Party popularity as reflected by participants in the Toronto Pride Parade:
Large mob of enthusiastic NDPers.
Smaller contingent of dutifully-cheerful Liberals led by a picture of Paul Martin.
A dozen supporters of one incredibly-brave Conservative candidate.
Three unofficial Greens.
There was also a large float urging people to take time out from their daily lives, get out there and VOTE! (I believe we get three hours off, then it’s back to the bacchanalia.) Many people throughout the parade had cards urging people to vote.
So I think I sense how the GLTB community feels.
(Any one else starting to think that the federal Greens are starting to look like Green Tories? )
It’s difficult to consider a party that believes in the absurdity of “Community-based trade” (what, I shouldn’t buy something from a store in Windsor?) is in any way related to a PC point of view.
I don’t see much Tory about them at all. They’re anti-free trade, which is pretty much the only conservative thing the last federal PC government stood for.
One of Mr. Harper’s MPs and close advisers, Randy White, is in a bit of hot water for suggesting that the Conservatives would be ready, willing and able to use the override:
Not surprisingly, Mr. Martin is beating Mr. Harper over the head with this one, as shown by this story
Does anyone actually think that Stephen Harper is stupid? What makes you think he would use the Notwithstanding clause on this issue that would pretty much guarantee his party never being elected again in the near future? It ranks right up there with people thinking the NDP could actually create jobs and be financially prudent if elected…oh, right…I can see how people might think that then.
Who says he keeps talking about it? Various OTHER candidates seem incapable of getting off the subject, but Harper has been quiet about it for the most part.
I dunno, Rick. It’s right there in their platform. From the “Platform Synopsis” they left in my mailbox:
That directly implies use of the Notwithstanding Clause, since anyone can see which way the courts are going on this one. If Parliament it going to have the “final decision”, there’s only one way for them to make it stick.
I don’t know about that. Since when did parliament give up its supremecy? Harper could also be referring to making new law that parliament would then vote on. The courts are there only to interpret what parliament enacts, not make up stuff on their own. And what parliament enacts it can change, can’t it?
What happens if Parliament elects to pass a law making it equitable for everyone? That could possibly happen with a free vote in the House. The objection is that the appointed judiciary system (described by John Ralston Saul as a collection of modern princes) can make law as opposed to strike down law. Is it the courts place to say that a right exists or is it the place of the court to say that a right is infringed? You may not see a difference between the two but I do. I might also have said it badly.
You can argue that the Charter, which was passed by the legislature, voluntarily transferred the power to make law to the judiciary. The notwithstanding clause is there to allow the government to wiggle out of it for 5 years. At which point a new government has been elected and can renew/revoke the need for the clause.
Besides, only 3 provincial governments have ever used the clause; the Quebec PQ and Liberals and the Saskatchewan provincial government during a labour dispute. The ability to sell the use of the clause within provincial law seems to be to be easier than at the federal level.
Stephen Harper is not stupid (Masters degree in Economics). Unfortunately, he’s leading a party that still has more than its share of reactionaries and idiots in it. Harper is trying to move the PCs into more of a Republican-style party - a little lighter on the religion and social conservatism, a little heavier on the free-market economics. But he has the same problem that John Kerry has in the U.S. - a ‘base’ in the party that’s troublesome.
The Liberals don’t have this problem because there are parties to the left and to the right of them. People on the far right and left gravitate to the PCs and NDP, leaving the Liberals with basically a center-left moderate base.
What the conservative party in Canada needs is fewer old farmers, and more urban professional conservatives. Harper’s the right guy to bring more of those people in, but he still has to deal with the old reactionaries.
I don’t vote. It serves no purpose and makes no difference in this illusion of democracy. Taxes will continue to go up, just as they have always done no matter who is in ‘power’ and the government parasite will continue to grow itself to leviathan proportions and intrude opon every possible aspect of my life, just as it has always done, no matter who is in power. Voting is how the ruling classes guage their success at duping the masses into believing they actually have a say in anything.
None of those liars and fools represent me. Why should I vote for them?
Hey! I thought only us Merkuns had folks like that!
Anyway, today’s the day, right? How does actual Canadian voting go? Do you use machines? Do you have to show ID? Does every province have its own standards and methods or is it all centralized?
Hope the favorite of everybody who has contributed to this fascinating thread wins! what?
Basically after work I’ll drive down to a local church. There’ll be some volunteers who will take my voter registration form and direct me to a room based on my postal code. I’ll wander down the hall, pick up a ballot. I think it’s normally about 4x6 and lists the candidates and their party down the left-hand side with large circles down the right. I’ll go behind a cardboard screen with a pencil and make an X in the circle linked to my candidate of choice. Then I fold it up and put it in the box and go home to have dinner.
No machines, simple counts and the hi-tech instrument of death known as a pencil. No dangling chads.
To be honest, out federal elections don’t have the multiple layers that your do. You wind up voting for sheriffs, senators and presidents all at the same time right?
Yep. You have primaries before the main election but all the Congressmen, 1/3 of the Senators, a few local officials, etc. will all be on the ballot along with Bush, Kerry, and whoever. Some local elections are held in off-years–for example, 9/11 interrupted the primary elections for Mayor. But it’s always the first Tuesday in November for non-special elections. It would be very strange to me to have elections scattered throughout the year and randomly scheduled by politicians.
In NYC, we use giant gray mechanical machines that date from the Johnson presidency (aka 1964-66) and are pretty reliable. This page has a link to a largish video on how they work. They’re actually kind of fun IMO. But even if there’s only a few offices up, we use the machines. Now this is only one city, but it’s the big one.
In general, yeah, but there are exceptions. For instance, here in Denver, our city elections are in April of odd-numbered years. But the federal election ballot is always full of senators, representatives, governors, state legislators, initiatives, state constitutional amendments, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. Gets pretty crowded at times.
Oh, the whole process is really insane. It’s all about appointments and partisan party wonks who have backstabbed their way to the top of their respective parties. Which means we get to select from a vast array of sleazebag failed lawyers, halfwits and professional liars making a career out of fleecing the taxpayer. Some choice.
F’example, a great choice for our Minister of the Environment would be Dr David Suzuki, a well known scientist, geneticist, and expert. Instead, we get some woman lawyer appointed to the position who knows absolutely NOTHING about the environment. That’s how the system “works”. Heheh. Sure it does.
The good thing about Canadiana politics is there are so many parties all they do is argue with each other such that no one can make any REAL changes in society regardless of who is in power, so they go about their other unaccountable business of extracting as much taxpayer cash as possible.
Fundamentally, it’s pretty much the same as in the U.S.
Oh yeah. In many states the Secretary of State (state level, administers elections among other things) sends out a booklet with the entire text of the (state) constitutional questions a couple of months before the election, with a pro and anti statement from leading reps of both sides. In some states, like CA, there can up to a dozen precisely worded questions about anything from taxes to gay rights to car registration. We get giant blow-ups of the face of the ballot that the voter will see in the machine and paste them to the walls; people study them while they’re waiting in line and are allowed to bring printouts with them into the booth (many newspapers will print the questions card-size as a public service). Legally, people can spend as much time as they want in the voting booth so it can take a while to vote if you haven’t boned up beforehand.
And again, methods of physical voting vary. I’ve lived in places where I used pencils, magic markers, giant machines, optical scanners; I’ve drawn arrows, filled in ovals, pulled levers…
But we’re hijacking the thread a bit from the Canucks, and while of course they’re far too nice and polite to tell us to knock it off, I knew we covered American election procedures in another thread that I can’t find. In the meantime, I think I deserve a Karnak the Magnificent award for my post in this thread from last July.
They’re too busy voting. We’re just killing time waiting for them to come back and tell us who won, since it’s a safe bet that the U.S. media will slip the results in between a heartwarming story about a kitten that swam the Mississippi, and an in-depth breakdown of Arenabowl 2004. “In other news, some Canadian will be the leader of Canada. When we come back, StormCenter will have more on the potential thunderstorms that might hit us next week.”
Mehitabel, here’s how I voted:[ul][li]I receive a postcard from Elections Canada confirming that my name is on the federal voter’s list (which is maintained by Elections Canada). The card gives locations and times where I can vote.[]On one of the appointed times, I go to the polling place.[]I give my card to the first officer. Because this is an advance poll, she writes down that I’ve been there, and I sign next to it. If I had no card, and wasn’t on the voter’s list, I could show ID and register on the spot.[]I proceed to the next official, who hands me a freshly-prepared folded ballot.[]As instructed, I go to the voting booth, where I unfold the ballot, then (using the supplied pencil) put an X next to the name of the candidate of my choice, and then refold the ballot.[]I return to the official who takes the ballot, checks that it is properly folded, and hands it back to me to put in the box.[]I put it in the box.I leave with a ridiculous smug grin on my face, knowing that I have been a small but important cog in the vast political machine.[/ul]During the whole process, another official is watching the whole thing, making sure everything goes properly. I think this official is called the “scrutineer”. I remember the word from when my mom used to work in the elections.) [/li]
All of these officials are volunteers. I think at least some get paid though. I believe the voter’s list is updated largely by address information forwarded from federal income-tax returns. There’s a checkbox on my income-tax return asking me whether I want the tax people to forward this address info.
On election day, there are a vastly-larger number of polling places and volunteers running them. I’m sure the management of the voter’s list and the organization of the election itself are rife with databases and printouts, but the voting system itself has not changed for generations, is very low-tech, and has paper trails galore.
Because of our parliamentary system, the ballot is for one position: Member of Parliament for my “riding” (electoral district). There is no separate election for head of government (Prime Minister); in all but exceptional cases, this will be the leader of the party with the most seats, and will be known shortly after the ballots are all counted. There is no election for the Senate; its members are appointed. All other elections are provincial or municipal, and would take place at a different time.
Well, I can tell you that the Iraqi-handover thing will be story #1, but it’ll probably be in there before the first commerical break. Or the second. Third, TOPS!
I thought I’d be hearing from the bleary-eyed ones who stumble into the voting places on their way to work, diner coffee to go in their hands, as soon as we open at 6 a.m. Our biggest rush is when the commuters come home; second-biggest is the old sweeties coming in after 9 a.m. Mass at St. Barnabas.
