[Canada] Canadian Politics Redux

[Malthus]

I'm reminded of when the Federal Liberals talk about how they really should start appealing to Albertans.

The problem is they view it as a problem of technique - how can they convince Albertans that the Liberal Party is right for them.  But really the problem is one of substance - Liberal policies don't do anything helpful to Alberta (and instead are often harmful).

but in the case of ADQ or now CAQ, their policies aren't unhelpful for anglo-quebecers.  Even for Montrealers, I'd say it's more neutral than anything else.

Vote for us!  Our policies aren't unhelpful!

Not very catchy.

If separatists wants anglo quebecers to vote for them, then they need to put forward policies that are actually helpful for anglo quebeckers.

Or not - write them off and get your majority some other way (which is pretty much what the Conservatives have done with Quebec).  But don't complain they won't vote for you if you aren't actually trying to appeal to them.

This is the political version of the "nice guy" syndrome in dating: 'why don't women want to go out with me? I never call them bitches and hoes, like those other guys'. 

Yeah, that's kinda a necessary but not sufficient condition - you have to have more to offer than be 'nice' if you want to get laid.

[Capetan Mihali]

let us be the Delaware of Canada

Dear God, why?

we are the most regulated state of North America, no doubt.  It is a burden on many entrepreneurs, the small ones especially.  We need to streamline our government operations&procedures so that you can start a business without going through so much hassle that you basically need government funds&help to start it.

Delaware's not some kind of laissez-faire haven, it just has the most liberal incorporation laws so something like 85% of US public companies are incorporated there.  The rest are mostly in Nevada.

[Grey Fox]

let us be the Delaware of Canada

Dear God, why?

we are the most regulated state of North America, no doubt.  It is a burden on many entrepreneurs, the small ones especially.  We need to streamline our government operations&procedures so that you can start a business without going through so much hassle that you basically need government funds&help to start it.

No

[viper37]

Jim Flaherty just died

[Barrister]

Jim Flaherty just died

Poor guy!  I knew he was in poor health, but no idea it was that bad.

[viper37]

Vote for us!  Our policies aren't unhelpful!
Not very catchy.

I was responding to Neil's posts about unhelpful policies to English Quebecers.  I don't think economic prosperity and fiscal responsibility are 'unhelpful'

If separatists wants anglo quebecers to vote for them, then they need to put forward policies that are actually helpful for anglo quebeckers.

But I ain't discussing about seperatists.  You however make the assumption that once a seperatist, always a seperatist.  Same as those who oppose the Conservative Party of Canada saying it's just the Reform and extreme right-wing nuts, due to past affiliations.

But don't complain they won't vote for you if you aren't actually trying to appeal to them.

they want to be treated like every other citizen or they want a special status?  'Cause I tought Canadians were against any kind of special status for their franco minority... But we should give one for the Anglo minority in our province?

[viper37]

Jim Flaherty just died

Poor guy!  I knew he was in poor health, but no idea it was that bad.

65yo, not that old.  I guess now we understand why he quitted.  Or maybe it's unrelated, his past problems were apparently non life threatening.
CBC news

EDIT: seems to be an heart attack.

[viper37]

You are talking about corruption.  That is a problem with every political party.  I am talking about anti-anglo sentiment.  And in Grallon's case that is putting it very very politely 

You're making the assumption that because some people vote for party X it means the policies of this party will eventually - and "eventually" being more akin to "within 4 years" be hostile to them. 

Wich is akin to that infamous hidden agenda of the Conservatives, anti-gay, anti-women, pro-religion, anti-abortion, etc.
They weren't near to accomplish anything like that in their first 2 mandates, only once they got a majority that their pro-religion bias started affecting public policies, and even then, it's nothing to radically transform Canada into some kind of Democratic Saudi Arabia.  Enough for me no to vote for them at the next election, most likely, but not enough for me to demonize them and strike them for life.  But I took a chance.  I can't say I'm totally disapointed, but I tried.  It's not going the way I want to, but it's closer to my ideology than the Liberals or the NDP. 

I'll wait to see where the Bloc goes, or I'll simply stop voting again on the federal scene.

[crazy canuck]

Jim Flaherty just died

RIP 

He gave us years of service when most would have been on disability leave.  Reporters were astounded at how well he was able to hide his discomfort when he was on camera.  Apparently as soon as the cameras were off him, he would grimace in pain.

[crazy canuck]

You are talking about corruption.  That is a problem with every political party.  I am talking about anti-anglo sentiment.  And in Grallon's case that is putting it very very politely 

You're making the assumption that because some people vote for party X it means the policies of this party will eventually - and "eventually" being more akin to "within 4 years" be hostile to them. 

Not at all.  You asked the question as to why Anglos vote the way they do. Malthus gave you the answer that seems to be the most accurate.  I am not so sure what is so contraversial about Anglos voting for the party they know wont be hostile to them rather than the party that might be hostile.

The take home message for the other political parties is if they want to attract the Anglo vote they are going to have to remove the potential hostility.  I use Grallon as an example of the kind of hostility Anglos face in Quebec.  I wouldn't want to live with that.

[Barrister]

If separatists wants anglo quebecers to vote for them, then they need to put forward policies that are actually helpful for anglo quebeckers.

But I ain't discussing about seperatists.  You however make the assumption that once a seperatist, always a seperatist.  Same as those who oppose the Conservative Party of Canada saying it's just the Reform and extreme right-wing nuts, due to past affiliations.
[/quote]

No, it's not "once a separatist, always a separatist".  It's that the CAQ is not a federalist party.  It takes a deliberately very fuzzy position when it comes to independence.

So if you're an anglo quebec voter who *is a federalist, that fuzziness is not a point in the CAQ's favour.  Maybe they'll vote for the party for other reasons that compensate, but that fuzziness by itself isn't enough to do it.

[viper37]

No, it's not "once a separatist, always a separatist".  It's that the CAQ is not a federalist party.  It takes a deliberately very fuzzy position when it comes to independence.

there's nothing fuzzy about it.  They won't seperate Quebec unilateraly, they won't hold a referendum while Legault is head of the party.
Once upon a time, the Liberal Party flirted with the idea of independance, after Meech's rejection.  Did the Anglos stop voting for them?

So if you're an anglo quebec voter who *is a federalist, that fuzziness is not a point in the CAQ's favour.  Maybe they'll vote for the party for other reasons that compensate, but that fuzziness by itself isn't enough to do it.

I still don't see that fuzzyness.  Seperation is not magical.  It doesn't happen just like that, by voting a law to declare Quebec independant.  There's a whole process to it.  This party, as well as the ADQ, says there won't be such a process for now.  Maybe at some point in the distant future something will change in Canada.  Maybe the Conservatives will seize power the way Chavez did in Venezueala, rigging the electoral process to insure their constant victories.  We are getting closer to that everyday.

I think it's a wise thing to keep all your options on the table, you never know what happens in the future.  Would you sign a life contract with your current employer?

[viper37]

Not at all.  You asked the question as to why Anglos vote the way they do. Malthus gave you the answer that seems to be the most accurate.  I am not so sure what is so contraversial about Anglos voting for the party they know wont be hostile to them rather than the party that might be hostile.

So you understand francos not voting massively for the Reform, Canadian Alliance and Conservative Party?

Yet, we never voted in a monolithic block like zealots for 60 years, no matter the moron in the riding or the morons at the party head.[/quote]

[crazy canuck]

Not at all.  You asked the question as to why Anglos vote the way they do. Malthus gave you the answer that seems to be the most accurate.  I am not so sure what is so contraversial about Anglos voting for the party they know wont be hostile to them rather than the party that might be hostile.

So you understand francos not voting massively for the Reform, Canadian Alliance and Conservative Party?

Certainly.  You and Oex, amongst others, have explained the reasons very well over the years.

[Malthus]

Jim Flaherty just died

RIP 

He gave us years of service when most would have been on disability leave.  Reporters were astounded at how well he was able to hide his discomfort when he was on camera.  Apparently as soon as the cameras were off him, he would grimace in pain.

That's terrible, that he died so soon after retirement. It looks like he quite literally worked himself to death.