Looks like the pollsters got it right but they didn't predict a majority.

Like George W Bush and John Q Adams in US, Justin Trudeau becomes first son of a former Prime Minister (Pierre E Trudeau) to be elected PM. And without any recounts!!!!   

The polls in the final days definitely suggested a Liberal government, but I was quite surprised that he got the majority (and a strong one at that!). He won seats in (I believe) every province and territory and in rural and urban ridings so it will be tough for those who don't support him to blame the 'urban' areas or those silly Ontarians / Quebecers for returning the Libs to power. Fact is, he has formed a truly national government.

I was surprised to see some of the more descent MP's lose though e.g. Megan Leslie, Peter Stoffer, Leona Aglukkaq - but that is politics.

A Jays win and a change in government - an exciting night all around!

So what will Trudeau bring to Canada as Prime Minister?

Quoting TheFlyingDisk (Reply 2): So what will Trudeau bring to Canada as Prime Minister?

Hopefully better days for the Canadian workers and citizens. It was getting a little anti-labor up there it seems to me.

I trust one of our Canadian brothers will explain this all to woefully uninformed US contingent. I've scanned the Economist articles but to be honest, compared to the US, Canada always seems Liberal to me, no matter what brand of PM takes office. And we're completely crushed by the Trump news train here. It's that or the Russkies so no air time is left for our bestest buddies.

What are the major changes we can expect up north?

Impressive win for the Liberals. They really trounced Harper and the Conservatives. NDP has to feel a little deflated this morning, as iI think they really thought they would put up a better showing.

Should be interesting to see what changes Trudeau implements, especially the TPP debate. Has he definitively come down on one side or the other? I was in YUL the day the Conservatives and NDP unveiled their platforms and TPP was almost sucking the air out of the room. Trudeau had simply said he wasn't firmly for or against, but was still looking at it.

Quoting TheFlyingDisk (Reply 2): So what will Trudeau bring to Canada as Prime Minister?

To name a few (I am probably missing some)...

- Middle class tax cut and introduction of a new tax bracket for those making over $200,000.
- Relaxing laws around marijuana
- Modest deficits of $10 billion for three years to provide a bump to the economy and invest in critical infrastructure.
- Balanced budget by 2019.
- Stronger action on climate change.
- Re-engagement with First Nations and implementation of the recommendations in the Report on Truth and Reconciliation.
- Re-engagement with the Premiers and participating in a more 'cooperative federalism.'
- While not retreating from the Middle East a realignment of Canada's interests in the ME and the fight against IS and, likely, an overall realignment of Canada's foreign policy.

Quoting Alias1024 (Reply 5): Trudeau had simply said he wasn't firmly for or against, but was still looking at it.

Sums it up - NDP came out against it while Trudeau basically said 'I haven't seen it, so won't comment one way or another.'

Quoting TheFlyingDisk (Reply 2): So what will Trudeau bring to Canada as Prime Minister?

A sexy world leader...he's cute   

Quoting skyservice_330 (Reply 6): Sums it up - NDP came out against it while Trudeau basically said 'I haven't seen it, so won't comment one way or another.'

A reasonable reaction. I wish more politicians on this side of the border would learn it.

Quoting wingman (Reply 4): Canada always seems Liberal to me, no matter what brand of PM takes office.

Not Really,

Stephen Harper was a Canadian mirror-image of George W Bush, sent fighter jets to bomb Iraq and Syria; tried to destroy gun registry among other nasty right-wing moves.

Oil-rich Alberta is a lot like Texas except for Banff which is like Colorado; Saskatchewan like Kansas, Nebraska and Oklahoma. BC is like Washington State/Northern California.

Quoting einsteinboricua (Reply 7): A sexy world leader...he's cute

I remember similar comments about former UK PM Tony Blair when he was elected back in 1997. Trudeau is same age he was then - 44.

[Edited 2015-10-20 10:13:43]

Quoting einsteinboricua (Reply 7): A sexy world leader...he's cute

This is all I've been hearing from the Americans following this.

Liberal/Progressives are being such hypocrites in that regard:

They cry/scream/fart/yell when Trump fixates on a woman's looks, but I've yet to hear just about any of them say a damn thing about Trudeau without referencing his looks.

Hate hypocrites!   

Quoting LAX772LR (Reply 10): Liberal/Progressives are being such hypocrites in that regard: They cry/scream/fart/yell when Trump fixates on a woman's looks, but I've yet to hear just about any of them say a damn thing about Trudeau without referencing his looks.

There's a big difference in the power dynamic and sociocultural milieu when it's about a woman vs. being about a man.

Republicans put actors in office...

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 11): There's a big difference in the power dynamic and sociocultural milieu when it's about a woman vs. being about a man.

Ah that's the ticket, try to justify the hypocrisy.

"It's okay when we do it because....."

How about, just not doing it?

The 2:00 mark is fascinating....enjoy Canada

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3xyiiR2ZSNs

Quoting bmacleod (Thread starter): Like George W Bush and John Q Adams in US, Justin Trudeau becomes first son of a former Prime Minister (Pierre E Trudeau) to be elected PM. And without any recounts!!!!

So where are the Canucks who will say he won the election based on his name and family influence? (At least that's what they were saying about Bush 43's election.)

Quoting skyservice_330 (Reply 6): Relaxing laws around marijuana

Well, I can see they have their priorities in order.

Quoting Aesma (Reply 12): Republicans put actors in office...

Democrats put inexperienced morons in office...

Quoting redflyer (Reply 15): Democrats put inexperienced morons in office...

Are not they one and the same? Actors, Politicians and Morons. I do think the Repubs have the edge though.  

Quoting ltbewr (Reply 17): At least Canada runs national elections a lot better than the US does, no wasting billions on lots of commercials, likely few or no non-candidate controlled ads, campaigns lasting a few months, not 2 years, paper ballots not computers and trust in their process.

It's also illegal for corporations and unions to contribute to political parties in Canada, and donations from individuals are much more restrictive than in the U.S. I think the limit for individual donations in Canada is around $1,500 a year (partly tax-deductible). They have to rely much more heavily on volunteers.

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 18): It's also illegal for corporations and unions to contribute to political parties in Canada, and donations from individuals are much more restrictive than in the U.S. I think the limit for individual donations in Canada is around $1,500 a year (partly tax-deductible). They have to rely much more heavily on volunteers.

A much better system for sure, here corporations are people and we get the most corrupt elections because of it. Billions spent to elect thieves and fools.

Quoting TheFlyingDisk (Reply 2): So what will Trudeau bring to Canada as Prime Minister?

Legalized Marijuana....About dam time!!!
  

[Edited 2015-10-20 21:19:45 by GulfStreamGirl]

Quoting redflyer (Reply 15): Democrats put inexperienced morons in office...

What was that?

Quoting jfk69 (Reply 14): The 2:00 mark is fascinating....enjoy Canada https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3xyiiR2ZSNs

I wish my French was better so I could pick up on what exactly is going on in the clip. Our federal leaders have a funny habit of doing silly things on camera. I believe there is more than one clip floating around on Harper playing the piano and singing. All part of 'humanizing' them I suppose...

Quoting redflyer (Reply 15): Quoting bmacleod (Thread starter): Like George W Bush and John Q Adams in US, Justin Trudeau becomes first son of a former Prime Minister (Pierre E Trudeau) to be elected PM. And without any recounts!!!! So where are the Canucks who will say he won the election based on his name and family influence? (At least that's what they were saying about Bush 43's election.)

*puts hand up* Trudeau himself has acknowledged he was born on third base and is privileged. Most Canadians (and Liberals at that, including Trudeau I would say) will readily admit that he benefits from name recognition. So the name definitely helped him, but over the past 78 days or so he also ran a sharp campaign and capitalized on a strong desire for change. He also had to run as an MP in 2008, run for the leadership and rebuild a severely damaged and broken party, so it isn't like he was parachuted into a machine that was ready to go. I think it would be hard for anyone to say that money influenced it - election spending laws are pretty restrictive in Canada (compared to the USA at least) and Trudeau himself is not wealthy along the lines of, say, a Bush. I believe his net worth is around $1.2 million, including money left to him by his father.

Quoting redflyer (Reply 15): Quoting skyservice_330 (Reply 6): Relaxing laws around marijuana Well, I can see they have their priorities in order.

Meh... changing the laws - decriminalizing or legalizing for personal use - is something that is supported by a majority of Canadian society, Liberals and Conservatives alike. Even Canada's police chiefs are on record as saying that something needs to change - they are tired of using limited public resources on criminally prosecuting people for possessing a small amount of weed. It is also one of many priorities that the new government has laid out - the new PM's first act is going to be a tax cut for the middle class, which was his signature policy. Softening laws on pot actually played a small role, policy wise, in the election.

Quoting skyservice_330 (Reply 22): is something that is supported by a majority of Canadian society, Liberals and Conservatives alike.

Apparently the will to legalize is stronger among parents of teenagers than the latter.

Quoting skyservice_330 (Reply 22): but over the past 78 days or so he also ran a sharp campaign and capitalized on a strong desire for change. He also had to run as an MP in 2008, run for the leadership and rebuild a severely damaged and broken party, so it isn't like he was parachuted into a machine that was ready to go.

Very well summed up.

Quoting bmacleod (Reply 9): Stephen Harper was a Canadian mirror-image of George W Bush, sent fighter jets to bomb Iraq and Syria; tried to destroy gun registry among other nasty right-wing moves.

That's the right analogy. This is a man that is also a clone of Benjamin Netanyahu and broke all ties with Iran. The Persian population in Toronto was railing against him because he cut off their Canadian bank accounts. The Iran Deal actually made 0 impact between the non-existent relations between Iran and Canada.

How he managed to hang onto power for 10 years in Canada is just amazing to me.

It says a lot about democracy that Netanyahu and Harper both are some of the longest serving leaders (over 10 yrs). Credit the USA for bouncing people out after 8 years.

Quoting solarflyer22 (Reply 24): Credit the USA for bouncing people out after 8 years.

The way it is going here, maybe it should be 4 years and out the door. I am not talking specifically about Obama either. I think all of them should have term limits, especially congress.

Quoting redflyer (Reply 15): So where are the Canucks who will say he won the election based on his name and family influence?

I voted for him and I support a lot of what his plans are but I will admit he presents a good vision for Canada which I mostly support. Saying that if his last name was not Trudeau he wouldn't have been the liberal leader so quickly. It could have happened over time but not as quickly as it did.

Quoting ltbewr (Reply 17): I would like to know better J. Trudeau's policies as to the Keystone/XL Pipeline (or one only in Canada to their eastern ports, and the continued development of the environmental disaster of western tar sand and shale oil and gas.

He supports the pipeline because this oil needs to be exported to places that can refine it. However I do not think he will be Hawkish with the US government like Harper was. The big difference with Trudeau is that he actually wants to do something about climate change and bring Canada back to the table in time for the Paris conference in December.

Quoting gulfstreamgirl (Reply 20): Legalized Marijuana....About dam time!!!

Hold on there!!

The reality is that although I agree 100% with legalizing not just pot but all drugs. The reality is that most of our exports go to the US and if we were to have legal pot here the US (whom federally is still draconian on drugs) would essentially screw up all movement of people and goods from Canada. If the American can find a facebook photo of you with a joint they can and will deny you entry.

What we should do is just not enforce the damn laws.

Quoting WarRI1 (Reply 25): The way it is going here, maybe it should be 4 years and out the door. I am not talking specifically about Obama either. I think all of them should have term limits, especially congress.

I like how it is in Canada because it gives time to get stuff done and eventually the people will get sick of you. The problem is the US is too much election. With congressional elections every 2 years an incoming president with an allied congress has under 2 years to get things done and that fear takes away from long term legislation that might sting short term.

In my home town of Mississauga, Ontario we had a mayor whom was in power from 1978 to 2014 and the only reason she left office is because she is 94 years old. This woman had been of service to this city for 36 years and outside of a few minor scandals she never needed to campaign for her job because she did it with integrity.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hazel_McCallion

Quoting WarRI1 (Reply 25): The way it is going here, maybe it should be 4 years and out the door. I am not talking specifically about Obama either. I think all of them should have term limits, especially congress.

Term limits primarily fuel short-term thinking and basically cut off any longer view. We don't have any term limits at all and our political scene is a lot more constructive, more rational, more forward-looking and has much more cross-party-line communication than the demented and utterly toxic american political scene.

Yes, this can lead to situations like Helmut Kohl staying in office for an interminable 16 years, but the voters did eventually get sick of him after all (without the Reunification happening on his watch he would have been out a lot sooner). There is no indication that this has led to any relevant downsides so far – apart from the dissatisfaction of the respective opposition and their supporters.

Term limits like many, many other parts of the US political system seem to be based on "well, it looked like a good idea back in the 18th century" more than on anything else, despite the obvious problems.

Quoting WarRI1 (Reply 3): It was getting a little anti-labor up there it seems to me.

Since when? Labour is pretty much never a topic of discussion at the federal level, at it certainly wasn't a key issue in this election.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 11): There's a big difference in the power dynamic and sociocultural milieu when it's about a woman vs. being about a man.

Justify it whichever way you wish, the reality is that objectification is objectification, and many of those who cry wolf about it when it happens to women are the same ones committing it against this man.

Quoting Aesma (Reply 12):

Quoting redflyer (Reply 15):

Quoting WarRI1 (Reply 16):

Typical A-net: Turning every thread into something about American politics...

Quoting ltbewr (Reply 17): At least Canada runs national elections a lot better than the US does, no wasting billions on lots of commercials, likely few or no non-candidate controlled ads, campaigns lasting a few months, not 2 years, paper ballots not computers and trust in their process.

It is only a matter of time before we switch to computers. It's already been a discussion in the media. It has become a post-election issue as well since there were some printing errors which lead to some ballots having candidates with marks already beside their names.

One other debate about our electoral system is that we don't use proportional representation, we use 'first past the post', which the losing side in each election always makes a fuss about. Take a look at the graphic below to get an idea of the Liberals win wasn't exactly as dominating as people suggest. There are some pros to the FPTP system, but it will continue to be an issue in every election.

Quoting skyservice_330 (Reply 22): I believe his net worth is around $1.2 million, including money left to him by his father.

His inheritance was $1.2M. His net worth is greater.

CTV: Justin Trudeau reveals details of his $1.2-million inheritance

Quoting skyservice_330 (Reply 22): He also had to run as an MP in 2008, run for the leadership and rebuild a severely damaged and broken party, so it isn't like he was parachuted into a machine that was ready to go.

He ran in Papineau. All he had to do was wait and not let the Bloc get too strong and he was guaranteed a seat. So yes, he very much parachuted into a machine that was ready to go.

Quoting StarAC17 (Reply 26): What we should do is just not enforce the damn laws.

Isn't that essentially what happens now?

I know in YVR, no cops give a damn about weed. Whole bunch of UBC kids smoking it right in front of two cops while waiting for a bus, and neither of them batted and eye.

I'm very glad the NDP didn't win.

Not sure about Tom Mulcair but when Jack Layton was in charge there were rumblings that if he won a majority, he had a hidden agenda that included wiping out Canada's military and ceding military sovereignty to the USA.

[Edited 2015-10-22 11:06:39]

Quoting LAX772LR (Reply 29): I know in YVR, no cops give a damn about weed. Whole bunch of UBC kids smoking it right in front of two cops while waiting for a bus, and neither of them batted and eye.

That's cool, and that is definitely a common experience. The reason that it's important to change the law is that a cop could still walk up to those kids, arrest all of them, and they could all end up with a criminal record. Further, if you go into the statistics around criminal charges relating to marijuana, you will find a disproportionate amount of charges to FN and minority/immigrant populations. Chanigng the law is the only thing that guarantees that it will be applied equally to all Canadians.

Quoting StarAC17 (Reply 26): . The reality is that most of our exports go to the US and if we were to have legal pot here the US (whom federally is still draconian on drugs) would essentially screw up all movement of people and goods from Canada.

Neither of the statements above are correct. The Canada-to-US trade in marijuana was weakened post-9/11 as border controls were ratcheted up, increasing risk/cost for exporters and degrading the competitive advantage provided by the lower degree of surveillance and the weaker criminal penalties north of the border. When legalization happened in WA and CO this basically sealed the deal for Canada's pot exports to the US - it simply no longer happens. The second point is laughable, given that when I look out my window in Canada I can see a jurisdiction where pot is legal. What is the incentive for USCBP to increase enforcement when the target item can be sold in a shop down the street from the border crossing?

The one part that would worry me is that they are setting out to run a budget deficit in order to "invest in critical infrastructure" This sounds very much like the statements of the Tony Blair Govt in the UK in the early 2000's. When the economy turned against them a modest deficit turned into a huge one, meanwhile all the programmes they instigated continued to splurge money. Even now despite what are said by many to be "savage cuts" we are still running a deficit.

Quoting WestJet747 (Reply 28): Since when? Labour is pretty much never a topic of discussion at the federal level, at it certainly wasn't a key issue in this election.

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2...ises-from-the-dead-tim-harper.html



You guys kill me, I live in the US and obviously know more about labor problems in Canada than you do.  

Quoting StarAC17 (Reply 26): I like how it is in Canada because it gives time to get stuff done and eventually the people will get sick of you. The problem is the US is too much election. With congressional elections every 2 years an incoming president with an allied congress has under 2 years to get things done and that fear takes away from long term legislation that might sting short term. In my home town of Mississauga, Ontario we had a mayor whom was in power from 1978 to 2014 and the only reason she left office is because she is 94 years old. This woman had been of service to this city for 36 years and outside of a few minor scandals she never needed to campaign for her job because she did it with integrity.

Obviously and it does not surprise me that you folks have more integrity, a lost value here. We are corrupt, (except me of course) and our elections are corrupt, so I do not blame you for trusting someone who is trustworthy by virtue of local knowledge and practice. They will not let you be trustworthy here, the parties control who runs, the money supports the parties choice. Someone like Trump who has wealth can run as an outsider. Of course in reality he is an insider who has used the corrupt system to his advantage. He did admit to that.

[Edited 2015-10-22 17:15:11]

Quoting WarRI1 (Reply 34): Obviously and it does not surprise me that you folks have more integrity, a lost value here. We are corrupt, (except me of course) and our elections are corrupt, so I do not blame you for trusting someone who is trustworthy by virtue of local knowledge and practice. They will not let you be trustworthy here, the parties control who runs, the money supports the parties choice. Someone like Trump who has wealth can run as an outsider. Of course in reality he is an insider who has used the corrupt system to his advantage. He did admit to that.

In the end the forced dependency on "donations" (actually bribes in many cases) due to the lack of any public campaign financing pretty much mandates corruption as the norm rather than the exception, and the PACs/Super-PACs with their unlimited influence for invested billionaires make it completely grotesque.

Sure, public campaign financing as in Germany (each party gets a certain amount of money from the state according to their previous election results) would give many americans an ideological shock, but it actually keeps external money largely out of politics.

There still are campaign donations and lobbyism, but no party is actually dependent on donations for running an effective campaign. Actual issues and of course personalities play a larger role, and there are much fewer strings attached to politicians once they're elected into office.

Quoting Klaus (Reply 35): Sure, public campaign financing as in Germany (each party gets a certain amount of money from the state according to their previous election results) would give many americans an ideological shock, but it actually keeps external money largely out of politics.

I have been in favor of public financed elections for years here. Of course anything passed here has many loopholes so it is worthless. Of course we cannot have that kind of law here because there is no control, no special interests, no corruption when taking money out of the process, and that will not do here. We have whole industries dependent on elections and the billions generated. Thousands of jobs also. One election goes by and we start another round of torment, It is never ending now.

First of all, Canada now has the world's best looking PM and first lady!!

Secondly, Im sure most have seen this, but as usual John Oliver explains the Canadian election to the rest of the world  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0V5ckcTSYu8

I know a lot of people who voted strategically just to get rid of Harper and for change. Mulcair and the NDP's popularity dropped hugely so for many the NDP just wasnt an option, so I think this was quite the catalyst in the huge Liberal majority, not just on their manifesto alone.

Quoting WarRI1 (Reply 25): The way it is going here, maybe it should be 4 years and out the door. I am not talking specifically about Obama either. I think all of them should have term limits, especially congress.

4 years is not long politically and economically, a lot of plans need time to put into place and work out, if we chopped and changed every 4 years theres a risk of tons of wasted money while the next guy keeps implementing his own plans and undoes his predecessors and there will never be any stability.

Quoting Bongodog1964 (Reply 32): The one part that would worry me is that they are setting out to run a budget deficit in order to "invest in critical infrastructure" This sounds very much like the statements of the Tony Blair Govt in the UK in the early 2000's. When the economy turned against them a modest deficit turned into a huge one, meanwhile all the programmes they instigated continued to splurge money. Even now despite what are said by many to be "savage cuts" we are still running a deficit.

I have no dog in the fight as being ineligible to vote, but as being in the UK and seeing this - and left when it was at its worst - I tend to wonder the same. VAT was "only" 17.5% for example when I left and since then it had to get raised. A lot of people seem to be unaware of the fact the whole world has just been through the worst recession in 80 years and have no real life day to day awareness of what is going on and has gone on in the recent past outside our borders in other Western democracies. Even China and their currency have issues, Japan is stagnant and these things are not going to go away soon and they do affect Canada (as everywhere else). Harper by no means got it right, but at the end of the day balanced budgets are not a bad thing and once you are in the hole it is easier said than done to get out of it. For an extreme example look at Greece or Spain. As I say, I have no dog in the fight but none of the options seem to good to me, such is the joy of democracy. At least its better than the choice the Americans have next election 

Now that Harper has resigned, the Conservatives need to find a new leader. Lisa Raitt's name is being thrown around. If they do that, then the Liberal's are going to get a nice stretch in power!! Best of luck to Mr Trudeau, I hope it all works out as planned, sometimes those stale rooms need a good breath of fresh air.

Quoting YVRLTN (Reply 37): 4 years is not long politically and economically, a lot of plans need time to put into place and work out, if we chopped and changed every 4 years theres a risk of tons of wasted money while the next guy keeps implementing his own plans and undoes his predecessors and there will never be any stability.

Trust me, with some of our clowns four years seems like an eternity. Our last Governor could have served eight years, he left after four years because he knew he could not be elected again. He is now running for President of the USA as a Democrat after being a Republican, an Independent and now a Democrat. Enjoy your system, do not let it happen there what we have here.

Quoting YVRLTN (Reply 37): Lisa Raitt's name is being thrown around.

I heard that rumour at least a year ago - she has been quietly collecting support around Ottawa along the theme of "girl power". She will present a stronger challenge than most people expect.

Quoting YVRLTN (Reply 37): Secondly, Im sure most have seen this, but as usual John Oliver explains the Canadian election to the rest of the world  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0V5ckcTSYu8

Hilarious!   

Quoting WarRI1 (Reply 33): Quoting WestJet747 (Reply 28): Since when? Labour is pretty much never a topic of discussion at the federal level, at it certainly wasn't a key issue in this election. http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2...ises-from-the-dead-tim-harper.html You guys kill me, I live in the US and obviously know more about labor problems in Canada than you do.

I concede that Bill C-377 does have some overreach, but it's hardly an indictment of "anti-labour" behaviour in Canada.

In fact, I'm a little shocked that someone like yourself who so opposes Citizens United would also be so completely opposed to a bill that requires unions to disclose political and lobbying efforts.

With regards to your claim that you "obviously know more about labor problems in Canada than (I) do", I'll have to respectfully disagree considering bring well versed in such topics is part of how I make a living. I would invite you to read the bill in its entirety so that we can debate it intelligently rather than you dishing out baseless insults at anyone who disagrees with you. It's not particularly long - you can find it HERE.

Quoting YVRLTN (Reply 37): voted strategically

Can we please kill this term already? Or at least educate people on what it really means? "Strategic voting" is just an over-simplifying euphemism for 'compromise voting', which is actually what happened in this particular election. It's nearly as bad as the Ontario provincial government referring to taxes as "revenue tools"...

Quoting YVRLTN (Reply 37): Now that Harper has resigned, the Conservatives need to find a new leader. Lisa Raitt's name is being thrown around.

If I were a betting man, I'd go with Jason Kenney as the front-runner, but it's almost too obvious a choice. Even though he has more-or-less been groomed for the position, he's ruffled a few too many feathers to be a smart choice for leader. He's also one of the more socially conservative ministers, which will not be embraced by younger conservatives.

People have also been throwing Peter MacKay's name around, but I find it unlikely and unwise to bring him back, even though he is soon to be unemployed. His public gaffes are too numerous (although Trudeau has proven that that may not be much of an issue...).

I see the wisest choice as being Saskatchewn Premier Brad Wall. He's a centrist with a strong track record. He also appears to be relatively easy to work with, which is always a great quality in a leader. It's unlikely the CPC will pull someone out of provincial politics to lead their party, but it may be their best shot.

Quoting WestJet747 (Reply 41): I concede that Bill C-377 does have some overreach, but it's hardly an indictment of "anti-labour" behaviour in Canada.

How noble of you, some overreach?

Quoting WestJet747 (Reply 41): In fact, I'm a little shocked that someone like yourself who so opposes Citizens United would also be so completely opposed to a bill that requires unions to disclose political and lobbying efforts. With regards to your claim that you "obviously know more about labor problems in Canada than (I) do", I'll have to respectfully disagree considering bring well versed in such topics is part of how I make a living. I would invite you to read the bill in its entirety so that we can debate it intelligently rather than you dishing out baseless insults at anyone who disagrees with you. It's not particularly long - you can find it HERE.

http://www.peoplesworld.org/canadian...-right-wing-prime-minister-harper/

Quoting WestJet747 (Reply 41):

I suggest you read the bill again about who has to divulge information.    

Quoting rampbro (Reply 39): She will present a stronger challenge than most people expect.

If she handles the whole country like she handles transport, then no thanks   

Quoting WestJet747 (Reply 41): Can we please kill this term already?

Im sorry, I should have put that in inverted commas. Nevertheless, thats what I have heard numerous people say they were doing and what they thought they did.

Quoting WarRI1 (Reply 42): http://www.peoplesworld.org/canadian...-right-wing-prime-minister-harper/

This article references the exact same piece of legislation already discussed...

Quoting WarRI1 (Reply 43): I suggest you read the bill again about who has to divulge information.

"(2) Every labour organization and every labour trust..."

"“labour organization” includes a labour society and any organization formed for purposes which include the regulation of relations between employers and employees, and includes a duly organized group or federation, congress, labour council, joint council, conference, general committee or joint board of such organizations."

"“labour trust” means a trust or fund in which a labour organization has a legal, beneficial or financial interest or that is established or maintained in whole or in part for the benefit of a labour organization, its members or the persons it represents."

Quoting YVRLTN (Reply 44): Im sorry

Your Canadian is coming along quite well  

Quoting YVRLTN (Reply 44): Nevertheless, thats what I have heard numerous people say they were doing and what they thought they did.

And I'm not saying you haven't. I've seen it all over my social media feeds as well every day since the election was called. My point is that the people using it generally don't know what they're talking about. Strategic voting is very much a thing, but it's way broader a term than what actually occurred in this election. I guess "compromise voting" just doesn't sound as sexy in a Facebook post...

Quoting solarflyer22 (Reply 24): How he managed to hang onto power for 10 years in Canada is just amazing to me.

As someone has already explained, by splitting the vote. Harper's party never had more than 40% of the popular vote.

Supposedly they are going to have an all-party review of "first-past-the-post" elections and some changes might come into force in the future.

It will be interesting to see what, if any, changes result as each party has their own preferences.

I believe that until we can vote by smart phone, in addition to ballot box, we'll never have "true" representative democracy. And even then, with gerrymandering, Super PACs, voter suppression laws & tactics, etc, etc, it is already an uphill climb to have "true" democracy.

Quoting WestJet747 (Reply 45): I guess "compromise voting" just doesn't sound as sexy in a Facebook post...

With a +7% increase in voter turnout it would seem that it could be strategic in that voters were motivated to get rid of Harper more than anything else.

One big disadvantage - freedom is curtailed somewhat, Justin's wife Sophie can't drive the kids to school or go anywhere without an RCMP escort.

[Edited 2015-10-25 09:34:28]

Quoting planemaker (Reply 46): With a +7% increase in voter turnout it would seem that it could be strategic in that voters were motivated to get rid of Harper more than anything else.

Absolutely, they can spin it all they want to, the Conservatives overplayed their hand as usual and got their asses handed to them. Justly so. Anti- worker program policies eventually are rewarded by the workers and their families who have to survive. The same here.

In his decade in power, Harper made a target of Canadian unions.

Taking a page from the U.S. right wing playbook, Harper used parliamentary maneuvering in the Canadian Senate earlier this year to push through an anti-labor law that forced unions - and only unions - to disclose spending on everything from organizing to lawyers' fees to salaries to paper clips. Violators would be fined and sent to jail.


My answer to the bull shit spin.