Note to the author: the Liberal internal coalition is pretty rough too. Not all of us agree with all of the things the left is pushing for and frankly, some of us are politically homeless. This is in part because pragmatic liberals are less plentiful than the ideologues right now.

Expand full comment

Interestingly enough you did not mention the part the mainstream media plays in all this. Nor the fact that any other opinions, scientists, or intellectuals are aloud to speak. If they do, the left of center mob comes for them and the media descends. It has much to do with of the bias and destructive media along with the silencing of voices that disagree with the ideology of the left of center globalists. Look at the US due to left of center Democrats. I think Canadians will be doing a similar turn around when further inflation and costs become unsustainable and their cupboards are bare. Seeing what I am, it should not be to long before they do.

Expand full comment

Ah, issue polling. This is probably one of most abused tools available to political parties and activists seeking to pursue certain policies. The questions are invariably phrased in such a way that the respondents are happy to agree with the pollster: "Should the government of Canada give everybody free cookies?" Hey, sure, sounds great! Get into the details of the policy, though, and the answer isn't so clear cut. It turns out there's only one flavor, there's no nuts because some Canadians have allergies. The diabetics complain that they're being excluded, and the gluten-intolerant are similarly outraged. Then we find out that you need to fill out a form for your cookie or use a badly-designed website requiring a letter from The Department of Cookies with a unique passcode, and expect a lead time of 6-8 weeks. Cookies will be delivered by Canada Post only. Suddenly support for the free cookie policy isn't so solid. So, citing support for climate change mitigation isn't a particularly compelling argument, given that we know support will start to crumble the moment people are confronted with any real cost or inconvenience. The Conservative supporters concentrated in the West may just be a little more aware of the inevitable costs than the typical Liberal or NDP supporter living in Toronto, Montreal, or Vancouver.

Expand full comment

Canada is usually 2-5 years behind the US in political trends. Remember Gerald Butts comment about voter efficiently. As Stephen Maher pointed out the fate of elections is increasingly tied to analytics (shorturl.at/sJMW6). No need to build a coalition anymore. The next step is gerrymandering, once you have know how each household votes it wouldn't take much to adjust the riding boundaries. No as a hyper partisan Conservative voter it wouldn't bother me too much never to see a Liberal government again, but alas I expect that it will the Liberals to get there first.

Speaking of trends the US reached peak woke insanity, peak Trump about 3 years ago, and today I saw this on twitter

"I’ve met many Ontario parents who share my concerns: the constant race essentializing and suggestion that non white kids are victims, as well as the encouragement of tweens toward medicalized gender transitioning. "

via Jamil Jivani


Expand full comment

I'd like to suggest the malaise we need to be concerned about isn't the one afflicting conservative parties - its the malaise the political parties are inflicting on the population at large that we should be worry about. They have evolved into a scourge.

Expand full comment

The column gives a feeling that this is a crazy-mirror reverse of America, where we read about the Right being utterly united (many of them unwillingly, hating Trump but terrified of his voters) while the Left is divided into "moderates" (that Canadians would call a "right-wing coal baron") and "extremists" (which Canadians would call the NDP).

The Canadian Left has accepted its fractions, forming two parties with a total popular vote of 52%. (If the Bloc can be called "lefty", in economic terms at least, then 60%)

The Right seems to remain in some agony over whether to be two parties or one; Bernier clearly couldn't split off a functional party of bigots, to general relief, and Mr. Manning's brave experiment doesn't seem likely to repeat.

O'Toole will probably follow the "strategy" of the American Democrats, with their fractious coalition: try to keep threading the needle between their respective hot buttons, trying to please both, and having poor electoral results to show for it.

FPTP may well save O'Toole next time. When your nation is split into multiple parties so that none are likely to achieve 50% of the popular vote, you need FPTP to have a majority of seats.

Expand full comment

This seems like an appropriate opportunity to pitch an idea first worked up when Justin was talking electoral reform.

Rather than a grand, complicated transformation of voting in the House of Commons, ridings would remain, as now, each with one vote in the House.

The one and only difference, riding candidates would continue to participate between elections. Any single riding legislative vote in the House of Commons would be the result of riding candidates voting, according to their weighted proportion of the general electoral vote received on general Election Day.

For example, if riding candidates A, B, C and D received 40%, 35%, 15% and 10% respectively of the general election votes, then they would bring that weighted proportion of voting power to decide individual pieces of legislation, for the riding. To cast the riding vote in the House, the local candidates would vote (based upon their weighted election result percentages) on any piece of legislation.

The advantage of this system? Minimum complexity or convoluted PR mechanisms. Regional representation remains. Individual ridings could choose to opt in or out of this system with no disruption of the national system. In other words, FPTP could be on the ballot, if it wins the FPTP system remains for the riding, if it loses, the new system kicks in. Simple, flexible, minimal change, proportional representation. Try it, if you like it, keep it, if not, not. No great muss or fuss. One majority part of the country doesn't force a PR system on another minority part of the country.

Of course, candidates would need to be remunerated for participating between elections, but surely democracy is worth the added expense.

I have a somewhat longer description here...http://democracyskitchen.ca/Elections/electoral-reform.php

Expand full comment

Rob in Germany1 min ago

I think it would be safe to say that there are now 4 parties in Canada. The left the centre left the centre right and the right wing (avoiding the term far right for obvious reasons) with the pre Justin Liberals moving comfortably between the centre left and centre right while the PCs sticking to the centre right. Now with Justin we’ve seen the Liberals move much further to the left (someone called him the 1st NDP PM) than any government hitherto had done before. And I should add it shows in the election results - barely squeaking out a win.

This brings up one important question. Are demographics destiny? The Democrats sure thought so. My own feeling is that looking at this from afar is that Canada isn’t as woke or as progressive as one might think. Having said that I agree with Stewart, PCs have a much bigger challenge in coalescing around a simple message, unlike the Liberals where “just elect us, we’re the natural governing party, just seems to work!

Expand full comment

Saskatchewan Premier Moe may reflect something of the ideological befuddlement besetting the political descendants of Old John Eh, as he recently asserted nationhood for Saskatchewan in a bid for more provincial autonomy. (https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatchewan/sask-moe-autonomy-1.6242880)

While provinces seeking more powers is nothing new, musings about being a "nation within a nation" may indicate how bereft the conservatives in Canada have become as Old John Eh's colonial vision crumbles around them. Pallister falls in Manitoba shouting defiance on behalf of all the colonial "builders" upon whose shoulders he stands. So Moe's 'coming out' moment for a nation trapped in the Confederation closet since 1905? Does Moe envision himself a modern day Louis Riel, believing he can invent a nation by mumbling something about it in a tweet? Is the nation of Saskatchewan about to rise and rally to the call of its visionary hero?

One might think that a premier of a province with half a dozen numbered treaties straddling its jurisdiction might be a tad more circumspect about pondering the relationship between autonomy and nationhood within Canada. Does Moe's pleading indicate he sees his Pallister-moment looming up before him, his hand reaching out to grasp a last desperate narcissistic vision? Beseeching Ole John Eh to arise and lead us once more to the promised land? Blinders be bliss for true believers.

Like Kenney in Alberta seeking to open the constitution over equalization, Moe's mumblings may indicate a tribe running out of ideas. Not a visionary about to launch Canada on a new path to what D'Arcy McGee envisioned as a "new northern nationality" (https://macdonaldlaurier.ca/files/pdf/MIConfederationSeriesMcGeeF_Web.pdf) but a sad little political caricature about to descend into the dusty bin of destiny rallying only sighs of indifference? A final footnote to...nothing in particular.

Expand full comment
Comment deleted
Expand full comment