Welcome Guest!
In order to take advantage of all the great features that Waterloo Region Connected has to offer, including participating in the lively discussions below, you're going to have to register. The good news is that it'll take less than a minute and you can get started enjoying Waterloo Region's best online community right away.
or Create an Account




Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2019 Federal Election
#31
(02-26-2019, 08:52 AM)PhilippAchtel Wrote:
(02-26-2019, 08:11 AM)Rainrider22 Wrote: I was reading and giving your thoughts careful consideration until you went and did just what you were speaking against  You categorized , or labeled people based on being in a particular group.  I align myself with more conservative politics however, I am extremely aware of my personal bias, and I continue to work on emotional intelligence each and everyday. I treat people fairly and I dont care what their back ground or gender identity is.  I am just respectful to everyone.  Much easier way to live life....  I dont take offense to your comment,  even though I feel it is in accurate. (I just wanted to be clear on that,so please continue to comment)

"A particular group"? I'm sure you're aware that affiliation with the Conservative Party or support for conservative policies is not comparable to membership in LGBTQ or a racialized group? You choose to associate with those people and promote those policies; you were not born into that group and can dissociate at any time. There's also an element of power dynamics that is completely absent from your situation.

If people judge you based on your chosen political affiliation, it's not even in the same league as the experience of racial discrimination.

That said, if you spend time to think about your biases and work to correct them, that's a great thing. But when you choose to group yourself with people who quack like a duck, what do you expect people to do?

My intent was not to have you judge me.  You do not know me nor do you know what my group affiliations are. You assume I am not part of the LGBTQ or from a racialized group based on what?  Because I openly admit I lean towards Conservative party when I vote?  I am not going to go any further on this discussion because clearly it will not be productive.
Reply


#32
(02-26-2019, 12:32 PM)MidTowner Wrote: Bernier's new party managed to take more than 10 percent of the vote in the Burnaby byelection last night, though it achieved much less success in the other two. With enough quality candidates (it wouldn't take many), it would surely be able to significantly impact the Tories' chances of a victory.

That will definitely add another level of uncertainty to the election: this is the old Reform/PC split again, balancing out the Liberal/NDP split on the other side.
Reply
#33
(02-26-2019, 01:15 PM)tomh009 Wrote:
(02-26-2019, 12:32 PM)MidTowner Wrote: Bernier's new party managed to take more than 10 percent of the vote in the Burnaby byelection last night, though it achieved much less success in the other two. With enough quality candidates (it wouldn't take many), it would surely be able to significantly impact the Tories' chances of a victory.

That will definitely add another level of uncertainty to the election: this is the old Reform/PC split again, balancing out the Liberal/NDP split on the other side.

likely a minority government....
Reply
#34
(02-26-2019, 01:18 PM)Rainrider22 Wrote:
(02-26-2019, 01:15 PM)tomh009 Wrote: That will definitely add another level of uncertainty to the election: this is the old Reform/PC split again, balancing out the Liberal/NDP split on the other side.

likely a minority government....

Maybe we could start thinking of "coalition" as something other than a dirty word ...
Reply
#35
(02-26-2019, 01:18 PM)Rainrider22 Wrote:
(02-26-2019, 01:15 PM)tomh009 Wrote: That will definitely add another level of uncertainty to the election: this is the old Reform/PC split again, balancing out the Liberal/NDP split on the other side.

likely a minority government....

I'm not so sure. The NDP won Burnaby last night, but that should be a given that the leader wins his seat. They lost Outremont, which could foretell a poor showing in Quebec. The Liberals may do very well in Quebec again.

My thinking is that, if Bernier polls well between not and autumn, the Tories may try to shore up their base with various more-rightist policies and messaging that the Liberals can capitalize on to capture swing voters who might be easily convinced that Scheer is as "scary" as Harper. It's not hard to imagine Scheer saying something to a group like that truck convoy in Ottawa last week that the Liberals successfully turn into this cycle's version of the "old stock Canadians" remark.

I believe the Liberals have the possibility of campaigning to younger voters with the same type of more progressive rhetoric they used in 2015; and to older, more moderate voters with their actual record of governance since.
Reply
#36
I haven't seen the details of whatever healthcare plan the Ontario PCs are putting forth today, but I am curious about the impact their year of governance will have on the federal election, and whether or not that's even something that can be measured.
Reply
#37
(02-26-2019, 02:39 PM)MidTowner Wrote:
(02-26-2019, 01:18 PM)Rainrider22 Wrote: likely a minority government....

I'm not so sure. The NDP won Burnaby last night, but that should be a given that the leader wins his seat. They lost Outremont, which could foretell a poor showing in Quebec. The Liberals may do very well in Quebec again.

My thinking is that, if Bernier polls well between not and autumn, the Tories may try to shore up their base with various more-rightist policies and messaging that the Liberals can capitalize on to capture swing voters who might be easily convinced that Scheer is as "scary" as Harper. It's not hard to imagine Scheer saying something to a group like that truck convoy in Ottawa last week that the Liberals successfully turn into this cycle's version of the "old stock Canadians" remark.

I believe the Liberals have the possibility of campaigning to younger voters with the same type of more progressive rhetoric they used in 2015; and to older, more moderate voters with their actual record of governance since.

It's going to take some serious scare mongering to get most progressives to vote Liberal again...to quote the second worst US president in my lifetime and...a painter, fool me once, shame on me, fool me twice...well you don't fool me twice.
Reply


#38
(02-26-2019, 03:31 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: It's going to take some serious scare mongering to get most progressives to vote Liberal again...to quote the second worst US president in my lifetime and...a painter, fool me once, shame on me, fool me twice...well you don't fool me twice.

Agreed. I like what Trudeau set out to do, and I do think that some of his changes have been wonderful, but Liberals gonna Liberal and I'm getting tired of voting for them mostly for the purposes of keeping policies I dislike out.
Reply
#39
(02-26-2019, 02:39 PM)MidTowner Wrote: I believe the Liberals have the possibility of campaigning to younger voters with the same type of more progressive rhetoric they used in 2015; and to older, more moderate voters with their actual record of governance since.

Amongst my group of friends, the Liberals have pretty much destroyed their chances - they did that as soon as they cancelled electoral reform. That's not to say strategic voting won't be a factor, but I still expect to see a lot of younger people swinging back to the NDP or Green Party.
Reply
#40
(02-26-2019, 07:15 AM)jgsz Wrote: Some observations regarding Andrew Moraga’s nomination to be the NDP candidate in Kitchener-Centre:

Yes, we are all the same.  Yes, we are all different.  I get that...

So far, the comments here have zeroed in on Moraga’s racial background and that he’s a member of the LGBTQ+  community.  

No one has commented on the fact that he is an environmental advocate and a scientist.  The article also mentions that he is working on his doctorate in social and ecological sustainability at UW.  These are very important qualifications for me.  

Although no one specifically mentioned “Identity Politics,” most of the comments so far have been about his identity.

The accusation of identity politics always comes from the political right-wing or those who unconsciously use right-wing talking points.   They see identity politics as a bad thing.  But what they don’t seem to understand is that everyone has an identity.  The identity of those who accuse others of identity politics are almost always white, heterosexual, male/female, preferably Christian.  However, they come from a place of privilege.  They don’t have to declare that they are a white, heterosexual man or women.  After all, they belong to the natural, god-given order of things.  

I can imagine the uproar from the right-wing if Moraga didn’t mention his sexual orientation until after he won election.  He would be accused of deception and dishonesty.  What to do?

I have never heard anyone from the LGBTQ+ or anyone from marginalized communities accuse someone of identity politics.  That is the exclusive preserve of conservatives.  

Bolded for my thoughts:

1. Not true. In fact, you'll often hear from the "left-wing" about inclusiveness (nothing wrong with that) when choosing members, and often focusing on minorities/the LGBTTQQIAAP community, new Canadians, females, etc. That's discrimination. That's why you have many "left-wingers" bashing people that believe in God, for example, or bashing those that don't want to participate in LGBTTQQIAAP festivities. Yet it's many the left that wants to force EVERYONE to get involved in PRIDE, and if you don't, you're a horrible, evil person. Sure, you have religious fanatics who'll protest and tell these people that God will make them burn in hell for eternity, but that's a very small minority. Trudeau, for example, has done identity politics with his cabinet. Did he choose the best? Or did he choose what fit his agenda?

2. I can't imagine anyone being in an uproar of Moraga didn't mention his sexual orientation (and he wins). 99% of people simply don't care anymore, including so-called conservatives. If Moraga wins the election, and had failed to mentioned his sexual identity, the ONLY people (a very vocal minority) that might be upset are those on the left that don't like that lifestyle. After all, it was the Conservatives (or any right-wing group) that fielded a candidate that couldn't win, those conservatives have no reason to be upset, other than losing. Of course, there have been several gay Conservatives in politics....so, you have that.

3. I have. Many times. It goes both ways. Quite often it's simply something negative about the 'straight, white, Canadian (English), male'.
Reply
#41
(02-26-2019, 03:31 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: It's going to take some serious scare mongering to get most progressives to vote Liberal again...to quote the second worst US president in my lifetime and...a painter, fool me once, shame on me, fool me twice...well you don't fool me twice.

George W. Bush....

It would have been an excellent quote had he said "Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice....well, you won't have that opportunity"

That said, I believe Trudeau will win another majority (although very small).
Reply
#42
(02-26-2019, 03:56 PM)jeffster Wrote:
(02-26-2019, 07:15 AM)jgsz Wrote: Some observations regarding Andrew Moraga’s nomination to be the NDP candidate in Kitchener-Centre:

Yes, we are all the same.  Yes, we are all different.  I get that...

So far, the comments here have zeroed in on Moraga’s racial background and that he’s a member of the LGBTQ+  community.  

No one has commented on the fact that he is an environmental advocate and a scientist.  The article also mentions that he is working on his doctorate in social and ecological sustainability at UW.  These are very important qualifications for me.  

Although no one specifically mentioned “Identity Politics,” most of the comments so far have been about his identity.

The accusation of identity politics always comes from the political right-wing or those who unconsciously use right-wing talking points.   They see identity politics as a bad thing.  But what they don’t seem to understand is that everyone has an identity.  The identity of those who accuse others of identity politics are almost always white, heterosexual, male/female, preferably Christian.  However, they come from a place of privilege.  They don’t have to declare that they are a white, heterosexual man or women.  After all, they belong to the natural, god-given order of things.  

I can imagine the uproar from the right-wing if Moraga didn’t mention his sexual orientation until after he won election.  He would be accused of deception and dishonesty.  What to do?

I have never heard anyone from the LGBTQ+ or anyone from marginalized communities accuse someone of identity politics.  That is the exclusive preserve of conservatives.  

Bolded for my thoughts:

1. Not true. In fact, you'll often hear from the "left-wing" about inclusiveness (nothing wrong with that) when choosing members, and often focusing on minorities/the LGBTTQQIAAP community, new Canadians, females, etc. That's discrimination. That's why you have many "left-wingers" bashing people that believe in God, for example, or bashing those that don't want to participate in LGBTTQQIAAP festivities. Yet it's many the left that wants to force EVERYONE to get involved in PRIDE, and if you don't, you're a horrible, evil person. Sure, you have religious fanatics who'll protest and tell these people that God will make them burn in hell for eternity, but that's a very small minority. Trudeau, for example, has done identity politics with his cabinet. Did he choose the best? Or did he choose what fit his agenda?

2. I can't imagine anyone being in an uproar of Moraga didn't mention his sexual orientation (and he wins). 99% of people simply don't care anymore, including so-called conservatives. If Moraga wins the election, and had failed to mentioned his sexual identity, the ONLY people (a very vocal minority) that might be upset are those on the left that don't like that lifestyle. After all, it was the Conservatives (or any right-wing group) that fielded a candidate that couldn't win, those conservatives have no reason to be upset, other than losing. Of course, there have been several gay Conservatives in politics....so, you have that.

3. I have. Many times. It goes both ways. Quite often it's simply something negative about the 'straight, white, Canadian (English), male'.

This is quickly getting off the rails, but this is absolutely untrue.  I have never met anyone, of any level of progressiveness, who believes one *must* get involved with pride.  They object to discrimination, hate, and otherwise intolerance of pride folks, but if you don't care what someone's sexual orientation is, and don't discriminate, that's fine according to everyone I know.

Yes, what you describe is a very small minority, most people do not preach the eternal damnation of people from the LGBTQ community.  That does not mean that other forms of discrimination are not far more broadly visible in our society today.  Just this weekend I was at the autoshow and had the unpleasant experience of hearing some young men using homophobic slurs against a third for not liking a pickup truck--stereotypical I know, but absolutely true, absolutely in public, and absolutely common.  These forms of discrimination still do hurt and are a problem.

You are right however that the left does have a problem with religious people, those on the left do have a problem separating religious folks from those who use religion as a justification to discriminate against others.

For two I generally agree, I was in fact very happy to see that Wynne's sexual identity was barely an issue in the first election.  In her second election, however, I did see a substantial amount of homophobic slurs used against her, but she didn't make an issue of it in my mind.

For three, while some people may, to various levels of seriousness suggest that being a white a straight male is "bad", I think the most frustrating things to the majority of marginalized folks are people refusing to acknowledge the privilege and advantages that being in that group provides.
Reply
#43
(02-26-2019, 03:56 PM)jeffster Wrote: Yet it's many the left that wants to force EVERYONE to get involved in PRIDE, and if you don't, you're a horrible, evil person. Sure, you have religious fanatics who'll protest and tell these people that God will make them burn in hell for eternity, but that's a very small minority. Trudeau, for example, has done identity politics with his cabinet. Did he choose the best? Or did he choose what fit his agenda?

The left doesn't want everyone involved in Pride, the left does want politicians who are supposed to represent everyone, to participate in major events in those communities. I've never been to a big Pride event - those kind of crowds are not my thing - but I identify as a member of the left and am generally welcomed in those communities.

Speculating whether or not someone made the right choice is not evidence that they didn't, but it is a form of propaganda that implies that he didn't. He absolutely made some wrong choices, it's inevitable. All PMs have, some people just can't do the job they're given - the Peter Principle applies to political jobs just as much as corporate ones. Whichever wrong choices he made weren't because they were unqualified - his initial cabinet was almost entirely qualified.

A notable exception that comes immediately to mind for me was Chagger who I was genuinely concerned about given her lack of experience with either small business or tourism. Given that she moved on from her Ministry to become the Leader of the Government in the House - a pretty important position - I'm not aware of any particularly egregious failures.

That question ("are they filling quotas or are there good candidates who aren't white men?") continues to be a talking point not because it's proven to be valid in Trudeau's cabinet (or in any of the other places that it's used), but because it's a useful tool to cast aspersion onto candidates who come from backgrounds outside the historic norm. If you assume that any white male candidate is qualified without evidence, you should assume that the same is true for anyone else and if there is anyone else you're concerned about you should focus on their specific lack of qualifications, not the fact that you think they're filling a quota.

(02-26-2019, 03:56 PM)jeffster Wrote: 99% of people simply don't care anymore, including so-called conservatives.

To the extent that this is true (I agree that for gay and lesbian folk it largely is) however, is because of people like Moraga using their platforms to normalize these sorts of differences and force the default away from the hetero nuclear family. Also, many vocal conservatives globally absolutely are using and promoting trans-folks-as-predators related fears just as much as gays-are-pedophiles type messaging was used historically.
Reply


#44
(02-26-2019, 03:44 PM)jamincan Wrote:
(02-26-2019, 02:39 PM)MidTowner Wrote: I believe the Liberals have the possibility of campaigning to younger voters with the same type of more progressive rhetoric they used in 2015; and to older, more moderate voters with their actual record of governance since.

Amongst my group of friends, the Liberals have pretty much destroyed their chances - they did that as soon as they cancelled electoral reform. That's not to say strategic voting won't be a factor, but I still expect to see a lot of younger people swinging back to the NDP or Green Party.

I know a lot of people who say that, too. I question how many of them will vote NDP in the face of a Tory victory. Especially given that, those of my friends plugged in enough to be interested or passionate about issues like electoral reform will be aware that, in many ridings, the choice will be between sending a Conservative or a Liberal to Ottawa.

One disadvantage the Liberals definitely have is that the Singh will not be tempted to try to move to the right of the Liberals as Mulcair did in 2015. With no credible expectation of forming government, they will not give the Liberals the opportunity to outflank them on the left on any issue, and will make it much harder for progressives to vote Trudeau than last time.

All that said, I think that both the NDP and the Tories will present as relatively more extreme than they have in recent elections, given the Liberals plenty of opportunity to capture most centrists, which describes most Canadians.
Reply
#45
(02-26-2019, 04:23 PM)robdrimmie Wrote: ...A notable exception that comes immediately to mind for me was Chagger who I was genuinely concerned about given her lack of experience with either small business or tourism. Given that she moved on from her Ministry to become the Leader of the Government in the House - a pretty important position - I'm not aware of any particularly egregious failures.

That question ("are they filling quotas or are there good candidates who aren't white men?") continues to be a talking point not because it's proven to be valid in Trudeau's cabinet (or in any of the other places that it's used), but because it's a useful tool to cast aspersion onto candidates who come from backgrounds outside the historic norm. If you assume that any white male candidate is qualified without evidence, you should assume that the same is true for anyone else and if there is anyone else you're concerned about you should focus on their specific lack of qualifications, not the fact that you think they're filling a quota...

Hey- it seems to me that this is directly related to the title of the thread!

I think that, in 2015, it was disturbing to some that Trudeau made the commitment to a gender-balanced cabinet before he knew what talent pool he would have to draw from. Most MPs elected in the past have been male. Parliament is not gender-balanced. Would he have been able to achieve a gender-balanced cabinet if his caucus wound up being 75% male? To what lengths would he have gone? I think these were the types of concerns.

That's less of a concern now that his cabinet has functioned for four years with no serious issues (that's a matter of opinion). Also, when a party wins nearly 200 seats and does a good job of continuing to try to recruit experienced female candidates in winnable ridings, those misgivings become less credible.
Reply
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »



Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)

About Waterloo Region Connected

Launched in August 2014, Waterloo Region Connected is an online community that brings together all the things that make Waterloo Region great. Waterloo Region Connected provides user-driven content fueled by a lively discussion forum covering topics like urban development, transportation projects, heritage issues, businesses and other issues of interest to those in Kitchener, Waterloo, Cambridge and the four Townships - North Dumfries, Wellesley, Wilmot, and Woolwich.

              User Links