4 Responses for "North Vancouver"

1. Dave October 10th, 2008 at 2:55 pm 1

   “West Vancouver – Sunshine Coast -STSC, oh the anticipation….John Weston, Conservative PICKUP”

   You will be forgiven for getting this one wrong because you don’t live here.

   John Weston’s support started strong and was probably tracking his partys’ support. But his incredible weak performances in the debates has cost him a lot. I see his soft support going to the Greens and Libs.

   Those that read tier news will go the Greens as being closest to Progressive Conservative, and those that watch their news on TV and think the Greens are further left then Liberal, will go Liberal.

2. Whiskey Echo (N. Van, unaffiliated Canadian nationalist) October 10th, 2008 at 9:54 pm 2

   I went to the AC meeting on Thursday night (Parkgate), so here’s my report.

   First of all the crowd. It was relatively small, I’d say maybe 60 people or so. You copuld tell by the number of blue buttons that Sexton had probably brought his whole campaign team to stack things a bit. AS with most AC forums, the crowd was mostly senior citizens. Instead of citizens putting questions directly, they were written on cards and the moderator just chose some. This disapointed me, because I had some really sharp questions which never got asked.

   Don Bell (Liberal) did indeed know his stuff, and had to spend quite some time refuting rumours and such that Sexton had opbviously been spreading around in previous meetings. Mainly he defended Liberal economic plans, talked about the Green Shift and environmental issues quite a bit. Bell made a point that I also would have expected to hear more from the Greens to jump on more (yet they didn’t), namely that a Cap and Trade system for reducing C02 emissions would be too slow, too weak, and even more bureaucratic. One thing Bell did point out that was a few times he had been not in line with his party, such as over issues like mandatory sentencing guidelines. That probably went over well, since here in North Van there is a sort of “independent” streak unlike City of Vancouver where party politics are the norm even municipally.

   Andrew Sexton (Conservative) was very slick, he has a real “salesman” aura around him. He spoke well, I suppose, and I get the feeling he’s either not in agreement with Harper’s party core on some things, or else does a good job of seeming more concerned on some issues (like environment) than he is. Probably the latter, since his style of attacks on Bell are clearly straight from the Conservative playbook, phrase for phrase. He accused Bell of having done nothing for North Van, and of being absent from voting a lot. (Mind you Bell did counter with essentially a long list of commitees and panels he’s on, and different figures of his own.) One thing Sexton kept going back to over and over was Ujjal Dosanjh and Bob Rae – painting the federal Liberals with a sort of NDP brush, I guess, trying to invoke the spectre of Glen Clark maybe. Bit it got a bit worn after hearing it for like the 3rd or 4th time.

   Jim Stephenson (Green) did his best, he brought the environment into most issues one way or another. He did have some recurring microphone problems, so I don’t know if he kept the audience at all times. But he acquitted himself well on the economic side, remniding people of his professional background, and he didn’t make any outlandish statements. On the whole it was a respectable performance but quiet compared to the Liberal-Conservative battle, or the NDP’s noisiness.

   Michael Charrois (NDP) was the most animated candidate by far. You can tell he’s an actor by his bombastic style. However, sometimes he seemed over-promotional, or like he was repeating various Laytonisms. He did better when he was improv-ing it with his own words. He did get very emotional about the Insite issue, though on that issue even Sexton didn’t really come down in the “shut it down side”. One thing he kept going back to over and over was those times the Liberals (Bell included) had abstained in the House of Commons, trying to embarass Bell or suggest the Liberals tactly supported the Conservatives. His best line was about the Conservatives and how Tunya Audain (Libertarian) was what the Conservatives were really about if only they had the guts to say so.

   Tunya Audain (Libertarian) came off as someone very uncompromising on her principles. Hers was the least nuanced and most direct set of answers and attitudes. Housing issues? No federal subsidies, not feds problem. Economic turmoil? Leave business alone, let the market handle it by self-correcting. Social programs? Eliminate. Afghanistan? No foreign interventions or government foreign aid, period. Student aid? Zero – make ‘em work for it all, and in fact most people are too “average” to deserve to go to university anyways. I suppose the ultra-right-wing economics she espoused would have been batter balanced if there were more questions on the social values side. She did say that a vote for her party was more of a message than any real chance at governing.

   Proportional representation:
   - Stephenson said “yes” to that or perhaps a runoff system.
   - Audain was kind of on the fence about it, mildly “yes”, but focusing more on things like voter recall and referendum ideas.
   - Bell was in the “maybe” column – not against it, more like in favour of studying the various PR systems, and perhaps also Senate reform. Nothing specific, basically.
   - Sexton said whatever would give the West more representation, and if PR would do that, good. (Which is odd logic.) I would say that was for “cheap pops”, get that whole “western alienation” flag flying, but not committing to anything specific.
   - Charrois was most direct, he just said “yes” to PR.

   Overall, I’d say it this AC meeting changed little or nothing in the audience. Many seemed to already have chosen before entering. Nothing spectacular or outrageous happenned. Bell defended his record well well, and put forward the case for the Liberals economically and envoironmentally; Sexton is clearly the chief opponent, clearly a well-trained Harperite – this meeting did not give an indication of who would ultimately win. The people who stayed quiet may carry more weight than those who were noisy and clapping. North Vancouver is a hard place to get a reading on – Don Bell may win, largely on his roots and reputation.

3. Dr. Leo Spaceman October 11th, 2008 at 6:08 am 3

   I totally agree with your assessments, but I’d like to add that in Vancouver-Centre, Carr is a paper tiger. She’ll get 15% of the vote and be a (relatively) distant fourth.

4. Whiskey Echo (N. Van, unaffiliated Canadian nationalist) October 14th, 2008 at 10:00 am 4

   So at the last update, North Vancouver’s “too close to call”.
   This should be a message to the NDP and Greens that stretegic votes will matter, will cost the Conservatives a victory if they happen. I do feel bad for them, they ran a spirited campaign, but I think now it’s time to face the reality that just a few votes will make the difference. (I’m going strategic myself – yuck! A necessary evil.)