Canada General Discussion: Trudeau II

[DC Al Fine]

P e o p l e k i n d

That was a very silly clip.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/wine-boycott-alberta-british-columbia-trans-mountain-1.4523473

Crazy Alberta Premier bans British Columbia wines.

Hopefully federal NDP wakes up and kick out that oil industry puppet out of the party, with every MLA that refuses to vote her out.

Puppet? Good grief. Might I suggest Notley takes the stances she does because she wants to be re-elected and the Albertan public is generally pro-oil? If the NDP wants to lose elections on a principal that's their business, but let's stop this silly nonsense about someone who started their career in what was then a permanently minor party being a careerist puppet of industry.

[DC Al Fine]

Rookie MLA for Cumberland North, Elizabeth Smith-McCrossin is running for NS PC leader, bringing the field to four. No other candidates are expected to run.

Scott Armstrong, former MP for Cumberland—Colchester—Musquodoboit Valley has endorsed her and will likely co-chair her campaign.

The standings for caucus endorsements are as follows:

Houston: 5
Clarke: 3
Lohr: 0
Smith-McCrossin: 0

Undeclared: 4
Neutral (interim leader): 1

[Hatman 🍁]

P e o p l e k i n d

That was a very silly clip.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/wine-boycott-alberta-british-columbia-trans-mountain-1.4523473

Crazy Alberta Premier bans British Columbia wines.

Hopefully federal NDP wakes up and kick out that oil industry puppet out of the party, with every MLA that refuses to vote her out.

Puppet? Good grief. Might I suggest Notley takes the stances she does because she wants to be re-elected and the Albertan public is generally pro-oil? If the NDP wants to lose elections on a principal that's their business, but let's stop this silly nonsense about someone who started their career in what was then a permanently minor party being a careerist puppet of industry.

Indeed. The cynic in me believes that she only way she can get re-elected is by attacking her own party. (and maybe Horgan is in on this too, and is a scheme to siphon off votes from the Greens)

It's unfortunate that this party is experiencing a civil war of sorts, but I must admit it is pretty damn amusing.

[mileslunn]

I agree with the Alberta and BC feud are all tactical.  Considering how far back Notley is and that there is only 478 days left in her mandate, this is pretty much the only chance she has although even with this, I expect polls might tighten, but doubt it will be enough to overcome the gap.  In the case of BC, Horgan has probably figured there are few BC Liberal votes for taking, otherwise the party is down to its core so to win next time around he needs to pick up some Green votes.

[ProgressiveCanadian]

Notley has been nothing but a disappointment. Her father would be ashamed.

[136or142]

P e o p l e k i n d

That was a very silly clip.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/wine-boycott-alberta-british-columbia-trans-mountain-1.4523473

Crazy Alberta Premier bans British Columbia wines.

Hopefully federal NDP wakes up and kick out that oil industry puppet out of the party, with every MLA that refuses to vote her out.

Puppet? Good grief. Might I suggest Notley takes the stances she does because she wants to be re-elected and the Albertan public is generally pro-oil? If the NDP wants to lose elections on a principal that's their business, but let's stop this silly nonsense about someone who started their career in what was then a permanently minor party being a careerist puppet of industry.

Indeed. The cynic in me believes that she only way she can get re-elected is by attacking her own party. (and maybe Horgan is in on this too, and is a scheme to siphon off votes from the Greens)

It's unfortunate that this party is experiencing a civil war of sorts, but I must admit it is pretty damn amusing.

This may be the first time it's happened in the NDP, but it isn't the first time it's happened between two governments of the same party.  In the early 1980s, after the imposition of the National Energy Program, then Progressive Conservative Alberta Premier Peter Lougheed got into a civil war with then Progressive Conservative Ontario Premier Bill Davis who was a staunch supporter of the National Energy Program.

Lougheed's comment of "let the eastern bastards freeze in the dark" was largely directed at Premier Bill Davis.

At that time, the two provincial and federal Progressive Conservative Parties were much more linked.  Davis' Big Blue (campaign) machine assisted the federal party as did the Alberta Progressive Conservatives and both Peter Lougheed and Bill Davis were considered as potential candidates in the 1983 federal Progressive Conservative leadership race.

I've written this a number of times before here: the reason this is considered a 'family fight' is because in order to join a New Democratic Party at any level (Federal, Provincial and, where existing municipal), you have to join at all levels.  If I recall correctly, Rachel Notley had previously threatened to try to split the Alberta NDP from the Federal NDP during the debate over the LEAP Manifesto.  I don't know if this civil war over a pipeline is a good reason to separate the parties, but overall I think it's by far a net negative to have all the NDP parties combined. 

I recently read Brad Levigne's book on the 'Orange Crush' and he also was unhappy with it, though for completely different reasons which I believe he said he successfully resolved.

[136or142]

P e o p l e k i n d

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau apologized for this, calling it a 'dumb joke.'  Watching the clip, it was clear most of the audience thought it was a joke.

However, people don't like it because they don't like the implications, but there are likely sound reasons for gender neutral language.  

I've been reading the book Thinking, Fast and Slow by Daniel Kahenman and he mentions a phenomenon called the anchoring effect.  Unfortunately, in the book it only mentions this effect with numbers, but I don't see why it wouldn't apply to any language, including use of the term 'man' for people.

The example given in the book is a (statistically significant) group of people are asked 'Was Gandhi older than 141 years old when he died.  If not, how old was he when he died?"

I believe another (statistically significant) group of people are asked "was Gandhi younger than 10 when he died.  If not, how old was he when he died?"

(I realize Gandhi didn't just die, but was assassinated, but I presume the intention was to not provide any other information.)

Even though the people in both groups knew the '141 years of age' and 'the 10 years of age' were obviously not true and was, therefore, irrelevant information,  the people who were asked was he older than 141? gave a much longer life span than the people who were asked was he younger than 10?  The separation of the answers was greater than 50% (the 'older' group gave an answer of around 80 and the 'younger' group gave an answer of around 50.)

Kahneman then showed that this 'anchoring effect' occurs all the time with people (at least when numbers are involved)  and explains the two likely reasons for it that comport with 'fast thinking' and 'slow thinking.'  He ends with "people don't believe that obviously irrelevant information affects them personally. They are wrong."

Kahenman gives a couple reasons for that as well, mainly that it suggests that people don't fully have free will.  I think the explanation is even simpler than that: to realize you (and me) are influenced by irrelevant information means we're no where near as smart as we all like to think we are.

https://newrepublic.com/article/100050/reason-thinking-fast-slow-kahneman

[Orthogonian Society Treasurer]

Ten years ago, the idea of a gender-neutral anthem would have also been thought of as a dumb joke but yet here we are.

[Hatman 🍁]

Ten years ago, the idea of a gender-neutral anthem would have also been thought of as a dumb joke but yet here we are.

it was brought up 10 years ago, and it was thought of as a dumb joke. (Well, 17 years ago, but: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ot_k59A5yrA)

[136or142]

Ten years ago, the idea of a gender-neutral anthem would have also been thought of as a dumb joke but yet here we are.

20 years ago the idea that people would fall for 'anchoring' would have been thought of as a dumb joke, but yet here we are.

[Dr. MB]

Trudeau's been a failure of a PM. I have a hard time buying that the "peoplekind" thing was a joke – he seemed to be taking it pretty seriously. Shows even more he likes to focus on non-issues.

[DC Al Fine]

Trudeau's been a failure of a PM. I have a hard time buying that the "peoplekind" thing was a joke – he seemed to be taking it pretty seriously. Shows even more he likes to focus on non-issues.

Eh, I very much dislike the guy and disapprove of (most) of his politics, but he's not a failure thus far. There has been a trickle of incidents where he and his government have come off as arrogant or self-interested (being only in favour of electoral reform so long as it benefits his party comes to mind) that he needs to get under control, but it's certainly not a disaster yet.

[Lechasseur]

Trudeau's been a failure of a PM. I have a hard time buying that the "peoplekind" thing was a joke – he seemed to be taking it pretty seriously. Shows even more he likes to focus on non-issues.

[Hatman 🍁]

Trudeau's been a failure of a PM. I have a hard time buying that the "peoplekind" thing was a joke – he seemed to be taking it pretty seriously. Shows even more he likes to focus on non-issues.

Eh, I very much dislike the guy and disapprove of (most) of his politics, but he's not a failure thus far. There has been a trickle of incidents where he and his government have come off as arrogant or self-interested (being only in favour of electoral reform so long as it benefits his party comes to mind) that he needs to get under control, but it's certainly not a disaster yet.

"Disappointment" is the best word to use, I think.

[136or142]

Trudeau's been a failure of a PM. I have a hard time buying that the "peoplekind" thing was a joke – he seemed to be taking it pretty seriously. Shows even more he likes to focus on non-issues.

Eh, I very much dislike the guy and disapprove of (most) of his politics, but he's not a failure thus far. There has been a trickle of incidents where he and his government have come off as arrogant or self-interested (being only in favour of electoral reform so long as it benefits his party comes to mind) that he needs to get under control, but it's certainly not a disaster yet.

"Disappointment" is the best word to use, I think.

Canadian conservatives are in a bubble every bit as much as U.S conservatives are.  They continue to believe that 'once Canadians comes to realize as we do that Trudeau is a dunce, support for the Liberals will decline."

The problem for them on that is, outside of their bubble, Canadians don't believe that.

What Canadians of all partisan stripes are increasingly believing is that Trudeau and this Liberal government advocate symbolism over substance.  If either the NDP or the Conservatives want to defeat the Liberals in 2019, I think that is the criticism of the Liberals they should adopt.

[MaxQue]

Yes, the general opinion around here seems to be he's all talk and no action, but than it's not Harper, at least.

[mileslunn]

While I never want to make any firm predictions considering how often the unexpected has happened, I see a Conservative majority is extremely unlikely.  Minority perhaps (but I suspect the NDP and Liberals would gang up them to keep them out).  The best case scenario for the Tories, albeit not most likely, is around 150 seats, otherwise 7 in Atlantic Canada, hold what they have in Quebec, 60 seats in Ontario, 20 seats in Saskatchewan/Manitoba, 32 seats in Alberta, and 20 seats in British Columbia.  Obviously they will likely do worse, but if the Liberals continue to mess up and the Tories have a strong platform and campaign, I see this as their best case scenario.  For the NDP, with Trudeau moving leftward, cannot see them winning, but I could see them having more influence.  If the Liberals drop to a minority, the NDP will hold the balance of power and could push through some of their policies.  Many progressive policies like Medicare and CPP happened in Liberal minority governments due to the NDP so you don't have to win to matter, you can have an impact even without winning.

[RogueBeaver]

Peter Stoffer accused of sexual harassment.

[King of Kensington]

^ Horrible.  Reading that made me ill.

[Hatman 🍁]

I had heard some strange things about Stoffer (like refusing to use a computer), but hadn't heard that. Then again, I was never invited to the notorious 'all party party' that he hosted. Apparently lots of people knew though...

[King of Kensington]

He was voted Parliamentarian of the Year by MPs of all parties.  What does that say about the culture on Parliament Hill?

http://www.macleans.ca/news/canada/presenting-the-2013-parliamentarians-of-the-year/

[DC Al Fine]

While I never want to make any firm predictions considering how often the unexpected has happened, I see a Conservative majority is extremely unlikely.  Minority perhaps (but I suspect the NDP and Liberals would gang up them to keep them out).  The best case scenario for the Tories, albeit not most likely, is around 150 seats, otherwise 7 in Atlantic Canada, hold what they have in Quebec, 60 seats in Ontario, 20 seats in Saskatchewan/Manitoba, 32 seats in Alberta, and 20 seats in British Columbia.  Obviously they will likely do worse, but if the Liberals continue to mess up and the Tories have a strong platform and campaign, I see this as their best case scenario. 

There's still time for a major scandal or the economy to take a downturn, but assuming neither of those happen, the trickle of unforced Liberal errors won't be good for anymore than a Tory minority and probably not even that. Eyeballing the polls, it looks like the Tories will take back a decent number of seats from the Liberals in Anglo Canada, but the Liberals will more or less break even by swallowing the NDP and Bloc Quebecois in Quebec.

Someone needs to emerge as a clear runner up in Quebec to force a minority (assuming the Tories don't pick up the pace in the ROC). The Liberals will run the table in Quebec if the polls hold and the result is something like 45-15-15-15

[2952-0-0]

Scheer isn't helping himself every time he harps on and on about the Agha Khan, as if anyone south of Queensway cares.

[DC Al Fine]

Scheer isn't helping himself every time he harps on and on about the Agha Khan, as if anyone south of Queensway cares.

What should he be pushing exactly? Liberal corruption sounds like a winning issue to me.

[DC Al Fine]

Actually, I'd like to get the rooms opinion on this.

What issues/strategies should Scheer and Singh be pushing from now until the writ drops?