Tuesday, March 19, 2013

Would Justin Trudeau Liberal leadership win pave way for Conservative re-election?


Will Parliament’s Member for Twitter-East win or will MP Joyce Murray meld parties with social media backing?  

Will Justin Trudeau or Joyce Murray be victorious in Liberal leadership?
And other far out fantasies fueled by social media.

Bill Tieleman’s 24 Hours/The Tyee column
Tuesday March 19, 2013
By Bill Tieleman
"Twitter is a great place to tell the world what you're thinking before you've had a chance to think about it."
- Chris Pirillo, blogger
Canada is apparently doomed -- unless one of two things happen, depending on which Twitter feed you follow:
Either Justin Trudeau -- Parliament's member for Twitter-East -- becomes Liberal leader, is elected prime minister in 2015, and vanquishes both Conservative Prime Minister Stephen Harper and New Democrat leader Tom Mulcair, or;
Vancouver Quadra MP Joyce Murray becomes Liberal leader and drags into a one-time-only 2015 electoral cooperation deal her own reluctant party, the uninterested NDP and the keen Greens, who all then implement proportional representation and allegedly ensure Conservatives never rule Canada again.
While the first option is extremely unlikely, it at least has a mathematical possibility of coming true.
Justin Trudeau/Joyce Murray/Marc Garneau - Sun News photo
The second option, however, would require more things to happen in precisely the right order with exactly perfect timing than the Big Bang Theory that created our universe.
But two of Canada's biggest social media groups, LeadNow.ca and Avaaz.org, are betting everything on the cosmology caper coming true.
For others, either one of those events happening in Canada in 2015 would be a sign of political apocalypse akin to the Mayan calendar's 2012 end of the world prediction, and equally unlikely.
Nonetheless, when the Twitterati become restless thinking that Harper will extend his Darth Vader rule by winning another election in 2015 -- they do what they do best: Tweet.
Windmills 2.0
Avaaz.org and LeadNow.ca both have admirable campaigns that I endorse, such as fighting violence against women in India or opposing Conservative environmental cuts.
But they strained their credibility beyond the breaking point when they asked Canadians to join the Liberal Party of Canada to support Murray's windmill-tilting campaign for the leadership.
They had the same unsuccessful strategy backing NDP MP Nathan's Cullen's leadership campaign, when he also advocated electoral cooperation -- and came a distant third.
Leadnow.ca and Avaaz.org don't even seem bothered by the fact that Murray's own track record on the environment -- one of their top issues -- is simply awful.
Murray was once hatchet person for then-premier Gordon Campbell's BC Liberal government, serving as minister of water, air and land protection while clear cutting 25 per cent of the staff that actually protected wildlife.
Murray was also in charge when the BC Liberals ended the moratorium on salmon farm expansion and hunting grizzly bears and stopped issuing reports about who were the worst corporate polluters in the province. They even eliminated the name "environment ministry."
But her past apparently doesn't matter even to famous enviro endorsers like David Suzuki, because Murray now opposes the Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline -- and wants electoral cooperation.
You have to choose
As I have argued before, removing voters democratic right to choose between political parties through an electoral cooperation deal is simply wrong -- and what's more, won't work.
And while Tyee contributor Murray Dobbin endorses the lowest common denominator approach to Canadian politics, the reality is that those who want to depose Harper have a simple choice -- Mulcair or Trudeau, but not both.
Electoral cooperation can still happen if Canadians wish to support whichever party can most likely win against a Conservative in a "strategic voting" scenario. But neither the NDP opposition nor the third party Liberals will endorse it.
That approach is totally fair for groups like LeadNow.ca and Avaaz.org to advocate, inform and persuade -- but trying to remove voter choices through a party deal will never succeed.
And while their efforts have gained some media traction, the reality is that currently about 51,000 Canadians have signed LeadNow.ca's electoral cooperation petition online -- which represents less than half the number of voters in one average Ontario riding.
Unfortunately neither LeadNow.ca nor Avaaz.org are launching campaigns to restore democratic representation by population in Canada, where currently Prince Edward Island has ridings with just 30,000 voters and Saskatchewan and Nova Scotia average about 70,000 voters -- compared to six Greater Toronto-area ridings with 150,000 to 170,000 voters.
That means a vote in PEI is worth five times more than in Toronto!
What does Trudeau stand for?
Meanwhile Justin Trudeau continues the Liberal coronation campaign backed by his nearly 200,000 Twitter followers.
Marc Garneau -- an actual Canadian hero who once challenged Trudeau to debate the real issues facing our country instead of making vague pronouncements -- has dropped out and endorsed the party favorite, but only after landing more punches than pathetic ex-Conservative Senator Patrick Brazeau did against Trudeau in his celebrated boxing match.
"He has told Canadians that we need a 'bold plan' and a 'clear vision' without defining either," Garneau said in February. "On Justin's two clear priorities -- the middle class and youth engagement -- he has said nothing. We have to know what we're voting for, not just who we're voting for."
"We made the mistake last time of saying, 'All we have to do is choose a leader and everything will work out,''' Garneau said, with a reference to disastrous former leader Michael Ignatieff.
"We did not define ourselves, the Conservatives ended up defining us. They'll do it again this time unless we know where each of the candidates stands."
"I am doing the Liberal party a big favour by bringing this up. It's a difficult question but it's one that needs to be asked," Garneau concluded.
Garneau also went after Murray's "wishful thinking" electoral cooperation plan in the Halifax debate March 3.
"Joyce, have you abandoned the Liberal party? Have you lost faith in our party?" Garneau asked her. Murray responded that her plan was "about one-time co-operation... to defeat Stephen Harper."
Lastly, one of my Facebook friends says the NDP and Conservatives seem to be getting nervous about Trudeau -- and I agree, but only on the part of the NDP.
Trudeau's celebrity leader status may eliminate any chance of the NDP seriously challenging Harper's rule in 2015 but there is almost no chance of a third to first miracle comeback win by the Liberals.
So the Conservatives aren't nervous about Trudeau as Liberal leader. They are elated.

.

13 comments:

Anonymous said...

Meanwhile Justin Trudeau continues the Liberal coronation campaign backed by his nearly 200,000 Twitter followers.
----------
For $12,000.00 CDN, I can get 1 million twitter followers.

Mr. Beer N. Hockey said...

I don't know Bill. The more you pee on Trudeau the more I smell fear.

e.a.f. said...

Joyce Murray would not be a good choice. The 2 organizations should stick to what they do well. They don't know enough about politics do make useful suggestions.

If T. the younger wins, then so be it. Mulcair will have to up his game. The rest of the party ditto. As long as Harper doesn't have the most seats, the one of the other parties will be able to form a government which will require support from another party, a minority government. Does T. the younger have what it takes? Most likely not but almost anything will be an improvement over stevie slime and his slimers. Vic Toews isn't helping the Cons with his latest statements regarding migrant workers.

Anonymous said...

Justin is more width than depth.

Watch this "celebrity" turn into another federal Liberal trainwreck.

"The Crash of The Canadian"

Starring: Justin Trudeau. Mark Marissen. Hedy Fry.

Anonymous said...

I am absolutely convinced the only way to defeat the increasingly dangerous Harper is for the Libs and NDP to merge. I guess it wont happen as both Mulcair and Little Pierre have such enormous egos. Too bad...it means at least another 10-15 years of Tory rule.

Anonymous said...

In a simple answer to your question, yes.

There are enough low information voters out there to manipulate any outcome. With the media onside the Justin campaign has skated down easy street. I don't see why this will change after he is elected leader.
If media wasn't biased then we would get a true look at what Canadians really want.

Anonymous said...

A merge of the federal Liberals and the NDP? Good luck on that one. It's not only egos, but also ideaological differences in how each perceives governance of Canada.

Something is going have to give when it comes to a merger, and who loses the most (it will never be an even loss).

A democratic socialist political ideaology will not last long in a Liberal environment (if it ever did) which is socially aware, but which capitalism is recognised to allow to flourish and grow.

The federal NDP is also beholden to the CLC and Big Labour something which does not exist in the federal Liberals.

Mark Friesen said...

Wow. This article and commentary are so inspiring. I sure wanna get out and vote. Can't wait to have my vote not count for anything.

tieleman: "conservatives are elated about justin". Great, once again, first past the post concentrates all power with one party and one leader. I look forward to more prorogations of parliament. Bill my choice is with Justin or Mulcair, but not both? Sooo...option 1=vote doesn't count, option 2=vote doesn't count, and cooperation is out of the question. you've sure left a lot of alternatives. thanks again for your contribution to democracy.

anonymous: "the 2 organizations don't know enough about politics to make useful suggestions." Perfect, so if i'm not an expert, I'll just stay at home and watch TV and not engage. I'll leave it to you guys.

Neither of you had better complain about low voter turnout. Ever.

Mark Friesen said...

Wow. This article and commentary are so inspiring. I sure wanna get out and vote. Can't wait to have my vote not count for anything.

tieleman: "conservatives are elated about justin". Great, once again, first past the post concentrates all power with one party and one leader. I look forward to more prorogations of parliament. Bill my choice is with Justin or Mulcair, but not both? Sooo...option 1=vote doesn't count, option 2=vote doesn't count, and cooperation is out of the question. you've sure left a lot of alternatives. thanks again for your contribution to democracy.

anonymous: "the 2 organizations don't know enough about politics to make useful suggestions." Perfect, so if i'm not an expert, I'll just stay at home and watch TV and not engage. I'll leave it to you guys.

Neither of you had better complain about low voter turnout. Ever.

Patrick M. said...

What has the aptly named ‘twitter verse’ got to do with anything? I don’t subscribe to either twitter of Facebook became I’m not interested in the minute by minute musings of the great unwashed nor have any need to slavishly monitor the “illuminatee”, but I certainly believe that another 4 years of Harper Inc. will destroy what’s left of this country.

At least Leadnow and Avaaz are trying to do something, while you sit and snidely snipe from the sidelines

As someone who routinely cycles my vote through Lib, NDP & Green I completely reject your premise that one-time-only cooperation which will lead to one non-Harper candidate per riding for this next election is “wrong” or somehow undemocratic.

For the sole purpose of getting rid of Harper a one-time-only single candidate is no detriment at all.

The Libs have a history of raiding the NDP for major policy initiatives, the Greens and Libs share conservative economic philosophy while NDP have moved towards the centre, they all support more environmental policies than the Cons. And most importantly, for the immediate future, none of them are Harper. As far as I’m concerned their differences are in nuance not substance and none of them alone provide every policy that I would endorse.

Maybe you are unique in having had a choice between multiple dynamic candidates to vote for but it is my experience, from long years of voting in both city and rural ridings that we are fortunate to have even one trWhat a load of bull-bleep. If you support the idea that Harper must be stopped from forming the next government, then supporting the only Liberal leadership candidate who endorses the only practical way to achieve that end is perfectly reasonable.

What has the aptly named ‘twitter verse’ got to do with anything? I don’t subscribe to either twitter of Facebook became I’m not interested in the minute by minute musings of the great unwashed nor have any need to slavishly monitor the “illuminatee”, but I certainly believe that another 4 years of Harper Inc. will destroy what’s left of this country.

At least Leadnow and Avaaz are trying to do something, while you sit and snidely snipe from the sidelines

For the moment I could care less what Joyce Murray’s record is. If electoral co-operation succeeds then we will likely have a coalition of some sort and her supposedly weak environmental record will not be an issue. Besides I’d rather see her leading the Liberals than young, my-handlers-don’t-want-me-to- talk-about-policy-but-aren’t-my-teeth-and-hair-spiffy, Trudeau.

As someone who routinely cycles my vote through Lib, NDP & Green I completely reject your premise that one-time-only cooperation which will lead to one non-Harper candidate per riding for this next election is “wrong” or somehow undemocratic.

For the sole purpose of getting rid of Harper a one-time-only single candidate is no detriment at all.

The Libs have a history of raiding the NDP for major policy initiatives, the Greens and Libs share conservative economic philosophy while NDP have moved towards the centre, they all support more environmental policies than the Cons. And most importantly, for the immediate future, none of them are Harper. As far as I’m concerned their differences are in nuance not substance and none of them alone provide every policy that I would endorse.

Maybe you are unique in having had a choice between multiple dynamic candidates to vote for but it is my experience, from long years of voting in both city and rural ridings that we are fortunate to have even one truly dynamic candidate per riding. I can’t count the number of times I have held my nose and strategically voted for a candidate or a leader when writing in some comic book character on the ballot would have made me feel better.

Patrick M. said...

your comment form doesn't seem to like editing. I tried to shorten my comment to adhere to your character maximum but it seems to have a mind of it's own, likes jumbled thoughts I guess, a little like it's moderator?

Bill Tieleman said...

Ha-ha Patrick M - jumbled indeed! On the other hand, many posters here tend to repeat themselves, just not usually in the same post! ;-)

Anonymous said...

Indeed many posters have to repeat themselves because they think they are speaking to many when in fact they are the only ones in the room, or most often, they are preaching to the choir.