Ontario Liberal leadership race
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 04:32:52 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  International Elections (Moderators: afleitch, Hash)
  Ontario Liberal leadership race
« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 3 [4]
Author Topic: Ontario Liberal leadership race  (Read 4283 times)
The Right Honourable Martin Brian Mulroney PC CC GOQ
laddicus finch
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,833


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #75 on: May 24, 2023, 10:45:18 AM »


The Liberals aren't winning back those ancestral Liberal ridings back any time soon due to realignment. The path to victory is indeed the Wynne path - sweeping the GTA.

Crombie's strategy is a bold one, considering there are more swing voters on the centre-left than the centre-right. But maybe if she focuses on the 905 suburbs, and the NDP focuses on keeping their seats, the two parties can force a Tory minority government? That's the ideal situation, but would involve Ontarians voting tactically.

Thank you, that's what I was trying to say but wasn't elaborating very well. The McGuinty path doesn't really exist anymore, because those right-wing ancestral Liberals in small town Ontario no longer vote Liberal. The good thing for the Liberals is, even though they've lost those places, the massive growth of the GTA means they can win with a completely different coalition. A centre-left strategy can absolutely win votes in the GTA, as Trudeau has proven three times in a row - in large part because a centre-left strategy actually energizes Liberals.

I said this about O'Toole, I said it about Charest, and now I'm saying it about Crombie - in today's political atmosphere, if you can't excite your party's core voters, your supposed appeal to swing voters means nothing.
Logged
DL
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,405
Canada


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #76 on: May 24, 2023, 11:06:26 AM »

From an NDP perspective I actually really hope the OLP is dumb enough to pick Crombie as leader. She would be a total turn-off to NDP/OLP switchers and would cement the NDP stranglehold on urban Ontario and the north. At most a Crombie-led OLP might pick up some seats in Mississauga or York region - but those would be seats the NDP is never going to win anyways - and she could repel voters in Brampton with her constant Brampton-bashing
Logged
The Right Honourable Martin Brian Mulroney PC CC GOQ
laddicus finch
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,833


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #77 on: May 24, 2023, 11:21:10 AM »

Well to be fair she's not entirely the same as Ford. Ford's not a NIMBY.

But keep in mind that that might be, indeed, his tripping point--that is, being perceived as a NIMBY is one thing, being perceived as a "Greenbelt is a scam" insensitive goon bulling ahead with pet notions for Ontario Place and Ontario Science Centre is another.  And remember: Doug Ford has *always* had that "insensitive goon" thing going--it's what galvanized Toronto voters to opt for John Tory instead in '14...

On the greenbelt thing:


I just hope people realize what this means. Ontario has an annual population growth nearing 450,000. The Ford government has passed some of the most pro-intensification laws in Canada - for example, by the end of 2023, all Ontario municipalities will be required to permit secondary suites in single detached zones. The pie-in-the-sky urbanist fantasies may be fulfilled at some point in the future, but we need quick-and-dirty solutions right now, and things like basement apartments and "shiny towers" are part of that mix.

The other thing with intensification is that it creates a strain on existing municipal infrastructure, and require major upgrades. So yes, in some cases, it's more economical to create new infrastructure to service new lots built in the greenbelt than to intensify within an urban area. Doesn't mean we shouldn't be vigilant about encroachment into the greenbelt, but this I guarantee you: whether there is a PC, Liberal, or NDP government, there will be development on the Greenbelt. The rate of population growth and the lack of developable land within settlement areas makes it somewhat inevitable.

Of course, one could argue that maybe the rate of population growth is too high, but I know better than to touch the third rail of Canadian politics. Besides, that's a federal issue. I do find it a little ridiculous that the federal government has doubled immigration rates with no national strategy for how to accommodate such growth. But again, third rail, we can't question that.

Anyway, what Bonnie Crombie is signaling represents the WORST possible outcome for the Greenbelt. The Ford government has been perhaps too lax with the greenbelt, but has also been pro-intensification. If we get a Liberal government that opposes intensification, make no mistake - the Greenbelt will be opened up MUCH, MUCH more than the PCs have done.
Logged
Hatman 🍁
EarlAW
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 25,978
Canada


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #78 on: May 24, 2023, 12:05:08 PM »

Yup. Crombie is worse than Ford on housing. Good luck getting very many voters under 40 if she wins.
Logged
adma
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,718
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #79 on: May 24, 2023, 07:21:49 PM »

Yup. Crombie is worse than Ford on housing. Good luck getting very many voters under 40 if she wins.

Almost like Wynne '18 redux--i.e. how it was the Brahmin-ratepayer over-40s (or heck, over-60s) that were her most faithful remaining demo.

But at the same time, it's hard to see Marit Stiles (much less Mike Schreiner, duh) being in agreement over the Greenbelt being a "scam".  Remember: the under-40s concerned about housing are *also* concerned about the environment--that is, they might approve of a *measured* approach to development on the Greenbelt, but statements like that suggest a bone-headed contempt for any such "measured" approach.  Not just to the Greenbelt, but to *anything*--unless one is using the "Ontario Proud" barometer for what under 40s are thinking...
Logged
toaster
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 352
Canada


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #80 on: May 25, 2023, 07:09:03 PM »

Yup. Crombie is worse than Ford on housing. Good luck getting very many voters under 40 if she wins.

Almost like Wynne '18 redux--i.e. how it was the Brahmin-ratepayer over-40s (or heck, over-60s) that were her most faithful remaining demo.

But at the same time, it's hard to see Marit Stiles (much less Mike Schreiner, duh) being in agreement over the Greenbelt being a "scam".  Remember: the under-40s concerned about housing are *also* concerned about the environment--that is, they might approve of a *measured* approach to development on the Greenbelt, but statements like that suggest a bone-headed contempt for any such "measured" approach.  Not just to the Greenbelt, but to *anything*--unless one is using the "Ontario Proud" barometer for what under 40s are thinking...
Maslow's Hierachy, shelter trumps any kind of ability to worry about the environment.  We have reached (and surpassed) the breaking point of being able to live in the GTA on an average income.  So, I don't think this is true that these are somehow equal concerns, maybe for very wealthy under 40s (I'm thinking 200k+ salary, or excessive generational wealth from parents real estate), but not your average under 40 who isn't able to survive.
Logged
Хahar 🤔
Xahar
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 41,731
Bangladesh


Political Matrix
E: -6.77, S: 0.61

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #81 on: May 25, 2023, 07:35:05 PM »

There's no real point in analyzing a general election strategy for Bonnie Crombie when her leadership campaign will end up like that of Jean Charest. It doesn't matter how many opinion pieces you get lauding your willingness to tell bold truths if you can't provide anything that members of your party actually want. She's clearly not all that committed, either, since she's going to keep the Mississauga mayoralty.

I don't really know anything about Peel Region deamalgamation, which appears to be the primary positive accomplishment she can point to, but it doesn't really matter how popular it is locally when most OLP members aren't from Mississauga. I find it hard to imagine that she would be able to register enough new members to make up the gap.

As someone who would like to see the NDP succeed, the most dangerous candidate to me is certainly Erskine-Smith, who presents an obvious path for the OLP to winning Toronto again. Ted Hsu and Yasir Naqvi both have names I recognize but I haven't seen much about what they're actually offering. Maybe they'd be winners, too.
Logged
adma
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,718
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #82 on: May 25, 2023, 10:30:52 PM »

Yup. Crombie is worse than Ford on housing. Good luck getting very many voters under 40 if she wins.

Almost like Wynne '18 redux--i.e. how it was the Brahmin-ratepayer over-40s (or heck, over-60s) that were her most faithful remaining demo.

But at the same time, it's hard to see Marit Stiles (much less Mike Schreiner, duh) being in agreement over the Greenbelt being a "scam".  Remember: the under-40s concerned about housing are *also* concerned about the environment--that is, they might approve of a *measured* approach to development on the Greenbelt, but statements like that suggest a bone-headed contempt for any such "measured" approach.  Not just to the Greenbelt, but to *anything*--unless one is using the "Ontario Proud" barometer for what under 40s are thinking...
Maslow's Hierachy, shelter trumps any kind of ability to worry about the environment.  We have reached (and surpassed) the breaking point of being able to live in the GTA on an average income.  So, I don't think this is true that these are somehow equal concerns, maybe for very wealthy under 40s (I'm thinking 200k+ salary, or excessive generational wealth from parents real estate), but not your average under 40 who isn't able to survive.

Yes, but that's if you view "shelter" in generic, utilitarian terms--like, you'll find that in practice, the under 40s most concerned about the "shelter question" are *not* the sort who'd choose generic developer fare in the Greenbelt boondocks.  They're advocating for urban intensification.

But on top of that, if these under-40s are the sort who are so desperate for shelter that they'd be on board with Doug Ford-style obtuseness--let's put it this way: their poverty goes beyond the monetary into something more broadly civic and cultural; and in an age where a lot of onetime "universal" values and concerns have become pigeonholed as more remote and elite than they were in the days of traditional media, who can blame them.  Particularly if they, themselves, are the offspring of Ford Nation, and thus never had the chance to know better--which also makes them, in their desperation for shelter, easy marks.

Any under 40 who's all on-board with Doug Ford's promise to rip down the Ontario Science Centre for "housing", with no regard for either the OSC's architectural merit or the conservation-land conditions that preclude the building of "housing" upon said land, is truly...dim.  Though yeah, maybe the whole Catch-22 is that those "precluding concerns" are probably *already* remote to the poverty-beyond-the-monetary set--which is how Ford populism can be seductive in its framing of said concerns as "elite scams"...
Logged
adma
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,718
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #83 on: May 25, 2023, 10:46:15 PM »

And another thing to keep in mind is that there's a sliding scale of "affordability concerns"--and the kinds of under-40s seeking "affordability" in Greenbelt sprawl isn't the more authentically sympathy-drawing "intensification" crowd, but more like old-school middle-class suburbans and blue-collar-aristocrats who find they can no longer afford their desired bang for the buck within the 416.  Sort of like modern versions of...Doug Ford's parents (who were around 40 when they built their Etobicoke spread in the 70s)
Logged
adma
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,718
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #84 on: May 25, 2023, 10:49:28 PM »

I don't really know anything about Peel Region deamalgamation, which appears to be the primary positive accomplishment she can point to, but it doesn't really matter how popular it is locally when most OLP members aren't from Mississauga. I find it hard to imagine that she would be able to register enough new members to make up the gap.

Maybe by way of the LPC.  That is, the brand *is* still inherently strong in Mississauga, even if the provincial party's the weaker element (and even through that weakness, they managed fairly good mid-30s shares in most Mississauga ridings last year).
Logged
Хahar 🤔
Xahar
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 41,731
Bangladesh


Political Matrix
E: -6.77, S: 0.61

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #85 on: May 26, 2023, 12:29:48 AM »

Yup. Crombie is worse than Ford on housing. Good luck getting very many voters under 40 if she wins.

Almost like Wynne '18 redux--i.e. how it was the Brahmin-ratepayer over-40s (or heck, over-60s) that were her most faithful remaining demo.

But at the same time, it's hard to see Marit Stiles (much less Mike Schreiner, duh) being in agreement over the Greenbelt being a "scam".  Remember: the under-40s concerned about housing are *also* concerned about the environment--that is, they might approve of a *measured* approach to development on the Greenbelt, but statements like that suggest a bone-headed contempt for any such "measured" approach. Not just to the Greenbelt, but to *anything*--unless one is using the "Ontario Proud" barometer for what under 40s are thinking...
Maslow's Hierachy, shelter trumps any kind of ability to worry about the environment.  We have reached (and surpassed) the breaking point of being able to live in the GTA on an average income.  So, I don't think this is true that these are somehow equal concerns, maybe for very wealthy under 40s (I'm thinking 200k+ salary, or excessive generational wealth from parents real estate), but not your average under 40 who isn't able to survive.

Yes, but that's if you view "shelter" in generic, utilitarian terms--like, you'll find that in practice, the under 40s most concerned about the "shelter question" are *not* the sort who'd choose generic developer fare in the Greenbelt boondocks.  They're advocating for urban intensification.

But on top of that, if these under-40s are the sort who are so desperate for shelter that they'd be on board with Doug Ford-style obtuseness--let's put it this way: their poverty goes beyond the monetary into something more broadly civic and cultural; and in an age where a lot of onetime "universal" values and concerns have become pigeonholed as more remote and elite than they were in the days of traditional media, who can blame them.  Particularly if they, themselves, are the offspring of Ford Nation, and thus never had the chance to know better--which also makes them, in their desperation for shelter, easy marks.

Any under 40 who's all on-board with Doug Ford's promise to rip down the Ontario Science Centre for "housing", with no regard for either the OSC's architectural merit or the conservation-land conditions that preclude the building of "housing" upon said land, is truly...dim.  Though yeah, maybe the whole Catch-22 is that those "precluding concerns" are probably *already* remote to the poverty-beyond-the-monetary set--which is how Ford populism can be seductive in its framing of said concerns as "elite scams"...

Perhaps if the opposition tells Ontario youth who want new housing that they're stupid for wanting that, it'll successfully change their minds. It's an interesting thought.
Logged
adma
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,718
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #86 on: May 26, 2023, 01:07:27 AM »
« Edited: May 26, 2023, 05:52:20 PM by adma »


Perhaps if the opposition tells Ontario youth who want new housing that they're stupid for wanting that, it'll successfully change their minds. It's an interesting thought.

No, the stupidity is not in Ontario youth wanting new housing.  The stupidity is in a *particular solution to the problem* that's offered as a Hobson's choice.

Or, the kinds of housing-hungry under-40s who'd be on board with "the greenbelt is a scam" are the sort whose ultimate aspirational values are delineated here.
 
https://thebaffler.com/outbursts/bad-manors-wagner?fbclid=IwAR3WPTGpCyXCmwMwNW0uKAnddoSDw1N2BYwJOUvrEsgLoz_qCDCLTwvKlHA

And incidentally, the author of that piece is under 40.  Which leaves me wondering how much this whole argument over youth, housing, etc is using "youth" as convenient next-gen window-dressing for age-old notions like "silent majority", "lumpenproletariat", etc...

So, let's present this duality...

(a) the POV that might view Greta Thunberg as a spokesperson for her generation.

(b) the POV that might view Greta Thunberg as a fantasy fixation by elites and aging boomers who *want* her to be a spokesperson for her generation.

The former might, in terms of Canada, reflect Justin/Jagmeet under-40-targeting; the latter would be the tack taken by the Ford/Poilievre realm.

The notion of a Millennial/Post-Millennial lumpenproletariat is ill-understood; yet it might address the cohort for whom those kinds of environmental or "civic" concerns might seem remote and greybeardy and who might view, I don't know, Drake as more of a positive, aspirational cultural figurehead than Greta.  And *those* are the ones who might demand "housing" with an utter unconcern as to what gets impacted in the name of said housing, and who'd paint those who *do* have such concern with a broad NIMBY or "rich privileged elite" brush.  Instead of learning something from them, "othering" them.

And since this thread *is* about the Ontario Liberal leadership race, let's remember that in recent times when the federal and provincial Liberals have been most "boxed in" (under Iggy in '11, under Wynne in '18), it's been as a "rich privileged elite" rump.  However, lest we forget, the leakage was *not* solely to the Conservatives...

Logged
toaster
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 352
Canada


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #87 on: May 28, 2023, 06:57:46 PM »


Perhaps if the opposition tells Ontario youth who want new housing that they're stupid for wanting that, it'll successfully change their minds. It's an interesting thought.

No, the stupidity is not in Ontario youth wanting new housing.  The stupidity is in a *particular solution to the problem* that's offered as a Hobson's choice.

I mean, it's a philosophical discussion at this point.  People want what they want, for a variety of reasons, trying to be the person to dictate what someone should want, or what solution should exist  (this "I know what's best for you!!! And it's not housing near where you work, where your family lives, where your culture and community exists) isn't my idea of appropriate. And it's not like it's an excessive "want" that isn't what generations of Canadians were used to prior to the last 10 years - just a comfortable place to live near family and friends.  I don't think the Greenbelt is any more of a novel idea or piece of land than all the development that has occurred in the GTA in past.  This argument that well, I get to have mine (ie. I get to have a house on land that at some point had to be developed, no matter how far back you want to go, to the detriment of the Indigenous communities if you want to go that far back), but this new generation shouldn't get theirs, isn't one that sits well.  And let's be honest a big part of this land, and the Highway 413, pass mostly through North Brampton and Milton - it's not a coincidence that it is the Toronto 416 elite (read white) "old stock" Ontarians, who are against new development in areas that would likely house new immigrant (non-white) groups, and all this being done under the guise of environmentalism. 
Logged
adma
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,718
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #88 on: May 28, 2023, 08:21:21 PM »
« Edited: May 29, 2023, 06:20:52 AM by adma »


Perhaps if the opposition tells Ontario youth who want new housing that they're stupid for wanting that, it'll successfully change their minds. It's an interesting thought.

No, the stupidity is not in Ontario youth wanting new housing.  The stupidity is in a *particular solution to the problem* that's offered as a Hobson's choice.

I mean, it's a philosophical discussion at this point.  People want what they want, for a variety of reasons, trying to be the person to dictate what someone should want, or what solution should exist  (this "I know what's best for you!!! And it's not housing near where you work, where your family lives, where your culture and community exists) isn't my idea of appropriate. And it's not like it's an excessive "want" that isn't what generations of Canadians were used to prior to the last 10 years - just a comfortable place to live near family and friends.  I don't think the Greenbelt is any more of a novel idea or piece of land than all the development that has occurred in the GTA in past.  This argument that well, I get to have mine (ie. I get to have a house on land that at some point had to be developed, no matter how far back you want to go, to the detriment of the Indigenous communities if you want to go that far back), but this new generation shouldn't get theirs, isn't one that sits well.  And let's be honest a big part of this land, and the Highway 413, pass mostly through North Brampton and Milton - it's not a coincidence that it is the Toronto 416 elite (read white) "old stock" Ontarians, who are against new development in areas that would likely house new immigrant (non-white) groups, and all this being done under the guise of environmentalism.

Well, in which case, said "immigrant groups" are the new lumpenproletariat--and have been exploited by the Fords, Harper/Kenney, etc thusly.  (And maybe as such, it's the pivot from "youth" to "immigrant groups" in this discussion that's important in delineating the issue.)

And in that light, maybe you're better off framing the opposite number not in white/old stock terms, so much as in "Laurentian Elite" terms--and the superframing of *any* legitimate Canadian-style concerns over environment, preservation, etc as "Laurentian Elite" or "Laurentian Consensus" is about as efficient a way of "othering" those concerns as one can get.  (Or as the Fords might say:  "Hey, folks, 'those people' don't speak for people like you who work hard to earn your keep.")

So yeah.  It's not about "age" or "youth" per se.  And even the "immigrant group" cultural divide can be blurry, depending on what said immigrants choose for themselves once they come to Canada.  (And some of it is "education divide" as well, or more properly kind-of-education divide--that is, the marginalization of "Laurentian Elite" concerns might as well correlate to the increasing marginalization of humanities relative to STEM or career-geared education.)

But honestly (and arguably innocently) I think the matter of "immigrant groups" is peripheral to the concerns of said 416 (white) elite rallying for the Greenbelt (not that it *hasn't* been subliminally central to past conservationist controversies--like the White vs Asian undercurrent to the debate over "monster homes" in 80s/90s Vancouver).  Or at most, they might look at it the way I'm framing it; that is, said suburbanizing "immigrant groups" and "new Canadians" as an easily duped lumpenproletariat.  "Not evil; just misguided."  Many of whom came to Canada as, well, "cultural refugees" in extremis--that is, Canada as a tabula rasa where they could be free to do what they want; but once they find out some kind, *any* kind*, of land use "regulations" are in place, it reminds them of the oppressive regimes they sought to escape.  (And I'm not talking about "English only" regulations, I'm talking about "don't tear down this designated 19th century farmhouse or rip down this heritage orchard for your personal abode" kinds of regulations.)

Because frankly, said environmentalist so-called "white" elite would *love* to have said "New Canadians" as part of their big tent of concerns (after all, Greta-ism is "international" by nature)--and in practice, when they do, it's in the event that the offspring of said "New Canadians" enroll in an environmental-studies or adjacent-minded program at U of T or TMU or some such institution and thus are "drawn into the dialogue".  (And that's where we go full circle back to "under-40s".)

(ETA: though the "where you work" matter might be subtly important here--that is, all those Amazon-type distribution centres have to go *somewhere*, and those who work in them likewise have to live somewhere--the "suburb as company town" argument.)
Logged
toaster
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 352
Canada


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #89 on: December 02, 2023, 03:19:14 PM »

Bonnie at 43% on the first ballot.  Looks like this will go to 3 ballots since Ted (4th place) only has 10% to give.. unless she can take 7% from him.  Will be very close!  Anyone else watching live?
Logged
MaxQue
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,600
Canada


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #90 on: December 02, 2023, 04:29:17 PM »

Bonnie at 43% on the first ballot.  Looks like this will go to 3 ballots since Ted (4th place) only has 10% to give.. unless she can take 7% from him.  Will be very close!  Anyone else watching live?

What would be her campaign plank? Dissolve Ontario so that Mississauga can become a province?
Logged
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 67,609
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #91 on: December 02, 2023, 04:30:20 PM »

Well, given Ontario's governance record, there's certainly an argument for the first half of that.
Logged
adma
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,718
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #92 on: December 02, 2023, 05:18:46 PM »

First round: Hsu 10, Naqvi 21.3, Erskine-Smith 25.7, Crombie 43.0.
Second Round: Naqvi 24.0, Erskine-Smith 29.3, Crombie 46.7.
Third Round: Erskine-Smith 46.6, Crombie 53.4.

Whether one likes it or not, there's a lot of "anti-Crombie promiscuous progressives" in the OLP tent--not that they're unlikely to get in line, of course...
Logged
Leading Political Consultant Ma Anand Sheela
Heat
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,028


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #93 on: December 04, 2023, 03:33:46 PM »

The OLP seems to have made the right choice as far as winning the next election goes. Erskine-Smith's pitch was a mystery to me, tbh - knowing what to say to white yuppies who like weed certainly locks down B-EY, but that's not all the GTA is, and it certainly doesn't make you Trudeau in 2015. I'll be very surprised if there were any great number of people who voted for a party led by Steven Del Duca but somehow find Crombie unacceptably conservative, or who at least can't be won over by the argument that 'voting OLP is how you get the PCs out, end of story, no it doesn't matter who the official opposition is'.
Logged
King of Kensington
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,068


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #94 on: December 04, 2023, 03:44:37 PM »

How are Jill Andrew's chances in St. Paul's now?
Logged
Hatman 🍁
EarlAW
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 25,978
Canada


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #95 on: December 04, 2023, 04:48:39 PM »



Some interesting coalitions.

Crombie wins Mississauga, but not Brampton. Pretty dominant in Central Ontario/GTHA, in the kinds of ridings the Liberals need to win to form government.
NES doesn't do as well in Downtown Toronto (the map is wrong though, he did win Toronto-Danforth in addition to BES) as you'd expect. He also does pretty well in the North and the SW. Weird.
Naqvi wins Ottawa, but doesn't do as well in Ottawa Centre as some other Ottawa ridings. Also loses Kanata. Wins some random ridings across the province. Might be some Pakistani concentrations?
Hsu does pretty well to win more than just his home riding of Kingston, but didn't expand outside of rural Eastern Ontario

Logged
toaster
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 352
Canada


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #96 on: December 04, 2023, 08:23:19 PM »

Some of these results seem odd.  Really makes me wonder if the free memberships caused non-liberals to vote to skew results?  The Brampton ridings are interesting, the ones Crombie didn't win, perhaps influenced by the Peel region breakup.  There is the South Asian factor for Naqvi winning 2 of the seats, but NES winning one in Brampton is bizarre.  Not his demographic at all, and if there was any part of Brampton that skews left, it would be the eastern part, not the south-west where he won. Also a little surprised at how poorly Crombie did in Northern Ontario, or at how well NES did. He appears to come off as downtown "elite" even if he is a rebel/maverick.  Naqvi winning in Timmins is also odd, although I can't imagine it was many people voting, given the Liberals didn't even have a candidate there in the last election.
Logged
adma
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,718
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #97 on: December 04, 2023, 11:42:20 PM »

The Brampton ridings are interesting, the ones Crombie didn't win, perhaps influenced by the Peel region breakup.  There is the South Asian factor for Naqvi winning 2 of the seats, but NES winning one in Brampton is bizarre.  Not his demographic at all, and if there was any part of Brampton that skews left, it would be the eastern part, not the south-west where he won.

Actually, it might be more the *kind* of "skewing left" we're dealing with--Brampton South contains the heart of old Brampton, which is the most old-stock older-urban part of the city and hence the sort of territory where whatever left lean that exists might be more NES-amenable than the rest...
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 [4]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.064 seconds with 12 queries.