The problem is that they’ve kind of gone all in on being the Alberta Oil party. Expecting them to worry more about climate change is like hoping the Bloc will stop focusing on Quebec so much.
This is what I see as well. Not just the Alberta Oil party, they are the ANGRY Alberta Oil party.
It’s not a good look.
That is something the Rhinos would do, but it has been done in the past with more nefarious purposes. Most notably, in the 1960 Quebec provincial election, two of the candidates in the riding of Montreal-Laurier were named René Lévesque, journalist, and René Lévesque, artist. And I believe that at the time, ballots did not indicate party affiliation, so this is exactly how they were described on the ballot. It is believed that one of the candidacies was engineered by the Union nationale to confuse voters who might be tempted to vote for the Liberal star candidate (who was in fact the journalist, and still ended up winning by a fairly low margin).
Happy Voting Day!
And it shouldn’t be permitted. If two people legitimately have the same, or similar, names, that’s just how it is, but Elections Canada should absolutely screen for this sort of thing being done for bad reasons and should have broad powers to force names to be displayed differently or clearly show the voters who the real candidate is.
On the ballot, my impression was that the party affiliation follows the name. So the fake candidate would have (Independent) after their name.
Interesting how what I thought would be a chance for the Greens to eat heavily into the NDP it’s worked out that the NDP have surged forward.
The NDP have spent a lot of time in BC attacking the Greens, and doing the usual political stuff (lying about the Green platform, hoping that nobody actually reads it)
I’m quite disappointed in my local NDP candidate, who I thought had integrity. She’s either unaware of the lying attack ads, or she approves of them. Neither option looks good on her.
I watched myriding candidates debate each other and it was a study in contrasts. The NDP and Green parties were energized and assertive. The Liberal candidates comes across as a governing MP would - nuance, caveats and few answers. The Conservative one came across as stiff, almost unprepared and seemed to read from notes continually. The PPC one isn’t even worth the effort to discuss.
Still up in the air about this until later today I guess.
I’m starting to see a few cracks on this front, at least with regular voters. This morning there was a Facebook post by a Conservative voter who opined that he preferred the Conservative plan for climate change over the others, which at least presupposes we should be doing something about the climate.
It might be too little, too late, but as with watching the RedBlacks, I celebrate what I can.
Strange question of the day: is there some law, or policy, concerning when CBC’s election coverage starts in the western provinces?
I remember an election where C-SPAN did not start its CBC simulcast until 11 PM Eastern, after the BC polls closed. The only reason I can think of is, somebody in Canada asked C-SPAN to do this, to prevent somebody in BC from being able to watch the coverage before then - but if the coverage is available to BC anyway before that time, why bother with the embargo?
I bring this up because, according to the schedule, C-SPAN 2 will begin coverage at 9 PM Eastern tonight, assuming the US Senate’s session ends by then, although, in the past, when there was an unscheduled overlap, the foreign election coverage began on time on C-SPAN 3.
It is illegal to broadcast the results of a poll that is still open.
It used to be illegal to broadcast the results of a closed poll in a time zone where the polls were still open but this was changed.
Instead, except for Atlantic Canada (closes 1 hour earlier) and the Pacific Time Zone (closes 1/2 hour later), the polls all close at the same adjusted time (9:30 pm ET).
So, if the polls are closed in Ontario but still open in BC, it used to be that you couldn’t broadcast the Ontario results in BC. This is no longer the case.
As I recall, the election blackout law was put into place because there was serious evidence that releasing vote results before polls are closed in the West will suppress voters - mostly conservative voters - since the votes coming out of the east always favor the liberals. So we could be in a situation again where voters in Alberta and BC will get off work, turn on their car radios, and find out the liberals have a huge lead snd simply say, ‘screw voting then - I’m going home’. Worst case, a winner will be declared before the polls close in the west.
So It’s not surprising that the Trudeau gov’t would get rid of it - anything to help win, I guess.
For those lacking a way back machine here is an article from 2015, prior to the election of the Trudeau Liberals, that discusses the elimination of the blackout rules around election reporting.
Sam Stone, what the ever loving hell was that?
We did get a nice Google doodle today.
In Sam Stone’s world, everything is a slight against Alberta. And everything can be blamed on the Liberals, even those things that cannot possibly be blamed on the Liberals. If Trudeau had Grey Poupon mustard, then it would certainly because he prefers Quebec over Alberta.
“What’s the best policy to improve healthcare in this country, Sam?”
“I hate Trudeau and so should you.”
Ah, personal attacks. Good thing this is the pit. Oh, wait…
You’re right. I shouldn’t have characterized you that way. I apologize. I was actually confusing you with another poster.
And furthermore, even if you were the poster I was thinking of it would be wrong. I cannot simultaneously say that I’m tired of partisan venom and then say what I said, so again I apologize.