In previous elections, I provided democraticSPACE with non-partisan analysis, particularly on my home riding of Scarborough—Agincourt in Toronto. My intention was to do the same this election.

In the 2007 Ontario Provincial Election, I ended up endorsing the NDP candidate, Yvette Blackburn. Coming from a strong second-place finish in Windsor West, Yvette moved to Scarborough—Agincourt and ran the most organized campaign by the NDP I had ever seen since this riding was created in 1987. It was so impressive that she drew this non-partisan into the fold. It was on that campaign I met and canvassed with another New Democrat, Stacy Douglas.

Stacy was the NDP’s provincial candidate before Yvette (2003), and was nominated about a year ago as the NDP’s candidate for this 2008 Federal Election. She was also a Masters Student and an accomplished artist providing critical political analysis on her blog, “no time for metaphors.” At the time, I was finishing my Film BFA at York and applying some of my own critical analysis in the blogosphere, here at democraticSPACE and elsewhere.

Finding two strong local candidates all in one day was too good to resist. In addition to supporting Yvette, I committed to help Stacy in the next (this) election.

When Harper started beating his war drums, signaling an immanent election, I contacted the NDP to see how I could help out with the local campaign. I soon found out the timing of the election wasn’t right for Stacy; she had been accepted to do a PhD in England. That’s when local NDPers started throwing around the idea that I should run. I gave it some thought, checked with my family and friends, and when I realized there was enough support to run a credible campaign, I accepted the nomination about as soon as the writ dropped. The transition from Stacy to me was so smooth that I even got registered as a candidate with Elections Canada before Liberal incumbent Jim Karygiannis.

To be honest, this should have been a really innocuous story. You might be wondering if I’m only writing this as some kind of self-indulgent announcement to the blogosphere that I’m running as a New Democrat. I am a little happy, to be sure, although it was my intention to briefly foreground this information in order to make my transition from a non-partisan blogger to an NDP analyst clear to my readers. I never thought this little blip on the election radar would be wrapped up in a smear campaign, originating in the blogosphere and perpetuated by a major local paper, the Scarborough Mirror (Toronto Community News).

What?!? Yeah. Let’s back up to explain that one. The story basically goes like this:

(more…)

Nipissing—Timiskaming Riding is in the southern portion of Northeastern Ontario. The major population centre is the City of North Bay. The riding covers an area from Algonquin Park to the head of Lake Temiskaming. It’s bordered to the west by Nickle Belt Riding, to the east by the Ottawa River and Lake Temiskaming, to the southwest by Parry Sound—Muskoka, to the southeast by Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke and to the north by Timmins—James Bay.

Although the riding was first created for the 2004 election, about 80% of it comprises the prior Nipissing Riding. Since 2004, it’s been represented by Liberal Anthony Rota. The riding’s main predecessor, Nipissing, was pretty solidly Liberal, federally, since Confederation, with only a few exceptions.

Rota is running for re-election this time and he’s going to be tough to beat, especially given Northern Ontario’s seeming propensity to re-elect incumbents. His campaign got off to an early start in the sign war, with Rota signs springing up the day the election was called.

The Conservatives are represented by North Bay lawyer Joe Sinicrope. The interesting twist to this story is that Sinicrope once sought the Liberal nomination and was defeated in that quest by the same Anthony Rota who now holds the seat. Despite some delay in rolling out their visible campaign, the Conservatives now appear to be running in full gear.

The New Democrat hopeful this time around is Dianna Allen. Allen is a retired nurse who currently lives in Parry Sound—Muskoka riding. Although Allen was nominated a little late, several days into the campaign, she got off to a quick start with daily interviews and news releases in the first few days after her nomination. Since then, there has been somewhat of a silence emanating from the New Democrat campaign.

The Green Party is being represented by North Bay businessman and community activist Craig Bridges. The Greens are definite players in the sign war, for the first time, although their signs tend to be understated and strategically located rather than broadcast as the other parties have them.

In terms of the sign war, the Liberals definitely have the edge on public spaces but also on private property. The NDP have not yet deployed any signs.

This week, the candidates were at Canadore College/Nipissing university for a student-sponsored all-candidates meeting. Unfortunately, I was unable to attend but I can say from personal experience that the Greens and the New Democrats usually are better-received at this debate than at any of the others. The big-money debate, so to speak, in this riding is the North Bay Chamber of Commerce debate. I’ll try to attend that one, if I can, and report back on it.

In summary, look for Rota to retain this riding. I predict the margin will be similar to what it was last time.

In this election campaign, like no other before it, one thing that has dominated the political discourse is repeated calls by one party for candidates of another to resign over indiscretions in the past, statements or conduct. While some of those events are indeed objectionable and, in some cases, truly offensive, no party should have any business telling an opponent which candidates have to be let go.

Imagine me walking into some corporate head office and demanding that they fire their CEO or one of their secretaries. I’d be squeezed between two brawny security guards and on my way out before I could even finish making my case, no matter how valid my arguments may be.

Here’s how it works – or ought to work: Candidates are chosen by their local riding associations, i.e., members of the respective political party in the area. I should also mention that I am against appointments by party leaders; only the members on the ground, the grassroots, are in any position to make an informed choice about the candidate they want.

If the candidate turns out to be a dud, pervert, anti-Semite, etc., it will be up to all the voters in the riding to kick him or her out on election day. In other words, candidates are hired and fired by the voters, and not because one party leader tells another party leader that Mr. XYZ has to be fired with “no hesitation possible“.

The only thing that the current modus operandi will achieve is that good candidates will be loath to throw their hats in the ring in the future, and that would be a crying shame, seeing how we have a very small pool of able and talented politicians in this country.

The Prairie Wrangler sums it up perfectly:

People screw up and are occasionally idiots, if you don’t like it, just don’t vote for them.

Exactly.

Over at JimBobby Sez, the man has given me pause for thought and I’m so glad he did.

Perhaps all of us who have been thinking of voting strategically for the first time should think again and read his passionate reminder: about why we’ve never voted strategically before, about why we didn’t and that those reasons haven’t changed just because we’re facing another Harper government, about the feeling you get when you vote for the lesser of two evils, about ….

Here’s an excerpt from JB’s post.

It may take a strong dose of un-democracy to convince enough Canadians that we have a broken system in need of reform. So be it. When we engage in schemes and vote trading and candidate trading and all sorts of strategies to play the game by the unfair rules, we only perpetuate acceptance.

I voted strategically once… I felt slightly nauseous afterward and the experience still leaves a bitter taste in my mouth.

Hmm. Well you’ve given me something to think about, JB. Because I’ve never done it and have always voted according to the candidate whose party best matched my principles and values. Even thinking of voting strategically makes me feel ill and brings a writhing sense of self-loathing.

Until this election, I never entertained the idea of voting strategically and, as you, thought that only some real tough medicine in the form of an ultra-right Canada led by Harper or the like, would – maybe, just maybe – get Canadians to rethink their voting system.

This election more than most, I’ve been working hard as a volunteer with Fair Vote Canada and had already signed up with the FVC-BC group to support the coming STV referendum in BC.

I continue to believe that democratic and electoral reform are THE issues for all elections now and into the future – until the change to proportional representation gets done. That is, the first legislation passed by any party forming government should be to begin the process of electoral change. And that process must ensure that the people, not the parties, ultimately decide on the basis of a simple majority – no simple majority of MPs imposing a higher threshold -, the system which gets instituted.

Because only then, when we have proportional representation, will the majority of Canadians have a reasonable chance of seeing the major issues which concern them getting addressed.

People should read JB’s entire post. He offers many arguments against strategic voting, including ones which suggest that it will fail anyway. Not enough people will do it – they’ll either vote for their party of choice, destroy or refuse their ballots, or simply stay home.

Fidèle à ses habitudes de mauvais communicateur, monsieur Michael Fortier à encore fait preuve de condescendance chez Patrice Roy, à RDI hier soir. En effet, il est juriste. Michael Fortier connaît la justice. Nous, simples citoyens, ne comprenons rien à la justice et aux lois. C’est en gros la nature du propos qu’il a tenu après un peu plus de 4 minutes de « show ». Je le cite : « Pierre Paquette (représentant du Bloc à cette émission) n’est pas avocat, Serge Ménard en est un. Il a un sens et un propos beaucoup plus équilibré ». Il en remet vers 5 minutes et demie en disant que Paquette ne connaît pas l’application de la loi sur les jeunes contrevenants. Si les législateurs « non-avocat » au parlement ne peuvent comprendre la loi, selon Fortier, imaginez ce qu’il pense du citoyen moyen. C’était du grand art de défilement et de l’arrogance crasse. Ais-je besoin de dire que je me suis senti directement visé par les propos de Michael Fortier? Oui, je suis susceptible.

Ce que monsieur Fortier était en train de me dire, moi qui ne suit qu’un simple citoyen ignorant, est qu’il est inutile d’avoir une opinion, ou même une perception quelconque de la loi contre les jeunes contrevenants, le bon gouvernement Harper s’en charge. C’est bizarre, mais monsieur Fortier est en train de créer de la suspicion face à ses intentions réelles. Comment peut-il être capable de promouvoir une nouvelle loi extrémiste pour les crimes violents commis par jeunes de 16 ans, quand à la fois, il explique que les juges peuvent actuellement utiliser une telle clause s’ils le veulent. Il y a un double discours ici. Lorsque que statistiquement, les lois déjà existantes au Québec sont amplement suffisantes et très efficaces face aux jeunes délinquants parce que renforcées par une grande stratégie de prévention et de réhabilitation, je ne peux que constater que Michael Fortier ne travail par pour nous, gens du Québec. En effet, il travail pour les gens de l’ouest droitiste du Canada; ces gens qui n’ont pas encore compris que c’est en passant pas la prévention que diminue le crime chez les jeunes. Et que Fortier ne vienne pas me répéter que ce sont des cas d’exception. Je le sais dèjà.

(more…)

A nice TV ad from NDP playing in Québec sums it all.

In English:

A vote for the conservatives: It’s a vote for closed mind politics, for cuts in culture. It’s a vote against Kyoto [Against gay union]. It’s a vote pro-war which enslave us toward oil company.

That a really good summary of why I just can’t put my mark for Stephen Harper on October 14th.  That being said, I won’t necessarily vote for Mr. Layton.

Green Party candidate Elizabeth May brought her whistle stop campaign to Kingston this morning. A lively crowd awaited the VIA train from Toronto and the lights in the distance seemed to be it. Instead a rush of freight engines swept by — with the VIA train soon behind — setting the stage for the energetic arrival on the platform a few minutes later of the candidate. Some 50 local Greens, in their green shirts, with Kingston candidate Eric Walton and Lanark-Frontenac-Lennox & Addington candidate Chris Walker, greeted May enthusiastically. She alighted carrying a bouquet of dried sunflowers which she waved at the crowd and launched into a rousing speech.

The whistle stop campaign she contrasted with the large carbon foot prints of her airborne rivals. She said she had seen up close the great sweep of the country and the vital role VIA plays in serving it. The Mulroney Tories had slashed VIA in the past. Increased support for VIA would happen if Greens were in power, she said. May said she would be traveling on from Montreal to Halifax and that all along the way she had been greeted by enthusiastic crowds and that the whistlestops had given her a chance to go to places no federal leader had ever been before. VIA she said had been very patient with her at these whistlestops but she said it was time to go and gave a final wave of the sunflowers as the doors closed and the train was off to its next stop in Brockville no doubt to be welcomed by another group of supporters.

The Toronto Star reported yesterday that Harper “lives in a bubble”:

Rallies are off-limits for any member of the public who just shows up. Nobody gets in unless they have been pre-registered by the local riding association. Even local media are asked to sign up in advance.

Anyone wanting to attend an event featuring Harper has to have his or her name vetted by the RCMP, said a source at Conservative campaign headquarters, who would only talk on background yesterday. He said this rule applies even outside the campaign period, so no one–”even a staffer not scheduled to be there”–can show up unannounced at a Harper speech and expect to be let in.

The Harper campaign keeps a short leash on national and local media, limiting questions and access to local candidates, sometimes calling on RCMP security to block reporters from doing their jobs.

This story was well-timed for us here in Edmonton, as the local media discovered at Harper’s invitation-only rally in the city last night. “He took no questions from the crowd or media,” the Edmonton Journal wrote. Even the Tory-friendly Edmonton Sun made a mention of this, stating that “after his 30-minute speech, Harper left Edmonton without talking to the media.” In fact, the details about the event were kept such a tightly controlled secret that when one of the local bloggers at Alberta Get Rich or Die Trying called Edmonton-Centre MP Laurie Hawn’s campaign office to try and get information about the event, Hawn’s own staffers said: “we’re having a really hard time getting any details about this thing.”

Now, we could have a discussion here about whether or not we think this practice is ethical, whether we think it’s annoying, or whether we think it’s appropriate. But I’m actually more interested in discussing whether it’s strategically smart, specifically with respect to the Edmonton event. I mean, presumably Harper thinks the bubble will win him more votes than opening himself up to public contact would. And in general, he’s probably right. But in the Edmonton case in particular, he clearly made a stop here primarily to support his candidates in the two ridings that the Conservatives are most concerned about holding onto this election: Edmonton-Strathcona (which the Conservatives could lose to NDP candidate Linda Duncan) and Edmonton Centre (which the Conservatives could lose to Liberal candidate Jim Wachowich). And to accomplish that, you have to get the people in those ridings excited about Harper and their local MPs. And that’s hard to do when you don’t even let the people in to your event.

For that matter, if Harper was relying on the local media to get the word out about how important those Edmonton MPs are for his plans for the country, it didn’t work–the resulting coverage barely mentioned them. The star of the show was apparently Greenpeace, with Harper as second fiddle and his local MPs nowhere to be seen. That’s a far cry from the front-page stories after the Jack Layton rally that referred to two local NDP candidates as stars and directly quoted Layton’s words of praise about them.

I don’t know; it just seems to have been a strange strategic choice, from a man who’s supposed to be a master of strategy. And as so often with the Conservatives, I’m left wondering what I’m missing.

In the bag

In Vancouver East Libby Davies is winning the sign wars for the Dippers. But then again, it is perhaps the safest NDP seat in the country and she’s incredibly well respected by pretty much everyone. Including those who disagree with her. Another romp methinks.

Not Sarah Palin’s Alaska

And while the “culture wars” issue doesn’t seem to have much traction here in BC, its impact on the campaign Québec certainly has. And it’s unfortunate that relatively few here have seen the brilliant anti-Tory ad running là-bas. It’s in French, but I found a version with subtitles:

[Can’t embed the video here, but you can find it here with English subtitles: here.

The premise is simple: a québécois musician (Michel Rivard, formerly of Beau Dommage a 70s folks-rock act) seeks funding from an all anglophone ostensibly Merkunized government panel. Take note of the photos in the background: Heritage Minister Josée Verner and Harper with an American flag behind him.

The panel hears a series of malapropisms in the canonical «La complainte du phoque en Alaska» : phoque (seal, as in the animal) for fuck; p’tit (petit, or small) for tits; à faire (to do) for (an extramarital) affair. Their outrage and umbrage lead to y a big read REJECT stamp on the funding application.

Whatever you think of Québec nationalism (Rivard is an old skool sovereigntist) or government funding for culture, this is an entertaining, clever and very effective ad. Shame we don’t get things of this calibre in TROC.

Majority report

The Tories seem to have stalled in Québec. With no scope to grow significantly in Atlantic Canada or the Prairies and only a little scope in BC, Harper needs a lot of pickups in Québec and/or Ontario. They would need a net gain of about 20 seats across the country. They won 11 in la belle province in 2006, but there doesn’t seem to be the scope to pick up more than a handful. In Ontario they’d need to pick some up in or around Toronto. Again a tough sell

If you look at the unimpressive profile of Dion, if Harper can’t get a majority now he never will. Nor the Tories until he’s gone.

Quelqu’un va-t-il oser le dire? Et si les troupes de Jack Layton formaient la prochaine opposition officielle? Ce rêve que caressent les néo-démocrates depuis tant d’années semble désormais à portée de la main. C’est du moins le cas si on en croit les tout derniers sondages.

Le Harris/Decima, tenu du 21 au 24 septembre, révèle en effet que les conservateurs recueillent 36% des intentions de vote, suivis des libéraux à 23%, des néo-démocrates à 17%, des verts à 12%, puis des bloquistes à 9%. C’est ainsi que depuis le début de la campagne, l’écart entre le NPD et les libéraux a fondu de moitié, passant de 12 à seulement 6 points.

Même son de cloche chez Ekos qui dévoile quant à lui un écart encore plus mince, soit 5 points; le Parti libéral étant à 24% et le NPD à 19% (sondage effectué du 21 au 23 septembre).

Finalement, le Nanos quotidien était hier le premier à donner le NPD troisième au Québec : derrière le PC et le Bloc, mais devant les libéraux.

Sans proportionnelles, c’est à partir de 20% des voix que le nombre de sièges commence réellement à refléter le nombre de votes. Or, s’il est peut-être illusoire pour Jack Layton de penser atteindre la barre des 25%, il ne semble cependant pas y avoir de plancher pour les libéraux. C’est d’ailleurs pourquoi le NPD continue de tirer sur le parti de Stéphane Dion à boulets rouges. Leur plus récent effort à cet effet est la mise en ligne de pas moins de 87 vidéos sur YouTube dépeignant les libéraux comme un parti absent. On y voit en effet les chaises vides des députés libéraux lors de 43 votes de confiance. Des absences qui ne sont pas sans contredire l’argument voulant qu’ils soient les seuls à s’opposer de façon efficace au Parti conservateur.

Comme si ce n’était pas assez, l’ancien président du Parti libéral, qui était en fonction de 1998 à 2003, Stephen LeDrew, a publiquement souhaité que sa formation politique subisse une cuisante défaite aux élections du 14 octobre. « C’est la seule façon de s’assurer que le parti sera reconstruit sur des assises solides », estime-t-il. Dans une lettre ouverte publiée dans le National Post, M. LeDrew déclare en effet que les libéraux de Stéphane Dion ne vont nulle part. Il met entre autres le blâme sur l’impopularité du chef, l’ensemble du programme électoral, mais plus spécifiquement sur la formule de la taxe sur le carbone qu’il décrit comme « incompréhensible ou carrément stupide ». LeDrew conclut en affirmant « À moins d’un miracle, les libéraux vont subir toute une raclée durant cette élection. Et c’est exactement ce dont ils ont besoin s’ils veulent que le parti demeure une force nationale viable ».

Il va sans dire que pour le NPD, cet appui inespéré ne pouvait pas mieux tomber. Continuant à faire flèche de tout bois, le chef néo-démocrate semble bien décidé à convaincre les Québécois d’entrer à leur tour dans la danse. Jack Layton est d’ailleurs le seul chef de parti à ne pas fermer la porte à la création d’un CRTC québécois; une revendication du gouvernement Charest.

Si la tendance se maintient, Thomas Mulcair ne sera peut-être pas le seul néo-démocrate à se faire élire au Québec.