Canada General Discussion (2019-)

[mileslunn]

Polls like the Leger one could be advantageous for the Liberals. The closer voters perceive the race to be, the more ABC voting happens.

Absolutely and may help the Tories in Prairies too although much overall in sense that those further to right if Liberals have big lead may feel more comfortable voting PPC or Maverick party knowing Liberals are going to win anyways.  Whereas if close those supporting PPC and Maverick party likely come over to Tories to stop a Liberal win.  Obviously that has less impact than strategic voting on left, but there is that.  PPC was polling much higher than 1.6% it got and I think only because close a lot at last minute switched to Conservatives whereas if lead of either was more solid, PPC probably would have gotten closer to 4% mark.  And with O'Toole being more moderate, that could be even more devastating as if Tories stay where they are, I think you might see more further right feel its okay to vote Maverick or PPC thus pushing Tories into low 20s (combined right still 28-30%).

[mileslunn]

Polls like the Leger one could be advantageous for the Liberals. The closer voters perceive the race to be, the more ABC voting happens.

Absolutely and may help the Tories in Prairies too although much overall in sense that those further to right if Liberals have big lead may feel more comfortable voting PPC or Maverick party knowing Liberals are going to win anyways.  Whereas if close those supporting PPC and Maverick party likely come over to Tories to stop a Liberal win.  Obviously that has less impact than strategic voting on left, but there is that.  PPC was polling much higher than 1.6% it got and I think only because close a lot at last minute switched to Conservatives whereas if lead of either was more solid, PPC probably would have gotten closer to 4% mark.  And with O'Toole being more moderate, that could be even more devastating as if Tories stay where they are, I think you might see more further right feel its okay to vote Maverick or PPC thus pushing Tories into low 20s (combined right still 28-30%).

Side note: I wish pollsters would prompt for Maverick out west. If Western seperatists can poll 20% provincially in Alberta, we should probably be asking about them federally too.

Absolutely although I think a lot in Alberta were more your anti-lockdown types.  Had Kenney taken approach DeSantis and Abbott did in US, I suspect they would be around 5%.  Off course with hospitals probably collapsing leading to triage, deaths spiraling out of control, I suspect that might push even more moderates to NDP or perhaps hand a lifeline to Alberta Party.

[mileslunn]

Saw this https://nationalpost.com/opinion/john-ivison-tories-across-the-nation-confident-prepared-for-battle-in-upcoming-election .  I suspect privately a lot of Tories probably very nervous.  Most just won't say it as when in trouble you don't want to make it worse.  So coming out and saying, yeah our poll numbers are terrible and we expect to lose 40 seats is a good way to de-motivate your supporters and ensure you do even worse.  Parties always even if internals bad put on a brave face.

That being said, O'Toole's #s are not much different than Harper's in the summer of 2005 so parties have come back from this big a deficit.  But there are some strong differences.  Liberals had been in power for 12 years in 2005 so party was close to normal shelf life whereas now only 6 years and unless parties mess up really badly, they don't tend to get turfed that soon.  Likewise you had adscam whereas nothing like that now.  So 2005 shows in theory its possible to come back from double digit deficit, but I think circumstances now are much less favourable to Tories than in 2005.  Mind you that summer, I was convinced Harper would never become PM so my predictions haven't always been right.

[mileslunn]

Nothing especially important, but I'm sure regulars in this thread know this guy.

https://mobile.twitter.com/ksituan/status/1412480864597032971

Super cool that he's running, and running for the good guys too!

Anyone else buy his Alberta map?

Didn't Tories get over 80% here last time?  I suspect this is one of the safest Tory ridings in whole country.  In Saskatchewan, I think Saskatoon West and Desnethe-Missinippi-Churchill River only ridings I could see NDP flipping. 

[mileslunn]

Nothing especially important, but I'm sure regulars in this thread know this guy.

https://mobile.twitter.com/ksituan/status/1412480864597032971

Super cool that he's running, and running for the good guys too!

Anyone else buy his Alberta map?

Didn't Tories get over 80% here last time?  I suspect this is one of the safest Tory ridings in whole country.  In Saskatchewan, I think Saskatoon West and Desnethe-Missinippi-Churchill River only ridings I could see NDP flipping. 

No one is under the illusion he will win. It's just nice to see him put his name on the ballot.

Nothing especially important, but I'm sure regulars in this thread know this guy.

https://mobile.twitter.com/ksituan/status/1412480864597032971

Super cool that he's running, and running for the good guys too!

Anyone else buy his Alberta map?

Never underestimate the power of cartography to swing a district.

Didn't Tories get over 80% here last time?  I suspect this is one of the safest Tory ridings in whole country.  In Saskatchewan, I think Saskatoon West and Desnethe-Missinippi-Churchill River only ridings I could see NDP flipping. 

It's a paper candidacy, NDP got only 9.5% there last time

It's only a paper candidacy if you don't campaign, and he has already been door knocking.

Lots of times candidates with future ambitions start in a no hope riding to learn the ropes of campaigning and then next time around run in a more winnable one.  So might be a trial run to learn ropes of campaigning and then in 2025 run in a more winnable one.

[mileslunn]

Conservatives pitch fiscal reform to end 'mistreatment of Western Canadians' - Leader Erin O'Toole, in Calgary a day after PM, says Alberta would get $4B under plan


"The proposal would give Alberta $4 billion in rebates, according to the Conservatives, leaving $1 billion for the rest of the country."

The irony is probably lost on those fine folks who vote CPC because the damn Frenchies in Kwebeck and the lazy fishers in the maritimes steal their hard earned tax dollars through equalization

Probably suggests internals are horrible and actually at risk of losing seats in Alberta so trying to shore up that.  Fact Trudeau is in Alberta and seems quite confident suggests to me party internals show they are possibly on cusp of breakthrough there.

[mileslunn]

https://twitter.com/NEWS957/status/1413479246509400074

Wow, so he is switched fall on.  I know he switched to Liberals federally, but I assumed being a Red Tory he would still support the PCs provincially as provincial PCs are still like the old PCs pre-merger whereas federal Tories are not.

[mileslunn]

Third longest serving PM in Canadian history (17 years and 5 majority governments).

 Not likely to happen as nowadays people tend to fatigue after 10 years, maybe 15 if change leaders so I think Liberals lasting that long is extremely unlikely.

Established a 1,200 CA$ a month universal basic income for all Canadians.


While many favour this, not feasible without bankrupting country unless taxes go up a lot.  And just raising on rich won't cut as not enough of them, even if you taxed them at 100%.  Would have to raise GST at least 10% maybe 15% and somehow doubt public would support that.

Legalized Prostitution throughout Canada, in a heavily regulated system with brothels similar to the one in Australia

That is probably coming sooner or later much like legalization with marijuana.

Changed the national anthem line "God keep our land glorious and free" to "We keep our land glorious and free".


That would drive the right nuts, but much like change of all our sons command, I suspect this will come soon too.  We are a super woke nation.

Amended the Canada Health Act to include universal pharmacare, vision, dental, mental health, and gender transition treatment.


Pharmacare I think likely comes if Liberals are in power for another decade.  Dental care is a 50/50

Instrumental in the creation of the Canada Wireless Act, which further regulates the telecommunications industry. Establishes crown corporations similar to SaskTel across Canada. Breaks up Rogers, Bell and Telus and allows for wireless companies from other Commonwealth of Nations countries to operate in Canada to give consumers more options.

I agree something done here but unlikely both.  If more market oriented, then foreign ownership rules dropped which Marc Garneau ran on back in 2014 and Tories favour.  Freeland coming from left of party I think is more likely to go for nationalization, but perhaps opens to competition, but doubt does both.

Instrumental in the creation of the Canada Housing Act. Which is billed as "Universal Healthcare for Housing" and led to Canada having the lowest housing prices per capita in the G20.

I cannot see us having lowest housing prices in G20.  We are richer than many so our housing prices will always be higher than developing countries.  As for lowest in developed world, I will believe it when I see it, but yes if done could make her loved by millennials and Gen Z.  But hated by boomers who largely rely on housing as their primary asset to find retirement.

* Instrumental in the creation of a High Speed Rail line between Windsor and Quebec City.

This would be something that could look good as many talk about it, but no one ever walks the walk so if she achieved this, would be major achievement.

* Worked on an agreement with Quebec to change its status from the Province of Quebec to the Autonomous Nation of Quebec. Giving it further autonomy while recognizing it as both wholly Canadian and wholly distinct.

Not possible, requires constitutional amendment which requires 7 of 10 provinces with 50% + 1 of population support it.  This would probably be type of issue that would help push Alberta and maybe a few other Western provinces to separate.

* Instrumental in the establishment of CANZUK, allowing Canadians to live and work freely in Australia, New Zealand and the United Kingdom. While allowing nationals of those nations to live and work freely in Canada with approval from the country as a whole and the province, territory or autonomous nation they intend to move to (thereby satisfying Quebec).

This seems more a Conservative obsession.  While yes many would like this, I don't think there is much interest of parties on left for this.  Many see it as harkening back to old empire and even political correctness and race will come up as favouring white English speaking countries.  Might go over well in other three, but not in Canada which is a lot more woke than those.  Pretty much any free mobility agreement that is predominately white countries only is a non-starter in Canada.  It must include at least one non-white country and with asides Japan and South Korea (and a few others), most a lot poorer than Canada that seems unlikely anytime soon.

* Admits Turks and Caicos as the 10th province (remember Quebec is now an Autonomous nation and is not technically a province).

Lots of talk about it joining but requires a constitutional amendment.  More likely possibility is it joins an existing province.  Nova Scotia has already said they would take them as part of their province.  Other issue but could easily be worked out is Turks & Caicos Islands has no income tax while Canada has very high rates so people there might not like that.  But perhaps as an inducement maybe say those making less than 50K there would remain exempt and only those higher pay so avoid it becoming a tax haven where all the rich go to avoid paying taxes, but also be acceptable to middle class there.  

* Negotiated with the United States to give Puerto Rico the option to enter Canada as an autonomous nation. It votes to join, giving it a status that while similar to Quebec is more self contained. Allowing Puerto Rico to benefit from being part of Canada and Canada to benefit by having a larger economy of scale, cultural diversity and diplomatic foothold in Latin American organizations.

That is just silly.  More likely Puerto Rico becomes 51st state of US.

In summary some are impossible, some possible and would make her a great one.  One thing to remember is public is a lot more polarized than in past.  We tend to on polarization be about 10-15 years behind US so I think uniting people is a lot tougher than it was historically.  Too many go to echo chambers so isn't same united and common purpose as once was.

[mileslunn]

Also 2004 was 17 years ago and of those who have died since, my guess is Conservatives did better amongst them than those still alive.  By contrast someone who was 18 in 2004 would be 35 today and so a whole new generation who couldn't vote.  Never mind since then we have taken in 3 million new immigrants and while Conservatives can do well here with right policies, I think nativism amongst some in base has really turned this group off, even amongst those who may lean right.  So could be demographic churn.

At same time be interested in seeing who undecided are.  I know in Alberta with Kenney's big drop, almost all undecided are former UCP voters as very few 2019 UCP voters have gone over to NDP.  Many have instead moved to undecided column so its possible a lot of the undecided are on the right.  Question is where do they go?  Do they go to further right party?  Return to Tories?  Or not vote at all?

[mileslunn]

I'm sure this has been, if not answered, then at least discussed. I've read some of the comments in this thread, but I have to say I haven't seen anybody clearly answer it (not in a way that fully makes sense to me anyway.)

Never mind the polls right after Paul Martin became Liberal leader when it was generally assumed the Liberals would win 250 seats, the low the Conservatives received in an election was 29.6% of the vote in 2004.  According to NANOS, the Conservatives are now at 23.6% support.  It's generally assumed the base for the Conservatives is around 30%.

How does one explain this sharp and sudden drop in support for the Conservatives below what was assumed to be their base?

TBH, it makes no sense to me.

Because the Conservative Party of Canada is unbelievably awful. They combine the worst aspects of politics - they've got the bumbling incompetence that Trudeau displayed in his first term, they've got the standoffish and nasty nature Harper displayed in his last term, and ultimately they seem like an empty vessel that rarely puts forward half-decent policy ideas.

They've alienated a huge chunk of their accessible voters, both centrists and right wingers. They can't compete with the Liberals on policy ideas (in part because Trudeau can run around funding LRT projects and O'Toole can't). They don't seem competent when O'Toole can't seem to keep his party singing to the same tune, and his provincial Conservative counterparts haven't been doing very well.

Seriously, if you're not a CPC loyalist, or someone who wants Trudeau to go above all else, why should you vote for the Conservative Party?

On policy I would argue they will wait until campaign starts lest Liberals steal their ideas.  That being said I think bigger problem is what issue is there where Canadians lean right nowadays?  On pretty much every issue Canadians lean left.  Social Conservatism has never sold in Canada while fiscal conservatism is not too popular nowadays (it may in future, but not right now) so pretty much while I agree party with a different leader might not be doing as badly.  I think political make up of country means Tories cannot win no matter who they run and what they put forward.  Its also why with how awful things are I am not optimistic of them bouncing back anytime soon.  Some may have disagreed with me, but I think odds of them not forming government before 2030 are far higher than not.  Sure 9 years is a long ways away.  But the base and membership of party is not going to suddenly change.  I think party is in a big rut and its why I see NDP is being more likely to defeat Liberals when people fatigue of them than Tories.  Just because parties always come back ignores that if you have a tone deaf membership, pretty tough to.

[mileslunn]

I'm sure this has been, if not answered, then at least discussed. I've read some of the comments in this thread, but I have to say I haven't seen anybody clearly answer it (not in a way that fully makes sense to me anyway.)

Never mind the polls right after Paul Martin became Liberal leader when it was generally assumed the Liberals would win 250 seats, the low the Conservatives received in an election was 29.6% of the vote in 2004.  According to NANOS, the Conservatives are now at 23.6% support.  It's generally assumed the base for the Conservatives is around 30%.

How does one explain this sharp and sudden drop in support for the Conservatives below what was assumed to be their base?

TBH, it makes no sense to me.

Because the Conservative Party of Canada is unbelievably awful. They combine the worst aspects of politics - they've got the bumbling incompetence that Trudeau displayed in his first term, they've got the standoffish and nasty nature Harper displayed in his last term, and ultimately they seem like an empty vessel that rarely puts forward half-decent policy ideas.

They've alienated a huge chunk of their accessible voters, both centrists and right wingers. They can't compete with the Liberals on policy ideas (in part because Trudeau can run around funding LRT projects and O'Toole can't). They don't seem competent when O'Toole can't seem to keep his party singing to the same tune, and his provincial Conservative counterparts haven't been doing very well.

Seriously, if you're not a CPC loyalist, or someone who wants Trudeau to go above all else, why should you vote for the Conservative Party?

As somebody on the center left (a liberal but not a Liberal) I obviously agree with this, but the problem is we're not really the voters that the Conservative Party is targeting or has been part of their base for 17+ years.  So, this is our view, but is it the view of those voters?

I mean, I'm one of the more right wing Liberals so I could concievably vote Conservative, but it would require the Liberals to really screw up, so yeah not exactly an accessible vote.

To put a slightly different spin on Frank's take. Did you seriously consider voting for the Ford-Tories in 2018?

There's ~6-7% of the vote in Ontario that was willing to vote for a right wing populist leader in Ontario, recently enough that demographic churn wouldn't be an issue, that didn't vote Conservative or PPC in 2019. Those are the voters the Tories need to win back*, and whose vote decision process we really need to consider in the "what's compelling about the Tories" question.

*More or less, obviously the Fords are always going to have a different appeal in Toronto than the federal Tories.

I don't think you can draw a direct connection between Ford Nation and the federal Tories, Ford Nation ability to outperform the federal tories always relies on their ability to win minority communites in Toronto. On provincal level these voters are open to right-wing populist ideas regarding fiscal conservatives and the need to check left-wing ideas.
 
A conservative federal platform doesn't have the same resonance, there's no appetite for issues like western alienation that make up federal canadian conservative populism. The Liberals strong immigrant machine allows them to keep these communites on their sides along with being percived to be better on the issue of immigration which the conservatives can't outflank without abandoning their base.

On top of Ford Nation voters in Toronto (many of whom normally vote Liberal), a lot of Ford's gains (probably most of them) came from centre/centre-right Liberals voting strategically to stop the NDP. They're not going to vote Conservative if the NDP isn't a threat.

Very true, it does seem especially in 416 suburbs and 905 belt that when a Tory-Liberal race, Liberals almost always come out on top.  2008 despite being a national disaster, parties ran even while last time Tories at either level beat the Liberals in 905 belt was 1999 provincially.  By contrast both times in past century when it was a Tory-NDP battle (2011 federally and 2018 provincially), Tories won. 

I suspect that was a big reason Harper wanted to eliminate Liberals as he figured if NDP was main opponent, party would have better odds and could win those.  Perhaps he looked at BC which is not exactly a conservative province yet until recently, its been dominated by centre-right provincially.  Or across the pond as while UK is perhaps a bit more conservative not sure difference is as big as election results show.  After all Tories in UK usually get over 40% most of the time whereas in Canada, only in really good elections do they.

[mileslunn]

This is interesting https://abacusdata.ca/party-leaders-canada-abacus-july-2021/ .  Singh has very good personal numbers and while that may not mean much, after all both Layton and Broadbent had similarly good numbers yet never won, it does suggest to me if Liberals were unpopular, he might have a legitimate shot.  Trudeau's numbers are a meh.  Not great, but not either type that tends to lead to defeats of governments.  O'Toole's are awful and a few comparisons I can think of who had numbers like that for opposition leaders are Tim Hudak, Stephane Dion, and Michael Ignatieff.  I don't know of any opposition leader having numbers this bad and going onto win.  Closest perhaps was Harper in summer of 2005 whose were pretty negative and then changed that during the campaign, but I don't think they were this bad.  Doug Ford in 2018 and Jason Kenney in 2019 were also negative but again not this bad and Ford also benefitted from Wynne being worse and Ontario generally not comfortable with an NDP government while Kenney benefitted from fact Alberta is by nature conservative so they are default party, not natural underdog like Tories are federally.

[mileslunn]

Exactly I am from BC and BC is the most Western province and largest in West and is in many ways more aligned with Ontario than Alberta or Saskatchewan.  Western Alienation has really meant Alberta alienation and Saskatchewan.  A lot pushing it are really just right wing voters who are upset country won't vote the way they wished and is more progressive than to their liking.  And funny thing is even in Alberta, most voters aren't as conservative as they are.  In fact after seeing Kenney, some may be coming to conclusion maybe Trudeau for all his flaws as not as bad as it could be and that this is just really a diversionary tactic by right to cover for own mistakes.

[mileslunn]

Exactly I am from BC and BC is the most Western province and largest in West and is in many ways more aligned with Ontario than Alberta or Saskatchewan.

If this were the case, then the Reform Party wouldn't have won a huge majority of BC constituencies in 1993 and the Liberal Party would have won even a single BC constituency in 1980. More recently, in 2019, the Conservative Party won the most votes and the most seats in British Columbia; the only other provinces where that was the case were Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Manitoba. It might be true that residents of downtown Vancouver feel more connected to downtown Toronto than they do to the rest of the West, but voting patterns certainly do not suggest that this feeling is shared by the electorate of British Columbia in general.

That was true in 90s, largely over Charlottetown and Meech Lake Accord.  But today it is anything but.  If you look at raw percentage, Tory share in BC usually not far off Ontario; it was 34% in BC, 33% in Ontario in 2019.  Reason Tories do a lot better in seats in BC is NDP and Greens much stronger in BC than Ontario so stronger splits.  In 2011 when Liberals imploded, Tories did better in Ontario than BC despite similar percentages 44.4% in Ontario vs. 45.6% in BC.  Reason is better splits in Ontario.

By contrast in Alberta, Tory vote has been at least 20 points higher than BC in every election post merger while in Ontario biggest variance since merger has been 5 points.  Peace River part of BC only part that is politically and culturally similar to Alberta.  BC Interior may go largely Conservative, but if you look at raw numbers, its more in line with what Tories get in rural Ontario than Alberta.

BC has a very strong environmentalist movement, never mind first jurisdiction in North America to implement a carbon tax so on fossil fuels and climate change, province quite divergent from Alberta.  In 90s, it was more over constitutional issues and feeling feds pandered too much to Quebec and ignored West so much different than today.  Today its more in Alberta due to feeling feds are hostile to energy industry.

[mileslunn]

On a side note, while at this point still gossip, there is talk Aaron Gunn will enter BC Liberal leadership.  While he has lots of followers, party is not known for right wing populism so doubt he will win leadership (I think Falcon favourite, but Ross could be a wildcard).  But if BC Liberals stupid enough to chose them (I don't think they will, unlike Tories federally at least they have a better track record of winning and seem to want to win not throw elections; only struggle now as Horgan very popular so no leader could defeat him) party would get annihiliated and like Social Credit in 1991, probably would ensure another decade of NDP government until a new centre-right party emerged.

[mileslunn]

On a side note, while at this point still gossip, there is talk Aaron Gunn will enter BC Liberal leadership.  While he has lots of followers, party is not known for right wing populism so doubt he will win leadership (I think Falcon favourite, but Ross could be a wildcard).  But if BC Liberals stupid enough to chose them (I don't think they will, unlike Tories federally at least they have a better track record of winning and seem to want to win not throw elections; only struggle now as Horgan very popular so no leader could defeat him) party would get annihiliated and like Social Credit in 1991, probably would ensure another decade of NDP government until a new centre-right party emerged.

What do you think are the odds of the NDP replacing the "Free Entreprise Coalition" as the natural governing party of BC? Horgan seems to have drifted the BC NDP to LPC territory, forcing the BC Liberals to fish out of a smaller pond, and BC generally seems to be swiftly moving to the left.

Hard to say, but I suspect NDP will win a lot more often in future.  Real question is post Horgan, do they stick with more moderate approach or is next leader more from left of party and they face some problem Labour party did in UK which had broad appeal under Tony Blair but lost as moved leftward.

BC is definitely trending leftward however and BC Liberals cannot win on the we aren't the NDP.  That being said party unlike Conservatives is much more top down which some may say is a bad thing, but generally those types try to keep fringe types like Aaron Gunn out.  I doubt BC Liberals are out for good, but I am not sure if the old pro free enterprise coalition has same viability in past.  At same time in 1991, it looked like big shift yet things returned so a lot depends on whether NDP stays where they are or swings left.

[mileslunn]

On a side note, while at this point still gossip, there is talk Aaron Gunn will enter BC Liberal leadership.  While he has lots of followers, party is not known for right wing populism so doubt he will win leadership (I think Falcon favourite, but Ross could be a wildcard).  But if BC Liberals stupid enough to chose them (I don't think they will, unlike Tories federally at least they have a better track record of winning and seem to want to win not throw elections; only struggle now as Horgan very popular so no leader could defeat him) party would get annihiliated and like Social Credit in 1991, probably would ensure another decade of NDP government until a new centre-right party emerged.

What do you think are the odds of the NDP replacing the "Free Entreprise Coalition" as the natural governing party of BC? Horgan seems to have drifted the BC NDP to LPC territory, forcing the BC Liberals to fish out of a smaller pond, and BC generally seems to be swiftly moving to the left.

Hard to say, but I suspect NDP will win a lot more often in future.  Real question is post Horgan, do they stick with more moderate approach or is next leader more from left of party and they face some problem Labour party did in UK which had broad appeal under Tony Blair but lost as moved leftward.

BC is definitely trending leftward however and BC Liberals cannot win on the we aren't the NDP.  That being said party unlike Conservatives is much more top down which some may say is a bad thing, but generally those types try to keep fringe types like Aaron Gunn out.  I doubt BC Liberals are out for good, but I am not sure if the old pro free enterprise coalition has same viability in past.  At same time in 1991, it looked like big shift yet things returned so a lot depends on whether NDP stays where they are or swings left.

It certainly is hard to see a Liberal-Tory fusion party in today's environment. Not too long ago, the likes of Joyce Murray were members of BC's center-right party.

Of course, a huge part of it has been that John Horgan and his cabinet (at least from the outside looking in) have been extremely competent. If that's the basis of his support, then all it takes is a few scandals or a radical/incompetent successor to bring back the Liberals.

BC Liberals were really only a true merger of two in 2001.  In 2005, 2009, 2013, and 2017 they were more like Tories in 2011 federally or Ontario PCs now.  United all the Conservatives and appealed to Blue Liberals who didn't want NDP.  Since Horgan has been moderate and competent, NDP has more or less united Liberal and NDP voters federally.  But as Ontario showed in 2018 that can easily change if things go bad.  After all in 2008 and 2011, Harper got almost same share of the popular vote as BC Liberals in 2009 and 2013 and both cases had very weak federal Liberals.

That being said, it seems a lot of the Liberals who vote Liberal in Liberal-Tory race but Tory in NDP-Tory race skew heavily over 50 so could be a longer term problem for party.  Now if party stupid enough to choose Aaron Gunn (and I don't think they will), then they may never form government again.  Outside a few interior ridings, I don't think right wing populism or northern style Trumpism really sells well in BC.  Yes he has large internet following, but he is toxic to vast majority.

As for caucus, so far seem moderate, but I've heard from others they do have some radicals but Horgan much like Harper federally is good at controlling them.  So Horgan will be tough to beat, but can his successor have same discipline is question.  Scheer no more right wing than Harper and O'Toole yes, but both getting hurt badly on their inability to control more crazy elements which Harper kept under wraps so that will be NDP's challenge post Horgan.  But as long as he is leader I think BC Liberals face an uphill battle beating him.  But choose any of the current candidates, can probably improve slightly over 2020 but still fall short, while chose Aaron Gunn risk split and possible irrelevance.

[mileslunn]

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/article-more-than-leadership-or-policy-its-the-conservative-temperament-thats/

Coyne for the Globe.

I don't want to fully break the paywall, but this blurb resonated particularly well with me:

"If the besetting sin of Liberals is smarmy sanctimoniousness, the Conservative equivalent is a chippy defensiveness, an adolescent petulance, a conviction that the cards are perpetually stacked against them."

This is basically what I mean by the "Conservative image problem". It's not necessarily their policies (it's a part of it, but I don't think Canada is an inherently left-wing country where conservative politics can never win - people who criticize CPC policy for being too conservative are, for the most part, people who wouldn't vote for them anyway), the problem is their delivery. The CPC's culture, especially under O'Toole, manifests itself as angry and pessimistic - unlike the somewhat ideologically comparable Boris Johnson or Francois Legault who project more confidence and vision. Underneath that image I think is a defeatist mentality, a constant problem for generations of Canadian Conservatives.

Agree on the defeatists part.  I think Conservatives are afraid of Liberal attacks which will happen no matter what so better to go and out explain policy.  Yes it will get bashed by usual suspects, but if you stand for something better than nothing.  That being said winning can change things.  BC NDP has long had a defeatist mentality but after forming government in 2017, that has really changed. 

Also a lot of Conservatives seem to have a very pessimistic view of Canada that it is heading for all kinds of bad stuff and I don't think that sells.  Yes we have challenges but we are not going to become next Venezuela. 

Gordon Campbell in 2001 with New Era is a good example of a more positive one.  Very fiscally conservative platform but very much was forward looking not backward.  Off course today such platform wouldn't work, but still same tone with different policies may be way to go.

At same time, I do think last decade has really helped left.  In past lower taxes, balanced budgets, and smaller government was core conservative policy and until recently, there was a core audience for that.  Maybe not majority of population, but a solid 30% and over 40% open to it.  Today I think support for that much lower and not vote winner it once was so now party sort of doesn't know where to go.  There isn't any obvious Conservative policy that is a huge vote winner.  And many top issues like affordability, climate change, and income inequality, policies to deal with them tend to lean to left thus challenge.

[mileslunn]

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/article-more-than-leadership-or-policy-its-the-conservative-temperament-thats/

Coyne for the Globe.

I don't want to fully break the paywall, but this blurb resonated particularly well with me:

"If the besetting sin of Liberals is smarmy sanctimoniousness, the Conservative equivalent is a chippy defensiveness, an adolescent petulance, a conviction that the cards are perpetually stacked against them."

This is basically what I mean by the "Conservative image problem". It's not necessarily their policies (it's a part of it, but I don't think Canada is an inherently left-wing country where conservative politics can never win - people who criticize CPC policy for being too conservative are, for the most part, people who wouldn't vote for them anyway), the problem is their delivery. The CPC's culture, especially under O'Toole, manifests itself as angry and pessimistic - unlike the somewhat ideologically comparable Boris Johnson or Francois Legault who project more confidence and vision. Underneath that image I think is a defeatist mentality, a constant problem for generations of Canadian Conservatives.

The similarities between the CPC and the Labour Party are quite astounding.

Very true and while both once in a generation get a leader who is successful, they seem to fall apart when that leader leaves whereas Liberals in Canada and Tories in UK seem to avoid infighting and problems when this happens usually although not always. 

[mileslunn]

I think also Liberals do well in sense because they have won more elections than lost, people see them as safe choice so if unsure tend to default to them.  And having NDP to their left helps avoid being sunk by crazies in party.  Tories don't have any real party to their right (yes PPC and Maverick, but those are pretty small and fringe) thus have crazies who scare off moderate voters. 

For Tories a number of policies that are conservative but they might have a chance on are as follows:

-  A revenue neutral carbon tax like Michael Chong proposed or BC Liberals had.  Would anger base, but could be seen as pro business while helping environment.  True Chong's tax cuts were more towards higher income than lower, but can easily use same concept and just tweak rates.

-  Opportunity zones.  Any census division where unemployment is 1.5x the national average, firms that locate there would pay 5% instead of 9% if a small business and 10% instead of 15% if large.  So allows them to cut corporate taxes, but also aimed at helping communities that need it most.  Also so it creates jobs, require that it must employ at least five people who are not shareholders.

-  Remove barriers for foreign owned telcos to enter to allow more competition and choice.

-  Remove GST for 1 year on all restaurant bills and hotel bills so as to help hardest hit industries.  Or perhaps maybe a tax credit up to maximum of $1,000 for purchases on those and again only for one year.  UK did this last year for restaurants.

-  Allow joint income tax filing like US, Germany, and France do and perhaps maybe a cap so largely benefits lower incomes, so pro-family but lower taxes

-  Increased child tax benefit for each child so pro family and lower taxes.  In France, a single mother with 5 children has to make 57,000 Euros before she pays any income tax and France has higher birth rate than most of Europe.

-  Change immigration point system to give bonus points to those who go to low populated areas like Australia does.  This could help on housing front while still remaining pro-immigration and help smaller communities.

-  Expand rural broadband, this appeals to rural base but also could encourage more remote working.

-  Work with municipalities to convert office space to housing so help on housing front.

-  Policies to help make Canada a tech sector hub and knowledge corridors (Paul Martin was big on this and I think you could find cross party support here).

Obviously any socially conservative policy is DOA.  Cutting programs is a non-starter until we get a few credit downgrades.  Tax cuts despite being a staple conservative policy are actually toughest.  The ones that benefit lowest income tend to cost the most money while those aimed at higher income tend to be cheapest but least popular (we don't have a lot of rich people thus why cheaper).  In fact on tax policy, I think best thing is a full review of tax system, which I think is Conservative policy, but other than economists and some policy wonks, I doubt that is a big vote getter.  Still worth doing once in power like Mulroney did but to improve economy. 

I also think MacKay's job plan making some tweaks was good one.  It was more positive and forward looking rather than reactionary and negative.

[mileslunn]

Robert Fife just tweeted Stephen Harper spoke to UCP caucus.  That suggests trouble.  I also don't think Stephen Harper is that well liked, if anything more disliked today than even in 2015.  My bet is if Kenney stepped down and he were leader running against Notley, Notley would win hands down.  Heck if he ran against Trudeau, party would get absolutely crushed.  Otherwise party has to get as far away from him as they can to come back and that includes even in Alberta.

[mileslunn]

Oh yeah if we're talking elsewhere in the Anglo world there are tons of similar places in the Pacific Northwest. BC is basically an extension of the PNW in some respects.

Within Canada, you could make an argument for PEI except it's very deferential to the LPC and the NDP doesn't have much of a presence. But it's old, white, pretty rural, touristy, and leans left. Although PEI is also very agricultural unlike Vancouver Island, so the root of its left lean is different. PEI is ancestrally Liberal, very rarely voting Tory federally, while Vancouver Island does not have this ancestral Liberal tradition.

I would describe PEI as more traditional Red Tory in likes of Joe Clark and Robert Stanfield.  They have a Tory premier who is very popular.  Federally Tories do poorly there as right wing populism doesn't sell there and party seen as too much like Reform Party.  So I would argue Liberal strength there is more due to dislike of alternatives.  In many ways it is your communitarian conservative area in culture and that style of conservatism is largely absent in federal Tories but Liberals in many ways have elements that can appeal to those types.

[mileslunn]

Oh yeah if we're talking elsewhere in the Anglo world there are tons of similar places in the Pacific Northwest. BC is basically an extension of the PNW in some respects.

Within Canada, you could make an argument for PEI except it's very deferential to the LPC and the NDP doesn't have much of a presence. But it's old, white, pretty rural, touristy, and leans left. Although PEI is also very agricultural unlike Vancouver Island, so the root of its left lean is different. PEI is ancestrally Liberal, very rarely voting Tory federally, while Vancouver Island does not have this ancestral Liberal tradition.

West Kootenay in BC is pretty similar to Vancouver Island, too, and definitely the most similar area in Canada (other than immediately adjacent areas like the Sunshine Coast and Powell River). Kind of interesting that the same doesn't continue over the border into Washington or Idaho at all.

Two reasons for this: Dhukobors and Draft Dodgers.  Former live a communal lifestyle and are a pacifists while latter specifically moved from US in 60s and many settled in Slocan Valley.  In fact in Nelson and surrounding area, a large part of the senior population was born in US and moved up during Vietnam War to avoid serving thus brought the hippie counterculture with them.

[mileslunn]

"Western alienation" doesn't seem to be much of a thing in South Burnaby.  When Jagmeet Singh moved there to run a small number may have objected to him being a parachute candidate, but nobody seemed to object on the grounds that he's an "easterner" who "doesn't get the West."

I live in BC and I don't see much Western Alienation at all.  Most here have little affinity for Alberta and while maybe more alienation in Interior not Lower Mainland.  Yes in past, BC and Alberta were on same side in 90s, but that was over constitutional debates and feeling government gave special status to Quebec which generally in Western Canada has had less support than in Ontario.  Also seeing French on cereal boxes used to annoy a lot as BC has few French speakers, but nowadays its a non-issue and people have moved on.

Canada in many ways is becoming more like US with less of an East vs. West divide but more coasts vs. interior.  Even US actually did at one time sort of have divide, after all in 1976, Carter won almost all the states east of the Mississippi, while Ford dominated most of the Western states, even West Coast. 

[mileslunn]

Canada in many ways is becoming more like US with less of an East vs. West divide but more coasts vs. interior.  Even US actually did at one time sort of have divide, after all in 1976, Carter won almost all the states east of the Mississippi, while Ford dominated most of the Western states, even West Coast. 

Minor nitpick, but it wouldn't really be "coasts vs interior" in Canada, because BC is the only highly-populated coastal area and most Canadians live in the interior. It's more like "metropolitan vs rural areas", which already somewhat exists in terms of Liberal support, but there are notable exceptions (most obviously, Calgary and Edmonton being CPC-voting metro areas, and the maritimes LPC-voting rural area).

I think better might be major body of water vs. away from one since if you count Great Lakes and St. Lawrence as coasts then this does more or less pan out.