and, is bernier a threat in quebec?
well, he has two positions that most people know about - he wants to modify immigration policies (which is likely to do well in the rural areas) and he wants to end supply management (which is likely to do terribly in rural areas).
he would, in theory, make more sense in alberta, but he's a distant francophone. bernier lost to scheer in quebec, remember - and that's in a province with a small conservative movement, and little centre of gravity. in quebec, nobody joins the conservative party looking for career advancement.
so, if i'm a dairy farmer in quebec - the target of his immigration policies - am i going to vote against my economic self-interest to uphold some cultural attachment to quebec? not unless i'm a buffoon - and the quebecois don't vote against themselves like this, like kentuckians do. and, especially not if the bloc are offering the same nationalist policies without the attack on supply management.
he's apparently running around 6% in quebec, but we see this with the greens all of the time - it's a mirage. it's partly the math of sampling. but, you should also read into it as apathy.
regardless, even if he can muster 4%, i would expect that to be broadly distributed rather than localized. quebec is known for close races, so a 2-3% swing could absolutely lose the conservatives a few seats. but, it would be difficult to isolate from the noise.
the media is unlikely to step away from this, as it seems to like the narrative of bernier playing spoiler. but, i don't suspect the numbers will actually pan out - this is just statistical noise, in the end.
Monday, February 4, 2019
in canada, support for the international rule of law - for better or worse, whatever the consequence - is one of the things that makes a liberal a liberal. and, because our right has historically been moderate, it has broad, nationalist support as a model, as well.
if you're willing or eager to act outside of the united nations on this kind of thing, you're in the wrong party - and broadly even in the wrong country.
if you're willing or eager to act outside of the united nations on this kind of thing, you're in the wrong party - and broadly even in the wrong country.
somebody do a poll on whether donating, card-carrying members of the liberal party support acting outside of the united nations in venezuela. and word it like that. don't talk about supporting one faction or the other, as though we have any business doing so - talk about whether you support the institution of the united nations and adherence to the international rule of law or not.
i wouldn't expect more than 10% of them would support what the government is doing. i wouldn't even expect much more than 40% of conservatives would support this kind of thing. it's completely unheard of, here.
support for the united nations as the basis of canadian foreign policy is foundational in the party base - as important as support for universal health care. it's one of the key, defining issues of canadian liberalism. canada simply doesn't stand with the united states when it acts outside of the un, it just doesn't do this, it goes to the un and seeks an international consensus, then seeks to find a way to moderate america's policies around the edges.
i'm not even willing to get into a debate about the merits of the action, it's too absurd to even bother. the point here is ideological.
this is the kind of thing that got ignatieff completely routed. and, if the party holds to it, it should be looking at 2011 for a baseline, even if it's unclear who steps into the void.
the bloc are at least ready to step in in quebec. the greens might step in a few places elsewhere....
whatever they're projecting, here - some kind of rfk-style anti-communism or something - it isn't canadian. and, canadians are not going to stand for it.
i wouldn't expect more than 10% of them would support what the government is doing. i wouldn't even expect much more than 40% of conservatives would support this kind of thing. it's completely unheard of, here.
support for the united nations as the basis of canadian foreign policy is foundational in the party base - as important as support for universal health care. it's one of the key, defining issues of canadian liberalism. canada simply doesn't stand with the united states when it acts outside of the un, it just doesn't do this, it goes to the un and seeks an international consensus, then seeks to find a way to moderate america's policies around the edges.
i'm not even willing to get into a debate about the merits of the action, it's too absurd to even bother. the point here is ideological.
this is the kind of thing that got ignatieff completely routed. and, if the party holds to it, it should be looking at 2011 for a baseline, even if it's unclear who steps into the void.
the bloc are at least ready to step in in quebec. the greens might step in a few places elsewhere....
whatever they're projecting, here - some kind of rfk-style anti-communism or something - it isn't canadian. and, canadians are not going to stand for it.
i was initially leaning towards the liberals losing their majority in october.
but. if they continue walking down the path they're on, they're going to lose outright.
it's one thing when the government does this kind of thing behind the scenes, as a part of a careful balancing of various powers. but, there is no appetite for white supremacist imperialist war mongering in canada, especially not as a kind of jingoist electioneering tactic.
it is a ballot issue amongst enough voters to matter - not because of the specific situation, but because of the general tone.
canada is supposed to act through the united nations on situations such as these. and, i would call on the liberal party to stop obsequiously supporting the monroe doctrine and reassert it's party's historical policies on this matter.
but. if they continue walking down the path they're on, they're going to lose outright.
it's one thing when the government does this kind of thing behind the scenes, as a part of a careful balancing of various powers. but, there is no appetite for white supremacist imperialist war mongering in canada, especially not as a kind of jingoist electioneering tactic.
it is a ballot issue amongst enough voters to matter - not because of the specific situation, but because of the general tone.
canada is supposed to act through the united nations on situations such as these. and, i would call on the liberal party to stop obsequiously supporting the monroe doctrine and reassert it's party's historical policies on this matter.
why not just write the check to lockheed martin?
this is disgusting. and, they should expect it to backfire - this will be unpopular, here.
it's not the money, it's a tone issue.
unfortunately, there is no opposition in the country that is able to hit them on this.
https://globalnews.ca/video/4922143/trudeau-announces-53-million-investment-to-support-venezuelans
this is disgusting. and, they should expect it to backfire - this will be unpopular, here.
it's not the money, it's a tone issue.
unfortunately, there is no opposition in the country that is able to hit them on this.
https://globalnews.ca/video/4922143/trudeau-announces-53-million-investment-to-support-venezuelans
this took far too long, but it's done. sort of.
i still need to organize it to by month and zip it up for later.
it runs from sept, 2003 to may, 2016, with a gap in mid 2004 (when i did not have internet access) and another gap from mid 2008 to mid 2010, but i think can fill in the second gap with an archive put away on a dvd somewhere.
and, that is the last step in the tree i'm building: i'll need to go through all of the physical media i've got lying around and file it by year.
once that's finished, i'll swing myself back around to mid-2013 in order to get back to the rebuild, one more time. i expect to be back to where i was (late 2016) relatively quickly. and, getting to the end of 2016 means getting back to the alter-reality, and ultimately trying to finish the period one disc by the end of the year.
i still need to organize it to by month and zip it up for later.
it runs from sept, 2003 to may, 2016, with a gap in mid 2004 (when i did not have internet access) and another gap from mid 2008 to mid 2010, but i think can fill in the second gap with an archive put away on a dvd somewhere.
and, that is the last step in the tree i'm building: i'll need to go through all of the physical media i've got lying around and file it by year.
once that's finished, i'll swing myself back around to mid-2013 in order to get back to the rebuild, one more time. i expect to be back to where i was (late 2016) relatively quickly. and, getting to the end of 2016 means getting back to the alter-reality, and ultimately trying to finish the period one disc by the end of the year.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)