And now the end is near, and so I face the final curtain

So. It's been a good run. Over the course of the election, I wrote 100 posts (this is the 101st on this blog). And you know what? For all of our activism, the voter turnout only went up by 1%.

Where do we go from here? I could keep on blogging about Canadian politics but now that we're in a majority government situation, there's not likely to be a vote anytime soon so the title of this blog, at least might be a little irrelevant. Also I would have to start taking stances on policy issues not related to youth and student issues, something I've been trying to avoid doing this election because this blog was intended to appeal to youth voters of all political leanings (as long as they believe in the Westminster System...).

I haven't decided on my blogging future. I may just go back to my old blog on feminist issues. Or I may stop entirely.

As for the future of the country? Economists are pleased, claiming that the Harper majority will stabilize the economy. They talk a lot about how this majority means less uncertainty, but I'm not too sure.

Oh, I'm not all doom and gloom like the folks over at The Galloping Beaver.

There will be no sudden declaration of martial law or dramatic day when CPC stormtroopers surround Stornaway or round up dissidents in the night - there won't need to be. That nice, soft-spoken, Christian economist and hockey dad who just wants to protect us from the bad guys doesn't work that way. There will just be a steady drip of manufactured small crises that lead to privatization, deregulation, and "temporary" security measures, until we get back to the good old days of the robber barons.

I'm not that cynical. But I am nervous.

From my perspective, this majority means more uncertainty, not less. Is certainty measured in whether or not there is a clear leader in the House of Commons? One constant you will always see in a minority government is compromise. The parties compromise in order to run the country, which means things tend to run down the middle of the political spectrum, nothing much drastic happens to get either side too riled up. In other words, outside of Question Period, the country is calm. Change is slow and gentle. But majorities can do things--big things--drastic things. And often, in the past, they have surprised their electorate. I find much uncertainty in not knowing what the Conservatives will choose to do with their majority, and yet knowing that they CAN do whatever they choose.

And even if the economy initially stabilizes due to perceived lack of uncertainty--the economy is largely a psychological beast after all--with the strength of the NDP, union party par excellence, how can there not be striking?

A friend of mine, a recent graduate of business school, thinks the country is going to hell in a handbasket. She's appalled by the Conservative majority, hating their social conservatism, and possibly even more appalled by the strength of the NDP and their left-wing economics. Where is my centrist party? she asks.

Another friend sees the rise of the NDP as a positive development. The polarization of opinion in this country is a good thing, according to her, because the parties can differentiate themselves more. Centrist parties and special interest parties like the Bloc have no place in the current ideological landscape.

Can we reconcile all our opposing views? I don't know anymore. We're moving farther and farther away from the conciliatory style, all about compromise and attempted consensus, championed by early prime ministers like Laurier, and more and more towards the down-and-dirty uber-partisan uncompromising two-party republic along the lines of the US. Some people think this is a good thing, and others want to move to Australia.

But maybe my favourite prediction for the future is this. "Stephen Harper is going to pull a Brian Mulroney," said my Awesome Housemate last night. "He's going to do all this crap, and then everyone will hate him, and at the next election he'll lose everything and the NDP will win."

Oh, my inner instincts are warring between delight at the political games and sadness at what this will mean for the parliamentary system I love so dearly...

Results: My Jaw, It has Dropped

Elizabeth May wins her seat; Gilles Duceppe loses his. Tories a majority, Dippers official op. Bloc completely destroyed and Grits nearly destroyed.

Once again. Who said this election wasn't going to change anything?

Ontario, West propping potential Tory majority, Quebec picking NDP even when candidates are horrible

On the NDP rush in Quebec: Bloc Quebecois "past their best before date," Jack Layton the first NDP leader to become Leader of Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition. "You know what, nobody's born a cabinet minister."

My friend found a small NDP frisbee (probably from the last election) while packing. I wonder if it would be fun to take it and fling it dramatically at people's heads while screaming, "ORANGE CRUSH!"

Now they're predicting a Conservative majority, which Andrew Coyne refers to as "a majority coalition of the West and Ontario," unlike Brian Mulroney's attempt to cobble together a Conservative majority with the West and Quebec.

That NDP candidate who was in Vegas for part of the campaign and doesn't speak French is winning in her Quebec riding!

BC numbers are starting to come in. Peter Mansbridge predicts the NDP might hit triple digit seats.

Thinking up clever titles is just so exhausting

Well-known, long-time Liberal MPs are trailing in their ridings--this is NOT a good election for the Liberals so far. It's great for the NDP, they're doing better than they ever have before, even taking the lead in ridings where their candidates didn't put up much of a campaign. If this isn't a sign that people are voting more for the party than the candidate this election, I don't know what is.

Nearly a third of ridings are far too close to call right now, just to keep everything in perspective.

Once again, the #deadpmelxndesk is the best part of the coverage. @PMJAMacdonald: "As the leader of the Liberal-Conservative Party, I'm a bit ambivalent about these results."

Things are Progressing

The room Michael Ignatieff is sitting in (his living room, maybe?) is SO BEIGE. Like, the couches are brown on beige and the walls are beige on beige and the curtains are beige and the lampshades are beige. Jack Layton and Olivia Chow's place is classy, lots of plants.

He's currently "trailing in his riding," that is 21 votes to 13. I'm sure he's frightened. Oh wow, NDP just passed Liberals in leading/elected seat count! Oh, never mind, Libs are back ahead. Bloc is doing terribly.

So amused by the super-long riding names. Ancaster-Dundas-Flamborough-Westdale, anyone?

LOCAL RESULTS TIME! I CAN'T LOOK!

I love the CBC

Oh, Don Cherry and Rex Murphy. Peter Mansbridge: "If you were wondering, they're actually the same person, which is why they keep saying such complimentary things about each other."

On the one hand, people are posting election results on Twitter illegally. On the other hand, these results are far from unexpected.

Peter McKay just said "forged a beachhead, if you will." I don't know what that means but it sounds very Peter McKay.

The colour keeps on going in and out on my TV. At some point I need to give up the rabbit ears and spring for cable, I can't see the colours of the parties...

It's Election Night!

I'm watching the CBC and will be blogging sporadically and on Twitter. Right now: the Dragons from CBC's The Dragon Den with their election predictions. I love the Dragons! Kevin O'Leary: "I would never run for prime minister, the job simply doesn't pay enough. I should be prime minister, though, I would clean this whole mess up."

George Strombouloupoulous on the best social media moments of the election! Jack Layton's hashtag fail, Michael Ignatieff's Rise Up speech and the YouTube mashups, VOTE MOBS, Stephen Harper the Facebook creeper, VIntage Voter. Who wins the Internet?

Electoral Politics: Going Places

Citizen Engagement: Going Up (say this in an elevator voice)

Thanks to social media campaigns and the uprisings in the Middle East, Canadian voters are super engaged this election. But we already knew that, didn’t we?

Everyone is particularly impressed that young people seem to be so engaged.

Montreal-based Apathy Is Boring, one of several non-partisan organizations that have sprung up to promote increased voting in this federal election, hailed the busy advance polls as a harbinger of hope for Canadians’ interest in the political process.

“WE. ARE. DOING IT,” the group boasted after the Easter weekend numbers came in.
“Let’s keep turning up in record numbers to prove that young Canadians care about democracy, and that apathy is boring.”

Coalitions: Going Down

While Stephen Harper is ratcheting up his coalitions-are-scary-things rhetoric, and more and more Canadians seem to believe him, coalitions are both normal and stable in other parts of the world.

“We’ve have been forming coalition governments at the national and state level for a long time,” says Norman Abjorensen, a leading political commentator and professor at the Australia National University in Canberra. “And the sun has always risen the following day.”

The typical pattern in Australian federal politics, says Abjorensen, is either a leftish Labour government or a coalition of right-of-centre Liberals and rural Nationals.

“We change governments rarely here,” he says. “Only six changes in more than 60 years. No coalition has fallen except at the ballot box or on the floor of the house when in a minority in 1941.”

Western democracies such as Canada and the United Kingdom are behind the times, argues London School of Economics political scientist Jonathan Hopkin.

Not that Canadians haven’t thought about it:

A few days after Trudeau’s comeback victory in the 1980 federal election, he invited NDP leader Ed Broadbent to his office.

“I had a surprise for him,” Trudeau, who had just led his Liberals to a majority government, recalled in his 1993 book Memoirs.

“In an attempt to negotiate some sort of alliance with his party, I offered him and his colleagues some senior positions in our cabinet,” wrote Trudeau, explaining that his scanty take in Western Canada — just two seats, both in Manitoba, out of 143 Liberal MPs — had left him craving some of the widespread western representation of the NDP.

National unity, Trudeau believed, “would be strengthened if we could consolidate our forces.” He noted that there had been similar Liberal-NDP collaboration talks “on and off since (Lester B.) Pearson’s day,” but that Broadbent, who feared that his party would lose its power and credibility, quickly declined the offer.

Women in Politics: Going Nowhere

I mean that two ways: women who are in politics aren’t leaving anytime soon, but women are making very few gains in politics right now.

Anita Neville, a Liberal Member of Parliament and former minister for the status of women, agrees that more needs to be done to recruit women, and that the tone of Canadian politics is a barrier to that goal.

“I don’t think any of the parties have done a great job recruiting candidates,” she said at a campaign rally in Winnipeg, Manitoba last week.

“The rancor and nastiness of the political discourse turns off” many women, Neville said, adding that the atmosphere before the last election was “a really ugly Parliament.”

The New Democratic Party said April 11 it had set an “historic first” by having women as 40 percent of its nominated candidates. Still, Equal Voice said on its website that only 31 percent of NDP candidates in what it gauges are winnable ridings are women. That figure compares with 27 percent for the Liberals and 22 percent for the Conservatives. The Conservative Party did not respond to requests for comment yesterday about this issue.

Post-Vote Brain Break

The polls are just about to open in ET, CT, and MT, another half hour for PT, and they're already open in the Maritimes and Newfoundland. So you should go out and vote, and then come back and read this brain break.

Are any of the leaders going to have a good day today? Watch the outreach of my investigative journalism as I check with the experts—also known as, reading their horoscopes.

In the process of doing this I discovered that all of the leaders were born sometime between April 30th and July 22nd. Is that weird or is that weird? Why are they dominating one quarter of the year? Both the Amazing Housemate and I also have birthdays between April 30 and July 22, does this mean we are destined to be in politics?

Anyway, this means that several of the leaders share signs, which sounds like it would make things more boring, but actually is really interesting when you look at WHO shares signs.

Stephen Harper and Michael Ignatieff—Taurus

Your workload will increase dramatically over the next few days, so make sure you get your chores out of the way as quickly as possible. If you fall behind now it may be a long time before you catch up again, so get it done.

That it will… that it will…

No matter how modest your goals are today, there will be some foggy energy or friendship dramas that could interrupt things and make major forward movement difficult right now. But do not worry! You will have a realistic awareness of what you can and cannot accomplish, so this will help keep things in perspective -- and you in a positive frame of mind. So save what you can't get done today, and deal with it another day -- it isn't going anywhere anytime soon.

Ha. Hahaha. “You will have a realistic awareness of what you can and cannot accomplish.” “Deal with it another day—it isn’t going anywhere anytime soon.” Hahaha.

Jack Layton and Gilles Duceppe—Cancer

If you force yourself to do something when your heart isn’t in it it’s unlikely you will make a very good job of it. Maybe it would be better to put it off until you are in a more receptive frame of mind.

Ohh. Hidden meaning?

Regarding your current struggle or debate, you should know that there are more people on your side than aren't ... and the people who aren't don't have much pull with the powers that be. Keep pushing for what you want, and keep talking to the people who can help make it happen. You're gaining real momentum, and you could reach an exciting tipping point today. Whatever has been holding you back is long gone -- and it's not coming back! Stay with this positive frame of mind.

You can tell this is Jack Layton’s horoscope because it has the words “gaining momentum” in it. I don’t see how it applies to Gilles Duceppe, though… but then he’s a borderline case, maybe he’s really a Leo. Let’s see what the Leo horoscopes are…

You seem to be holding back from taking risks, even quite small ones, and that's a shame because if you push yourself hard today chances are it will pay off in a big way. Don’t just think about it – do it!

Yep, that’s more like Duceppe…

Try not to confuse a growing sense of responsibility with a growing sense of guilt. The associations you are making with other people right now are a sign of your growth. You are more connected with a few people and it is effecting your sense of duty -- these people rely on you, and this may be a new feeling. Give yourself a chance to get used to it. But if you keep following your own goals and making decisions based on your own priorities, there is nothing wrong with that.

Is this about his association with the PQ?

Elizabeth May—Gemini

If you allow a feud to linger on much longer the results could be disastrous, so get to the root of it today and either agree to be friends or agree to stay out of each others way. Is a compromise solution really so hard?

I feel like this would have been more appropriate (or more hilarious) as Harper and Ignatieff’s horoscope.

After a spontaneous conversation with a casual acquaintance today, you could gain greater insight into the things that have been troubling you lately. The key is to listen intently and be ready to hear some things that may make you a little uncomfortable -- new ideas are not always palatable. If you ignore the realities of the external world, you won't get very far. You will have to face up to reality and pay more attention to the things that really matter.

Well, this isn’t too applicable. Except maybe the “face up to reality” part?

Anyway. If you've read this before voting, you can now vote already knowing the future!

TIME TO VOTE! THAT MEANS YOU! YES, YOU, READING THIS RIGHT NOW!

VOTING TIME!!!!!!!!!



Here is a useful election FAQ if you're unsure about how long voting will take, how to vote if you wear a face covering, or what kind of ID you can bring.

Still undecided? Here's one more platform-comparing tool.

And now go vote! And to awesome people like my Awesome Housemate who are working the polls this election: you guys are awesome. You are like millions of hand across the country holding the democracy tent over our heads.

Okay, awkward simile time is over. Time to vote!

Coast-to-Coast with Editorials

So this is pretty neat. It’s a collection of abridged editorials from across the country. I, of course, cannot refrain from adding my commentary.

From the Vancouver Sun:

…the Conservatives should be returned to Parliament with a majority. A minority government will be unstable at a time when we need stability. Without a majority, Canadians will have no idea who their leader will be. The fact is that the opposition could defeat the government on the budget within a matter of weeks of the next sitting of Parliament. Then, either Ignatieff (or possibly his successor, whoever that might be) or Layton could ask the Governor-General to invite one or the other or both of them to form a government.

. . . Canada can't afford an election that delivers a result with so much uncertainty.

. . . Despite the Tories' flaws, however, a Conservative majority is the only path that at this time leads us to a Canada that will remain the prosperous, peaceful and predictable country in which we are fortunate enough to live.

False. We are not a republic. Not knowing who the leader of our government will be doesn’t really change much. The prime minister is the leader of the party that forms the government. Let’s not inflate the position with too much importance.

Honestly, majorities are scarier because they’re the closest this country can legally get to a dictatorship. Minorities have to compromise, not be reckless—be predictable. Majority governments have historically been the most unpredictable, and passed the most bills that weren’t in their platforms.

And you know what? No matter what happens in the House of Commons, the core of the civil service remains stable, with just a few changes at the upper bureaucratic levels. Civil servants will be peeved if the upper administration keeps changing on them like that, but the people who actually do the stuff to run our country are going to be here doing the stuff that runs the country regardless of the situation in the House.

From the Winnipeg Free Press:

That the country even talks about coalitions composed of weak parties focused on buying votes, instead of focusing on the fragile economic recovery, is all the evidence Canadians should need to conclude that seven years of minority government, of the posturing and name-calling and brinksmanship that results when no one ultimately is in charge, must end. Canada must get more serious about its present predicaments and future prosperity. That leaves only the Conservatives.

To be sure, Conservatives over the past five years, and Prime Minister Stephen Harper in particular, have contributed much to the rancour that today sours our polity. But just as surely, over the past five years no political party or leader has shown more disciplined commitment to the engine that makes all else possible — the economy. For all the talk of a hidden, right-wing agenda, none has emerged over five years and there is no evidence it will over the next four.

Oh, please. Our economic recovery is hardly fragile, little thanks to the Conservatives. It was Paul Martin’s banking regulations that left us in such a good place to being with. And as I mentioned earlier, no one ever is “ultimately in charge.” The prime minister’s powers are supposed to be fairly limited, to a leadership role over his own party, and the ability to appoint people and recommend things to the governor general. In fact, the Speaker of the House is far more “ultimately in charge” of the House of Commons.

Of course a “hidden, right-wing agenda” hasn’t emerged over the last five years—that kind of thing is really difficult to have with a minority government. The fact that we haven’t seen a hidden right-wing agenda doesn’t mean there isn’t one (not that I’m saying there is).

From the Halifax Chronicle Herald:

Voting intentions have moved to the poles as we have got closer to the polls, turning this into an effective contest of the NDP left and the Tory right.

You can peg this partly on Prime Minister Stephen Harper being a polarizing leader. And also on his strategy of eking out a majority by winning over targeted demographic groups in a few marginal ridings instead of aiming to make the Tories a bigger-tent party.

That left a lot voters essentially disengaged. But they have decided they want to be heard in this election. And they've been jumping to Jack Layton to do that . . .

It's an astonishing result when most people, at heart, are probably still somewhere in the middle, not looking either for a big expansion of government, or a drastic shrinkage of the social safety net, but simple competence in managing the economy and public finances and in ensuring crucial public services like health care are there when needed.

True that. Truuue that.

Voters Today: Not All Bad

Low voter turnouts may mean that more of the people who show are informed voters, but this isn’t necessarily the case—especially since only about 20% of the electorate “votes well” (that is, for the common good). And despite everybody freaking out, voter turnout today is not that much less than it has been historically since Confederation:

According to Elections Canada, voter turnout from 1867 to the present has hovered at approximately 70 per cent, but more recent elections have shown erosion from there. About 64 per cent of voters cast a ballot in 2006 and 58.8 per cent voted in 2008.

Voter turnout has actually been in decline since the 1980s, according to Elections Canada, but political scientists have only recently been able to verify this.

Voter turnout figures were based on calculating the number of votes cast against lists of eligible voters. The problem was that lists were sometimes incomplete, error-filled or non-existent. Voter turnout rates were calculated using incomplete data for decades after Confederation in 1867.

In 1997, the national registry of electors was developed, a permanent list that kept track of every eligible voter in Canada. For years until then, political scientists weren't sure whether the perceived downturn in voter turnout was more a myth than reality.

You know, I don’t understand why people persist in thinking that we’ve degenerated from the 1860s. I mean, in the 1860s we still didn’t have secret ballots (those weren’t around until 1874 for federal elections and even later for provincial ones), so you had to stand on the hustings and proclaim your vote, and you got heckled, and the candidates were sitting there watching you proclaim your vote, and people would try to bribe you and because it wasn’t a secret ballot they would know if you didn’t vote the way they wanted and come and beat you up after.

So… yeah. Voting: in better shape than the 1860s even if the voter turnout is about 10% lower.

Harping on Harpers Hypotheticals

Yesterday was Stephen Harper’s 52nd birthday, and he celebrated by getting his sycophants to boo a CBC reporter asking a legitimate question.

I’m sorry, was that too bitter and uncalled-for?

Okay, okay, I modify. He celebrated by rebuffing talk of government 'hypotheticals', and then his supporters rebuffed this talk further by booing Terry Milewski when he tried to ask the question again.

The whole thing is fairly ridiculous.

But when pressed by reporters about what he would do if the next-biggest party was asked to form a government, Harper said he would not speculate about "hypothetical" scenarios following the election.
"We're in this to win, I believe we're going to win; a lot is at stake, every race is close," Harper said.

"What we're doing now is speculating on hypothetical scenarios. We're putting before Canadians the choice that they have, a Conservative government that will keep taxes low and keep the economy moving forward, or an NDP government that will raise taxes, stall our recovery, and set Canadian families back."

The CBC's Terry Milewski faced supporters' boos when he attempted to ask Harper the question again.

In an interview with the CBC's Peter Mansbridge earlier in the campaign, Harper said said he would not attempt to form a government if another party won the most seats in the election and his party came in second place.

When Mansbridge said the other parties have a right to try to form a government if the Tory government failed to gain the confidence of the House, Harper replied: "That's a question of debate, of constitutional law."

Well, actually, it’s not. That is how things work in a parliamentary democracy. Remember the Westminster System? I’ve been harping on that for a while. (haha, harping on Harper…) If Stephen Harper is like, “Screw parliamentary democracies, I want to make our system more like a republic,” that is one thing. But when he’s like, “Oh, no, all the rules you’ve ever known about the Westminster system are not at all set in stone and I’m just going to flout them individually one by one,” that’s when I get angry.

And people believe him!

Guys, I think the answer is obvious. Clearly, I must run for a federal seat, and fix democracy myself, since none of the supposedly intelligent people we elect seem to know how to do it.

Also. “We’re in this to win,” “I believe we’re going to win,” “A lot is at stake,” and “Every race is close” are all four different complete sentences with very different meanings, and their juxtaposition here into all one long sentence is a bit confounding. Just saying.

You may not have realized this, but I am actually not an ice cream cone

So there was this thing called "election-themed flavour of the week, and was like, "Oh, I wonder what that is? Perhaps a selection of the most popular stories of the week!" My Awesome Housemate was like, "The flavour of the week should be orange crush!" And then we clicked on it and it is neither of those things. Instead it's a collection of pictures of attractive female candidates. Can I be appalled? The "sexiest election candidate" was one thing, because it was equal-opportunity and also you knew what you were getting into when you clicked on the link. And this one also has little blurbs underneath the pictures that half the time sounds like a personals ad… you know, "enjoys mountain biking with that special someone!" SO disgusted right now. Women are not ice cream cones. "Flavour" of the week, pah.

Getting Ready for the Big Day

I made an election playlist on YouTube of all the most epic, empowering, pro-political engagement songs. If I've forgotten one that is key to your empowerment, comment here or drop me a line at voteagainstapathy[at]gmail.com.

Also preparing election results drinks! I'm watching the results come in with my Awesome Housemate after she comes back from her Awesome Job as a poll clerk. At a polling station. See, these are just the kinds of people I hang out with so you can understand how I'm confused about this apparently low youth voter turnout...

Andrew Coyne explains why he's voting Liberal.

If we return the Conservatives with a majority, if we let all that has gone on these past five years pass, then not only the Tories, but every party will draw the appropriate conclusions. But if we send them a different message, then maybe the work of bringing government to democratic heel, begun in the tumult of the last Parliament, can continue. And that is why I will be voting Liberal on May 2.

Are you still undecided? Apparently, undecided voters are more likely to vote for someone who looks like them. So, you know, if you're a white guy, you've probably got lots of choice.

Chantal Hébert says that the real winner in this election is democracy. Well, I'm paraphrasing a bit, but mine sounds more epic. Actually, she says that the winner is citizen engagement.

The populist mood that could result in a dramatically realigned Parliament on Monday changed the face of municipal politics in Calgary and Toronto last fall, bringing a left-leaning mayor to Alberta’s energy capital and a right-wing one to the home of Canada’s caviar Left.

The wave that could carry Jack Layton and the NDP to a historical finish next week has tapped into the same powerful desire for change but it is different from the one that propelled Rob Ford to the Toronto mayoral office in one significant regard.

In Quebec, where the so-called orange wave originated, the surge of support for the NDP is borne out of more hope than anger.

In spite of the best efforts of Conservative Leader Stephen Harper to claim the role for himself, it is Gilles Duceppe who has emerged as the angry man of the campaign.

The more the Bloc Québécois leader has raised his voice over this campaign, the less his call for a seventh strike vote against the rest of Canada has resonated.

To a lesser degree the same could be said of the Conservative and Liberal campaigns.

If anything, the developments of the past five weeks have shown that there is a lot more appetite for a discourse based on hope than one based on fear.

Hear, hear!

This week the Young Liberals released Angry Bairds, which is exactly what it sounds like.