*NEW* Login or register using your Facebook account.
Not a member? Join the fastest growing conservative community!
Membership is free and takes 15 seconds
CLICK HERE or use Facebook to login or register ---->
  |
|
Page 1 of 1
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Bugs
Joined: 16 Dec 2009
Posts: 1945
  
votes: 5
|
 Posted: Thu Feb 03, 2011 4:43 pm Post subject: Catch 22 strategy aims to vote out Conservative MPs |
 |
|
A new strategy is being put in place, to encourage 'strategic voting' in key ridings which the opposition coalition -- which, it looks like is already in operation -- hopes to take away from the Conservatives.
| Quote: | The game plan: unseat at least 22 Conservative MPs by endorsing an opposition candidate who has the best chance of winning a seat in the next election.
Going by the name Catch 22 Harper Conservatives, the movement’s list has grown to 32 Conservative-held ridings across the country, including four in B.C.
“We feel that some strategic voting is needed because our dysfunctional electoral system doesn’t really allow Parliament to represent the full range of views of people,” Masrour Zoghi, the campaign’s local spokesperson, told the Georgia Straight in a phone interview. [....]
“I’m sure a lot of those Green candidates [in the last election] would have preferred a government formed by Stéphane Dion with some sort of green agenda, as opposed to an anti-green, anti-environment, anti-women, anti-whatever government that Harper is running,” Zoghi said. |
This seems to be highly organized on a national basis.
| Quote: | Toronto-based trade-union activist Gary Shaul is the campaign’s coordinator. He explained in a phone interview with the Straight that the initiative’s name is inspired by the 22 sitting days lost when the Harper government prorogued Parliament for a second time in 2009 and 2010.
Shaul said the campaign intends to hold the Conservative government to account for its “abuses” of democratic institutions and processes. In addition to the two prorogations of Parliament, he cited as examples the withholding of documents related to the torture of detainees in Afghanistan, where Canadian soldiers are deployed; funding cuts to nonprofit organizations involved in advocacy work, especially on women’s issues; the killing of the climate-change bill in the Conservative-dominated Senate; and the scrapping of the mandatory long-form census. |
It looks like the NDP and Liberals are involved, but the Green Party is not.
| Quote: | ... the movement is considering whether to endorse federal Green party Leader Elizabeth May in Saanich–Gulf Islands, as well as a Green candidate in another riding.
When asked for her opinion on strategic voting, May said in a phone interview from Ottawa that it’s a “poor idea because what it means is people have to hold their nose and vote for someone they don’t like because they fear someone else more”.
“What I hope is that voters in Saanich–Gulf Islands will take a look at what’s on offer and decide that I’m the best possible representative for their values,” May told the Straight. |
http://www.straight.com/articl.....t-tory-mps |
|
|
|
 |
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 03, 2011 4:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
If I was a Conservative supporter with globs of cash to spare,
I would be pumping money into this effort like crazy.
When the PC merged with the CA, they lost 8% of their popular vote which was around 30% of their support.
I think more then enough center to slight right of center Liberal voters would opt for Harper over Layton, and most left of left New Democrat voters would opt for May over Ignatieff.
If they can get some mainstream media attention; you let it get some burn.
Then you ask the question that most Canadians have in the back of their minds;
What if you dont have more seats the the Conservatives?
Will you reach an agreement with the Bloc? Will you give them the 7b they want?
And I would spend the entire election campaign highlighting that.
All this does is highlight this "hidden coalition agenda"
As for the results of the efforts;
Didnt we have a highly organized vote trading set up during the 2008 election?
That creative effort against the Conservatives resulted in them securing 19 more seats? |
|
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 03, 2011 5:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Queue Zoro^W Justin Trudeau as the reluctant hero figure to unite the left. Coming soon to an election near you..
Last edited by mazepynka on Thu Feb 03, 2011 6:43 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
|
|
|
beaver
Joined: 09 Oct 2008
Posts: 231
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 03, 2011 6:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| cosmostein wrote: | If I was a Conservative supporter with globs of cash to spare,
I would be pumping money into this effort like crazy.
When the PC merged with the CA, they lost 8% of their popular vote which was around 30% of their support.
I think more then enough center to slight right of center Liberal voters would opt for Harper over Layton, and most left of left New Democrat voters would opt for May over Ignatieff. .
All this does is highlight this "hidden coalition agenda"
As for the results of the efforts;
Didnt we have a highly organized vote trading set up during the 2008 election?
That creative effort against the Conservatives resulted in them securing 19 more seats? |
I wholeheartedly agree. This Catch 22 initiative is a double-edged sword. It plays into hands of Tories who can say: "see, the Lib-New Dems conspiring again" provoking thoughts of the dreaded Coalition. |
|
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 03, 2011 6:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| That only works while the prospect of a coalition is dreaded. Just imagine the fawning free furtherance the media would provide to NDP-Liberal coalition initiatives. I was only partly joking about Zoro stepping up. Maybe it's still a little early, but he may be the perfect next-generation vehicle for the progressive Canadian tomorrow. |
|
|
|
|
johnm
Joined: 05 Dec 2008
Posts: 73
votes: 2
Location: North Vancouver
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 04, 2011 2:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
Catch-22 is grasping at straws if my MP's riding is any example.
Andew Saxton beat out a well known Liberal incumbent: popular ex-mayor Don Bell.
Don's gone and it's hard to see Iggy's coattails sweeping some unknown Liberal into this seat, even with NDP strategic voting. |
|
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 04, 2011 10:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
| beaver wrote: | | cosmostein wrote: | If I was a Conservative supporter with globs of cash to spare,
I would be pumping money into this effort like crazy.
When the PC merged with the CA, they lost 8% of their popular vote which was around 30% of their support.
I think more then enough center to slight right of center Liberal voters would opt for Harper over Layton, and most left of left New Democrat voters would opt for May over Ignatieff. .
All this does is highlight this "hidden coalition agenda"
As for the results of the efforts;
Didnt we have a highly organized vote trading set up during the 2008 election?
That creative effort against the Conservatives resulted in them securing 19 more seats? |
I wholeheartedly agree. This Catch 22 initiative is a double-edged sword. It plays into hands of Tories who can say: "see, the Lib-New Dems conspiring again" provoking thoughts of the dreaded Coalition. |
The dreaded Coalition helps right now;
If the Liberals/NDP lose an election over this and consider a proper merger rather then one arranged in smoke filled rooms, there is an effect in the next election as well.
The current CPC only secured the popular vote equal to that of the PC/Alliance's peak in 1997 in this past election; it takes a long time to embrace a former enemy as a friend. |
|
|
|
|
Bugs
Joined: 16 Dec 2009
Posts: 1945
votes: 5
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 04, 2011 2:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Great point, Cosmo ... but, on the other hand, even right after the merger, there was no loss of seats in Parliament due to the merger.
In Ontario, there was a steady flow towards the CA, away from the PCs. In the Chretien years, there were no real losses of votes due to Adscam -- not in Ontario. The Liberal vote stayed remarkably stable.
The PCs, provincially, avoided a split because the CA did not enter provincial politics. Harris kept the two wings together, but the Red Tory wing chafed under his leadership.
In federal politics, the 600,000+ votes that were supporting the PCs seem to have gone to the NDP. They made big gains. The new Conservative Party maintained its seat count because the participation rate jumped to the same degree. (Of course, you can't assume every Red Tory acted the same way, and you can't assume that all of the increase in participation supported the Conservatives, but that probably describes the main trends.)
The point is -- the results of a merger can't be anticipated very well. |
|
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 04, 2011 3:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Bugs wrote: | Great point, Cosmo ... but, on the other hand, even right after the merger, there was no loss of seats in Parliament due to the merger.
In Ontario, there was a steady flow towards the CA, away from the PCs. In the Chretien years, there were no real losses of votes due to Adscam -- not in Ontario. The Liberal vote stayed remarkably stable.
The PCs, provincially, avoided a split because the CA did not enter provincial politics. Harris kept the two wings together, but the Red Tory wing chafed under his leadership.
In federal politics, the 600,000+ votes that were supporting the PCs seem to have gone to the NDP. They made big gains. The new Conservative Party maintained its seat count because the participation rate jumped to the same degree. (Of course, you can't assume every Red Tory acted the same way, and you can't assume that all of the increase in participation supported the Conservatives, but that probably describes the main trends.)
The point is -- the results of a merger can't be anticipated very well. |
I think after the merger there was a whole lotta horse trading with voters;
As I recall one polling agency said that the 2004 election saw the most "first time voters for political party XYZ".
Lets not forget the political landscape when Martin became PM.
Progressive Conservatives got "their man" in Paul Martin who was suppose to be the most Conservative Liberal leader in easily half a century.
Chrétien Liberals in large part went to the NDP who saw their popularity jump to the mid-20's in 2003 and ahead of both the PC's and Alliance respectively.
It didnt matter to Martin who was polling in the low 40's because he traded right support for left support.
When the CPC came into being; there was a slight pop at the expense of the Liberals and they pulled ahead of the NDP in the MoE; and when the writ was dropped the Liberals were still polling in the 40's.
The CPC went hard after the Liberal vote on the right, and Martin opted to go and try and recoup some of the support he had lost on the left, as the NDP finish the 2004 election with nearly double the support they had but no where near the 20+% they had leading up to the writ.
A Liberal and NDP merger is a little easier to handicap.
Its not a situation where the Liberals can pick support from both sides of the spectrum, this is a move that placate the left.
There are not that many ridings where a split NDP/Liberal vote really makes the difference we all have convinced ourselves it does.
Assuming that every Liberal and NDP voter votes for the new merged party in Ontario it costs us 15/51 seats.
Assuming a 2% Drop off, its 12 seats.
Assuming a 5% Drop off, its 6 seats.
Then anything beyond that still costs you basically the 4 seats that were within a few % of each other.
Then basically west on Ontario, Sakatoba, Alberta and BC
Assuming Liberals and NDP voters stay the same as 2008,
It costs us:
7 seats.
Yep.
7 out of 71 seats.
Then assuming a drop off of 2% its 5 seats
Then assuming a drop off of 5% its 2 seats
Basically we lose Gary Lunn & Dona Cadman in the event of any merger.
Whats interesting is that the Conservatives still maintain a minority government; and the Liberals and NDP do not have enough combine seats to form a government, so even if we take 2008 as our benchmark, they still need the Bloc.
The more and more I think about this a public merger of the Liberals/NDP is nothing more then a very shallow threat, because on paper after spending an hour with the 2008 election results are just not so impressive.
Who would have thunk it;
They are a paper tiger. |
|
|
|
|
kwlafayette
Joined: 03 Sep 2006
Posts: 6155
votes: 28
Location: Saskatoon Saskatchewan
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 04, 2011 6:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| All this does is play into the coalition rhetoric that the Conservatives already plan to use in the next election. |
|
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 07, 2011 10:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
| kwlafayette wrote: | | All this does is play into the coalition rhetoric that the Conservatives already plan to use in the next election. |
The interesting thing is that your riding is one of the few that would go NDP if this was the case. |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Page 1 of 1
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
Catch 22 strategy aims to vote out Conservative MPs |
|
phpBBCopyright 2001, 2005 phpBB |
|
