18 Aug 2025: Poilievre/By-election in Battle River–Crowfoot (AB)

[Good2Golf]

100% disagree. Elections Canada asked last year for this nonsense to stop. It pisses people off. One of my 1,001 Liberal voting aunts (who lives in Pierre's old riding) was furious about the ridiculous ballet. As were many other people.

Meh. It didn’t bother me at all. Maybe your aunts need to harden up?

 

[RangerRay]

Want to see it stop? Do it in a liberal riding. Elections Canada will outlaw it within days.

They did it in my riding which is Liberal. Nothing changed.

 

[lenaitch]

Whatever, I'm sure it will have it's own discussion when the Election Canada inquiry takes place into the irregularities in the recent election.

What inquiry? There were some allegations of irregularities but I don't what became of them. Even at that, would any have turned a riding? Are we turning into the US where every election is 'stolen' and the 'other' should all be in jail?

 

[Remius]

I’m of two minds. They are not breaking any laws or rules. It’s allowed but it isn’t something that was an intended.

Rules as written and rules as intended conundrum.

I support their right to make a statement about their cause. But not the method being used.

But the effect it can have on some people (ie people with disabilities) means that it can risk the democratic process even if it affects a small amount of people. Yes, I know that elections Canada put steps in place to mitigate any of that which is good. But…

Malicious Compliance is what I would call it.

 

[Remius]

What inquiry? There were some allegations of irregularities but I don't what became of them. Even at that, would any have turned a riding? Are we turning into the US where every election is 'stolen' and the 'other' should all be in jail?

There is no inquiry.

Elections Canada prepares a full report after every election. Including recommendations.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Meh. It didn’t bother me at all. Maybe your aunts need to harden up?

 

[rmc_wannabe]

But the effect it can have on some people (ie people with disabilities) means that it can risk the democratic process even if it affects a small amount of people. Yes, I know that elections Canada put steps in place to mitigate any of that which is good. But…

Malicious Compliance is what I would call it.

My wife has worked multiple elections, and was a Poll Site Supervisor this most recent election.

There is EVERY opportunity afforded to eligible electors to cast their ballot. The training program Deputy Returning Officers and Poll Clerks receive is thorough and covers many of the "what if" scenarios.

I asked her about the "Longest Ballot" thing and she kind of shrugged. She said it would cause a delay, but ultimately they would throw as many DROs at it as they could to assist the electorate, because they do that anyways if turn out is higher than expected or if they are in a high needs polling station (e.g. a hospital, LTCF, or area with a large unhoused population).

 

[Good2Golf]

I asked her about the "Longest Ballot" thing and she kind of shrugged. She said it would cause a delay, but ultimately they would throw as many DROs at it as they could to assist the electorate, because they do that anyways if turn out is higher than expected or if they are in a high needs polling station (e.g. a hospital, LTCF, or area with a large unhoused population).

The DRO I spoke with said it would take more ballot boxes because of the size, which would have some cost associated, but he thought it was minor compared to the overall costs including personnel pay.

Certainly far less money than an unwanted election barely halfway through a mandate…

 

[HavokFour]

Critchley certainly isn't going to make it easy for Poilievre. Her presence online has really ramped up the last week on social media. Gotten to a point where I'm seeing more of her than anything Pierre related to the byelection. Even getting her campaign ads thrown at me on Youtube, a resident of Ottawa.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Certainly far less money than an unwanted election barely halfway through a mandate…

Oh I don't know, I know lots of people that want another election. I can wait though. Carney hasn't been tested under fire yet. I'll reserve judgement until PP is back in the House, trying to keep him honest (a lofty goal for anyone, when Carney is the subject).

We have thousands of Canadians living rough, because of an inept government. Millions using food banks, out of control crime and punishment, and making Canada the international illegal pharmaceutical lab that it has become. However, we always seem to have billions to spend on foreign aid, in part, establishing housing and food relief around the world. The cost of an election is paltry pocket change comparatively. Money is moot though. We don’t have any. We're broke. If we're going to borrow the better part of $100,000 billion, on top of what we've borrowed/ wasted already since trudeau/carney took over, a few million of non existent money for an election should be a simple line item buried in the non existent budget. The cost of an election needs to be weighed against the costs to the country under another liberal government.

 

[ArmyRick]

And that is due to what, exactly? That there were more candidates than a Blue one and Red one like in the U.S.?

Under our laws we can have multiple independent candidates who are valid options, but also, this can be used to flood the ballot. How do you differentiate the two? Who gets to decide? The Canada Elections Act prescribes who can become a candidate and as far as I am aware, all 50 in this by-election were legal and vetted by the Chief Electoral Officer.

If Elections Canada wants it to stop, it is Parliament that must amend the Act to forbid it. Which brings me to your secind point...



This is exactly what democracy is. Using the system in place to try and bring about changes to it that people feel are in need of changing.

Eliminating this kind of protest would require revisions to the Canada Elections Act. No one in their right mind wants to do that, especially in a minority parliament. Why? Amendments.

Additionally, me things that may be the end goal. This group wants to move away from FPTP and they are using the system as written to at least bring awareness to their cause.


Works for whom? It works great for Toronto, Montreal, Quebec, and Ontario, but not so much for the rest of Canada. It works for staunch Conservatives and Liberals, but makes Dippers and other party followers have to either vote with their heart or vote strategically.

FPTP worked when our electorate was small and centralized to a few ridings. It has outlived its suitability due to our population growth and regional disparity.

Proportional Representation and Ranked Balloting work in other social democracies around the world; perhaps we at least look at it as an option?

The majority of these people running as "longest ballot candidates" have ZERO intention of trying to be an MP to represent that particular or any other riding.

In fact, I did your response typical "lets not deal with a problem that is" mind set that plagues so many Canadian minds. The ONE and ONLY f-ing reason you run as a candidate is to legit try to become an MP. If not wanting to be an MP, GO HOME and shut up.

Want to protest the electoral system? Try a petition. Try a protest outside the MPs office. This is not the way to do it by putting a bunch of names on a ballot of people who will do ZERO door knocking, zero canvassing, zero in person debates, zero event attendance, etc.

That alone is the deciding factor that put a full stop to this, period, end it NOW.

 

[ArmyRick]

Critchley certainly isn't going to make it easy for Poilievre. Her presence online has really ramped up the last week on social media. Gotten to a point where I'm seeing more of her than anything Pierre related to the byelection. Even getting her campaign ads thrown at me on Youtube, a resident of Ottawa.

I can respect that Bonnie is NOT a longest ballot candidate but a legit independent candidate. She is door knocking big time, canvassing, advertising and ohhh, she has also asked the ballot committee to politely knock it off (it HURTS her chances more than anything as a legit candidate.

 

[ArmyRick]

Meh. It didn’t bother me at all. Maybe your aunts need to harden up?

Trust me, my aunts are as Liberal as you can get. They vote Liberal and when they don't like the Liberal option, they don't vote at all.

This is pissing people off on ll sides of the political spectrum. And the head of Elections Canada did have words to say about it.

The people who think this is an ok form of protest probably think our criminal justice and bail is fine, our immigration is hunky dorry, our economy is doing just marvelous and other stupid wish washy mind sets. Face the real world before it hits you in the face full force.

 

[Blackadder1916]

100% disagree. Elections Canada asked last year for this nonsense to stop. It pisses people off.

This is pissing people off on ll sides of the political spectrum. And the head of Elections Canada did have words to say about it.

The people who think this is an ok form of protest probably think our criminal justice and bail is fine, our immigration is hunky dorry, our economy is doing just marvelous and other stupid wish washy mind sets. Face the real world before it hits you in the face full force.

These are the words that the Chief Electoral Officer had about long ballots. Like most activity of Elections Canada, it concerns itself mostly with the legality and mechanics of conducting elections. In the last election, it was very evident during the poll worker training (I was a Central Poll Supervisor) the emphasis that Elections Canada places on impartiality and providing accessibility. I see nothing in the CEO's position that indicates a stance against the motives of the long ballot crowd or consideration of the negative reactions of those who disagree with them.

Statements and Speeches

---

www.elections.ca

---

A second area that I would urge the committee to consider relates to ballot accessibility. As members are aware, there is a protest movement that has encouraged large numbers of candidates in the 44th general election and in four recent by-elections. The ballot in the September by-election in LaSalle–Emard–Verdun featured 91 candidates.

We have now reached the point where any further increase to the number of candidates will require me to reduce the font size on the ballot, further compounding accessibility challenges. Marking and counting modified ballots takes longer and is more complex for voters and election workers.

While I support the proposal in the bill to reduce the number of signatures required for nominations from 100 to 75, it is important to ensure that the requirement for supporting signatures is not turned on its head. In the case of the longest ballot initiative, we have seen nomination papers for the various participating candidates signed by the same electors. This indicates that voters who sign the nomination papers are not supporting the nomination of a particular candidate, but rather the idea of having as many candidates as possible, whomever they may be (consistent with the goals of the longest ballot initiative).

I wrote to Minister LeBlanc in September, asking the Government to consider an amendment to Bill C-65, which I have included in the table that I shared with the Committee, to ensure that voters are limited to signing the nomination paper in support of only one candidate. It is essential, however, that candidates should not have their nomination papers rejected or challenged simply because a person happens to have signed someone else's nomination paper.

---

Long ballot accessibility considerations - CEO appearance on Bill C-65, An Act to amend the Canada Elections Act (Electoral Participation Act) before the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs

Appearance of the Chief Electoral Officer Bill C-65 An Act to amend the Canada Elections Act (Electoral Participation Act)

www.elections.ca

Key messages

• Elections Canada (EC) strives to ensure that the ballot's design is adapted to fit any number of confirmed candidates while maintaining a balance of accessibility, security, reliability and fairness.
• Long ballots create additional barriers for voters and electoral workers with disabilities.
• Long ballot accessibility considerations were first identified during the November 2022 by-election in Mississauga–Lakeshore.
• Since then, EC has used various channels to gather feedback on accessibility considerations associated with long ballots.

 

[Halifax Tar]

I agree the long ballot thing is stupid but it's within the rules.

If you want the rules changed engage your MP. Make it known this is an issue for you.

 

[rmc_wannabe]

This is pissing people off on ll sides of the political spectrum. And the head of Elections Canada did have words to say about it.

Then, as I said, Elector Reform needs to be a bigger issue from the Opposition than it has been in the past. Then again, everything is great when you're on the benefiting side of things. JT showed that to be true, and I am certain if PP wins this by-election his outrage will be nothing more than a whimper until the next writ is dropped.

The people who think this is an ok form of protest probably think our criminal justice and bail is fine,

I think our bail and justice system is a farce and needs to be reformed to protect Canadian society

our immigration is hunky dorry,

Its routinely exploited and has more holes in it than Swiss cheese. I fully disagreed with the previous guy's policy and commend the new guy's approach thusfar at stemming the tide.

our economy is doing just marvelous

Our economy is dogshit and I pin that entirely on the Eco-Terrorist turned Minister and a lack of forward thinking from our previous establishment.

Blue or Red, whomever replaced them inherited a nightmare. We are going to feel the pain of this for decades.

and other stupid wish washy mind sets. Face the real world before it hits you in the face full force.

The real world has hit me in the face many times. I have also known that the only way the "real world" is changed, is by people having the balls to challenge the status quo.

We bemoan the previous decade of JT governance; good. It was awful and one of the key things he campaigned on in 2015 was electoral reform. He reneged on that promise and then benefitted from FPTP in two additional elections that enabled his continued effort to crash the bus into the quarry.

There will be no change until the juice is no longer worth the squeeze. If that means protesting FPTP with a legal, if not annoying, manner; so be it. The CBC articles and discussions being had because of this effort might bring enough attention to this issue that it becomes something debated in Parliament. Or put on a party's platform. Or open up the Canada Election Act to further changes that improve our democratic processes.

Democracy, done right is neither comfortable, nor tidy; and is far from orderly.

 

[brihard]

I agree the long ballot thing is stupid but it's within the rules.

If you want the rules changed engage your MP. Make it known this is an issue for you.

It poses a challenge for sure. It’s annoying and dumb, but so far has been utterly lawful, and there’s an argument to be made for freedom of expression in this form of protest.

While I would like to see a way to curb this, I’m also very, very wary of any proposed measures that would have the effect of making it harder for Canadians to exercise their democratic right to run as a legitimate candidate.

Limiting individuals to signing a single nomination is probably a defensible restriction that would have some positive impact… But I don’t imagine it’s a silver bullet on the issue. Organizing using the internet to get a mass signature campaign for nomination forms would likely not be a major challenge. A lot of people want electoral reform and would fundamentally agree with the objectives of this protest.

Anything that makes it harder to register as a candidate will disproportionately impact true independent candidates who actually truly intend their run, since they won’t have as much of an organization backing them.

I don’t know how to square this one.

 

[ArmyRick]

Then, as I said, Elector Reform needs to be a bigger issue from the Opposition than it has been in the past.

How many Canadians were screaming for electoral reform last election? VERY few. So why would either the LPC or CPC need electoral reform just because of the snot nosed kid who doesn't like first past the post system? The Libs and Cons are pretty much ok with FPTP, it works both ways.

Electoral reform was a nothing issue this past election, it just wasn't important enough. Its NOT AN ISSUE at this time.

So for the mouthy marxist brat (he has admitted it publicly) Mr Tomas Szuchewycz this too f-ing bad he doesn't get his way. That is DEMOCRACY. He is representing 104 (at this time) of the so called "candidates" and these candidates (some of who "ran" in the Carleton riding last April election) will do ZERO door knocking, canvassing, self promotion, attendance at public events, etc.

I am not pissed about this because Pierre is. I was pissed about this when I first heard about it during the 2024 by elections. It was pure fuckery then and it is now. Its a stupid game and at this time it is lawful. Not acceptable but lawful.

Would try out for a football team but not actually intend to get on the team? No

Would you attend Selection at Dwyer hill and have no interest in being a Special Operations Assaulter? Hell no.

You DO NOT run as an MP in any riding unless you legitimately want to be an MP in that riding. Nothing anybody has said changes the truth of what I just stated. And that means doing the leg work.

There was a petition to stop this horseshit sponsored by Ned Kurek MP and before it closed it reached more than 30,000 signatures. Lets see how this unfolds.

As for Tomas Szuchewycz/Mark Moutter (yes he has an alias), I hope he gets get scorned for this and finds his ass cancelled by society, he deserves it. If you "shrug it off" people here don't get what an issue this punk is, its people like this who don't stop at this. It will be one issue after another they push on society at large.

 

[McG]

How many Canadians were screaming for electoral reform last election? VERY few. So why would either the LPC or CPC need electoral reform just because of the snot nosed kid who doesn't like first past the post system? The Libs and Cons are pretty much ok with FPTP, it works both ways.

The Liberals and Conservatives are happy with FPTP because they both think they can game it for a perpetual majority, and they know it keeps third parties from "stealing" their power. If you don't remember calls for electoral reform in the recent past, it is maybe because you didn't care to hear calls for electoral reform. There were plenty.

You are starting to turn a little toxic on this topic. You might want to go relax with a beer instead of any more name calling.

 

[brihard]

If you "shrug it off" people here don't get what an issue this punk is, its people like this who don't stop at this. It will be one issue after another they push on society at large.

Then deal with actual future conduct if it actually escalates into something that breaks the law.

The actual tangible impact of this stunt - because of course it’s a stunt - is pretty negligible. There’s a high risk of a ‘baby with the bathwater’ issue in trying too aggressively to curb this, versus the chilling impact on the rights of any citizen to run for office, or of the right to protest.

I do think it’s a minor problem and I hope someone smarter than me finds a solution, I just don’t know what that looks like.