This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.
The last election there was a 61 percent turnout. Most people that do not vote tend not to be "on the right".
Of those that voted 37 percent voted Conservative. They will keep their core of around 30 percent while 7 percent will shift to an alternate party.
Given the last election held when the economy considered strong , this suggests the majority vote Liberal Green or NDP for other reasons than just the economy.
I worked for the Greens for 2 years, which was enough time to see it was a doomed project. I'm not writing this to agitate against Stein, whom I think everyone should vote for if you're going to insist on voting at all.
Nevertheless, there are reasons why the Green umbrella hasn't expanded over so many years.
The template for near-successful third parties doesn't come from Greens, or other multitendency parties that try to combine socialists and capitalists in the same group (it doesn't work; ever). It's from the left. Especially the communists (before they jumped the Stalinist shark) and the two socialist parties in play at the turn of the last century.
When you're a political insurgency, people need to know what you will do--and not in terms of your political platform. They need to see what you do. What you believe in. Reds have always combined political participation (those that allow this) with strong community organizations, especially reciprocity types of operations: food banks, soup kitchens, social halls (a huge factor that is way too overlooked historically) and those sorts of things. Green do literally nothing until election season. They're explicitly not committed to social organizing because they still have the old schism between corporate enviros and social greens, and it's been their problem form day one.
All this is a way of saying--and not to just pick on the greens, we pinkos aren't doing this either--that we can't just do elections to get real change. It's not enough. Not even close. You have to change people. And to do that, you have to be a part of their lives. A big part of their lives.
Why has the Bloc Quebecois leader been left out? They are about about as likely to get at least as many seats as the Greens...
Nice graphic showing the results here:
So far, the Liberals are sweeping the Maritimes - and they have some conservative parts, don't they?...
I predict that the conservatives will be routed except the right-wing Ford-nation suburbia around Toronto - and a few right-wing cowboy ridings in Alberta...
This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.
way early, but liberals are crushing it. they might not need allies if they keep up this pace. although I'm sure as results move westward things will start tightening up. Right wing base is west. Still, good start.
Unfortunately for the Greens in the US the situation remains similar. Below the 49th I believe a major reason is not the platform, put forward by Greens, but the lack of ability because of the rules state to state, to even be able to be on all of the ballots. If felt the Greens had a chance in the presidential election I would give them my vote. The result is, though I have been a lifelong Democrat, I will put my single vote for candidate (s) in the general/national election for the one I feel is the most able to serve.
I hope all goes well and there is the removal of Harper. One doesn't have to be Canadian to realize even after he is been in office so long, it is well past time to removed him as PM which requires, as I understand your parliamentary system, another party must gain the most numbers or form a
coalition reject the Conservative to make that removal as PM.
Oh, those radical Canadians, they actually have real people counting the votes, tsk , tsk.
The Liberals are doing far better than I expected with early poll returns. This comes at the expense of the NDP. As I have stated the NDP tried to move way too far to the right and abandoned their traditional supporters with their promise of balanced budgets and austerity. People saw little that seperated them from the Liberals.
I was thinking this would be a minority Government. It might well be a Liberal majority albeit if it is it will be just barely. Trudeau ran a smart campaign. He did not have the budget the Conservatives had and the Conservatives thought they could use his age against him. The attack ads backfired , this along with people tired of Harpers politics.
"Anything but conservatives".
Among his Policy platforms. Now this is not offering an opinion or stating whether he will follow through.
Legalizing Marijuana, He indicated he would work on this immediately if elected. It would not be decriminalization but outright legalizing.
Increase of taxes of those making more then 200k a year.
Increase in our Canada Pension Plan deductions per cheque with the goal of enriching the plan.
Spending into deficit to invest in infrastructure.
A review of the Election system aimed at eliminating the first past the post system and examining alternatives such as PR.
Reversal of the OAS and GIS for seniors from 67 to 65 years old.
A reversal on the plan to buy f-35 aircraft.
This are the main ones I am aware of.
A form of PR is the answer. Under such a system the Greens would get around 12 seats in the current parliament. This in and of itself will result in a cascade effect with more people willing toi vote green,
The US middle class doesn't want to "work from the ground up." Their idea is to "build the economy from the middle out," and the only response to our poverty crisis from "progressives" reflects their apparent faith in trickle down economics. Incredibly, in 2015 "progressives" redefined "inequality" itself to apply only to the gap between the better off and the rich, ignoring the canyon between the poor and the working class (in a country with a shortage of jobs, and no "safety net" for the poor). "Occupy" did, indeed, define this era, but not in the way liberals think. What began as an extraordinary people's movement was quickly redefined (by Dem pols, liberal media, and then many participants) as a pointless pep rally for the middle class alone, and that was the end of any progressive movement. The middle class have the public microphone, so no other voices have been heard. We have successfully been divided and conquered.
What would you expect Sen. Sanders to change? He was an Independent, and is now a Democrat. He is not a socialist, but a solid capitalist. It's true that Sen. Sanders used to speak out powerfully about US poverty and the need for legit poverty relief programs, but this doesn't sell to today's middle class campaign donors. So, he dumped the poor, and embraced "trickle down economics" as the response to US poverty.
That's why Democrats are likely to lose 2016. The masses of poor, and those who get why unrelieved poverty is such a critical issue, had voted for Obama on the chance that he could launch a legit discussion about our poverty crisis. He did raise the issue, Democrats and liberals aren't interested. Democrats have continued to worsen conditions for the elderly poor and the disabled, liberals continue to respond with flat indifference. The poor, etc. know that no matter how the elections turn out, conditions will only continue to deteriorate for them. And in the end, that's what matters.
Anything in the Liberal platform or Trudeau's statements regarding "trade" agreements like TPP / TTIP / TISA?
Or more like many more seats. Bloc 8 clinched, 2 more probable - a gain of 8. Green only 1 (in BC) - a loss of 1.
That's a priority? Those who can still afford homes, etc., are capable of organizing, if they want to. We need political parties, organizations, people that have the integrity and courage to address our most critical issues. You mention Greece, and fail to note that Greece (as well as the successful countries), unlike the US, legitimately address poverty. The Green Party, liberals, and middle classers don't know much about US poverty today. (It might help to organize discussion groups to consider the difference between low-income and poor, an apparent point of confusion to libs and Dems.) When so many are in immediate need of food and shelter, organic gardening and "social halls" are way low on their list of priorities. Those who are able to work and have jobs -- and certainly those who own homes! -- are not the ones in need of "community organizing." These are the better off, and there are already groups in every city that do home repairs, etc., for low-income people, set up community gardens, and so on.
Well not quite a rout - lots of blue dots in Alberta - people vote for their oil-industry paychecks I guess.
Saskatchewan is pretty blue too - didn't know wheat farmers were so right-wing.