Canadian Federal Election 44 - Sep 2021

[Altair]

Well yes - but it won't change gun violence - none of the Major Cities in Canada have crimes to any significant % being conducted with legal firearms.
90% are with firearms already prohibited in Canada - so the ban won't do SFA

Maybe, maybe not. But its a very visible way of showing that they are doing something.

It isn't math - it's the fact Liberals love to misconstrue the story - anyone honest and semi intelligent looking at the firearms crime in Canada can see that further restrictions aren't going to change anything.

7 out of 10 Canadians want more restrictions on firearms. That's math. Gun owners can cry about this all they like, but if 7 out of 10 people believe something, you had better believe that the political parties will shift to accommodate that. The fact that the LPC is able to use this as a wedge issue only makes things worse for the CPC. Its easy to paint the CPC as the party willing to remove restrictions on guns when everyone who opposes restrictions on guns vote for the CPC, making it so the 7 out of 10 who want more restrictions on guns feels uneasy about the CPC being in power.

This is repeated across the board.

Abortion, vaccine mandates, childcare, the environment.

Until the CPC is willing to get onside with the 65-70 percent of progressive voters in the country they are pretty much going to need to hang around until people tire of the LPC enough to give them a chance. And even then, they will need to be non threatening enough to have progressives stomach them in government, otherwise the LPC will use the standard scare tactics to get enough progressives to vote for them to keep the CPC out.

How the CPC does that without completely alienating their base is the golden question. O'Toole seems to be trying. He's pro choice, he wants a carbon tax, he tossed gun owners under the bus during the campaign, I can imagine him just going along with a established Childcare system. But for all his effort he seems to be facing significant dissent from his own ranks.

 

[QV]

Altair's argument can be summed up as the CPC need to be just like the LPC to win.

The fact is the CPC need a better PR/media campaign to win. Countering the LPC/legacy media misinformation is all they need to do. This will be tough because of who's in bed with who when it comes to controlling the national media.

Edit to add: Tough but not impossible. Now more than ever before people are waking up to what complete bull shitters the legacy media are. The internet and social media allow the mechanisms to counter them.

 

[Altair]

Altair's argument can be summed up as the CPC need to be just like the LPC to win.

The fact is the CPC need a better PR/media campaign to win. Countering the LPC/legacy media misinformation is all they need to do. This will be tough because of who's in bed with who when it comes to controlling the national media.

Just like? No. But the uncomfortable truth might be that the LPC are much closer to what Canadians overall want than what the CPC is. This has been the case for generations, not just now. The fact that the CPC came from a right of center merger of parties deciding that the only way they stood a chance was to have a united right against a fragmented left and they only achieved 1 majority government in the 18 years since is rather telling.

But I look overseas to the UK to see a conservative party doing things the right way.

UK conservatives.

Very big on climate change.

Very pro labour.

Raising taxes to fund social programs and the NHS.

Big spending government.

And by doing all of this voters gave him a majority government.

 

[KevinB]

Maybe, maybe not. But its a very visible way of showing that they are doing something.

7 out of 10 Canadians want more restrictions on firearms. That's math. Gun owners can cry about this all they like, but if 7 out of 10 people believe something, you had better believe that the political parties will shift to accommodate that. The fact that the LPC is able to use this as a wedge issue only makes things worse for the CPC. Its easy to paint the CPC as the party willing to remove restrictions on guns when everyone who opposes restrictions on guns vote for the CPC, making it so the 7 out of 10 who want more restrictions on guns feels uneasy about the CPC being in power.

What Canadians want is a safe and security society. That is a no brainer.
But what does more restrictions mean -
The LPC and some other parties are trying to make a public show out of banning more guns, and eventually criminalizing personal firearm ownership in Canada.
Given it is not clearly shown on any media about firearms crime data, a blanket statement saying that Canadian want more restriction is being done in a vacuum.


Any party (CPC etc) that wants to address the firearm issue will need to tackle it with detailed data - and show the data coming out of Totronto, Vancouver, Montreal etc - which shows that the guns used in crimes are already banned.
They come in from either the US, or via Ports -- years ago VPD seized a ConEx box full of Chinese AK's - select fire guns have been prohibited since '79 - so clearly they where not being imported legally for sale...
Heck the Natives at Oka had a Milan ATGM and some M2 HMG's - yet they where allowed to fly them out with no drama.

Getting tough on crime, and enforcing the laws on the books with better mental health screening and assistance will do a lot more good again gun crime than attempting to ban more guns.

It doesn't take a great deal of efforts to put in research for a comprehensive policy - and communicate it effectively - the CPC just doesn't seem to have any competency in that respect - and lets the LPC fear monger the populace that everyone will be able to get an AK at the 711...

 

[Brad Sallows]

Raising taxes to fund social programs and the NHS.

But under Harper, the CPC kept and extended Paul Martin's "fix for a generation". And under O'Toole they promised to do something similar.

 

[Altair]

What Canadians want is a safe and security society. That is a no brainer.
But what does more restrictions mean -
The LPC and some other parties are trying to make a public show out of banning more guns, and eventually criminalizing personal firearm ownership in Canada.
Given it is not clearly shown on any media about firearms crime data, a blanket statement saying that Canadian want more restriction is being done in a vacuum.


Any party (CPC etc) that wants to address the firearm issue will need to tackle it with detailed data - and show the data coming out of Totronto, Vancouver, Montreal etc - which shows that the guns used in crimes are already banned.
They come in from either the US, or via Ports -- years ago VPD seized a ConEx box full of Chinese AK's - select fire guns have been prohibited since '79 - so clearly they where not being imported legally for sale...
Heck the Natives at Oka had a Milan ATGM and some M2 HMG's - yet they where allowed to fly them out with no drama.

Getting tough on crime, and enforcing the laws on the books with better mental health screening and assistance will do a lot more good again gun crime than attempting to ban more guns.

It doesn't take a great deal of efforts to put in research for a comprehensive policy - and communicate it effectively - the CPC just doesn't seem to have any competency in that respect - and lets the LPC fear monger the populace that everyone will be able to get an AK at the 711...

This may all be true. Probably is. But at the end of the day, Canadians 6-7 out of 10 of them want more restrictions on firearms.

That's the math at the end of the day.

The why this is matter less than the fact that it is.

So I say what I said in the beginning, best of luck to the party that tries to go against 66 percent of the population.

 

[Altair]

But under Harper, the CPC kept and extended Paul Martin's "fix for a generation". And under O'Toole they promised to do something similar.

He did, but he undid his good work on that front by saying he wanted increased privatization without explaining what that meant.

Without a clear understanding of what that meant, people assumed a more American style healthcare system, which is kryptonite in Canada.

 

[Brad Sallows]

Sure, so back to the underlying truth: people find excuses to justify the way they really want to vote.

 

[Altair]

Sure, so back to the underlying truth: people find excuses to justify the way they really want to vote.

This "outcomes are predetermined and nothing any leader does can change it" narrative is very boring.

Campaigns matter, policies matter. If the CPC could get rid of the faction of that party holding it back and offer a socially progressive and financially conservative alternative, I think they form government.

If the CPC came out and said they will not allow any votes on abortion and kick out anyone anti abortion candidates, they would be closer to government.

if they came out and said that more needs to be done to tackle climate change, including more aggressive targets, they would be closer to government.

if they came out and said that they would restrict access to assault rifles (not hunting rifles, assault rifles) they would be closer to government.

If they had a better childcare plan than just tossing tax credits at folks, they would be closer to government.

Because every one of these seem to be where the average Canadian voter is, minus the 30-35 percent who feel otherwise. The fact that the LPC is on the right side of all of these polls and the CPC isn't shows why Canadians are still voting for the LPC. The biggest challenge to the LPC is that enough progressives think they are not moving fast enough on these issues and thus they might just vote NDP in protest.

The CPC needs to find a way to get more people voting for their party, but they put a artificial ceiling on their party by holding these positions.

 

[Brad Sallows]

If only the CPC could get more votes than the LPC in an election, eh?

 

[Altair]

If only the CPC could get more votes than the LPC in an election, eh?

More votes don't mean squat.

The NDP have less seats than the BQ despite having 1.7 million more votes.

The PPC have less seats than the GRN despite having 440k more votes.

But hey, congrats to the CPC on the participation medal.

 

[KevinB]

This may all be true. Probably is. But at the end of the day, Canadians 6-7 out of 10 of them want more restrictions on firearms.

That's the math at the end of the day.

The why this is matter less than the fact that it is.

So I say what I said in the beginning, best of luck to the party that tries to go against 66 percent of the population.

Leadership, is the art of getting people to do what they don't want to do.
Any Leader who wants to address a 'unpopular' topic that is an issue with their base needs to do the math - and the research - and find a way to appease the base - while still growing those who are neutral or mildly negative to their cause on some issues, but responsive to a majority of others.

I am absolutely disgusted in the CPC for their woeful platforms.
It seems half of them where thrown at a wall to see if they stuck.
They also don't seem to understand that when one has some key party platform that are easy attacked - they need to have rock solid data and a crisis management team on 24/7 to deal with those issues when they arise - either due to opposing parties/candidates putting out misinformation or from bonehead imbeciles in their own party wanting some air time.

 

[Altair]

Leadership, is the art of getting people to do what they don't want to do.
Any Leader who wants to address a 'unpopular' topic that is an issue with their base needs to do the math - and the research - and find a way to appease the base - while still growing those who are neutral or mildly negative to their cause on some issues, but responsive to a majority of others.

With that logic, Maxime Bernier would be Prime Minister.

Just needs more leadership!

I happen to think that parking your policies where the majority of Canadians naturally reside is far easier than trying to convince them that they are wrong.

I am absolutely disgusted in the CPC for their woeful platforms.
It seems half of them where thrown at a wall to see if they stuck.
They also don't seem to understand that when one has some key party platform that are easy attacked - they need to have rock solid data and a crisis management team on 24/7 to deal with those issues when they arise - either due to opposing parties/candidates putting out misinformation or from bonehead imbeciles in their own party wanting some air time.

Their platforms suck because they try to appease the base while trying to be palpable to the general public. In the end, it satisfies neither.

 

[KevinB]

With that logic, Maxime Bernier would be Prime Minister.

Not really because they don't have a platform that anyone would stomach.

Just needs more leadership!

I happen to think that parking your policies where the majority of Canadians naturally reside is far easier than trying to convince them that they are wrong.

I think if the CPC put effort into tackling climate change in a rational manner, addressing cost of living issues, crime, taxes, child care from a defensibly researched standpoint that would benefit the majority of Canadians - that selling a clearly researched firearms policy would be cake.
The current Canadian guns laws are absolutely trash - and make no sense in how some firearms have been classified -
But pushing folks further will create more issues in Canada - I for one will welcome our next State of Alberta...

Their platforms suck because they try to appease the base while trying to be palpable to the general public. In the end, it satisfies neither.

They don't really do either anymore - the amount of double talk and retractions daily on the campaign trail was mind-blowing - which annoyed everyone but Liberal voters. However they used to, Brian Mulroney era did a good job, and Harper was popular enough for a while.
The CPC just doesn't think about the effects of certain platforms.

 

[Altair]

Not really because they don't have a platform that anyone would stomach.

You said leadership is the art of getting people to do what they don't want to do.

Thus it shouldn't matter if a platform is stomachable, its up to those with leadership to get those who don't support it to support it, no?

If that's not the case, then wouldn't it make more sense for the CPC to make a policy that is more in line with 6-7 out of 10 Canadians?

I think if the CPC put effort into tackling climate change in a rational manner, addressing cost of living issues, crime, taxes, child care from a defensibly researched standpoint that would benefit the majority of Canadians - that selling a clearly researched firearms policy would be cake.
The current Canadian guns laws are absolutely trash - and make no sense in how some firearms have been classified -

You're right. There should be even more restrictions on firearms, like the general public seems to think.

But pushing folks further will create more issues in Canada - I for one will welcome our next State of Alberta...

I don't see Alberta as the conservative bastion that you do. The two biggest cities just elected progressive mayors, the provincial NDP are surging, and the LPC and NDP are starting to win in the cities despite 1 leader wanting to shut down the oil industry tomorrow and the other being the son of Pierre Elliot Trudeau.

They don't really do either anymore - the amount of double talk and retractions daily on the campaign trail was mind-blowing - which annoyed everyone but Liberal voters. However they used to, Brian Mulroney era did a good job, and Harper was popular enough for a while.
The CPC just doesn't think about the effects of certain platforms.

It took a once in a generation level scandal to kneecap the LPC for a decade. If the CPC is hoping for a repeat of that they may be waiting for a long time.

 

[Jarnhamar]

More votes don't mean squat.

But you agree whoever gets the most votes should win, right?

 

[Altair]

But you agree whoever gets the most votes should win, right?

That's not exactly how MMP works, so no.

 

[QV]

The CPC need to sway about 5% of the voters. That’s it. They can do that if they recognize and start to control the message.

 

[Remius]

The CPC need to sway about 5% of the voters. That’s it. They can do that if they recognize and start to control the message.

The need to sway 5% of the right kind of voters. Vote efficiency and distribution is key.

 

[The Bread Guy]

But you agree whoever gets the most votes should win, right?

In each riding, the one with the most votes does win. Problem is, there's no single national choice on ballots for all voters to answer "who so you want as PM?"

Prop Rep could give people more choice to vote the party they want nationally as well as the individual they want locally, depending on how it's set up. Then again, that system's not perfect, either, so .....