I am officially declaring yesterday's election invalid.
Taxpayers shelled out $300 million or so to stage an election that meant nothing, proved nothing, and changed nothing. The Conservatives still have a minority government. The Liberals are still second. The Bloc are still third. The NDP is still fourth. And the Elizabeth May still doesn't have a seat.
I could probably still accept all this if Canadians had bothered to show up, but they didn't. The last estimate I saw yesterday predicted a voter turnout of somewhere around 56%. That's despicable. Almost half the vote-eligible population chose to remain voiceless. That's not democracy. If my math is correct (and if this prediction proved accurate) less than 20% of eligible voters gave Stephen Harper a de facto majority. Why not just go back to the good ol' days when the wealthiest 20% of the population ran everything, and the other 80% had no voice? It would be cheaper to run irrelevant elections.
Locally, Tim Fugard and Andy Bruziewicz, even if combined, couldn't fell encumbent Pat Davidson. What makes this so hard to swallow is that barely half the vote-eligible population of Sarnia-Lambton bothered to vote. What a joke.
For these reasons, I am officially declaring yesterday's federal election invalid.
While I'm confident we will continue debating last night's events for decades to come, I have to take exception with your statement.
ReplyDeleteWhile perhaps 20% of eligible voters gave Harper and the Tories a stronger minority government, I really don't take seriously the opinions or beliefs of those that don't bother to vote. Therefore, I will state that 59% of Canadians voter and the opinions of those individuals are what I care about.. if people don't bother to show up and vote, then quite frankly, I don't give a damn if they don't like the result.
However, I should also say that last night's victories are quite similar to the majorities that Chretien racked up in the 1990s. In fact, I believe Chretien also got around 37-38% in his final election but he managed to get a majority. While I was a Liberal at the time, I can see how people on the Tory side of the aisle feel -- the guy gets 37% and somehow he can govern like the Friendly Dictator.
Locally, even if 100% of the population voted in the election, by virtue of the law of statistics, Davidson probably would have won by a large margin anyway. Not to slight Tim in any way, but Davidson is just too strong an MP in the rural areas for Tim to even have had a chance. Besides, even Mayor Mike was backing Davidson, so Fugard didn't have a chance.
I would like to take seriously the opinions and beliefs of those who don't bother to vote, but by not voting, they make it virtually impossible to do so. On the other hand, of that 59% who did bother to vote, well, at least they did something.
ReplyDeleteThe major contrast between last night's vote and those Chretien majorities is voter turnout. Last night was the worst voter turnout in Canadian history. At least in the Chretien days 65% or so of us bothered.
Locally, I also have to disagree. Pat Davidson is not a strong MP. She's the perfect Harperite - check the hansard, she's said nothing of value. By being a good little sheep, she's managed to collect tolken (Liberal program) money for this riding. Meanwhile, Sarnia-Lambton is bleeding jobs, the biggest industrial project in the riding's history slipped away, and we're proposing to widen the highway thinking that'll somehow reduce the amount of time trucks spend idling before crossing the border (please explain that one to me).
Tim didn't connect well enough in Sarnia. I heard someone opine last night that Tim's only (modest) successes where in county/rural polls. He was an unknown when he was chosen as our candidate, and he couldn't overcome that. In general, he won the debates, he out-canvassed Davidson, and he ran the best local campaign, but it didn't matter.
As for Mayor Mike...he doesn't care who's cheeks he needs to kiss (if you get my drift). Even before the polls closed he was making excuses about why he endorsed Davidson...just to cover his ass. Mayor Mike is useless. This is the man who is replacing job losses in the valley with call centre jobs. The net job stats look good, but instead of well-paying jobs, we have a bunch of second-income, service sector jobs.
But that's enough of my ranting. I'm clearly still bitter. The point of this blog is that Canadians have dropped the ball when it comes to democracy. I was not arguing the results, I was questioning the point.
I am just as disgusted with my fellow Canadians as you are, Sean. You have no idea how many people said "I am not going to vote, because I have no idea what is going on" - pick up a fucking newspaper, people!
ReplyDeleteIt was a good run for all involved and I commend you and the rest of the Liberals for fighting a good fight. Now let's just wait for Dion to actually step down...
Dion is done. Either he'll come out of hiding and announce his resignation (hopefully for Liberals) or he'll be pushed out by Rae, Ignatief, Kennedy, Trudeau(?), or whoever else decides they want to be leader.
ReplyDeleteI appreciate your comment Anne-Marie. It took me precisely 6 minutes to vote on Tuesday (it was 10:41am when I turned my car off and 10:47am when I turned it back on). Doesn't seem like too much to ask.
You know it! Now, Mr. Kerr, I must confess, that it was Dion specifically that swayed my vote away from what would otherwise be a Liberal vote (I will not specifically tell you who I voted for, but lets just say it didn't resemble anything right wing and was crazily contrary to my profession). I know deep down that Dion had some good policies, but I just saw him making Canada a bigger joke in the international sphere than it already is. I blame Kennedy.
ReplyDeletePersonally, although quite inexperienced and young, I would LOVE to see Trudeau run for the leadership. He already has a soft spot in many (older) Canadians' hearts due to his father and I think he could be the breath of fresh air that the Liberals need. Either way, I think you could put a department store dummy in Dion's place and it would be an improvement - charisma is what this country needs to wake up its citizens.
There's another big problem the Liberal campaign had nationally. Because the Conservatives did such a fabulous job of branding Dion an idiot, we never bothered to build up his credentials, we just hid him behind the Liberal "Leadership Team" (and the Green Shift).
ReplyDeleteHere are some of the things Canadians don't know, and should: Dion was a professor at the University of Montreal (after recieving his doctorate from the Institut d'Etudes Politiques de Paris), was a guest scholar at the Brookings Institution in Washington DC, and has been an MP since 1996. Dion is a smart man who has won elections before. He is also responsible for the Clarity Act that keeps Canada whole. He chaired the Montreal meeting of the UN Climate Change Convention which expanded and strengthened the Kyoto Protocol. Dion has great credentials and he's proven himself on the national and international stages. Canadians generally don't know that. Basically, I don't believe he would have made Canada a "joke on the international sphere," certainly not moreso than does GW Bush's little puppet (Harper).
Having said all that, I will henceforth refrain from defending Dion. He wasn't a good choice as leader because he lacks the ability to show charisma when (trying) to speak english (as you said). Chretien had it right when he made Dion Environment Minister: let him lead in a policy-driven, "a-sexy" portfolio. That is the role Dion is best suited for.
I like Trudeau, too. My only concern is that he's not got a lot of political experience (as you also said). Maybe he can be the leader after the next leader (whoever that proves to be)?
I think you need to get your facts straight concerning Mr. Dion's background. While it's true that he was a well-respect academic, the Liberal Party DID make it known to all Canadians of his background... I remember being told by Liberal pundits before every Parliamentary Break that once Canadians got to "know" Dion, they would fall madly in love with him... Canadians heard the message but didn't agree. Chalk that up to a poor choice for leader.
ReplyDeleteSecond, it was not Chretien that made Dion Environment Minister but rather it was Martin. Dion's tenure as Environment Minister was shorter than his tenure as Liberal Leader, so I'm not quite sure that the environment was his strength. If Dion wanted to come up with a policy on intergovernmental relations that trupetted his Clarity Act, then he might have had a shot. But to choose a policy which, at best, he's a Johnny-come-lately (i.e. climate change), that's weak.
Overall (and I'll be blogging about this), David Herle hit it bang on when he said to CBC that the Liberal has lost its way; an "empty store front" is the term he used. I know you'll vehemently disagree with this, but the only reason the Liberals give to voters to vote for them is to vote against Harper and the Tories. In fact, with the exception of the carbon tax policy, since the '04 election, the Liberals have primarily run a campaign that tries to paint Harper as a Bush (in fact, you ran a website actively promoting this and you reference this in your previous comment). While most Canadians don't like the US president, we're also smart enough to distinguish between Harper and Bush. Bashing Bush and linking the two leaders only serves to keep the Liberal base in tack; a base that is ever increasingly becoming smaller and smaller. Proof? Simply look at the results. Take away the Toronto-area ridings and the Liberals get roughly the same number of seats as do the NDP. The more the Liberals bash the right-of-center voter, the less and less support the party gets.
I only have to look to the 2004, 2006 and 2008 elections to confirm that this is true.
A few things:
ReplyDelete1) Sorry I gave Chretien credit when I should have given Martin credit. Either way, my point remains that Environment is the perfect type of portfolio for an acharismatic intellectual (like Dion). It is the type of portfolio that is not sexy, but requires impressive intellect.
2) Dion wasn't environment minister long, but that's through no fault of his own. His PM lost an election. His environmental credentials go much deeper than his time as minister. (Note to Mr McIver: people exist before and outside their stint as minister.)
3) We didn't sell Dion very well. Too many people thought/think he's just a meek Quebecor who only speaks french. As for our (the Liberal) assertion that once Canadians got to know Dion, they'd fall in love; I stand by that assertion. Every Canadian who got to shake his hand and hear him address small crowds, liked him. He simply couldn't shake enough hands (a problem Tim had as well) and he couldn't connect to people the same way through the television. That's not an excuse, that's a reality - one which made him a poor choice as leader.
4) The Liberals offered an actual plan in this past election. They may not have in 2004 and 2006, but they did in 2008. Problem is Canadians weren't looking for anything substantial, or new, they just wanted to get the election over with. Frankly Pat, this election had absolutely nothing to do with policy, or campaign acumen, it had everything to do with "the new season of Survivor starts tonight!" Get it? Canadians didn't care, that's why we got the results we did. Harper broke his own law to win the smallest majority in history. He bet on Canadians' apathy and won. To trumpet this election is like trumpeting a goal into an empty net while on the power play after the fans have left the arena.
Your party, the one you claim actually offered Canadians something, the one that supposedly simultaneously ran a supurb election while crushing an impotent Liberal Party, didn't earn anything. They stumbled through the first weeks of the election jumping from apology to apology. They spent the next week or so deflecting/defending their lack of a platform. Then they released a joke of a platform with a week to go (after 1.5 million Canadians had already voted) while refusing to accept the obvious economic turmoil.
I said earlier in another blog that the Conservatives were on their way to running the worst campaign in Canadian history and the only thing that stands in the way of me being correct is their "victory". Canadians paid $300 million dollars so the Tories could gain 19 seats - what a travesty.
* Earlier I promised I wouldn't defend Dion any further. Sorry. I promise this time.