2025 Federal Election

[trtcttc]

I hope an outcome of this election is that instant runoff is seen as more viable. The efficiency problem nor strategic voting is as much of an issue. Regional parties can still be represented.

The issue with many European systems with small parties is that they sometimes hold the balance of power. Like the NDP or Bloc, I don't think anyone outside of QC wants the Bloc, a party built on separatism, holding the balance of power in the Canadian Parliament and extracting concessions to QC more than what we already do.

 

[darwink]

The issue with many European systems with small parties is that they sometimes hold the balance of power. Like the NDP or Bloc, I don't think anyone outside of QC wants the Bloc, a party built on separatism, holding the balance of power in the Canadian Parliament and extracting concessions to QC more than what we already do.

I'm not sure any european country has runoff voting for a position other than president. Ireland has single transferable vote in multimember constituencies, but I'd argue that is a proportional representation system that allows candidate selection by voters, not a run-off system.

I'd also argue against applying our rules of thumb about canadian politics today to a new system. I think any changes could cause parties to fracture into constituent parts, and increase ideological competition as there would be less incentive for brokerage within parties.

 

[Red Star]

It makes you wonder where all the voters are. It's also the same in the US. Only 63.7% of eligible voters turned out, in what should have been a very hotly contested election.

A lot of people don't vote because it doesn't really matter who wins. None of the federal political parties in Canada really represent my political beliefs. In fact, I have to squint to see the difference between the Conservative and Liberal party of Canada.

Furthermore, politicians make a lot of promises on the campaign trail. Whether they keep those promises while in office is another story.

 

[Mountain Man]

So Liberal minority with a 68.5% voter turnout. I expected a majority, but the Cons did better than expected. Good to see the Libs make inroads in Quebec, though they still vote too much for a useless party.

 

[CalgaryTiger]

So Liberal minority with a 68.5% voter turnout. I expected a majority, but the Cons did better than expected. Good to see the Libs make inroads in Quebec, though they still vote too much for a useless party.

The slimmest of minorities too. A majority was really required. I think they can get a partner in NDP on some things but that also feels awkward since Carney is "laser focused on the economy" when that just doesn't feel like what the NDP care about. I also worry about getting any NDP (definitely not Bloc) support for his idea of infrastructure corridors. To me those are his two most important tasks and I don't know see a path to how he finds the support... Saying all that the NDP will not want another election for awhile so maybe they do become a partner to the Liberals again. Probably wouldn't be the worst idea to have the NDP party take the economy and infrastructure more seriously if the NDP wanted to get back some of the Orange/Blue switchers.

 

[trtcttc]

The NDP needs to pick a lane if they really want a future in federal politics. Are they a workers party? or a progressive party? Governing with the liberals essentially resulted in them losing the working class vote to the Conservative and the progressive vote to the Liberals. Carney's centrist message won over progressives because they were scared of Pollievre (real or imagined), and Singh was a terrible politician. If Carney actually executes on his centrist agenda (energy corridor, infrastructure projects, etc.), and not the written for him Liberal platform, he could lose those progressive votes fast, and Quebec votes.

One of the potential candidates for NDP leader is Montreal's mayor, and if they were to build out of Quebec, the next election could come sooner than later.

 

[darwink]

he could lose those progressive votes fast, and Quebec votes

I doubt that would be the case.

 

[CBBarnett]

The NDP needs to pick a lane if they really want a future in federal politics. Are they a workers party? or a progressive party? Governing with the liberals essentially resulted in them losing the working class vote to the Conservative and the progressive vote to the Liberals. Carney's centrist message won over progressives because they were scared of Pollievre (real or imagined), and Singh was a terrible politician. If Carney actually executes on his centrist agenda (energy corridor, infrastructure projects, etc.), and not the written for him Liberal platform, he could lose those progressive votes fast, and Quebec votes.

It's actually a good election to remember that right/left, progressive/conservative dichotomies may be useful to chat politics at a high-level, but voters are far more nuanced in practice particularly in a country as diverse and regional as Canada.

• NDP vote went all over the place, largely to the Liberals in the West and east but also to the Conservatives, particularly in Ontario.
• Quebec once again proves it has a different angle on the whole right/left thing; language, nationalism don't always site neatly on a spectrum in a single box.
• Leadership qualities among national sovereignty threats was a new question we don't typically have in elections - again, not really a right/left dynamic, just who people thought would be best to deal with current crises.
• Voter turn-out was up quite a bit - with both the Liberals and Conservatives seeing huge vote share increases from recent years.

Then there's a logic game that I think some people need to reconcile with:

1. Is a policy progressive or conservative independent of who enacts that policy? (Carbon taxes originally a conservative think-tank idea to stop the government from meddling directly when trying to constrain pollution)
2. Is a policy progressive only because a "progressive" party is one that implements that policy? (Liberals enact the carbon tax)
3. Is a party still "progressive" when they no longer do "progressive" policies (Liberals repeal the carbon tax)
4. If a single-issue voter voted for the Liberals based only on their new carbon tax policy, are they a progressive voter?

While all this is going on, the political teams are using labels of "progressive" and "conservative" to label themselves (or each other) to attract certain voter attitudes and supporters. The level in which they did this labelling changes regionally to cater to local and regional tastes.

So "progressive" and "conservative" aren't helpful labels without additional context and understanding of regionally-specific nuance. Many "conservative" attitudes in the UCP's Alberta are essentially unrelatable in Doug Ford's Ontario, for another example.

 

[FriendlyDrunks]

Why don't the NDP come to a similar supply and confidence agreement in exchange for election reform, specifically ranked ballots.
This would guarantee official party status after the next election?
Random thought

 

[Albertasaurus]

Why don't the NDP come to a similar supply and confidence agreement in exchange for election reform, specifically ranked ballots.
This would guarantee official party status after the next election?
Random thought

That's actually a really interesting idea. Although, from Mark Carney's perspective, he only needs 3 more votes to pass legislation, so he may find it less constraining to find common ground with the 3 opposition parties on an issue-by-issue basis (especially if, as seems likely, he takes the party rightward on fiscal and economic policy).

 

[darwink]

Why don't the NDP come to a similar supply and confidence agreement in exchange for election reform, specifically ranked ballots.
This would guarantee official party status after the next election?
Random thought

They have no leverage. And the NDP HATE ranked ballots. They want a non specific version of perportional representation that is never defined to maintain ideological purity, with none of the constitutional hard parts or practicalities laid out.

That's actually a really interesting idea. Although, from Mark Carney's perspective, he only needs 3 more votes to pass legislation, so he may find it less constraining to find common ground with the 3 opposition parties on an issue-by-issue basis (especially if, as seems likely, he takes the party rightward on fiscal and economic policy).

Yeah issue by issue.

 

[trtcttc]

That's actually a really interesting idea. Although, from Mark Carney's perspective, he only needs 3 more votes to pass legislation, so he may find it less constraining to find common ground with the 3 opposition parties on an issue-by-issue basis (especially if, as seems likely, he takes the party rightward on fiscal and economic policy).

And most of his economic/US-Canada bills would probably get cooperation from some Conservatives. Pollievre won't be back for another few months and they're probably focused on internal politics than bashing anything the Liberals come up with.

 

[CalgaryTiger]

One thing I'm not seeing discussed is the fact that the Liberals upped their vote percentage in Alberta. Conservatives still won by a lot in most of the ridings but there are a quarter of Albertan's who voted Liberal and are not represented by the fact that 34 of 37 ridings in the Province went to the CPC. So as much as people in the province, like the Premier, make a lot of noise about not being represented by the federal result. There's a decent amount of Albertan's who are not represented by the "Alberta is so conservative" narrative. It swings both ways.

 

[trtcttc]

One thing I'm not seeing discussed is the fact that the Liberals upped their vote percentage in Alberta. Conservatives still won by a lot in most of the ridings but there are a quarter of Albertan's who voted Liberal and are not represented by the fact that 34 of 37 ridings in the Province went to the CPC. So as much as people in the province, like the Premier, make a lot of noise about not being represented by the federal result. There's a decent amount of Albertan's who are not represented by the "Alberta is so conservative" narrative. It swings both ways.

Unfortunately, that's the reality of the electoral system, and Liberals are historically the greatest beneficiary. And why they swing from majority to 50 seats so easily, whereas the CPC always maintain a stronger base of support.

The Liberals are free to pursue electoral reform, as long as it comes when they are in government and not as one of "the greatest regrets" when the party is down 20 pts...

 

[CalgaryTiger]

Unfortunately, that's the reality of the electoral system, and Liberals are historically the greatest beneficiary. And why they swing from majority to 50 seats so easily, whereas the CPC always maintain a stronger base of support.

The Liberals are free to pursue electoral reform, as long as it comes when they are in government and not as one of "the greatest regrets" when the party is down 20 pts...

View attachment 647639

I agree, it is our system. I'm just not seeing it as part of the narrative coming out of the result. That seems to be focused on "nothing changed in Alberta, it is Conservative". You can only come to that conclusion looking at the seat count. I'd like to see some deeper thought but I won't hold my breathe.