• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Trudeau Popularity - or not (various polling, etc.)

Perhaps trudeau has thrown this on the table, not as real reforms, but to get parliament focused and arguing on it. If they and the press are embroiled with arguing about it, they won't be looking at housing, the economy and trudeau's ethics breeches. He needs breathing room because he's currently mired by any number of the current scandals that are becoming to clumsy to keep juggling.
Maaaaaaaaaaaaaybe, but a lot of polling out there shows people are unhappy over the economy & bread/butter issues, so I'm not as confident this'll be enough of a "shiny thing" to distract enough voters with.
When parties advance "voting reforms" which are not universally supported, assume they do so because they believe it will give them an electoral advantage.
And when they don't support reforms, it's because they know they'll never win a majority ever again using the new system.
 
Pretty pointless since we already have advanced voting options, multiple polling stations and mandatory time off for voting if one's schedule prevents voting.
read the fine print. What we have heard from them are benign talking points but nothing that is worthy of long discussion. I would be very afraid of the things they haven't mentioned
 
read the fine print. What we have heard from them are benign talking points but nothing that is worthy of long discussion. I would be very afraid of the things they haven't mentioned

Agreed. My only issue, and minor one, would be 3 day voting period. But I can see the pluses for it as well.
 


I only post this because it's directly related to the conversation at hand.

I read through it & something did stand out that caught my eye...its when Steven Guilbeault & co talk about "inciting violence against people who disagree with you, thats not how things are done in Canada."

...apparently he forgot all about the Trucker Convoy, and how that ended...and the references to it that still come up in various international media...


Also, the Liberal's backlash at her use of common language, and their attempt to make a mountain out of a molehill.

Saying "I wish you'd put Steven Guilbeault in your crosshairs..." to the host of a show that regularly takes aim at various political issues is NOT inciting political violence...give me a break 🙄



EDIT - I thought I had posted this a few days ago, sorry for the randomness
 
Smug as fuck.

Justin Trudeau ripped for smug response to pricey vacation question: 'He is laughing at us'​

'Like a lot of Canadian families, we went to stay with friends for the Christmas holidays,' smirking PM said this week defending Jamaica holiday trip

 
The simplicity and intuitiveness of our current system beats out any proposed system I have seen.

You vote for the person you want to represent you, the one with the most votes wins. Adding layers of complexity just ads confusion to the results.

Yes, I know that individuals can be made to understand a more complex system, but given the lack of knowledge of how our current system works, I suspect the masses won't learn any new system. When the masses don't trust the system the system fails. With our simple and intuitive system in place now, people already don't trust it. How does adding complexity and more layers make it more trustworthy?
I agree. Although some call the first-past-the-post system a tyranny of the minority, it is devilishly simple and quick. All of the others I have seen proposed; mixed member proportional, ranked ballot (my favourite if we really must but nobody seems to like it) and the others all seem to result in more members and/or and election that takes a couple of weeks to sort out. When Ontario considered an alternative a number of years ago, it struck me as having to vote with my left hand while swinging a chicken over my head by the light of a full moon.

If what we are hearing about is all there is to 'election reform', it's pretty thin soup and changes none of the fundamentals.
 
Smug as fuck.




Well, to fair, it's the first time he's ever made that mistake .... wait, what's this from 2023?


Trudeau’s Jamaica family trip is facing new scrutiny. Here’s how much it cost​


Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s week-long family vacation in Jamaica over the winter holidays cost taxpayers at least $162,000, and is drawing criticism that it shows he does not “understand the realities of everyday Canadians” from NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh.

70c8fc80

The details of Trudeau’s trip were released in documents tabled in the House of Commons last month in response to questions from MPs, but are under renewed scrutiny following a report by CBC/Radio-Canada on Tuesday.

The outlet reported the Trudeau family stayed at a luxurious estate belonging to a wealthy family friend who made a large donation two years ago to the Pierre Elliott Trudeau Foundation.




 
On this voting thing I’ll reserve judgment til we see in writing what they propose. It sounds like no change to FPTP; if it’s simply steps to increase access to voting by eligible electors, I’m conceptually fine with that so long as voting integrity is preserved. But for any significant changes I’d still need to be convinced of the need.
 
Agreed. My only issue, and minor one, would be 3 day voting period. But I can see the pluses for it as well.
I have reservations about being able to go to any voting location in the riding instead of your assigned one.

Why is this change thought to be necessary, and will it lead to people possibly voting twice or more?
 
I have reservations about being able to go to any voting location in the riding instead of your assigned one.

Why is this change thought to be necessary, and will it lead to people possibly voting twice or more?
The benefit is that if there are long line-ups at a station, people could go to another one. Also, it makes it harder for people to interfere with voting by playing dirty tricks that interfere with the rate at which polling stations can process voters.

Multiple voting controls depend on how thorough voting integrity checks are. Every time I've voted, my name has been in a ledger and a line is drawn through it. That works well when people vote at assigned polls. Obviously there's a weak point in any-station voting if not all of a riding's ledgers are completely cross-checked. If exhaustive cross-checks across all means of voting aren't already being done - spot-checking simply isn't good enough - then now would be a good time to start. If the system isn't already achieving 100% coverage, any additional changes ought to be deferred until 100% is achieved.
 
Perhaps trudeau has thrown this on the table, not as real reforms, but to get parliament focused and arguing on it. If they and the press are embroiled with arguing about it, they won't be looking at housing, the economy and trudeau's ethics breeches. He needs breathing room because he's currently mired by any number of the current scandals that are becoming to clumsy to keep juggling.
Naughty pants.🙄
 
I have reservations about being able to go to any voting location in the riding instead of your assigned one.

Why is this change thought to be necessary, and will it lead to people possibly voting twice or more?
Interesting- to me that was the most reasonable "vote enablement" method suggested, that could be very helpful in certain situations.

My own life example- I live at point A. My children will/attend school at point B, 8 minute drive SouthEast. I work at point C, 8 minutes south of point B, (12 minutes south of point A- more direct), my children's "home" extracurriculars will be at point D, in the same town as point C, but a further 5 minutes south.

Based on my current address I have been assigned 2 different voting locations. The first is in a community centre essentially sharing the parking lot of point B. Easy peasy. The 2nd is at point E, 10 minutes North of point A. The travel times seem trivial in a vacuum but anyone with kids knows that fitting point E into a Work (C) -> School Pick Up (B) -> Home Dinner (A) -> Hockey practice (D) evening is likely not happening.

As to preventing double voting-add anti forgery measures to voter registration cards, make the presentation and forfeit of your voter registration card mandatory at time of voting, treat at poll registrations like special ballots and add the appropriate resources to vet the names /addresses for accuracy and duplication prior to counting.

Is the juice worth the squeeze? I don't know. How many edge cases like me are there?
A simpler alternative would be to add a step to registration and let voters choose their designated polling centre in advance.
 
I have reservations about being able to go to any voting location in the riding instead of your assigned one.

Why is this change thought to be necessary, and will it lead to people possibly voting twice or more?
They must think it gives them an advantage, if they put it in there. What advantage, I don't know. Designated polling stations are picked to be the closest an most accessible to the people in a specific area. Why would someone travel so far out of their way to vote at a station not in their area? I can see some instances, like hitting a station near work or while shopping. But those isolated cases shouldn't warrant a change in legislation.

As has been said, when a single party coalition comes back, with ready to go legislation to change the way we vote, it needs to be looked at under a microscope. I would propose a committee of all parties be struck to look at changes or if they are even warranted or needed. The coalition government can then table their amendments for discussion and prove the need for them.

My biggest concern is that these proposals almost mirror current legislation in the US that caused so much angst and mistrust in their last election. There is zero need, here, for extended voting days. We already have more than enough ways of satisfying voter needs, without spending three days watching numbers go up and down while accepting loads of mail in ballots over the period.

Our system allows for scrutinized, hand counted paper ballots. We have been shown capable of counting and determining winners and losers in one day. I see no need to change that.

The one thing I would change is that no winners or numbers should be identified or televised nationally, until the last vote in BC is cast and their polls closed. There is nothing stopping polling stations from counting, so long as all the numbers, covering the whole nation are all released at one time, the next day.
 
This is why PP is winning.

All this takes is a handler to say, "PM this isn't a great idea. The optics are terrible and it gives ammo to the opposition."

I boggles me how bonehead this Gov is...
This is the part that blows me away... the LPC/PMO knew going into Christmas that cost of living was a huge concern for Canadians, so why didn't someone say "Hey boss, maybe skip the destination Christmas this year and just hang out in the Ottawa/Montreal area."?

Have his own people lost touch with reality that badly, or has he just ignored the advice that he is given?
 
Back
Top