Canada General Discussion (2019-)

[Benjamin Frank 2.0]

The NDP in Canada just proposed a motion in the House of Commons to recognize a Palestinian state. The NDP MP who proposed it, Heather McPherson, went on the CBC for an interview. She was asked by the interviewer why she proposed it. One of the reasons she cited was; 'Unlike any other issue, I've been hearing from hundreds of thousands of Canadians from coast to coast about this.' I'm convinced that part of the reason why our country is such a mess right now is because hundreds of thousands of Canadians are expending their time and energy on this issue and not the plethora of domestic issues like the cost of living. If hundreds of thousands of Canadians contacted the government about the cost of housing or immigration policy, the issue would be fixed in a day.

What's happening in the Middle East may not be effecting many Canadians at home, but it's an humanitarian crisis, and Canadians are a compassionate people. Why shouldn't we care about just what's happening in this country? We are all humans after all.

It's fine to care about it (though I think the NDP position on this is somewhat misguided). I care about foreign policy a lot as well.

My issue is moreso that this is the only issue that has galvanized hundreds of thousands of Canadians, according to Heather McPherson in the CBC interview, to contact their MPs? Not any domestic issue? What would happen if hundreds of thousands of Canadians contacted their MPs about housing? Maybe something would change.

M.Ps have only so much authority on housing and there are fairly massive changes in at least some areas depending on the provinces. There are massive changes in British Columbia, it still takes time.

I wrote on another thread that things could be sped up even further at the municipal level if more prefab and standardized housing blocks were built. It takes about 3 weeks to build a prefab or standardized housing block versus about 3 months to build a conventional house and they are cheaper to build. Beyond that, they don't require preapproval which speeds up the application process as well thereby reducing the time that the developer needs to own the lot without receiving anything in return (imputed interest cost.)

I think whether that actually lowers the price of housing in an area depends on how much the housing costs are determined solely by the value of the land, but, all else being equal, it certainly should lower housing costs.

As you know, the NIMBYs hate these things and they still have sway in some areas, this isn't as easy as passing some nonbinding resolution. Your argument would fit more if this Canadian resolution on the two states were not only binding in Canada but binding in Israel/Palestine.

I appreciate the frustration, but status quo interests are always very difficult to overcome.

I suspect that even people who don't consider themselves to be NIMBYs might find a problem with standardized housing blocks as the 'aesthetics' are supposedly ugly.

In addition to status quo interests, the other thing that needs to be fought to get things done is people not understanding the consequences of their choices and the tradeoffs involved, and, unfortunately, politicians tend to have a difficult time telling voters 'you have to make a choice.'

[The Right Honourable Martin Brian Mulroney PC CC GOQ]

What's the reason for the most recent Conservative surge? I checked in on the Wikipedia polls page for the first time since January and boom after stalling for like six months the Conservatives are going up again.

Looking back it seems like many were suggesting a tightening of polling/Liberals regaining momentum, but they are tanking again.

Until we see some actual data, it's anyone's guess. I can't think of anything that has significantly changed during the time of this polling surge. Conservatives haven't really changed anything since summer 2023 when they overhauled the leader's image and narrowed down their messaging. There hasn't been a major snafu from LPC these past few months either. Anecdotally, it feels like there's an increasing sense that the Liberals are a lame duck government, and when that happens, a significant % of Canadian voters decide to tepidly cast their lot with whoever the strongest opposition is. And in the minds of many Canadians right now, CPC is not the strongest opposition, it's the only opposition.

Right now there is only one poll that shows the Conservatives higher than 40% low 40%s.

This is 'Peak Atlas' to make a big deal of one poll.

What, this whole flurry of discussion is based on one single solitary poll?

Genuine lol.

It's not. Nobody specifically brought up any solitary poll until Benjamin Frank did. Someone did bring up the Wikipedia polls page, which shows this:

Link (the actual image is too big and messes up the UI)


Is it a massive swing? No, it's a tiny uptick that could just as easily go down. But is it one poll? Also no.

The poll itself was not brought up but I think it's clear a couple of the comments here were a reference to that poll.

As for the Conservative increase in January, I don't think there is necessarily a rational reason behind it or an incident, when the public individually and collectively decides it's 'time for a change' that's it.

On that we agree. At a certain point the opposition starts to surge for no reason other than they're not the government.

[The Right Honourable Martin Brian Mulroney PC CC GOQ]

After the repeal of socialism from the NDP platform, by and large there’s nothing the NDP has to offer to introduce or even seriously advocate for policies that actually matter.

In what way? Whatever word they use in the platform, the NDP has never been a proper "seize the means of production" type party, if that's what you mean by them not advocating for socialism. Their bread and butter has always been to expand the welfare state, and that's been Singh's priority, as it was for every NDP leader other than Mulcair.

[PSOL]

After the repeal of socialism from the NDP platform, by and large there’s nothing the NDP has to offer to introduce or even seriously advocate for policies that actually matter.

In what way? Whatever word they use in the platform, the NDP has never been a proper "seize the means of production" type party, if that's what you mean by them not advocating for socialism. Their bread and butter has always been to expand the welfare state, and that's been Singh's priority, as it was for every NDP leader other than Mulcair.

You compromise with the society you are dealing with, that’s the general rule for any politician, and getting to the point of abandoning democratic socialism for social democracy means you are going to have to compromise on social democracy and political differentiation from the liberals.

Mulcair was the most successful NDP leader in terms of electoral results, so what exactly are you on about? Furthermore, what expansions of the welfare state that was tangibly felt happened under Singh’s watch with their alliance with Trudeau?

[Upper Canada Tory]

After the repeal of socialism from the NDP platform, by and large there’s nothing the NDP has to offer to introduce or even seriously advocate for policies that actually matter.

In what way? Whatever word they use in the platform, the NDP has never been a proper "seize the means of production" type party, if that's what you mean by them not advocating for socialism. Their bread and butter has always been to expand the welfare state, and that's been Singh's priority, as it was for every NDP leader other than Mulcair.

You compromise with the society you are dealing with, that’s the general rule for any politician, and getting to the point of abandoning democratic socialism for social democracy means you are going to have to compromise on social democracy and political differentiation from the liberals.

Mulcair was the most successful NDP leader in terms of electoral results, so what exactly are you on about? Furthermore, what expansions of the welfare state that was tangibly felt happened under Singh’s watch with their alliance with Trudeau?

Mulcair was not the most electorally successful NDP leader - Layton was. He was the only leader to win official opposition status.

[Upper Canada Tory]

The NDP in Canada just proposed a motion in the House of Commons to recognize a Palestinian state. The NDP MP who proposed it, Heather McPherson, went on the CBC for an interview. She was asked by the interviewer why she proposed it. One of the reasons she cited was; 'Unlike any other issue, I've been hearing from hundreds of thousands of Canadians from coast to coast about this.' I'm convinced that part of the reason why our country is such a mess right now is because hundreds of thousands of Canadians are expending their time and energy on this issue and not the plethora of domestic issues like the cost of living. If hundreds of thousands of Canadians contacted the government about the cost of housing or immigration policy, the issue would be fixed in a day.

What's happening in the Middle East may not be effecting many Canadians at home, but it's an humanitarian crisis, and Canadians are a compassionate people. Why shouldn't we care about just what's happening in this country? We are all humans after all.

It's fine to care about it (though I think the NDP position on this is somewhat misguided). I care about foreign policy a lot as well.

My issue is moreso that this is the only issue that has galvanized hundreds of thousands of Canadians, according to Heather McPherson in the CBC interview, to contact their MPs? Not any domestic issue? What would happen if hundreds of thousands of Canadians contacted their MPs about housing? Maybe something would change.

M.Ps have only so much authority on housing and there are fairly massive changes in at least some areas depending on the provinces. There are massive changes in British Columbia, it still takes time.

I wrote on another thread that things could be sped up even further at the municipal level if more prefab and standardized housing blocks were built. It takes about 3 weeks to build a prefab or standardized housing block versus about 3 months to build a conventional house and they are cheaper to build. Beyond that, they don't require preapproval which speeds up the application process as well thereby reducing the time that the developer needs to own the lot without receiving anything in return (imputed interest cost.)

I think whether that actually lowers the price of housing in an area depends on how much the housing costs are determined solely by the value of the land, but, all else being equal, it certainly should lower housing costs.

As you know, the NIMBYs hate these things and they still have sway in some areas, this isn't as easy as passing some nonbinding resolution. Your argument would fit more if this Canadian resolution on the two states were not only binding in Canada but binding in Israel/Palestine.

I appreciate the frustration, but status quo interests are always very difficult to overcome.

I suspect that even people who don't consider themselves to be NIMBYs might find a problem with standardized housing blocks as the 'aesthetics' are supposedly ugly.

In addition to status quo interests, the other thing that needs to be fought to get things done is people not understanding the consequences of their choices and the tradeoffs involved, and, unfortunately, politicians tend to have a difficult time telling voters 'you have to make a choice.'

You're right for the most part, but prefabs are also more expensive than on-site construction. They would likely reduce housing prices overall by increasing supply, but part of the reason why we don't have more of them is because they're expensive to build.

[Upper Canada Tory]

The other issue that needs to be addressed is single-family zoning. 70% of land in Ontario that is zoned for housing is reserved for detached single-family homes - townhouses, condos, etc are not allowed.

[MaxQue]

The other issue that needs to be addressed is single-family zoning. 70% of land in Ontario that is zoned for housing is reserved for detached single-family homes - townhouses, condos, etc are not allowed.

Not allowing condos is probably a good thing. As they age, they are a ticking time bomb.

[Upper Canada Tory]

The other issue that needs to be addressed is single-family zoning. 70% of land in Ontario that is zoned for housing is reserved for detached single-family homes - townhouses, condos, etc are not allowed.

Not allowing condos is probably a good thing. As they age, they are a ticking time bomb.

I would jokingly say 'spoken like a true NIMBY' here, but that would be mean.  

In all seriousness, it's not such a great thing when all non single family housing is cramped in small pieces of land. At least allow other types of housing to be built.

[MaxQue]

The other issue that needs to be addressed is single-family zoning. 70% of land in Ontario that is zoned for housing is reserved for detached single-family homes - townhouses, condos, etc are not allowed.

Not allowing condos is probably a good thing. As they age, they are a ticking time bomb.

I would jokingly say 'spoken like a true NIMBY' here, but that would be mean.  

In all seriousness, it's not such a great thing when all non single family housing is cramped in small pieces of land. At least allow other types of housing to be built.

Mobile homes and small (or even mini) homes should be seriously considered, as should apartment buildings.

[The Right Honourable Martin Brian Mulroney PC CC GOQ]

Poilievre picking a fight with David Eby is really dumb. Boost the BC Cons by all means, but there's no reason to specifically go after a premier who is fairly popular in his province and is all but certain to win a full 4-year mandate this fall. The combative tone works against Trudeau because he's unpopular, it doesn't work against a popular leader. I'm not sure what he's trying to achieve here. Maybe he's trying to get Eby in line with the other premiers (and apparently Bonnie Crombie!) on the carbon tax issue. It's not gonna happen, Eby's like the one Anglo premier who doesn't feel the pressure to axe the tax, both because of his province's inclination towards environmentalism, and the fact that the opposition to him is very fragmented.

[MaxQue]

Poilievre picking a fight with David Eby is really dumb. Boost the BC Cons by all means, but there's no reason to specifically go after a premier who is fairly popular in his province and is all but certain to win a full 4-year mandate this fall. The combative tone works against Trudeau because he's unpopular, it doesn't work against a popular leader. I'm not sure what he's trying to achieve here. Maybe he's trying to get Eby in line with the other premiers (and apparently Bonnie Crombie!) on the carbon tax issue. It's not gonna happen, Eby's like the one Anglo premier who doesn't feel the pressure to axe the tax, both because of his province's inclination towards environmentalism, and the fact that the opposition to him is very fragmented.

Also, the federal carbon tax doesn't apply in BC, as they have their own provincial tax (same as Quebec, who has cap and trade instead).

[Agafin]

Poilievre picking a fight with David Eby is really dumb. Boost the BC Cons by all means, but there's no reason to specifically go after a premier who is fairly popular in his province and is all but certain to win a full 4-year mandate this fall. The combative tone works against Trudeau because he's unpopular, it doesn't work against a popular leader. I'm not sure what he's trying to achieve here. Maybe he's trying to get Eby in line with the other premiers (and apparently Bonnie Crombie!) on the carbon tax issue. It's not gonna happen, Eby's like the one Anglo premier who doesn't feel the pressure to axe the tax, both because of his province's inclination towards environmentalism, and the fact that the opposition to him is very fragmented.

Mainstreet has just released a poll showing the conservatives only 6 points below the BCNDP. Poilievre knows what he's doing.

[The Right Honourable Martin Brian Mulroney PC CC GOQ]

Poilievre picking a fight with David Eby is really dumb. Boost the BC Cons by all means, but there's no reason to specifically go after a premier who is fairly popular in his province and is all but certain to win a full 4-year mandate this fall. The combative tone works against Trudeau because he's unpopular, it doesn't work against a popular leader. I'm not sure what he's trying to achieve here. Maybe he's trying to get Eby in line with the other premiers (and apparently Bonnie Crombie!) on the carbon tax issue. It's not gonna happen, Eby's like the one Anglo premier who doesn't feel the pressure to axe the tax, both because of his province's inclination towards environmentalism, and the fact that the opposition to him is very fragmented.

Mainstreet has just released a poll showing the conservatives only 6 points below the BCNDP. Poilievre knows what he's doing.

Until we see more polls showing those kinds of numbers, I'm not buying it, especially because Mainstreet has a house effect of underpolling NDP and overpolling Conservatives. We've yet to see the BC Cons chip into the NDP margin on aggregate, NDP numbers have been very stable under Eby. The Conservative surge is coming from the collapse of the English soccer club formerly known as BC Liberals.

If other pollsters start showing a single-digit gap between BCNDP and BCCP, I take back everything I said and will never again question Polievre's instincts for horserace politics

[Benjamin Frank 2.0]

Poilievre picking a fight with David Eby is really dumb. Boost the BC Cons by all means, but there's no reason to specifically go after a premier who is fairly popular in his province and is all but certain to win a full 4-year mandate this fall. The combative tone works against Trudeau because he's unpopular, it doesn't work against a popular leader. I'm not sure what he's trying to achieve here. Maybe he's trying to get Eby in line with the other premiers (and apparently Bonnie Crombie!) on the carbon tax issue. It's not gonna happen, Eby's like the one Anglo premier who doesn't feel the pressure to axe the tax, both because of his province's inclination towards environmentalism, and the fact that the opposition to him is very fragmented.

Mainstreet has just released a poll showing the conservatives only 6 points below the BCNDP. Poilievre knows what he's doing.

The Mainstreet poll asked people their federal voting intentions before asking them how they'd vote provincially.

Mainstreet polls aren't junk polls but people should be suspicious of their motives. Quitto Maggi has used his polls to attempt to influence elections before.

[Hatman 🍁]

At this rate though, I wouldn't be surprised if BC United is totally annihilated come next election.

[The Right Honourable Martin Brian Mulroney PC CC GOQ]

At this rate though, I wouldn't be surprised if BC United is totally annihilated come next election.

Oh yeah BCU is toast. At best they'll hang around as a minor party for well-off Vancouverites who are too rich to vote NDP but too "woke" to vote Conservative. You know, the mythical "fiscally conservative, socially progressive" voter.

[Benjamin Frank 2.0]

At this rate though, I wouldn't be surprised if BC United is totally annihilated come next election.

Oh yeah BCU is toast. At best they'll hang around as a minor party for well-off Vancouverites who are too rich to vote NDP but too "woke" to vote Conservative. You know, the mythical "fiscally conservative, socially progressive" voter.

I don't know about that. Small subsamples, but the Angus Reid poll that came out in February showed B.C United in second place in the Interior/North behind the NDP with the B.C Conservatives a fairly distant third. 10 of the 16 B.C United MLAs who are running again are in the Interior/North including well known and generally well liked/well respected MLAs like Shirley Bond, Mike Bernier, Peter Milobar and Todd Stone.

[Benjamin Frank 2.0]

For those interested in the discussion on B.C politics, for instance, where I heard that the Mainstreet Poll asked questions on federal voting intentions before provincially voting intentions (I'm sure they wouldn't do this specifically but: so, you plan to vote Conservative federally, how will you vote provincially?) I listen to Baldrey's Beat on CKNW 980 from 10-10:30 AM Monday to Thursday (Bill Tieleman with Bill's Beat is on Fridays) with host Mike Smyth.

I otherwise dislike Mike Smyth, but the right wing lean of the audience is interesting. For all the complaints about Liberal/Laurentian 'elites', CKNW archives its audio for two weeks (https://globalnews.ca/pages/audio-vault-cknw/) and I'd especially recommend listening to Tuesday's show. There were three callers in a row who repeated the myth/legend that 'B.C/Canada needs a conservative government because only conservatives know how to manage the economy'  or that 'conservative values are needed to save Canada.'

You can't get more elite/arrogant than that.

'Conservative economics' ranges from the more monetarist balanced budget focused types of Stephen Harper to the seemingly populist Pierre Poilievre types which are more incoherent economically (based on Trump anyway.)  Based on Danielle Smith and Scott Moe, they basically mean shilling for fossil fuel interests.

I have extolled many times the virtues of centrist governments like Brian Mulroney/Jean Chretien, but, for instance, the poor Canadian productivity growth highlighted in the lack of real GDP per capita growth has been poor since around 2000, which covers both the full tenure of the Stephen Harper Conservatives as well as the Justin Trudeau Liberals. Stephen Harper was also little more than a (mostly failed) shill for the fossil fuel sector though he did leave office having balanced the budget.

[The Right Honourable Martin Brian Mulroney PC CC GOQ]

At this rate though, I wouldn't be surprised if BC United is totally annihilated come next election.

Oh yeah BCU is toast. At best they'll hang around as a minor party for well-off Vancouverites who are too rich to vote NDP but too "woke" to vote Conservative. You know, the mythical "fiscally conservative, socially progressive" voter.

I don't know about that. Small subsamples, but the Angus Reid poll that came out in February showed B.C United in second place in the Interior/North behind the NDP with the B.C Conservatives a fairly distant third. 10 of the 16 B.C United MLAs who are running again are in the Interior/North including well known and generally well liked/well respected MLAs like Shirley Bond, Mike Bernier, Peter Milobar and Todd Stone.

Would you say it's looking more like the Socreds' last election then, where strong incumbents prevent a complete wipeout? I don't know much about BC provincial politics, but something feels very terminal about BCU

[Benjamin Frank 2.0]

At this rate though, I wouldn't be surprised if BC United is totally annihilated come next election.

Oh yeah BCU is toast. At best they'll hang around as a minor party for well-off Vancouverites who are too rich to vote NDP but too "woke" to vote Conservative. You know, the mythical "fiscally conservative, socially progressive" voter.

I don't know about that. Small subsamples, but the Angus Reid poll that came out in February showed B.C United in second place in the Interior/North behind the NDP with the B.C Conservatives a fairly distant third. 10 of the 16 B.C United MLAs who are running again are in the Interior/North including well known and generally well liked/well respected MLAs like Shirley Bond, Mike Bernier, Peter Milobar and Todd Stone.

Would you say it's looking more like the Socreds' last election then, where strong incumbents prevent a complete wipeout? I don't know much about BC provincial politics, but something feels very terminal about BCU

The historical part is easier to comment on, I was surprised at the Angus Reid subsamples myself and dismissed them as results based on very small samples, but I've said myself that I think Shirley Bond was personally responsible for turning Prince George and area from a swing area to solidly B.C Liberal, and maybe in especially the bigger cities in the interior of Prince George, Kamloops and Kelowna there is enduring support for the B.C Liberals/B.C United.

I know it's kind of become a cliche to say, but the Interior 'is not a monolith' and there could be an urban/rural divide in the Interior as well as the three interior cities of Kelowna, Kamloops and Prince George combine for a population of over 300,000.

Of course, the NDP leads in that small Angus Reid subsample as well, so I'd say things are probably still too unsettled.

For the B.C United though that would be in addition to the ridings in 'Metro Vancouver' (Vancouver-Quilchena, maybe Vancouver-Langara and maybe both West Vancouver ridings that are too socially liberal to vote Conservative but maybe won't vote NDP (or Green.))

The Angus Reid subsample suggested a three way race in the Fraser Valley, but B.C United won only the two Abbotsford ridings there and neither of their incumbents is running again.

B.C United also won two ridings in Surrey, the wealthy ridings of Surrey-White Rock and South Surrey which probably have similar demographics to Vancouver-Quilchena. Elenore Sturko recently won the Surrey South byelection.

On the history, that might be the way the 1991 election has been remembered, but that's actually not really true. I recently saw the 1991 election night coverage on the CBC again and nobody thought Social Credit would simply collapse (with a few holdouts in the B.C Reform Party) or even necessarily merge with the B.C Liberals. Social Credit still received nearly 25% of the vote after all.

I don't agree with this fully but also from Keith Baldrey who I mentioned above:

It was de Jong’s historic byelection win in the riding of Matsqui that stamped out any chance the once-powerful Social Credit Party could stage a political comeback after being routed in the 1991 general election.

His victory ensured the B.C. Liberal Party, a virtual political non-entity until its electoral breakthrough in 1991, would eventually become the free enterprise coalition around which non-NDP voters would support at elections.

De Jong defeated Social Credit icon Grace McCarthy by just 42 votes. Many have felt that McCarthy had enough gas in the tank to steer her party back to prominence if she proved to be victorious.
https://www.nsnews.com/local-news/baldrey-what-this-longtime-mlas-departure-could-mean-bcs-political-future-8329830

I also appreciate that there can be a difference in how a politician is perceived at the wider level and locally, but I don't think too many people would have regarded Social Credit MLAs like Lyall Hanson in Vernon or Harry De Jong in Abbotsford or Peter Dueck in Matsqui as especially strong incumbents. They were reelected because Social Credit had an enduring brand in the Fraser Valley and much of the B.C Interior.

I don't necessarily agree with Baldrey because Grace McCarthy was regarded by members of Social Credit as too socially liberal, (I think entirely because she was not 100% anti abortion) so I don't think she would have been a good fit for the party to lead them into the election. However, I think he is correct that at the time the political landscape was still unsettled.

For one short historical lesson: Unlike in Ontario or most other provinces in Canada there have not been any city mergers in British Columbia for something like 90 years (that might have been when South Vancouver merged with Vancouver) with the exception of Matsqui merging into Abbotsford. Unlike in other provinces, that was decided entirely at the local level with I believe the citizens of Matsqui not wanting to be associated with the prison a major reason.

[MaxQue]

Poilievre picking a fight with David Eby is really dumb. Boost the BC Cons by all means, but there's no reason to specifically go after a premier who is fairly popular in his province and is all but certain to win a full 4-year mandate this fall. The combative tone works against Trudeau because he's unpopular, it doesn't work against a popular leader. I'm not sure what he's trying to achieve here. Maybe he's trying to get Eby in line with the other premiers (and apparently Bonnie Crombie!) on the carbon tax issue. It's not gonna happen, Eby's like the one Anglo premier who doesn't feel the pressure to axe the tax, both because of his province's inclination towards environmentalism, and the fact that the opposition to him is very fragmented.

Mainstreet has just released a poll showing the conservatives only 6 points below the BCNDP. Poilievre knows what he's doing.

The Mainstreet poll asked people their federal voting intentions before asking them how they'd vote provincially.

Mainstreet polls aren't junk polls but people should be suspicious of their motives. Quitto Maggi has used his polls to attempt to influence elections before.

Let's not mince words and let's just admit the truth about Mainstreet. They're a partisan pollster, like Rasmussen in USA.

[CascadianIndy]

At this rate though, I wouldn't be surprised if BC United is totally annihilated come next election.

Oh yeah BCU is toast. At best they'll hang around as a minor party for well-off Vancouverites who are too rich to vote NDP but too "woke" to vote Conservative. You know, the mythical "fiscally conservative, socially progressive" voter.

I don't know about that. Small subsamples, but the Angus Reid poll that came out in February showed B.C United in second place in the Interior/North behind the NDP with the B.C Conservatives a fairly distant third. 10 of the 16 B.C United MLAs who are running again are in the Interior/North including well known and generally well liked/well respected MLAs like Shirley Bond, Mike Bernier, Peter Milobar and Todd Stone.

For what it's worth, that was a misprint - the BC Conservatives are still in a solid second place in the Interior. It's only a slight drop for them and a slight rise for the NDP (from 35 to 32 for the former, and from 37 to 42 for the latter).

Still want to hear how you think BC United's incumbents will make a difference though out there - I'm not too familiar with that neck of the woods.

[The Right Honourable Martin Brian Mulroney PC CC GOQ]

At this rate though, I wouldn't be surprised if BC United is totally annihilated come next election.

Oh yeah BCU is toast. At best they'll hang around as a minor party for well-off Vancouverites who are too rich to vote NDP but too "woke" to vote Conservative. You know, the mythical "fiscally conservative, socially progressive" voter.

I don't know about that. Small subsamples, but the Angus Reid poll that came out in February showed B.C United in second place in the Interior/North behind the NDP with the B.C Conservatives a fairly distant third. 10 of the 16 B.C United MLAs who are running again are in the Interior/North including well known and generally well liked/well respected MLAs like Shirley Bond, Mike Bernier, Peter Milobar and Todd Stone.

For what it's worth, that was a misprint - the BC Conservatives are still in a solid second place in the Interior. It's only a slight drop for them and a slight rise for the NDP (from 35 to 32 for the former, and from 37 to 42 for the latter).

Still want to hear how you think BC United's incumbents will make a difference though out there - I'm not too familiar with that neck of the woods.

Oh yeah, that makes more sense. It's more in line with what you'd expect for a Conservative party in BC.

[Benjamin Frank 2.0]

At this rate though, I wouldn't be surprised if BC United is totally annihilated come next election.

Oh yeah BCU is toast. At best they'll hang around as a minor party for well-off Vancouverites who are too rich to vote NDP but too "woke" to vote Conservative. You know, the mythical "fiscally conservative, socially progressive" voter.

I don't know about that. Small subsamples, but the Angus Reid poll that came out in February showed B.C United in second place in the Interior/North behind the NDP with the B.C Conservatives a fairly distant third. 10 of the 16 B.C United MLAs who are running again are in the Interior/North including well known and generally well liked/well respected MLAs like Shirley Bond, Mike Bernier, Peter Milobar and Todd Stone.

For what it's worth, that was a misprint - the BC Conservatives are still in a solid second place in the Interior. It's only a slight drop for them and a slight rise for the NDP (from 35 to 32 for the former, and from 37 to 42 for the latter).

Still want to hear how you think BC United's incumbents will make a difference though out there - I'm not too familiar with that neck of the woods.

Thanks! that does make more sense. I still find it hard to believe that Shirley Bond or Todd Stone could lose. Peter Milobar won by only 1% in 2020 over the NDP and certainly Mike Bernier will have a hard time getting reelected in Peace River which is very conservative. I got mixed up thinking that Bernier was in the Prince George area but that's retiring B.C United MLA Mike Morris.

Had I checked the size of the subsamples I like to think I would have realized something couldn't add up, but I assumed Metro Vancouver was just the city of Vancouver, Burnaby and North and West Vancouver, while 'Lower Mainland/Fraser Valley' was everything else, but obviously that's not correct. Lower Mainland/Fraser Valley is probably just the city of Surrey (and White Rock) and the Fraser Valley (the Langleys, Abbotsford and Chilliwack and maybe Mission.)

The other interesting thing, and again, these are very small samples, is that this survey counts the North Coast (including I presume Powell River-Sunshine Coast) with Vancouver Island. This is the NDPs strongest area in the Interior (except for parts of the Kootenays.) So, if the NDP is leading in the Interior/North without it including Powell River-Sunshine, North Coast and Stikine (and Skeena), it's probable that the NDP would win a number of these Interior/North ridings over the Conservatives and B.C United.