Canada General Discussion (2019-)

[Ⓐnarchy in the ☭☭☭P!]

So Trudeau is banning these weapons why exactly? They weren't the type of gun used in the shooting.

Because letting people own assault weapons has no benefits and substantial drawbacks?

Can you point to these said substantial drawbacks as a means of policy?

Are you familiar with the concept of mass shootings?

Well we just had our worst mass shooting in our entire country's history and the perpetrator used exclusively illegal weapons that were almost certainly smuggled in through the reserves (the most famous is the Akwesasne Mohawk reserve where they're known to possess fully automatic AK47s) so this law is going to do precisely nothing to prevent the same thing from happening again. A few weaselly outlets claimed that he used a "legally registered firearm" in reference to a sidearm he took off the body of an RCMP officer he'd gunned down.

Trudeau can pass all the laws he wants but they won't stop any serious killer.

[Ⓐnarchy in the ☭☭☭P!]

Something I have just found out that sounds absolutely ridiculous, like something Kafka would come up with, but it's actually true: throughout history, Canada has had 55 Superintendents-General of Indian Affairs/Ministers of Indian Affairs/Ministers of Crown-Indigenous Relations or some variations thereof. Of these fifty-five ministers, a grand total of zero (0) were actually Indigenous.

I've often wondered why this is too; it seems so absurd to not be intentional. My best guess is that no government has wanted to seem like it was favouring one Indigenous group over another.

It's more about Indigenous representation in high-level Cabinet. Only 3 ever were in "real" Cabinet positions (excluding Ministers of State and other junior positions) and none currently.

It probably doesn't help that the ridings with the highest number of reserves typically go NDP and most of the ones that don't (mostly in BC/AB/SA) go Conservative. The Liberals don't exactly have a deep pool of strong candidates to draw from without JWR

[Ⓐnarchy in the ☭☭☭P!]

Something I have just found out that sounds absolutely ridiculous, like something Kafka would come up with, but it's actually true: throughout history, Canada has had 55 Superintendents-General of Indian Affairs/Ministers of Indian Affairs/Ministers of Crown-Indigenous Relations or some variations thereof. Of these fifty-five ministers, a grand total of zero (0) were actually Indigenous.

I've often wondered why this is too; it seems so absurd to not be intentional. My best guess is that no government has wanted to seem like it was favouring one Indigenous group over another.

It's more about Indigenous representation in high-level Cabinet. Only 3 ever were in "real" Cabinet positions (excluding Ministers of State and other junior positions) and none currently.

It probably doesn't help that the ridings with the highest number of reserves typically go NDP and most of the ones that don't (mostly in BC/AB/SA) go Conservative. The Liberals don't exactly have a deep pool of strong candidates to draw from without JWR

Indigenous I think generally go pretty massively either NDP or Liberal but rarely Conservative.  Tories might do somewhat better amongst Metis but doubt they win them, but might as most in Prairies.  Now in Far north, Tories occasionally win indigenous vote like Leona Aguulak of Nunavut but in Far North generally people vote based on candidate not party.

That may be the case for people outside of reserves who identify as Indigenous but I'm talking specifically about the votes of the actual reserves themselves. West of Manitoba the Liberals have even less traction than the Tories.

For example, take a look at Skeena-Bulkley Valley. It's represented provincially by a Liberal councillor from one of the pro-pipeline nations and sits at the center of the whole controversy but the federal Liberals barely broke double digits there last election.

I'd be curious to see a poll by poll breakdown of the riding but while the NDP probably dominates most reserves I'm pretty confident that the ones that they don't (again, west of Manitoba) are far more likely to go Conservative than Liberal.

[Ⓐnarchy in the ☭☭☭P!]

I'd be curious to see a poll by poll breakdown of the riding but while the NDP probably dominates most reserves I'm pretty confident that the ones that they don't (again, west of Manitoba) are far more likely to go Conservative than Liberal.

http://www.election-atlas.ca/fed/
http://www.election-atlas.ca/bc/

Much appreciated! I wish the overlays had better labeling though, it's a bit of a hassle to correlate the polling with the map of reserves

Something I have just found out that sounds absolutely ridiculous, like something Kafka would come up with, but it's actually true: throughout history, Canada has had 55 Superintendents-General of Indian Affairs/Ministers of Indian Affairs/Ministers of Crown-Indigenous Relations or some variations thereof. Of these fifty-five ministers, a grand total of zero (0) were actually Indigenous.

I've often wondered why this is too; it seems so absurd to not be intentional. My best guess is that no government has wanted to seem like it was favouring one Indigenous group over another.

It's more about Indigenous representation in high-level Cabinet. Only 3 ever were in "real" Cabinet positions (excluding Ministers of State and other junior positions) and none currently.

It probably doesn't help that the ridings with the highest number of reserves typically go NDP and most of the ones that don't (mostly in BC/AB/SA) go Conservative. The Liberals don't exactly have a deep pool of strong candidates to draw from without JWR

Indigenous I think generally go pretty massively either NDP or Liberal but rarely Conservative.  Tories might do somewhat better amongst Metis but doubt they win them, but might as most in Prairies.  Now in Far north, Tories occasionally win indigenous vote like Leona Aguulak of Nunavut but in Far North generally people vote based on candidate not party.

That may be the case for people outside of reserves who identify as Indigenous but I'm talking specifically about the votes of the actual reserves themselves. West of Manitoba the Liberals have even less traction than the Tories.

For example, take a look at Skeena-Bulkley Valley. It's represented provincially by a Liberal councillor from one of the pro-pipeline nations and sits at the center of the whole controversy but the federal Liberals barely broke double digits there last election.

I'd be curious to see a poll by poll breakdown of the riding but while the NDP probably dominates most reserves I'm pretty confident that the ones that they don't (again, west of Manitoba) are far more likely to go Conservative than Liberal.

I'm not aware of a single reserve in the country (that isn't plurality White, yes they exist) that voted Conservative...

After far too much crossreferencing it appears at least a few northern BC reserves and villages went Conservative, albeit it isn't always obvious whether they actually compose the entire voting population at a poll or not. These include:

* The Taku River Tlingit (conveniently their reserve actually is covered by the polling boundary)
* The Prophet River Nation
* The Fort Nelson Nation
* Tsay Keh Dene
* The Saulteau First Nations
* The West Moberly First Nations
* The Blueberry River First Nations
* The Doig River Nations
* The Halfway River Nations
* Nadleh Whuten
* The Stellat'en First Nation

and in a particularly interesting twist, it appears the poll compromising the Wet'suwet'en Nation, site of the famous rail-blocking dispute over the development of pipelines, went Conservative by a solid 52%. This matches up with the elected councilors taking a more pro-pipeline position as opposed to the hereditary chiefs, though if it's actually true then I'm a bit surprised that nobody actually bothered to check.

That's just in the three northernmost ridings so presumably there are plenty more where that came from. I thought the coastal reserves were monolithically NDP when they went 70-80% NDP but a few of the interior polls that covered reserves (specifically in Prince George--Peace River--Northern Rockies)  somehow went 95% (!!!) Tory so I wouldn't be surprised if some of the Prairie reserves had similarly North Korean levels of single party support.

If anyone wants to double check feel free. My suspicion is that the reason you aren't aware of Conservative voting reserves (or "unceded villages", it gets complicated in BC) is because it isn't really in anyone's interest to bring them up; obviously the Liberals and NDP would prefer to monopolize the non-white vote by branding the Tories as the Racist White Guy Party while the Tories themselves are utterly inept on Indian Affairs and have only ever won those votes on the basis of economic policy, so they aren't likely to actually take advantage. I noticed that the coastal, heavily NDP voting descriptions tended to focus more on talking about "preservation" while the ones in Tory territory spent more space talking about economic development.

Maybe the most extreme example of this are the Salteau, whose description reads more like that of a corporation than of a reserve:

Summary of Economic Development Agreements, Community Businesses and Joint Ventures

Saulteau is involved in a variety of ventures which include: Twin Sisters Native Plant Nursery, 6 Nations Ventures, 3 Nations Ventures, 4ever green resources LP, Saulteau Safety and Secutity, Saulteau Camp Services, Saulteau Communications, and Little Prairie Community Forest. Saulteau also receives a variety of benefits from joint-ventures and partnerships with companies such as: Britco-Airamark, Bailey Helicopters, North Cariboo Air, Ruskin Construction, FMI Electrical Installations, Tetratec EVA, MTS Trucking, Jake’s Construction and KMC

Economic Development Background

Saulteau is currently reviewing the structure of its economic development program, businesses and joint-ventures. Saulteau is involved in a variety of enterprises that provide jobs and benefits to the community. Chief and Council will consider recommendations to restructure the Economic Development department and potentially create a ‘stand-alone’ economic development corporation with an independent Board of Directors that would manage and operate all of Saulteau’s business interests.

[Ⓐnarchy in the ☭☭☭P!]

I'd be curious to see a poll by poll breakdown of the riding but while the NDP probably dominates most reserves I'm pretty confident that the ones that they don't (again, west of Manitoba) are far more likely to go Conservative than Liberal.

http://www.election-atlas.ca/fed/
http://www.election-atlas.ca/bc/

Much appreciated! I wish the overlays had better labeling though, it's a bit of a hassle to correlate the polling with the map of reserves

Something I have just found out that sounds absolutely ridiculous, like something Kafka would come up with, but it's actually true: throughout history, Canada has had 55 Superintendents-General of Indian Affairs/Ministers of Indian Affairs/Ministers of Crown-Indigenous Relations or some variations thereof. Of these fifty-five ministers, a grand total of zero (0) were actually Indigenous.

I've often wondered why this is too; it seems so absurd to not be intentional. My best guess is that no government has wanted to seem like it was favouring one Indigenous group over another.

It's more about Indigenous representation in high-level Cabinet. Only 3 ever were in "real" Cabinet positions (excluding Ministers of State and other junior positions) and none currently.

It probably doesn't help that the ridings with the highest number of reserves typically go NDP and most of the ones that don't (mostly in BC/AB/SA) go Conservative. The Liberals don't exactly have a deep pool of strong candidates to draw from without JWR

Indigenous I think generally go pretty massively either NDP or Liberal but rarely Conservative.  Tories might do somewhat better amongst Metis but doubt they win them, but might as most in Prairies.  Now in Far north, Tories occasionally win indigenous vote like Leona Aguulak of Nunavut but in Far North generally people vote based on candidate not party.

That may be the case for people outside of reserves who identify as Indigenous but I'm talking specifically about the votes of the actual reserves themselves. West of Manitoba the Liberals have even less traction than the Tories.

For example, take a look at Skeena-Bulkley Valley. It's represented provincially by a Liberal councillor from one of the pro-pipeline nations and sits at the center of the whole controversy but the federal Liberals barely broke double digits there last election.

I'd be curious to see a poll by poll breakdown of the riding but while the NDP probably dominates most reserves I'm pretty confident that the ones that they don't (again, west of Manitoba) are far more likely to go Conservative than Liberal.

I'm not aware of a single reserve in the country (that isn't plurality White, yes they exist) that voted Conservative...

After far too much crossreferencing it appears at least a few northern BC reserves and villages went Conservative, albeit it isn't always obvious whether they actually compose the entire voting population at a poll or not. These include:

* The Taku River Tlingit (conveniently their reserve actually is covered by the polling boundary)
* The Prophet River Nation
* The Fort Nelson Nation
* Tsay Keh Dene
* The Saulteau First Nations
* The West Moberly First Nations
* The Blueberry River First Nations
* The Doig River Nations
* The Halfway River Nations
* Nadleh Whuten
* The Stellat'en First Nation

and in a particularly interesting twist, it appears the poll compromising the Wet'suwet'en Nation, site of the famous rail-blocking dispute over the development of pipelines, went Conservative by a solid 52%. This matches up with the elected councilors taking a more pro-pipeline position as opposed to the hereditary chiefs, though if it's actually true then I'm a bit surprised that nobody actually bothered to check.

That's just in the three northernmost ridings so presumably there are plenty more where that came from. I thought the coastal reserves were monolithically NDP when they went 70-80% NDP but a few of the interior polls that covered reserves (specifically in Prince George--Peace River--Northern Rockies)  somehow went 95% (!!!) Tory so I wouldn't be surprised if some of the Prairie reserves had similarly North Korean levels of single party support.

If anyone wants to double check feel free. My suspicion is that the reason you aren't aware of Conservative voting reserves (or "unceded villages", it gets complicated in BC) is because it isn't really in anyone's interest to bring them up; obviously the Liberals and NDP would prefer to monopolize the non-white vote by branding the Tories as the Racist White Guy Party while the Tories themselves are utterly inept on Indian Affairs and have only ever won those votes on the basis of economic policy, so they aren't likely to actually take advantage. I noticed that the coastal, heavily NDP voting descriptions tended to focus more on talking about "preservation" while the ones in Tory territory spent more space talking about economic development.

Maybe the most extreme example of this are the Salteau, whose description reads more like that of a corporation than of a reserve:

Summary of Economic Development Agreements, Community Businesses and Joint Ventures

Saulteau is involved in a variety of ventures which include: Twin Sisters Native Plant Nursery, 6 Nations Ventures, 3 Nations Ventures, 4ever green resources LP, Saulteau Safety and Secutity, Saulteau Camp Services, Saulteau Communications, and Little Prairie Community Forest. Saulteau also receives a variety of benefits from joint-ventures and partnerships with companies such as: Britco-Airamark, Bailey Helicopters, North Cariboo Air, Ruskin Construction, FMI Electrical Installations, Tetratec EVA, MTS Trucking, Jake’s Construction and KMC

Economic Development Background

Saulteau is currently reviewing the structure of its economic development program, businesses and joint-ventures. Saulteau is involved in a variety of enterprises that provide jobs and benefits to the community. Chief and Council will consider recommendations to restructure the Economic Development department and potentially create a ‘stand-alone’ economic development corporation with an independent Board of Directors that would manage and operate all of Saulteau’s business interests.

Using the Interactive map you provided, I looked up "Taku River Tlingit", which takes me to the "Unnamed 10" reserve (pop. 28) outside of Atlin. The poll that covers the reserve did go Conservative, but it also includes the community of Atlin (pop. 241) which is majority White.

Interestingly Atlin used to be a comically overrepresented provincial riding. While I haven't been able to find the exact boundaries of the riding or demographic data Wikipedia claims the riding was "dominated" by FN voters. This is backed up by the fact that the NDP Nisga'a MLA switching over to the SoCreds caused the vote to go from 41% NDP 15% SoCred to a 55% SoCred 28% NDP over a single election. I doubt you could get a swing like that without a majority (or at least a plurality) of FN voters

Is there any demographic data on the town of Atlin? The closest I found was a regional health report but unfortunately it didn't mention the proportion of whites to natives.

[Ⓐnarchy in the ☭☭☭P!]

I'd argue a lot of Trudeau's power comes more from incumbency than Canada's leftward lean. Just look at the BC or Ontario Liberals; they won repeated elections while being widely despised for corruption and ineptitude and survived even when the Federal Liberals were getting pummeled in their provinces. Higgs hasn't had much issue with reelection despite running a province that Trudeau literally swept in 2015 and Ford is (at least currently) looking likely to cruise to a fairly safe reelection.

It seems like Canadians will typically reelect incumbents regardless of partisan affiliation or ideology unless they really screw up, at which point even an oaf like Doug Ford can win a nominally Liberal province like Ontario. Trudeau's survived on the basis that his scandals haven't really impacted regular people that much and so far he's managed to successfully pass off blame for the ones that have. If the housing bubble bursts or severe inflation sets in then even a literal tool like O'Toole would have no problem Wynne-ing against Trudeau, though if the NDP nominated a decent leader they could conceivably fill the void.

[Ⓐnarchy in the ☭☭☭P!]

It just goes to show how strong the Liberal brand is in this province, that a party that won just 7 seats last election (and only 4 of which are running for re-election - 3 if Coteau is elected to federal Parliament), is in 4th place in fundraising (behind the Greens), arrogantly ruled the province for 15 scandal filled years before being booted from office, and and has an uncharismatic leader that none has heard of is now leading the polls.

There is no reason for a reasonable progressive voter to rally behind the Liberals in opposition. The Liberals have had their chance to govern. The NDP has been out of office for 26 years, and their incompetent Premier at the time is now a die-in-the-wool Liberal. Progressives should be supporting the NDP. 

But I guess what's also happening is the PCs are just shedding their moderate voters who normally vote Liberal (and would never vote NDP). Combined with the promiscuous progressives who have forgotten the NDP is in opposition, and have gone back to supporting them, the Liberals have begun to build up their coalition again.

That's the thing, and I know this really annoys New Democrats, but the Liberals are just perceived as the default centre-left option even when they're in a distant third in Queen's Park and their leader doesn't have a seat. The ONDP's best shot at government in Ontario since 1990 was 2018, and if they couldn't win then, their chances now look dim.

The NDP's best hope is that once people take a good look at Del Duca, they'll consider the NDP. In today's superficial and image-obsessed era, Del Duca is a poor fit. He's boring, bald, doesn't have an authoritative voice, isn't trendy or cool, and as rude as it sounds, he's kind of ugly. I know none of these things should matter, but looking the part has become more and more important for politicians, and unfortunately for Del Duca, I just can't see someone like him inspiring Ontarians en masse.

What the Ontario Liberals have done superbly well I feel is that their message these days seems very tailored to Liberals who voted for Ford in the 905, and the messenger fits the bill. An Italian blue Liberal from Vaughan who seems more naturally adept at talking about bread-and-butter issues like paid sick leave and LTC homes, rather than coming off as a "tax-and-spend Liberal" like many perceived Wynne.

Del Duca is a poor fit but so is Horwath. I have no idea how she's still leader after missing the open net twice and I don't see how she somehow manages it this time. The Liberals could nominate a cardboard box with a smiley face drawn in sharpie and they'd still be the more credible opposition.

[Ⓐnarchy in the ☭☭☭P!]

Devastating poll for the CPC if true, but the methodology is horrendous. Only Ontario is within an acceptable MoE, the rest is way too high and SK/MB are over 20% in MoE!

Don't trust crosstabs, good or bad

I see the PPC is at 5%. To repeat an argument I've made on Atlas and elsewhere, the Tory predicament is a lot more complicated than merely "tack to the left to capture the centre". The right side of the Tories can, show their dissent by voting with their feet. Even a Green Party-sized vote to the right of the Tories makes it very difficult for them to be competitive, much less form government.

Not a good day for Mr. O'Toole!

In the long run the Tories would have been better off had the PCs and Reform never merged. The differences between the Anglicized, urbane Atlantic PCs and the Americanized, populist Reformers (not to mention the Quebec separatists) are too great to be bridged by any but the most skilled politicians (and even Harper's coalition was falling apart by the end). It would make far more sense for two separate right of center parties to focus on the regions they're best at while strategically not running candidates in key swing ridings (presumably after negotiations and/or local primaries).

Still, we'll have to see how long this holds. Bernier definitely benefits from O'Toole tacking left on Carbon Taxes just as lockdown fatigue started to set in but if he wants to make a comeback he'd have to actually win a seat. I have no idea whether his odds in Beauce are higher or lower than they were in 2019; on the one hand he isn't an incumbent anymore and probably won't get the same level of press coverage, but on the other the Tories probably won't be treating it as a key tossup riding (if they are O'Toole is in deep trouble) and there are few places in Canada where anti-lockdown sentiment is higher than Beauce.

Regardless, even if Bernier doesn't capitalize, sooner or later someone will. A random separatist party in the last Saskatchewan election that nobody had heard of before won double digits and 2nd place in a half dozen ridings so I wouldn't be surprised if Western separatists start contesting or even winning formerly monolithic Conservative seats.

[Ⓐnarchy in the ☭☭☭P!]

Looking back two decades, the Lower Mainland of BC and Vancouver Island embracing Preston Manning and Stockwell Day sure looks weird today.  But so was the election of Rob Ford as mayor of Toronto.  

Reform was way more ideologically heterogenous than people give it credit. Keith Martin was hardly some far right extremist.

In the long run the Tories would have been better off had the PCs and Reform never merged. The differences between the Anglicized, urbane Atlantic PCs and the Americanized, populist Reformers (not to mention the Quebec separatists) are too great to be bridged by any but the most skilled politicians (and even Harper's coalition was falling apart by the end). It would make far more sense for two separate right of center parties to focus on the regions they're best at while strategically not running candidates in key swing ridings (presumably after negotiations and/or local primaries).

But how would not merging change anything? You would still need to bridge the divide between the various strains of Conservatism in Canada; the only difference is now they are in separate parties as well. It's not like this was new either; the pre-1993 PCs also suffered from regionalism that harmed their electoral chances. FWIW, your idea of having different Conservative Parties run in various regions was actually proposed but was shot down.

You don't need to bridge the divide. Just let the PC-equivalent run a center right UK Tory style campaign that runs on a carbon tax and beating down SoCons for those key upper middle class urban/suburban votes while the Reform-equivalent runs with all the policies that let it dominate the Prairies and that (especially recently) provided inroads in postindustrial ex-NDP regions like Essex and Oshawa.

As it stands a single Tory leader is forced to choose between their base and growth, whereas two Tory leaders could get both. If anything being divided is a good thing, since that makes it harder for Trudeau to do his usual trick of painting the Tories as Republicans to alienate centrist suburbanites.

Also, of course Trudeau is at his peak when he's paying a huge portion of the population to stay home. The same trick worked quite a while for Bolsonaro. But the real question is what happens to his popularity when the bill comes due, either in the form of austerity and service cuts when the BoC raises rates or inflation if it doesn't. I've seen zero explanations for how we're going to handle the debt (let alone provincial debt) when real rates aren't negative.

I'm sure Trudeau will capitalize by holding an election sooner rather than later though, ideally by baiting the other parties into forcing it somehow.

[Ⓐnarchy in the ☭☭☭P!]

You don't need to bridge the divide. Just let the PC-equivalent run a center right UK Tory style campaign that runs on a carbon tax and beating down SoCons for those key upper middle class urban/suburban votes while the Reform-equivalent runs with all the policies that let it dominate the Prairies and that (especially recently) provided inroads in postindustrial ex-NDP regions like Essex and Oshawa.

As it stands a single Tory leader is forced to choose between their base and growth, whereas two Tory leaders could get both. If anything being divided is a good thing, since that makes it harder for Trudeau to do his usual trick of painting the Tories as Republicans to alienate centrist suburbanites.

Also, of course Trudeau is at his peak when he's paying a huge portion of the population to stay home. The same trick worked quite a while for Bolsonaro. But the real question is what happens to his popularity when the bill comes due, either in the form of austerity and service cuts when the BoC raises rates or inflation if it doesn't. I've seen zero explanations for how we're going to handle the debt (let alone provincial debt) when real rates aren't negative.

I'm sure Trudeau will capitalize by holding an election sooner rather than later though, ideally by baiting the other parties into forcing it somehow.

The PCs and Reform/Alliance merged *because* the alternative was another decade of Liberal majorities with ~35% of the popular vote. More specifically, the PCs never recovered from the shocks of Mulroney's last years, and were a spent force. It's possible that, given another decade, the Alliance Party could have itself evolved into a big-tent centre-right party, but we'll never know.

There would certainly be room for a moderate, centre-right party. Unfortunately, the First Past The Post system makes it unviable.

That was with both parties stepping on each others toes, though. By a brief scan of the '93 results it looks like the PCs and Reform combined had enough votes to win several dozen ridings that they otherwise would have lost, particularly in BC, SK, ON and NB. Strategic primaries/dropping out (probably) wouldn't have been enough in '93 but in ['97 there were even more split ridings](http://esm.ubc.ca/CA97/results.html).

The PCs weren't what they used to be but they were hardly dead in the water considering Charest managed to get them from 2 to 20 seats.

Virtually every democratically elected government gave generous cash handouts over the past year. But, if buying voters with their own money was the magic elixir to keep power, then Trump would have won. People want real leadership, or at least the perception of it (admittedly, Trudeau did much better on the latter than the former). The debt will have to be addressed through big tax hikes, which most peer countries are going to introduce in some form in the coming years.

Did we follow the same election? Trump did everything he could to shovel out as much money as possible but he was blocked by the House and Senate. Whenever he did manage to get cheques out his approval increased considerably.

People want money in their pockets and the perception of safety, hence why Cuomo and Legault are (were?) the most popular subnational leaders in the US and Canada despite having literally the worst metrics of their respective countries.

As for tax hikes, if France and Colombia are of any indication people aren't going to take tax hikes very well.

[Ⓐnarchy in the ☭☭☭P!]

Is this why rural eastern Ontario is and has always been Tory, as opposed to formerly Liberal rural western Ontario?

To generalize, Eastern Ontario is more "traditional" Anglo Canadian conservative, while Western Ontario is more socially conservative, evangelical and German/Dutch. 

Eastern Ontario also has more farmers as opposed to Western Ontario, which is dominated by (often unionized) resource industries like lumber and mining.

[Ⓐnarchy in the ☭☭☭P!]

Is this why rural eastern Ontario is and has always been Tory, as opposed to formerly Liberal rural western Ontario?

To generalize, Eastern Ontario is more "traditional" Anglo Canadian conservative, while Western Ontario is more socially conservative, evangelical and German/Dutch.  

Eastern Ontario also has more farmers as opposed to Western Ontario, which is dominated by (often unionized) resource industries like lumber and mining.

That would be Northern Ontario.  The primary division in the province is between thinly populated, resource-based North and densely populated Southern Ontario.  More than 90% of the population lives in Southern Ontario, in about 12% of the land area.

Western (or Southwestern) Ontario and Eastern Ontario are subregions of Southern Ontario.  That's what we're comparing.  

I'm from Windsor so it's all Northern Ontario to me. I thought Western Ontario denoted Northwestern Ontario the same way Eastern Ontario is really Northeastern Ontario but apparently not.

Southwestern Ontario's NDP and Liberal parties still derive a ton of support from unions, but manufacturing and government employee unions rather than resource extraction unions. The former typically go for the NDP and deliver manufacturing hubs like Windsor and Niagara while the latter usually support the Liberals in white collar urban/suburban areas like London and KWC. Ontario has a high unionization rate and a large number of both federal and provincial employees so they provide a fairly high floor (assuming they don't all flip to one side or the other strategically like they did in the 2018 provincial election)

Besides that, it's worth noting that a lot of American trends in political geography either don't apply or have only started applying recently.

For one thing, the "elites" of Canadian society like bankers, real estate moguls, dynastic heirs and so on are generally either Liberals or at best swing voters who have to be bought with Harperesque tax cuts with the notable exception of those in Western industries like resource extraction. Whereas the Reagan era Republicans won overwhelmingly with the wealthy, the Canadian Conservatives are definitely more of an outsider party, hence their comparative reliance on small donations.

Another is that, at least until very recently, the Liberals (and even the NDP) were entirely capable of winning rural ridings. Support for supply management was (at least in some ridings) a winning issue and there was enough ancestral support to keep them competitive. It also probably helped that social issues were less of a focus and there were plenty of rural Liberal MPs who took a pro-life position to keep their constituents happy without any issue from leadership. As the Liberals and NDP have raced each other leftwards socially much of that former support has dried up and left the Tories in a dominant position. Of course running up increasingly huge margins in rural ridings won't help the Tories when the rural and post-industrial ridings moving in their direction are outnumbered by the urban and suburban ridings that vote monolithically red or orange.

[Ⓐnarchy in the ☭☭☭P!]

Another is that, at least until very recently, the Liberals (and even the NDP) were entirely capable of winning rural ridings.

They both still are. The Liberals dominate the mostly rural Atlantic provinces, have a few rural Quebec seats (and could win a lot more when the Bloc is weak), and do decently well in rural Northern Ontario and the territories. The NDP also wins rural seats, mostly in indigenous-heavy areas.

Even in Southwestern Ontario, though, the Liberals used to be able to win rural seats as recently as 2004, when Paul Martin won everything from Huron-Bruce to Leamington (but ironically not his actual hometown of Windsor or Essex), seats that even in the last election went Tory by over 50%.

You're right that "rural" means completely different things in the North, Quebec and the Atlantic but SWO has seen a Michigan-like rural shift.

[Ⓐnarchy in the ☭☭☭P!]

I doubt it's a coincidence that Bergen, the MP from the riding with the highest number of votes going PPC, was made the interim leader and has been unabashedly pro-trucker. The Tories probably figure that the Liberal and Trudeau brands are going to be so tarnished by the time the next election comes around that they'd lose to literally anyone (see: Premier Doug Ford), whereas if the PPC is able to seriously contest rural seats then the Conservatives have basically no path to a majority. However controversial they may be, nobody (except maybe traumatized downtown Ottawans who never vote Tory anyway) is going to be casting their ballot based on trucker protesters in a year, much like how the rail blockades had minimal impact on the last election.

The only real potential for a backfire would be if Trudeau suddenly decided to hold an election in the middle of the CPC leadership race, while they're still busy pandering to their base. In that case they'd actually have to deal with the disconnect now when people actually care, but I'm pretty sure it would also be completely unprecedented and early elections typically backfire on Prime Ministers. Still, with the inflation and supply chain issues I have a hard time imagining Trudeau having any better luck a year from now and at least right now there is a(n increasingly narrow) majority supporting mandates and lockdowns.

[Ⓐnarchy in the ☭☭☭P!]

I was at the Windsor convoy this morning.  Very happy group, police have closed off the area but do not seem too concerned.  The bridge was closed but I believe it  has since reopened in limited capacity and they are rerouting traffic.  No sense things will get violent unless the government unfairly escalates tensions.  There were a lot of families and children as well.  I wish them the best

EDIT: Just to clarify, I'm not participating in the protest, but I wanted to check it out.  I live less than an hour away and it's pretty unusual when international news events happen here.

Not that surprising, since in a bizarre twist of fate Canada's most important border crossing is coincidentally also the city with the most PPC support in the country. That's probably a decent proxy for hardcore trucker convoy support, so it isn't surprising that this happened.

None of the major parties seem to be really gaining from this either. While association with the convoy might hurt PP, Trudeau hasn't exactly been covering himself with glory either. He's the Prime Minister and yet he's been reduced to lamely saying "stop" as key economic arteries grind to a halt as a result of blockade. The general perception I've seen from regular left-of-center Canadians is that he's basically throwing rocks at a hornets nest without any contingency plan. Trudeau had to leave Parliament early yesterday, almost certainly because the White House was freaking out over the nearly half billion in daily trade being held up at the border. It's gotten to the point where even longtime Liberal MP Joël Lightbound have started breaking ranks and calling out Trudeau for being divisive.

In theory Singh is in a great position to act Prime Ministerial and talk tough without having to actually deal with the consequences but he's reverted to his usual HR speak of "we can't tolerate racism" and "this is unacceptable". I've had a problem with Singh's leadership for ages but I think I can put a pin on the biggest problem he has: he has zero expectation of becoming Prime Minister, to the point where he's been a Federal leader for years yet can't give a straightforward answer whenever anyone asks what he'd do in response to any given problem as PM. At this moment his two biggest opponents are squabbling in the dirt and he can go any direction he wants and plausibly come out on top. He can get tough and talk about seizing trucks or charging million dollar fines or he can be conciliatory and talk about ending divisiveness and bringing people together but instead he's just copying Trudeau but without the force of government behind him. The NDP desperately needs a more ambitious leader but the base inexplicably loves him.

Del Duca, incidentally, has been doing exactly that and has been relentlessly hammering Ford and talking up how hard he'd crack down if he were Premier. Ford, incidentally, is probably the biggest loser here; so long as mandates (and the reaction to mandates) are the dominant story he's going to bleed to both flanks simultaneously. His only hope seems to be that his enemies all trip on their shoelaces. To be fair despite the groundswell of protesters the right-of-PC parties still seem to be totally uncoordinated and DD seems less likeable every time I see him so I'm not counting Doug out yet.

[Ⓐnarchy in the ☭☭☭P!]

Update on the Ambassador Bridge protest: there's somewhere between 100 and 150 vehicles on Huron Church in Windsor, plus about a hundred or so more non-participating sympathizers parked nearby. Vast majority are regular cars, a few mobile homes and maybe just over a half dozen actual rigs. Several hundred people on foot at the intersection barbequing, dancing and lighting fires.

Considering the value of the Ambassador Bridge's trade I'm kind of shocked there weren't thousands of OPP and RCMP with tanks but Windsor PD clearly isn't equipped for this. If this continues even a day longer the auto industry is going to start choking from supply shortages.

[Ⓐnarchy in the ☭☭☭P!]

https://twitter.com/DavidColetto/status/1490798380708208646

There's one point against the "people who are mad about the truckers will flock to Trudeau!" theory

In Windsor news, the mayor is calling for a hundred more cops but the blockade remains in place. They were hoping it would shrink but it's actually added some mobile homes and seems well supplied. For reference Windsor PD has 500 cops and London has 600, so bringing in 100 isn't as easy as it sounds. Of course the enormous Toronto PD could help, but they've already sent a contingent to Ottawa and Toronto has real crime to deal with.

[Ⓐnarchy in the ☭☭☭P!]

As the different jurisdictions play hot potato with responsibility the situation only continues to deteriorate. A new blockade popped up in Manitoba, a rolling blockade surrounded the Ottawa Airport and the blockades in Coutts and Windsor have only grown. The latter now features several new structures including, and I swear I'm not making this up, a giant inflatable beaver. OPP have started arriving but not enough, so now they're waiting on RCMP backup. As the CBC put it, it seems the police are always a step behind and now hundreds of millions of trade a day are at the mercy of trucker warlord Hot Donna. My guess is they either move tonight or tomorrow night with RCMP (or possibly military) backup because the crowd will surely increase substantially if it lasts to the weekend.

As if the situation wasn't embarrassing enough, now the US is "offering assistance" like we're Kazakhstan and they're Russia or something.

[Ⓐnarchy in the ☭☭☭P!]

As if the situation wasn't embarrassing enough, now the US is "offering assistance" like we're Kazakhstan and they're Russia or something.

What kind of assistance can US provide???

From what I've heard the offer was for heavy moving equipment to remove the trucks plus manpower from the DHS.

At the moment it sounds like the Windsor Police, OPP and RCMP are going to try removing them sometime today.

We've seen more substantive movement towards normalcy in the last two weeks in this country than we've seen in the whole pandemic. Ford is just the latest in a series of politicians shifting their approach to COVID. 

The narrative that the trucker protests would be ineffective or even prolong restrictions is looking more and more like wishcasting.

In terms of dominating the conversation and making the end of mandates and restrictions a key issue they might be one of the most successful protest movements in recent memory. I'd imagine protesters and governments all around the world are taking notes of the power multiplying effect of trucks and industrial equipment, as well as the pressure exerted by strategic blockades at key ports of entry.

Of course every level of government is going to throw the book at the protesters themselves as soon as they have the ability but in terms of achieving stated political goals they're already ahead of BLM

[Ⓐnarchy in the ☭☭☭P!]

Considering how there are Freedom Convoys in a half dozen countries now a mod should probably merge the threads

[Ⓐnarchy in the ☭☭☭P!]

Another nail in the coffin of Western moral superiority

https://twitter.com/OpIndia_com/status/1490983743426682886

https://twitter.com/wFalabede/status/1492941282624385024

https://twitter.com/nayibbukele/status/1492708333656104962

https://twitter.com/nayibbukele/status/1492740255123976193

[Ⓐnarchy in the ☭☭☭P!]

"59% of U.S. Voters Support Canadian Truckers in ‘Freedom Convoy’ Protest"

[Ⓐnarchy in the ☭☭☭P!]

"59% of U.S. Voters Support Canadian Truckers in ‘Freedom Convoy’ Protest"

Rasmussen, lol.

I'd prefer a better pollster asked the question but I'd be willing to put down money that a majority of Americans (at least of those with an opinion) are pro-trucker. The story is basically tailor made red meat for the 2022 Republican base while not offering much for Democrats to fight back on; the corporate Democrats stopped caring once the Ambassador Bridge was cleared, the leftists (even leftists who typically shill incessantly for the establishment like Vaush) instantly recognized the threat Emergency Act style bank seizures pose to any protest movement, and almost nobody is still interested in dying on the hill of vaccine mandates.

I thought it would take days after the announcement for American news outlets to start talking about "the Trudeau regime" but it didn't even take hours

Has it actually dawned upon  Is any critic of the Canadian government's action here that  Freezing the bank accounts of The protesters Until they cease illegally trespassing and shutting down the roads as they have been for weeks  Is is an infinitely more humane and Is non violent response than the typical American version of sending in cops with truncheons and tear gas?

I mean, would suddenly all the conservatives on this thread be mollified in saying "well, now THAT'S  okay"  If The Canadian cops suddenly started storming these trucks And dragging their owners out by force at gunpoint? I don't think so.

 And, if the fundamental response of the Fox News brigade of such critics is, "well, they shouldn't be punished, because they are RIGHT!1!!",  It bears repeating that Canadians overwhelmingly disagree with that premise, and are quite rightly telling such  right wing critics from South of the border to f##k off.

That they're avoiding violence is commendable but that says more about recent police training practices than any action by the government. Ultimately the only thing that will end the occupation other than capitulation is an overwhelming number of police, something the Emergency Act does nothing whatsoever to provide.

The financial controls won't do much to stop the protest since they were never reliant on that money anyway. The real "value" is in intimidating the people who donated to the protest or who might donate to future "disfavoured" causes, a horrific precedent that was made explicit by that thuggish, unbefitting display from our Justice Minister. Russia implementing similar measures rightly attracted international condemnation but because Canada is a "sophisticated democracy" the supposed "human rights organizations" of the world are silent (Canadian civil liberties organizations are thankfully fight back though). As my favourite Russian dissident put it, someone who actually spent time in Putin's prisons, in two weeks Canada fell down a path that took Russia a decade.

https://twitter.com/svtv_news/status/1493379432156995586

[Ⓐnarchy in the ☭☭☭P!]

I find it interesting how we're seeing a severe disconnect between the views of the domestic political establishment and of international observers and the press. Obviously American right wingers are having a grand time running with "Trudeau the Tyrant" but even the New York Times was subject to a struggle session from the Canadian "journalists" for reporting that protesters were arrested at gunpoint. After much preening about how ignorant these foreign journalists were for making up stories about our brave police it turned out that, indeed, protesters had been arrested at gunpoint.

Of all the parties most disgraced here, Canadian journalists might be at the top. Throughout the "crisis" they've acted like state media in how hard they've tried to avoid portraying the police or other institutions badly. Their response to a leaked RCMP chat of Mounties acting like a stereotype of fascist cops was to try to figure out the leaker. Their response to a photo of people being trampled by horses was to FACT CHECK some idiot from FOX who falsely claimed the woman was dead while implying or even stating that the trampling didn't happen. While she wasn't dead she was hospitalized despite the claims of the Ottawa Police that there were no injuries. And now the picture has gone viral:

https://twitter.com/ZubyMusic/status/1494822465364807688

I think Trudeau and our local bigshots still have the 20th Century mindset that Canada is a walled garden where only our local news outlets can have any influence on the public discourse. But in the year 2022 we have Starlink and people in pretty much every corner of Canada have access to independent and international coverage on the internet. It doesn't matter what CTV or the CBC claim when people can see defenseless protesters being kicked and bludgeoned for themselves with quick search. The claim that everyone present is an insurrectionist white supremacist falls apart when you notice the disproportionate number of indigenous people present, including aforementioned Trampled Lady who is a Tyendinaga Mohawk. Our state funded media might studiously avoid interviewing anyone who might dispel that narrative but unfortunately for them there are regular Ottawans willing to fill the gap for tens of thousands of people watching by livestream.

In turn, people from outside Canada can see the lack of violence from the protesters and the disproportionate response. The police used tactics normally reserved for violent riots against a clearly peaceful protest. Banks seizing the funds of organizers without a warrant is normally reserved for repressive dictatorships like Putin's Russia and seizing the funds of indirect supporters and donors goes beyond what even a tyrant like Putin does. The declaration of emergency powers, at best, demonstrates a severe lack of capability to protect essential infrastructure without the use of unprecedented measures. It also demonstrates severe hypocrisy: when India faced protests that blocked highways and caused severe economic damage, Trudeau recommended negotiations and claimed to "always stand with peaceful protesters". Naturally the Indians have been jumping on the blatant double standard:

https://twitter.com/AdvYuktiRathi/status/1494933509638881281

https://twitter.com/balajis/status/1494542088108609536

There are even European MEPs denouncing Trudeau

https://twitter.com/CristianTerhes/status/1495144987310317568

https://twitter.com/mislavkolakusic/status/1493515735523545089

It might take some time for it to set in among our elites but Canada is wildly out of line with the rest of the world right now. If we weren't protected by the double standard applied to "Developed Western Countries" we'd be getting internationally denounced like any tinpot dictatorship.

This isn't the War Measures Act. The charter has not been suspended. Stop whining about civil liberties.

It isn't suspended but it may as well be. Without judicial oversight the charter is about as useful as a toilet paper condom.

What about the civil liberties of Ottawans? They've been effectively suspended for the last 3 weeks.

Just like people have the choice to get vaccinated or to lose their job, Ottawans have the choice to live near Parliament Hill, a place where one might expect disruptive demonstrations to take place, or to live somewhere else.

Citizens of Seattle also endured a month long occupation, except their occupied zone had the highest murder rate of any country or city in the world and was ended not with unprecedented emergency powers or even with the precedented use of the National Guard but by the occupants leaving and police clearing up the stragglers after an armed militia gunned down two black kids. So you'll have to forgive me for not having much sympathy for our effete governing class having to endure some honking

I'm not sure what it says that the poll I've seen on the imposition of the Emergencies Act was at 51% in favor and 42% against.  

In 1970, outside of Quebec anyway, I believe support for the imposition of the War Measures Act to deal with the FLQ was around 90%.

Around the same time, from the book Turning Point: 1968 by Irwin Unger and Debi Unger (Page 499): A Harris Poll soon after the Democratic Convention (in Chicago) showed that 66% of Americans agreed with the statement "Mayor Daley was right the way he used police against demonstrators."

The police action was shown on live television and was later described by an investigating commission as a 'police riot.'

Polling in the US also showed massive support for the Kent State Massacre - several rang phone-ins to say their only regret was that even more "bums" hadn't been killed.

Cracking down is pretty much always popular at first. IIRC the Kent State polling had the margin at something like 53-10 in favour of opening fire. That opposition to the Emergencies Act from the start is already in the 30s is a bad sign for Trudeau. But now that there's no blockades and Ottawa has been cleared the justification has shifted from "we need Emergency Powers to remove the trucks" to "we need Emergency Powers because trucks could come back", an explanation unconvincing to the Globe & Mail or even the Beaverton. Pushing his luck might be a fatal miscalculation on Trudeau's part.

https://twitter.com/mattskubeCTV/status/1496176520846626817

Nope, no emergency here. Everything is clearly hunky dory in this city.

I'm not going to feel safe until all the yahoos are gone.

The police was weak again, they should have been forced to go home, instead of being allowed to go terrorize Embrun instead.

All available evidence suggests that it's an armed robber, not a terrorist.

If that actually turns out to be the case I'm going to laugh pretty hard that regular crime has given better justification for the "Emergency" than three weeks of occupation featuring zero drawn weapons.

EDIT: I'm not sure if this is true but someone on Twitter claimed that with two robberies and a murder "Red Zone" Ottawa has already experienced more violent crime than after nearly a month of trucker occupation

[Ⓐnarchy in the ☭☭☭P!]

Mission accomplished?

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/politics/article-ottawa-drops-invocation-of-the-emergencies-act-prime-minister-justin/

Is this a joke. On Monday they say the emergency act is still needed and must be voted. On Wednesday, it's not needed anymore.

The most obvious explanation is that Trudeau saw some absolutely horrific polls between Monday and Wednesday. He only had a narrow majority's support for invoking the EA when the Ambassador Bridge and Ottawa were both blocked off so I'd imagine even a lot of his supporters had an issue when he tried to extend it.

Alternatively, supposedly the banking portion of the EA caused a significant amount of bank account closures and capital flight. With how tied in the Liberal Party is with Bay Street its not out the question that the revocation was made after the bankers saw how much money they were losing.

Singh is the real loser here though. He humiliated himself and his party just for Trudeau to go "oh, actually, nevermind"