|||| Canadian Election 🍁 Sorry |||| Liberals win plurality, stay in power.

[Brick]

I'm seeing a lot of NDP support on Facebook from my peers, i.e. young people in their 20s and early 30s. Except for my one friend who is voting Conservative because of the party, even though he dislikes Sheer, and he hates Trudeau, and doesn't want to vote NDP because socialism lol

[CitizenVectron]

Trudeau was 1.5 hours late speaking at a large rally...looks like there was a credible threat against him:

 

 

[CitizenVectron]

18 minutes ago, Brick said:

I'm seeing a lot of NDP support on Facebook from my peers, i.e. young people in their 20s and early 30s. Except for my one friend who is voting Conservative because of the party, even though he dislikes Sheer, and he hates Trudeau, and doesn't want to vote NDP because socialism lol

 

NDP are surging in English Canada:

 

 

Could swing the election to Scheer due to vote splitting. Minority either way.

[CitizenVectron]

K this is a pretty good one:

 

 

[CitizenVectron]

Politics aside, I love the idea behind a hung Parliament and the constitutional options! Just once in my life I want to see the second place party form government with the support of the third or fourth place parties! It almost happened in 2008, and now the chances are there again!

 

What's weird is that it looks like the NDP is actually (in English Canada) pulling from both the Liberals and Conservatives:

 

 

[Uaarkson]

This bread is SO boring.

[CitizenVectron]

3 minutes ago, Uaarkson said:

This bread is SO boring.

 

Functional countries are like that.

[Uaarkson]

Yes, and that’s precisely the difference between our two countries. You’re the same as us, minus 90% of the batshit insanity.

[Brick]

7 hours ago, CitizenVectron said:

 

NDP are surging in English Canada:

 

 

Could swing the election to Scheer due to vote splitting. Minority either way.

 

That's what I'm afraid of. I keep seeing people talk about , and share memes about this concept, and mocking the idea of it, basically saying that showing support for the NDP online might make other people that are on the fence decide to vote for them too, and that you don't have to vote Liberal and "throw your vote away by voting NDP" just to keep Sheer out if we all go vote NDP, but guys, that's a nice sentiment, but early polling is showing that NDP don't have enough support to beat out the Conservatives and the Liberals, and it would take away votes from the Liberals allowing the Conservatives to win. 

 

I am curious how many people are in my boat that would vote NDP, but are afraid of the Conservatives winning, and going to vote Liberal to keep Sheer out. 

[chakoo]

NDPers better hope for a Lib minority because if Scheer somehow gets a minority they will get blamed for it. 
 

I still believe Libs will win (minority/majority) which is probably best to force CPC to reset their leader then a push could be made for liberals to also get a new leader before the next election.

[Jwheel86]

At this point I just want the Libs to win to see my Canadian cousin cry more. 

[AbsolutSurgen]

11 hours ago, CitizenVectron said:

Politics aside, I love the idea behind a hung Parliament and the constitutional options! Just once in my life I want to see the second place party form government with the support of the third or fourth place parties! It almost happened in 2008, and now the chances are there again!

 

I have a hard time coming up with a scenario where this happens.  I have yet to see a scenario where the Conservatives have the most seats, where the NDP holds the balance of power -- and the NDP believes its to their political advantage to pull this kind of move.

 

1 hour ago, chakoo said:

NDPers better hope for a Lib minority because if Scheer somehow gets a minority they will get blamed for it. 
 

I still believe Libs will win (minority/majority) which is probably best to force CPC to reset their leader then a push could be made for liberals to also get a new leader before the next election.

I agree that a Liberal minority is most likely.  I would be surprised if they decide to hold a new leadership race before the next election -- I can't see a minority government lasting more than 18 months.

 

[CitizenVectron]

 

As for my scenario, it's more possible this time as the liberals already hold power. This means they get first shot at forming government, even if the CPC has more seats. But it would have to be close. If they lost by 20 seats to the CPC, the moral argument would be harder to sell.

[AbsolutSurgen]

57 minutes ago, CitizenVectron said:

 

As for my scenario, it's more possible this time as the liberals already hold power. This means they get first shot at forming government, even if the CPC has more seats. But it would have to be close. If they lost by 20 seats to the CPC, the moral argument would be harder to sell.

Its a numbers game -- the NDP need to be able to hold the balance of power.  The Bloc's support would need to fall off a cliff for that to happen.

[AbsolutSurgen]

 

[CitizenVectron]

Two things today: Singh has come and say that he will not support a CPC government, and will attempt to form a coalition with other parties even if the CPC get the most seats (but not majority).

 

The second is that a pollster tweeted that there has been some big movement over the last few days, and has hinted that the CPC is now dropping into the 20s. Looks like the NDP is making some big moves across the English-speaking part of Canada.

[CitizenVectron]

Jagmeentum is real:

 

 

 

 

[CitizenVectron]

Pollster commented again that the CPC are dropping in Ontario, which will likely mean the Liberals hold there. So even if both the CPC and LPC are in the high-20s, the Liberals will still hold a plurality of seats.

 

And in "I'm an idiot" news, Scheer just announced that he would restart the Northern Gateway Pipeline project if he wins, bringing a pipeline to the northern BC coast. The thing is...people in BC really don't like oil going to the west coast. I'm not arguing that they are correct...because even though I am against further oil development, I do think that as long as we are selling it we should be getting the most money for it as possible. However, Scheer has been doing okay in BC so far, and this kind of announcement is strange since it's like he is playing to AB/SK even though he will already win almost all of the seats in those two provinces. Maybe he figures it's close enough to election day that this won't hurt in BC...except that the NDP is on the rise, who are the natural opponents of the CPC in western Canada.

 

It's very strange, but many people will go from the right-wing party to the left-wing party (and vice-versa) and skip over the more centrist party.

 

EDIT - Who even knows what is going on anymore:

 

 

 

 

[AbsolutSurgen]

The only thing less reliable than polls in Canada, is tweets about what pollsters think future polls might say. 

[AbsolutSurgen]

The more recent polls are starting to make this election a lot more interesting.  With the rise of NDP support, the message that a party is conveying may actually be VERY different to what their behavior is after the election:

NDP

On Saturday, Jagmeet Singh said:

Quote

NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh says he would try to form a coalition government with other parties if the Conservatives win the most seats in the election, but fail to secure a majority. 

Asked by reporters on Sunday whether he'd work with other parties, including Justin Trudeau's Liberals, Singh replied: "Oh absolutely, because we're not going to support a Conservative government."
"We're going to fight a Conservative government, gonna fight it all the way,"  the NDP leader said at a rally with supporters in Surrey, B.C. "So we're ready to do whatever it takes."

Then on Monday he said:

Quote

Asked by reporters on Sunday whether he'd "cobble up a coalition" with Justin Trudeau's Liberals in a minority government scenario, Singh replied, "Oh absolutely, because we're not going to support a Conservative government."

When asked the next day if the coalition talk was premature, Singh said, "That was not my position."

"My focus is not on a coalition. My focus is on this: If you vote New Democrat, you're going to get someone on your side," he said from Vancouver.

"I'm not negotiating the future today. Today I'm telling Canadians what they can do, and what they can do is this: If you vote for a New Democrat, you know our priorities and where we stand."

He is obviously trying to convince voters that are on the fence between voting Liberal or NDP that a vote for the NDP is not a wasted vote and will still work to prevent the Conservatives from forming a government.

the NDP has laid out 6 priorities they have if a coalition government is formed:

Quote

• A national, single-payer universal pharmacare plan and a national dental care plan.
• Investments in housing.
• A plan to waive interest on student loans.
• A commitment to reduce emissions, to end subsidies for oil companies and to deliver aid to oilpatch workers to transition them out of fossil fuel industries.
• The introduction of a "super wealth" tax and a commitment to closing tax loopholes.
• Reducing cellphone bills.

Liberal

They want nothing to do about discussions of a coalition government.  If a coalition is deemed probable, they risk losing votes to the NDP on the left (for voters that were planning on voting Liberal for Strategic reasons) and to the right (to the Conservatives for voters that are scared of what a coalition with the NDP would mean.

Conservative

They want to convince voters that the Liberals are going to pursue a coalition, and that voters should vote Conservative to avoid the NDP getting power.

 

This could get very interesting...

 

Post-Election

This is where things could get interesting.  If there is a majority of seats won by the Liberals or Conservatives -- nothing interesting happens.  If the combined NDP/Liberal seat count is over half of the seats -- nothing interesting likely happens.

Otherwise..  Things might get interesting.  After an election, the "winning" party has to convince the Governor General that they have the confidence of the House of Commons (i.e. this normally means that they can get more than 50% of the votes in a vote of confidence).

There is a possibility that both the Liberals (either in a coalition with the NDP, or an adhoc alliance, or alone) and the Conservatives could go to the GG with a proposal to form the Government.

There are really only three potential outcomes:

1)  The Liberals form a Minority Government

2) The Conservatives form a Minority Government

3)  The GG decides neither can, and calls another election

There are lots of possibilities here, lots of opportunities for complicated politics involving the Bloc, the NDP and the Greens.  It is increasingly looking likely that the Bloc could hold the balance of power here -- something I don't think they want.  I don't believe they want to see themselves allying with either the Liberals or Conservatives to force a new election -- but they might be forced to in order to avoid a new election.

Anyway you look at it, next Monday's election has the opportunity to be a very exciting night!

 

[CitizenVectron]

Something to keep in mind is that no party actually gets to approach the GG after the election if there is no majority. The Liberals will get first crack at government, as is the law. Only once they lose a confidence vote or voluntarily give up power does another party get to speak to the GG. So if the CPC gets first and the LPC second, the LPC can make a throne speech and then if the NDP and Bloc support it, they stay as government. 

[AbsolutSurgen]

I don’t believe there is a consensus on the process of forming a minority government after an election. 
you are expressing one POV that I have seen. I’ve seen it reported that other constitutional experts do not agree with that. 

[AbsolutSurgen]

@CitizenVectron  I am certainly not a constitutional expert.  To try and understand what will happen in the event of a minority government, I have been trying to educate myself and the process that is used to form a new Canadian Government.  I have come across very vague descriptions on Canadian Government sites, and lots of conflicting online opinions.  I have really struggled to find a clear description of the process.  I then stumbled on this article:

Who's in charge?  Why we need a how-to guide for forming new governments

Quote

I sat in on at least one of the sessions, where I learned just how uncharted this territory is in Canada. There are no rules over how long the Commons can sit dark after an election and there are serious disputes over who gets first try at forming government when election results are unclear. Some people say that the incumbent prime minister gets first crack, by convention — others argue that democracy dictates it should be the leader of the party who wins the most seats.

Imagine, for instance, that Andrew Scheer’s Conservatives win 141 seats and Justin Trudeau’s Liberals win 140, and the other 57 seats are scattered among New Democrats, Greens, the Bloc Québécois and the People’s party. Would Scheer be called upon to form a government, or Trudeau?

It’s a fun conversation-starter right now, but maybe less fun when it becomes more than academic speculation after Oct. 21. The standoff could whip up a polarized, political frenzy that would make any new minority Parliament impossible to manage — and a country difficult to govern when the dust settles, if it ever does.

 

Quote

I asked the Privy Council Office this week whether any work was being done behind the scenes on a manual for government formation in case the Oct. 21 is unclear.

“The Privy Council Office prepares for a range of potential outcomes for every general election and will be ready to support the government, whatever the result of the election,” spokesman Pierre-Alain Bujold said in a terse email.

I think that may be the Privy Council’s way of saying that it prefers not to deal with hypothetical questions — at least not now.

 

I am somewhat frustrated that I have been unable to find anything more clear.  If you could send me a link to your source that describes the process you outlined above, I would be VERY interested in reading it.

[AbsolutSurgen]

Latest Polls:

 

 

[CitizenVectron]

This actually already has happened in 1925, and convention dictates it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1925_Canadian_federal_election

 

William Lyon Mackenzie King's Liberal government came in second place, behind the Conservatives. However, with the third party Progressives the Liberals had a majority, so they formed government. What is even more interesting is that William Lyon Mackenzie King himself lost his seat in the election. So he was Prime Minister without being elected as an MP. This is also convention, as you don't need to be elected to be Prime Minister, only be the leader of the party/group that holds the confidence of the house.

 

The reason this is the case is that Canada's constitution (and previous governing documents) don't even mentioned political parties. The Prime Minister (and thus government) are simply those who hold the confidence of the house. Since the previous government (in that case King, in this case Trudeau) are already government, then they remain so until their confidence has been tested. This can be from an opposing group passing a bill that shows the government can no longer command authority, or it can be from the government agreeing to step down voluntarily. So until one of those two things happens, the existing government stays as government.

 

You are correct that much of this remains untested. The situation in the UK is a good example of how even one of the oldest democracies can still have its conventions challenged and changed. Boris Johnson prorogued Parliament for a long time, and the courts ruled that it was unconstitutional. In 2008 Harper did the same thing (to prevent the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th-place parties from doing exactly that, challenging the confidence) and got away with it. If the same thing happened today, the precedent set by the UK Supreme Court ruling would likely apply here and the Supreme Court of Canada (if asked) would likely deny the prorogation of Parliament. The question of "how long can an incumbent government stay in power if it knows it will lose a confidence vote?" remains untested in Canada as well. If there were some sort of emergency, it would seem reasonable to delay the transition of power by a week or two. But if the incumbent government attempted to delay this for months, it would likely be challenged and the Supreme Court would need to rule.

 

But on the matter of who gets to form government, it seems clearer in that the incumbent government remains in power until it is proven it does not hold the confidence of the house. So if the election ends in the results as you posited, the Liberals could simply inform the GG that they intend to test their existing confidence, and could pass a throne speech with the NDP (or whomever). If that failed, normal convention would be that an election would be held. However, before the writ was dropped, convention would also dictate that another party (in this case the CPC) could approach the GG and ask to be given the chance to test the confidence of the House, if they could show they had a shot (typically this would be by presenting a letter or something showing that another party would back them). This also happened in 1925, when a scandal rocked the King government and the Progressives left the agreement/coalition. The GG was expected to call an election, but instead offered the Conservatives a chance to form government, and they did (without a stable coalition, but they had the most seats). This however was seen as an intervention directly by the UK into Canadian politics (since the GG was still appointed by the crown at this point), and King rallied the Progressives back to his cause, defeated the new Conservatives on a confidence motion, and retook power. This makes the 1925 Conservative government unique in that it was unelected and only lasted 3 days.

 

However, polls in the last few days are apparently showing a massive lead in Ontario for the Liberals (10-15 points) which means the discussion is probably moot, as the LPC will likely hold a plurality of the seats anyway. But we shall see!

[AbsolutSurgen]

23 minutes ago, CitizenVectron said:

However, polls in the last few days are apparently showing a massive lead in Ontario for the Liberals (10-15 points) which means the discussion is probably moot, as the LPC will likely hold a plurality of the seats anyway. But we shall see!

Which one?  Ipsos poll released today shows a 3 point lead.

[CitizenVectron]

Just now, AbsolutSurgen said:

Which one?  Ipsos poll released today shows a 3 point lead.

 

Quito Maggi (Mainstreat) and Frank Graves (Ekos) have both said  on twitter that the CPC have experienced big drops in ON over the weekend, and the NDP have risen there. They hinted both were around 20%. The LPC however have remained stable, which would put them around 35%. A user on reddit leaked the Nanos regional results, which also showed the LPC up 15% in ON. At the same time, the CPC keep running up their score in AB/SK, so the national race remains statistically tied.

 

So nothing official out yet, but should be confirmed tomorrow/thursday as the weekend dates weight more heavily in the rolling polls. Ipsos and Forum have both showed a closer race in ON.

[CitizenVectron]

Still could go almost any way if there is a late swing:

 

 

 

[AbsolutSurgen]

 

[CitizenVectron]

Regionals:

 

 

 

I don't trust the Angus poll at all. They have the CPC above the LPC by 8% in Atlantic Canada, when everyone else has the opposite. Atlantic Canada is most definitely not swinging to CPC that hard. 

[AbsolutSurgen]

 

[CitizenVectron]

Yeah, but again, Angus has some very questionable numbers. Most (I think all) other pollsters put the Liberals 10-20% ahead in Atlantic Canada, and he puts it at a 8% CPC lead. It's just not believable.

[CitizenVectron]

These 905 polls are all over the place. Leger says that Toronto (city) is going to be a Liberal sweep, which I think is obvious. But they say the 905 is tied between LPC and CPC. Nanos, on the other hand (and Mainstreet I believe) shows the LPC advantage there widening to 13%:

 

https://secureservercdn.net/198.71.233.47/823.910.myftpupload.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/2019-1445-CTV-Globe-Nanos-ELXN-Ontario-Ballot-Comparison-Up-to-Thanksgiving-Weekend-COMPILED.pdf

 

I do think there will be a minority either way, and I think it will come down to the 905. If the seats break roughly evenly, then the CPC have a shot at a plurality of seats (not guaranteed government, but their best chance). If they break Liberal, then the CPC have no chance at a plurality unless there is some large-scale issue with the polls nationally (which is possible!).

 

It will definitely be different than last election. In 2015 I volunteered as a scrutineer at a polling station, and was excited to go home after and watch the results come in. But as soon as I left and opened twitter, everyone had already called it for the Liberals since they had won 100% of Atlantic Canada and were sweeping Quebec. This election will clearly not be so cut-and-dry. For for the first time in a long time, BC's votes will actually matter!

[CitizenVectron]

Here's the tweet for the numbers, forgot to include:

 

 

It's hard to tell who could be more reliable here. Nanos used a sample of 329 for the 905, while Leger used a sample of 1,000 for the entire GTA, of which the 905 is a subset. So maybe 300-500? Tough to compare polls when pollsters only release some information to the public, and other parts to subscribers.

[AbsolutSurgen]

A lot of the polls are contradicting each other -- and I am seeing some of the CEOs being unprofessional online, battling with each other and the partisan twitter trolls.  I think we will know 2 things on Tuesday:

1)  We should understand 99% of the seat numbers 

2)  Which pollsters were right

@CitizenVectron 905 will be a big part of the story, but not necessarily the entire story.  Conservatives will need to do well in 905 -- and even if they do, they need to gain some seats elsewhere as well.

Right now, I think everything is in play.

I still believe a minority plurality is the most likely scenario -- probably for the Liberals.  However, I also think it is very likely that the BQ will have the balance of power (i.e. whomever would like to form the government, will need their votes to pass a confidence motion).

@CitizenVectron -- Do you have any links to party finances (i.e. which parties could afford another election this year?)