11 users responded in this post

Subscribe to this post comment rss or trackback url
mygif
Mitchell Hundred said on April 10th, 2013 at 12:01 pm

In hindsight, my initial question came across as a bit too cynical. Your take seems on point. I agree that voting against the grain can be a useful way to send a message in a situation like this.

ReplyReply
mygif

You know, I have a lot of bad things to say about the American political system. It’s hideously malapportioned, especially at the Senatorial level. It vests too much power in the Executive. Our grand experiment in federalism seems to have basically proven that we require huge supermajorities in order to achieve social, political, and economic chain that the rest of the world beats us to by years if not decades.

But one thing I do think we have the Westminster democracies beat on is how we choose our candidates. We don’t charge membership fees in political parties; anyone who wants to be a Democrat or a Republican or anything can just fill out a form. And ALL of those party members, every single one of them, collectively choose all their candidates in every single election, right before the election.

It seems baffling to me that the Liberals are picking a standard bearer literally… what, three years? Four? Before the next election. And that only a tiny slice of the people who self-identify as Liberals will be allowed to pick him, and they had to pay money in order to do so.

ReplyReply
mygif
Canukistani John said on April 10th, 2013 at 1:12 pm

The Leaders of the Parties tend to be chosen well away from an election – both to allow the public to connect the party with the mouthpiece /politico in charge and to get them worked into the news cycle as a household quantity. It also helps to humanize and familiarize them.

Which is why we have people who believe Stephen Harper is not a soulless demon-robot cast adrift in the voids of time to come into the past and feed the coming of the dark gods of the nether realms to consume the potential of humanity.

ReplyReply
mygif
The Unstoppable Gravy Express said on April 10th, 2013 at 1:27 pm

Which is why we have people who believe Stephen Harper is not a soulless demon-robot cast adrift in the voids of time to come into the past and feed the coming of the dark gods of the nether realms to consume the potential of humanity.

Well, that’s unacceptable.

ReplyReply
mygif

Oh, as an additional comment, it’s not just the centre-left parties that need to deal with the fact that Canada is a parliamentary democracy, it’s actually the Canadian public as a whole.

I remember a few years back when the Liberals, NDP, and Bloc realized “Hey! There are MORE OF US than there are Tories! We could form our own government, with hookers! And blackjack!”

And everyone freaked the fuck out like it was some kind of coup attempt, and Harper got away with what I still feel was a grossly illegal prorogue with nary a peep.

ReplyReply
mygif

Remember Murc part of the prorogue problem was that our governor general was a push over. The senate should have raised bloody hell and made itself useful as well.

ReplyReply
mygif
Bunnyofdoom said on April 10th, 2013 at 6:39 pm

Murc, the Liberals actually took a major step and did open up this vote to anyone who wanted to sign up for it with the free supporter category. That’s why 300,000 people signed up as supporters, and 129,000 of them took a second step of registering to vote.

Also, MGK, the problem is that Mulcair himself said he would never do co-operation with the Liberals. So, this is not just the Liberals at fault, but the NDP. And may I point out in 2008 the Liberals under Dion did try to havve co-operation with the Greens (Which the NDP never did) which ending up backfiring.

ReplyReply
mygif

Mulcair has already said no to cooperation, so it makes no sense for the Liberals to elect a “cooperation” candidate. As Trudeau observed, that’s basically just saying people should vote for the NDP.

I imagine that if, after the next election, the Liberals and the New Democrats outnumber the Tories, even if the Tories are the single-largest party, they will try something, but they’re not going to say anything beforehand. Which is the smart thing, both for the individual parties’ prospects, and because (as also observed by Trudeau) it’s not really accurate that you can just merge all the parties’ voters into a “not Conservative” banner, and the Liberals would be more likely to suffer in that regard.

ReplyReply
mygif

@Murc: In my state we have open primaries and open precinct caucuses, so the form isn’t even necessary. You just have to show up.

ReplyReply
mygif

The open primary I am less enthused about, as these days its an excuse for people from other parties to show up and try to fuck with you.

ReplyReply
mygif
Peztopiary said on April 14th, 2013 at 8:07 pm

I think that’s an advantage of it though. If your primary candidates are scary enough that I go vote in your primary even though I wouldn’t vote for either of them in the general, then what the hell are those jerks doing in your primary? If people are regularly crossing party lines to vote, then it’s because that party is extremely powerful and scary to the people who do so.

ReplyReply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Please Note: Comment moderation may be active so there is no need to resubmit your comments