Curious about Canadian DUers party affiliations or voting tendencies...

[Lucy Goosey]

I'm gonna go out on a limb and guess that most of you aren't HarperCons, but please correct me if I'm wrong.

I generally vote NDP, but I have voted Green and (apologies) Liberal on occasion.

I`ve volunteered on a couple of NDP campaigns - Ed Broadbent`s 2004 comeback in Ottawa Centre, and for Paul Dewar, his successor.

I now live in the Liberal stronghold riding of Ottawa-Vanier.

Please reply! I`m interested.

[tuvor]

1. No significant Liberal support in Vancouver Island North, so I have to vote NDP.

They're the only ones who give the erstwhile Reform Party a run for their money here.

Here's hoping for success a second time around.

[HeresyLives]

2. Voting Liberal.

[Spazito]

3. I usually vote Liberal if there is a Liberal candidate, if not, I vote

NDP, anything but faux con. I currently reside in Texas-lite, aka Alberta, so my vote won't make a difference in the number of seats here but, at the very least, it is one protest vote, lol.

[Clintonista2]

4. I vote Liberal

Currently working to unseat Paul Dewar. Funny how that works :P

[iverglas]

15. aren't you clever

You're currently working to split the non-Conservative vote in a riding held by an NDP member at present.

Gosh, you just have the country's best intersts at heart, doncha?

[Name removed]

19. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[iverglas]

20. I guess you're just a young one

There has historically been a (P)C presence in that riding, and it has in fact been taken by them.

Here's its recent history:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ottawa_Centre

1. George McIlraith September 9, 1968 April 27, 1972 Liberal
2. Hugh Poulin January 4, 1973 April 28, 1978 Liberal
3. Robert de Cotret October 16, 1978 March 26, 1979 Progressive Conservative
4. John Evans October 9, 1979 July 9, 1984 Liberal
5. Michael Cassidy November 5, 1984 October 1, 1988 New Democratic Party
6. Mac Harb December 12, 1988 September 9, 2003 Liberal
7. Ed Broadbent October 4, 2004 November 29, 2005 New Democratic Party
8. Paul Dewar April 3, 2006 New Democratic Party

2006 Party Candidate Votes % ±%
New Democratic Party Paul Dewar 24,611 36.93 -4.2
Liberal Richard Mahoney 19,458 29.2 -1.9
Conservative Keith Fountain 15,126 22.7 +3.7
Green David Chernushenko 6,766 10.15 +2.7
Marijuana John Akpata 386 0.58 -0.1
Independent Anwar Syed 121 0.18
Communist Stuart Ryan 102 0.15 +0.1
Marxist-Leninist Christian Legeais 68 0.10 0.0


Now, if your true and genuine concern is preventing a Conservative victory, why would you be working to unseat the sitting NDP MP with a margin like that? Maybe you're hoping that the Greens will take enough votes from the NDP that the Liberals can come up the middle?

OH LOOK:

As the Liberal national numbers declined over the course of the campaign, it seemed more likely that the NDP could retain the seat. Mahoney went on the offensive late in the campaign, claiming a vote for Paul Dewar would help the Conservatives and threatening a lawsuit against his opponent two days before the election. Dewar retained most of Broadbent's voters and won by over 5000 votes.

Venally partisan politics, perhaps?

But all for the good of the country, I'm sure. Liberals always know what's best for the country. Le Canada, c'est le parti libéral.



By the way, you might want to read the rules of this forum. My own take is that the subject line of your post is what's called a "personal attack". An unfounded and stupid one at that.

Oh yes. I did want to mention what a completely useless and slimey piece of shit that Mac Harb was. You know, the Liberal who held the riding for some time. (My work involves federal-level political stuff. I see people like him in action. Well, in his case, inaction.) Well done, Liberals.

[Clintonista2]

22. Swing and miss

Where to begin? Should I start with the fact that you had to go back 30 years to find the last time a conservative (scratch that - PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE) won this left-wing riding?

Moving on...

Now, if your true and genuine concern is preventing a Conservative victory, why would you be working to unseat the sitting NDP MP with a margin like that?

We've already established that the conservatives have virtually no chance in this riding. Every seat gained for the liberals is one less chance at the conservatives forming the government. Unless you would prefer a conservative minority/majority?

As for Mahoney, do you really want to go there? The lawsuit was due to Dewars slanderous claim that Mahoney acted illegally as a lobbyist for rogers. Dewar was forced to later apologize for his lie. Venally partisan politics for sure.

I know its your greatest dream that the NDP will one day form the opposition (even if that means a con minority/majority), but really the NDP are soon to fade into obscurity. Elizabeth May is a far more able leader, and despite Jacky's attempt at squashing her voice in the upcoming debate, it didn't happen.

Sheesh look at the time. I have to get up early tommorow to get rid of Dewar. Have a nice day.

[iverglas]

25. who "we", white man?

We've already established that the conservatives have virtually no chance in this riding.

Good luck with that.

Of course, with the Liberals haemorrhaging votes to the Conservatives, I guess it's probably a good thing if they run a strong campaign in Ottawa Centre. Splitting the Liberal/Conservative vote is a very good idea.

Anyhow, I think we've established that it's "venally partisan politics".

[Bragi]

5. I vote strategically to defeat Cons

In my riding, this means voting NDP.

- B

[offog]

35. I can understand voting strategically.

I'm actually a serious NDP supporter, but I really want to defeat those Tories too.

I live in (Liberal MP) Ralph Goodale's riding, so I guess I'll be voting for him. Fortunately, he's also a good MP. I've dealt with the staff in his riding office a few times, and they've always been courteous and helpful.

[daleo]

6. Have tended to vote Liberal recently

But it depends on who I think has a better chance in my riding (Edmonton Strathcona) - Liberal or NDP. I suppose if any Alberta riding goes non-Conservative, this could be the one. I live in hope.

[u4ic]

8. We're in the same riding

I saw a lot of Linda Duncan signs out tonight. :)

[daleo]

43. I am thinking I will probably vote for her

I have a hunch that the strategic voters might go to her this time, based on her steady presence in the riding since the last election. Jaffer is such a cypher, I would just be glad to see him out of there. Even if I was a conservative, I would wonder what the hell good he was doing for Strathcona.

[Bragi]

7. I sense we aren't all on the same page...

I know from past discussions here that the group here probably represents the whole blessed array of partisan leanings and ideological fractures in Canada that will ensure that the centrist and left-of-centre Canadian majority sprinkles its votes among 4 parties, thereby enabling the election of another Conservative minority government, lead by a Prime Minister who sees 6 in 10 Canadians as political enemies who bad values. Great.

- Bragi

[HeresyLives]

10. As Martin once said:

"If you lend Jack Layton your vote, you will hand Stephen Harper your country,"

And that's exactly what happened.

[u4ic]

9. I'm an NDPer at heart

though I've voted Liberal a few times if they stood a better chance in my riding.

In my younger days I did vote Rhino and Natural Law once each as 'protest' votes. :crazy:

[Lucy Goosey]

14. Oh, I'd forgotten about the Natural Law Party!

They actually fielded 230 candidates in '93. I'd love to believe that yogic flying really could bring about world peace.

[Wabbajack_]

11. "I'm gonna go out on a limb and guess that most of you aren't HarperCons,"

MOST? You think there are some? :o

Please educate them I've got a cousin up there.

[Lucy Goosey]

12. I think it's unlikely ...

that any Canadian who is enough of a fan of the Dems to be at DU is also a Harper Tory, but party platforms here are generally to the left of the USA, so it isn't impossible.

I was being a bit facetious, however.;)

[iverglas]

16. DU is the place

where Liberal Party shills get to pat themselves on the back and get props from foreigners for being so "liberal".

If they took their shtick out for a walk at Rabble, they'd get their partisan asses handed to them on a platter.

[HeresyLives]

17. Enjoy 4 years of a Harper majority

government then.

See what remains of 60 years of NDP initiatives then.

[Name removed]

18. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[HeresyLives]

21. But the NDP MP will never

be govt, so he's a waste of time and effort.

[Clintonista2]

23. Iverglas is in a tizzy because he knows the greens are going to destroy his beloved party

All his delusional hopes for the NDP replacing the libs... are quickly vanishing.

[HeresyLives]

24. After 60 years of trying

he really believed the NDP were going to replace the Liberals - the most successful party in the western world???

[iverglas]

27. Ooooh!

And you too!

Assumptions make such assholes out of people, don't they?

[iverglas]

26. you really are a cute little fellow, aincha?

And a misogynist to boot.

[Clintonista2]

28. Oh gee I just detest women...

This coming from a guy who claimed that the only female party leader in Canada is a "piece of shit and should fuck off and die," simply because she announced that she was running against Peter Mackay.


Desperate much? Can't wait to see the NDP crumble. Hopefully Jacky boy can find another job. As for you... try anger management.

[iverglas]

29. think much?

This coming from a guy ...

Think real hard. Try, anyhow.


... who claimed that the only female party leader in Canada is a "piece of shit and should fuck off and die," simply because she announced that she was running against Peter Mckay.

Tell the truth much?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=190&topic_id=20253&mesg_id=20287

Evidently you found and read the post. Here it is:

iverglas
Tue Mar-20-07 08:06 PM
Response to Original message
11. May is a piece of shit and should fuck off and die

http://www.empowerment4women.org/community/blogs/insidethebox/?p=87

“I respect people who say, 'I’m against abortion because there is a right to life, and the fetus is sacred.'

I respect that, because I think all life is sacred. So, where do I come to thinking we should be able to have - and must have - access to therapeutic abortions in Canada?

It’s the other side of the moral dilemma: If we make them illegal, women will die. We know this. It happened for hundreds and hundreds of years, that women would seek out whatever butcher they could find to cause an abortion to happen, and they would die horrible deaths, and the baby would die too.

So I see it as a moral dilemma, and I don’t see it as a clear-cut black-and-white.

And I think one of the things I would like to bring to Canadian politics is to show enough respect for the other view, that we could actually have a dialogue about it. Because one of the things that is wrong about polarization is the language becomes a barrier to understanding.

So if one group of people say, 'A woman has a right to choose,' I get queasy, because I’m against abortion. I don’t think a woman has a frivolous right to choose.

What I don’t want is a desperate woman to die in an illegal abortion. But I also don’t think it’s right to say - Well, you see, you end up having this conflict.

What I’d like to do in politics - is to be able to create the space to say, 'Abortions are legal because they must be to avoid women dying. But nobody in their right mind is for abortions.'

I’ve talked women out of having abortions. I would never have an abortion myself, not in a million years. I can’t imagine the circumstances that would ever reduce me to it.”

Followed by:

“If anyone had let me know I was being taped or had asked about publishing the remarks, I might have used slightly (not very) different terms. As it was, the net effect has been positive and I think my statements correspond to the views of most Canadians”.

Not this Canadian, and not any decent human being, but hey, Elizabeth, fly those true colours for us. Don't forget to lick Brian Mulroney's boots while you're doing it.

You seeing the words "Peter MacKay" (it's his name; that's how it's spelled) in there anywhere?

No? So why did you make the false claim you made in your post?


Is it because you're a Liberal hack? Nah. I don't really think being a liar is a requirement for that job. It's one of those valuable extra skills, though.

[Clintonista2]

30. Are you really that dense?

Read the OP that you were responding to.

Name of the thread title: CBC: Green party leader expected to run against MacKay

Title of your response: May is a piece of shit and should fuck off and die

You're a pleasant one aren't you? :rofl:

[iverglas]

31. You are quite simply disgusting

There actually isn't any more needs to be said about someone who has this little respect for the truth.

[Clintonista2]

32. What did I say that was untruthful?

The thread was about Elizabeth may announcing that she will run against Peter Mackay. Your very first response was that she is a "piece of shit and should die." Sounds like someone was hoping for a Mckay win. Hey, all that matters is that the libs aren't in power right?


Pot, meet kettle.

[CHIMO]

13. Well If

Layton keeps his attacks to the Conservatives, the party or riding will receive my $1.75 a year. Otherwise it will go somewhere else. But not the Conservatives.

Of course if the NDP phone campaign for money continues to disrupt my life they may not get the $1.75.


David Orchard: Liberal of the north
Liberal party members of Northern Saskatchewan have made their voices heard - they have asked for David Orchard.

"David Orchard, we're pleased to announce, is the nominee for Desnethe-Missinippi-Churchill River," said Robert Ermel, executive director of the Saskatchewan Liberal Association.

He added that party policy is not to release the number of votes received by each candidate.

Orchard said he heard of his victory at about 11 p.m. on Thursday. The polls closed at 9 p.m.
http://www.paherald.sk.ca/index.cfm?sid=162878&sc=4

[IntravenousDemilo]

33. I think it might be interesting and instructive (and maybe a little satisfying)...

... if David Orchard were the only Saskatchewan Liberal elected. I grew up politically in Saskatchewan during the Trudeau years, a time when federal Liberals were considered an endangered species in western Canada, and the Liberal party has always seemed a trifle foreign to me. Provincially, if you were left-wing in Saskatchewan, you were pretty much assumed to be NDP, and if you were not left-wing, you were whatever the non-Dipper party happened to be in vogue at the time, whether that be PC, SP, or, yes, Liberal. Federally, it was never unusual for folks who'd vote NDP in provincial elections to be staunch Diefenbaker supporters federally (mind you, Dief would be considered a lefty by today's Cons -- hell, he was called the Prairie Bolshevik by the Conservative establishment even then).

So David's candidacy for the Liberals is a little puzzling, but I wish him good fortune on 14 October, since he's a good, decent man, a true Canadian, and a friend of mine.

As for where I'm living right now, the MP is Peggy Nash of the NDP, who is very much liked in the riding. I only wish Gerard Kennedy had chosen someplace else to run in this election, because I'd like to see both Nash and Kennedy in the House. I would see either Nash or Kennedy as having equivalent value in a minority Liberal H of C, which is my preferred result. Conservative presence is minimal in Parkdale-High Park, and we have an embarrassment of riches as far as our representation is concerned, at all three levels of government. It'll be tough deciding between a good candidate and a just-as-good candidate, and I'll be both satisfied and dissatisfied with whoever wins.

[Posteritatis]

34. I wobble between Liberal and NDP

Ideologically I tend to land in-between both parties, and both Liberal and NDP candidates tend to have a decent chance in my riding (Dartmouth-Cole Harbour), so I also have that weird, pleasant feeling that my vote counts most of the time.

It lets me vote strategically without feeling like I'm voting against my conscience. If the Liberals are making a strong showing (i.e., I expect a majority), I'll vote NDP in the hopes of getting some pressure on them to go a little further to the left. If things are looking good for the Conservatives, I tend to vote Liberal to try to bolster the opposition (or shoot for a minority).

I miss Wendy Lill though; wish she kept running.

[offog]

36. Dear Lucy:

Great post! I'm enjoying reading the responses. Now, can you help your fellow progressive Canadians with another matter?

Starting this election, voters will have to show i.d. at the polling stations before they can vote. You need to verify both your identity and your address. This will, of course, disproportionately affect the poor, elderly, minorities, immigrants, people with disabilities, and other marginalized people. I am very suspicious about this new requirement, knowing that the Harper Conservatives often like to borrow the Republican playbook. (I assume you know all about Republican vote suppression?)

The only reason I know about the i.d. rule is because I visited the Elections Canada website to check on something unrelated. Unlike Republicans, the Tories haven't been making a big fuss about alleged voter fraud. I haven't seen any news coverage about this issue. (For details and more information, visit elections.ca.)

I've got a call in to my local anti-poverty group in the hopes of getting them to raise this issue. I would like to see someone ask Stephen Harper why this requirement was brought in.

I'm afraid that a lot of people will be turned away at the polling stations on election day because they don't have the proper i.d., or don't even know they need it. So I'm asking you and all the other progressive Canadians out there to help spread the word about the new requirement and maybe raise some hell about it. Write a letter to your newspaper, phone your candidate, talk to the local social activists.

Thanks in advance!

[iverglas]

37. it's an issue ...

I have to say that I've seen the other side: voting fraud that could have been prevented by such measures. Dead Liberals liked to vote in my riding. It's probably been almost as easy to vote fraudulently as a homeless person, say, as it is to vote as a dead person ... homeless people, one might guess, have a low turnout and are less likely to pursue any problems they encounter.

And municipally, as a scrutineer, I caught someone voting in the ward where she owned a business and in the ward where she lived (you get one, not both), but it couldn't be proved because no one could prove she was the one who voted the second time.

In the Ontario provincial election when this first applied (although the rules allow for a statutory declaratio at the polling station), measures were taken to ensure homeless people could vote, just as we did before the requirement was brought in to ensure they got on the voters' list.

Unfortunately, corruption is not unknown. Another example I saw first-hand was at the nomination meeting in my riding once, when we had a complete outsider (and known Liberal hanger on ... who subsequently sought the Liberal nomination in another local riding next time out) try to get the NDP nomination. We heard from several sources that he had advised people in two particular ethnic communities to transfer their driver's licences into our riding, even though they did not live there, and that this had in fact been done by some people. We were reluctant to do any more than inform the people at the nomination meeting about our rules before the vote was taken. Obviously that was not just fraud against our riding association, it was an offence under provincial law -- and an attempt to subvert the way we run our democracy.

That said ...

This will, of course, disproportionately affect the poor, elderly, minorities, immigrants, people with disabilities, and other marginalized people.

... there may be a little of the Cassandra in some of this.

http://www.elections.ca/content.asp?section=ele&dir=ids&document=index&lang=e&textonly=false
(see Option 2)

My mum's 78 and has a driver's licence. All my neighbours are minorities/immigrants and have drivers' licences and photo OHIP cards and hydro bills. (I love that Elections Canada says "hydro".) Virtually all of the others mentioned will have photo health cards in Ontario -- other provinces? Most will have something in the list with an address shown on it.

It's all a bit of a hassle, and I'm not convinced the rules had to be so stringent to address what problem there was -- a statutory declaration should probably be allowed, on the theory that someone voting corruptly would hesitate to lie "under oath", hm. But I'm also not convinced that organizing to enable, say, homeless people to meet these requirements would be much more difficult than organizing to get them on the voters' list and to the polls in the first place.

[Clintonista2]

38. During the ontario provincial election ID needed to be shown. HOWEVER...

If you absolutely did not have any ID you could sign an oath swearing that you are who you claim to be. I'm not sure if it's the same way in the federal elections though, but you're absolutely right that it would hurt the groups you listed.

[iverglas]

41. (see my previous post)

It isn't the same way federally -- stat decs are not allowed -- and that's much of the problem.

The alternative to ID, federally, is a guarantor. But each elector in a riding may only stand guarantor for one other elector -- as one site explained it, your neighbour could not do the job for both you and another member of your household.

I'm not persuaded that this isn't unconstitutional -- not persuaded that it is constitutionally permissible. We do have the right to vote entrenched in the Charter. This requirement does sound rather like an unjustified interfereence in that right.

On a challenge, the gummint would have to meet the tests for justification, if the court decided it was a violation of the right -- evidence of the pressing and substantial problem that needed addressing, demonstration that this is the least possible impairment of the right, etc. I tend to think it would not be able to do so.

[Grey]

39. NDP n/t

[Doctor Cynic]

40. Liberal, but this riding is solidly Liberal anyways.

[ironflange]

42. I think I'm gonna vote for Obama

I'm in Harper's riding anyway, so it's a foregone conclusion. I think it might be fun to cross out Harper and write in Obama.