different from my own - but that stuff never shows up on my FB feed.

The thing that makes elections unpredictable is not the old foggies who still use facebook or read websites.  If that were the case you would be correct.   Its all about snap chat, instragram and to a much lesser extent twitter - or so my boys tell me. 

Twitter, instagram, snap chat are still self-selecting.  You're not going to hear from the the other side during an election campaign.

[crazy canuck]

Twitter, instagram, snap chat are still self-selecting.  You're not going to hear from the the other side during an election campaign.

You must have a very isolated existence on twitter.  It is a war zone that makes languish look like a gentleman's club.

snap chat sends whatever the people you are chatting with send you.  If something goes viral there are no filter's selecting what you want to see .  The only way to be immune is if all your friends think exactly like you do.  Granted for the true believers in all the parties that may be the case.  But that is not where elections are won and lost.  We saw that in the last election.

[Barrister]

Twitter, instagram, snap chat are still self-selecting.  You're not going to hear from the the other side during an election campaign.

You must have a very isolated existence on twitter.  It is a war zone that makes languish look like a gentleman's club.

snap chat sends whatever the people you are chatting with send you.  If something goes viral there are no filter's selecting what you want to see .  The only way to be immune is if all your friends think exactly like you do.  Granted for the true believers in all the parties that may be the case.  But that is not where elections are won and lost.  We saw that in the last election.

Exactly.  Your boys, for example, are all going to snapchat with people broadly speaking like themselves - people who are young and urban.  They're not going to hear the perspective of, say, a first nations person on a reserve, or a middle aged oil worker.

[Josephus]

Oh, I do believe the Cons and Libs will battle it out for 1 and 2. But my earlier point about polls is that, any poll that shows the Conservatives up by six points, or the Liberals up by five means nothing heading into the election. I don't believe 2015 was an aberration. Look at the US, how the Dems went into election day believing they had the numbers to win. Polls are no longer reflective of the reality on the street come election day. There are too many variables at play now.

Anyway, I do predict Scheer will win unfortunately. Mostly because the Centre-Left vote is going to split several ways. 

[crazy canuck]

Twitter, instagram, snap chat are still self-selecting.  You're not going to hear from the the other side during an election campaign.

You must have a very isolated existence on twitter.  It is a war zone that makes languish look like a gentleman's club.

snap chat sends whatever the people you are chatting with send you.  If something goes viral there are no filter's selecting what you want to see .  The only way to be immune is if all your friends think exactly like you do.  Granted for the true believers in all the parties that may be the case.  But that is not where elections are won and lost.  We saw that in the last election.

Exactly.  Your boys, for example, are all going to snapchat with people broadly speaking like themselves - people who are young and urban.  They're not going to hear the perspective of, say, a first nations person on a reserve, or a middle aged oil worker.

You are projecting

[Malthus]

More to the point, people online across platforms have a distinct tendency to form into like-minded tribes; it can be very polarizing. It isn't like they don't hear from the other "side"; they do, but come to reflexively reject it, as each "side" becomes progressively more defined by its extreme.

Interestingly, this study suggests that 'hearing from the other side' actually increases polarization, not the reverse: https://www.pnas.org/content/115/37/9216

More interesting articles etc.:

https://greatergood.berkeley.edu/article/item/is_social_media_driving_political_polarization

https://scholar.harvard.edu/sounman_hong/political-polarization-twitter-social-media-may-contribute-online-extremism

[PRC]

Political power cycles will become even worse examples of reversals of the others guy initiatives.  Thinking of things like Left party gets in power, enacts a bunch of stuff... Right party gets in power, reverses all that stuff and enacts their version of stuff... Left party gets back in power, reverses the Right's stuff, re-enacts their stuff... and so on until one party maintains a long term mandate or enforces one.

[crazy canuck]

Political power cycles will become even worse examples of reversals of the others guy initiatives.  Thinking of things like Left party gets in power, enacts a bunch of stuff... Right party gets in power, reverses all that stuff and enacts their version of stuff... Left party gets back in power, reverses the Right's stuff, re-enacts their stuff... and so on until one party maintains a long term mandate or enforces one.

We have not really seen that in Canada yet though.  There is wide agreement about significant public policy issues.  For example everyone agrees that a single health care provider is the best model.  The disagreements arise as to how it can best function. Parties have also threatened to reverse changes in the law but did not do it once they obtained power - think of the Liberals promises that they would do away with both Free Trade and the GST.  Climate change polices may be the first time we see the sort of thing you are talking about.  There is no doubt Scheer will get rid of the carbon tax if elected.  And I think the thing that is driving it there is a fundamental difference in what people believe is true.  There is a significant amount of Conservative supporters who do not believe the IPCC report is reliable.  That drives Conservative policy.

Contrast that with what has traditionally occurred where there is agreement about basic facts - like climate change is man made, and disagreement about how best to deal with it.

[crazy canuck]

More to the point, people online across platforms have a distinct tendency to form into like-minded tribes; it can be very polarizing. It isn't like they don't hear from the other "side"; they do, but come to reflexively reject it, as each "side" becomes progressively more defined by its extreme.

Interestingly, this study suggests that 'hearing from the other side' actually increases polarization, not the reverse: https://www.pnas.org/content/115/37/9216

More interesting articles etc.:

https://greatergood.berkeley.edu/article/item/is_social_media_driving_political_polarization

https://scholar.harvard.edu/sounman_hong/political-polarization-twitter-social-media-may-contribute-online-extremism

The comments you and BB are making apply to people who have a side.  There are people on social media who do not and those are the people who, if motivated to vote because an event that has gone viral, can swing an election.

[viper37]

11th Ministerial Conference on Canadian Francophonie – Federal-Provincial-Territorial Meeting.

Quebec, New Brunswick, Saskatcheway and Yukon sent their ministers to the meeting.
Alberta didn't send anyone.
Ontario and the other provinces only sent a representative.

French truly is important for Canada, there can be no doubt.

[crazy canuck]

11th Ministerial Conference on Canadian Francophonie – Federal-Provincial-Territorial Meeting.

Quebec, New Brunswick, Saskatcheway and Yukon sent their ministers to the meeting.
Alberta didn't send anyone.
Ontario and the other provinces only sent a representative.

French truly is important for Canada, there can be no doubt.

You might have a point if the other provinces do not have a minister responsible, but they do.  Ministers do not attend all conferences all the time related to all the matters related to all their portfolios.

[viper37]

11th Ministerial Conference on Canadian Francophonie – Federal-Provincial-Territorial Meeting.

Quebec, New Brunswick, Saskatcheway and Yukon sent their ministers to the meeting.
Alberta didn't send anyone.
Ontario and the other provinces only sent a representative.

French truly is important for Canada, there can be no doubt.

You might have a point if the other provinces do not have a minister responsible, but they do.  Ministers do not attend all conferences all the time related to all the matters related to all their portfolios.

when it's important to them, they usually do.