babble home
rabble.ca - news for the rest of us
today's active topics


Post New Topic  Post A Reply
FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » from far and wide   » bc, alberta, saskatchewan   » Saskatchewan Election Results

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: Saskatchewan Election Results
wei-chi
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2799

posted 29 June 2004 05:08 AM      Profile for wei-chi   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Incumbent Dick Proctor goes down...
Larry Spencer dies hard...
Jim Pankiw dead too...
Grant Devine, ain't divine...
Nystrom gone...
Ralph wins by 12,000 votes!!!!!!!!!!!


Wierd. Some mighty close ridings. This was a fun one to watch.


From: Saskatoon | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
saskganesh
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4203

posted 29 June 2004 05:29 AM      Profile for saskganesh     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
almost had a second Liberal win in Regina-Lumsden-Lakeview.
From: regina | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged
steam.machine
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4916

posted 29 June 2004 05:32 AM      Profile for steam.machine     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I am sad to see Lorne Nystrom go down to defeat. He was a good MP and a valuable asset to the Party in the House.

However, as I suggested in another thread, as sad as I am to see the NDP lose every seat, it doesn't totally surprise me. The organization there is just coming off a draining provincial election last fall and suspect they didn't have enough resources to pull off a top notch campaign.

I would also suspect that the Calvert government also had an effect on the voting results, especially in the rural parts of many ridings. I don't know what the voter turnout rates are at this time, that could be a factor as well...

I am sure Calvert is poring over the results with great interest...


From: Calgary | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged
Mycroft_
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2230

posted 29 June 2004 06:04 AM      Profile for Mycroft_     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
The Liberal vote actually went up in Saskatchewn and the Tory vote went *down*! The NDP vote is down about 3% from 2000 so it looks like what happened is the Liberals took votes from the NDP (perhaps another example of unstrategic strategic voting a la Toronto) and the Tories benefitted despite taking a hit in the popular vote.

The closer you look the worse it seems Harper actually did. The Canadian Alliance got 49% of the vote in BC in 2000 but the new Conservative Party only got 36.2% so in BC it seems that 1+1=0.7! In Saskatchewan the Alliance, on its own, got 47.7% where the new Conservative party got 41%, it's really a fluke of the first past the post system that they gained seats there.

Overall the Tories got 29% of the vote which is the same percentage John Turner got in *1984* when the Liberals were shallacked.


From: Toronto | Registered: Feb 2002  |  IP: Logged
Kaitlin Stocks
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3766

posted 29 June 2004 07:08 AM      Profile for Kaitlin Stocks   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Clap. Clap. Clap. Thank you Liberals for telling everyone to strategically vote in SK, thus electing a slate of blue trash. I am in disbelief that several good friends of mine lost their jobs tonight. Good politicians. Good wokers. Good New Democrats. All because of the fucken Liberal "strategic voting" monster. Oh well. At least Axworthy lost. But... God. I am broken right now. My province clearly doesn't know how to vote.
From: The City That Rhymes With Fun... | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged
saskganesh
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4203

posted 29 June 2004 11:25 AM      Profile for saskganesh     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
did you run against the Cons or run against the Liberals? NDP strategy played right into Liberal hands.
From: regina | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 29 June 2004 02:01 PM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Its easy to blame everything on "strategic voting". After all it allows us to avoid questioning whether we in the NDP might have been at all deficient in our campaign etc...

Back in 1974, the popular wisdom in the NDP was "we lost half our seats because our people voted Liberal to stop the Tories from imposing wage and price controls". But then the massive Canada Election Study surveyed 10,000 people and did not find one single solitary person who voted NDP in 1972 but switched to Liberal in 1974 to stop Stanfield's wage and price control!!

YES, "strategic voting" is an issue. It happens. But what happened to all the rage against the Liberals that was supposed to be sweeping Saskatchewan? I thought that every single solitary person in Sask. hated the gun registry and would never vote Liberal in a million years - yet their vote INCREASED!

In Ontario, Atlantic Canada, Manitoba, Alberta and BC the NDP popular went up significantly in this election. Only in Sask. did it fall. You can't blame it all on strategic voting. There were clearly problems unique to Sask. and maybe you Saskatchewan NDP members should do some post-mortems and figure out went wrong instead of sticking your head in the sand and blaming it all on "strategic voting".


From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
N-SIGN
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4596

posted 29 June 2004 02:40 PM      Profile for N-SIGN     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Maybe the Liberal vote was not really a strategic vote, although that was initially my thinking.

Some things to consider:

- Paul Martin is more popular than Jean Chretien in Western Canada and Ralph Goodale is very well-liked in Regina. Federal money has been visible in Regina for the first time in decades, and the gun control lobby always pointed the finger at Chretien/Rock. We ignored these facts.

- Jack Layton polled behind the party in Saskatchewan, and Jack was very large in the campaign and media. I like Jack, but he picked us up some votes (city) and lost us some others (rural) - he seemed to have rubbed a lot of rural folk wrong in the debate.

That point may be moot because....

- The face of the NDP to the public in Saskatchewan is Lorne Calvert not Jack Layton, and the provincial NDP while not hated seems tired and disfunctional.

That said, there is no place to go but up!


From: Canada | Registered: Oct 2003  |  IP: Logged
wei-chi
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2799

posted 29 June 2004 05:00 PM      Profile for wei-chi   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
All because of the fucken Liberal "strategic voting" monster

Now, now Kaitlin, that same monster was unleashed by Calvert last time around, shutting out the Liberals provincially. We don't want to be hypocritical, do we?

[ 29 June 2004: Message edited by: wei-chi ]


From: Saskatoon | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
swirrlygrrl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2170

posted 29 June 2004 05:47 PM      Profile for swirrlygrrl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Wei-chi, wanna name a single constituency where the Sk Liberals had a hope in hell, where voting for them wouldn't give a far greater liklihood to the Sask. party taking the seat?

By contrast, the monstrous part about Martin's appeal to vote strategically, i.e. Liberal no matter where you live, is that it, in many cases, particularly in the case of ridings in Saskatchewan and British Columbia, took votes from the first place NDP candidate, gave them to the third place Liberal candidates, allowing a Conservative win.


From: the bushes outside your house | Registered: Feb 2002  |  IP: Logged
lonecat
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5460

posted 29 June 2004 05:57 PM      Profile for lonecat   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by wei-chi:

Now, now Kaitlin, that same monster was unleashed by Calvert last time around, shutting out the Liberals provincially. We don't want to be hypocritical, do we?

[ 29 June 2004: Message edited by: wei-chi ]


I find myself in agreement with wei-chi this time.
It was OK last fall when Liberals supported the NDP to stop a Saskatchewan Party government. However, now it is wrong when New Democrats vote Liberal to stop Stephen Harper? It can't work both ways.

The fact is, Saskatchewan New Democrats must take some time to analyze the results, then discuss what the results mean, how and why they were achieved, and where the party moves forward.

This process can't involve attacking and belittling people who are sympathetic to the party. If the party can't analyze itself in a meaningful way and learn from its mistakes, it may be doomed to repeat those same mistakes in the future.


From: Regina | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
Northern54
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5325

posted 29 June 2004 06:24 PM      Profile for Northern54     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
One thing I'd be interested in knowing is what would have happened in Saskatchewan if instead of having 8 urban/rural split ridings, there were 6 all-urban ridings?
From: Yellowknife | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 29 June 2004 06:39 PM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I'm not happy that "strategic voting" hurt us in some places, BUT, why do New Democrats have this crazy ideas that Liberals are supposed to help us win seats??? Are we like an endangered spotted owl that needs to be allotted some habitat just out of the goodness of peoples' hearts?

Paul Martin and the Liberal campaign is there to get the best possible result for themselves. They don't give a shit about whether it costs the NDP a few seats. We are another party. We are their enemy! If I were Paul Martin, i would have done the exact same thing. Why? BECAUSE FROM A LIBERAL PERSPECTIVE - IT WORKED!!

In politics you have to keep the message simple. It makes sense for Paul Martin to appeal to anyone thinking of voting NDP or GReen to vote Liberal - PERIOD! Does anyone seriously think that the Martin was going to give impassioned speeches across Canada saying "I appeal to New Democrats in the following 160 ridings to vote Liberal to stop the Consdervatives, but if you live in the following 50 seats in BC and Saskatchewan - you can ignore this and stick with the NDP."

As has been said, the other parties are not their to help the NDP win seats. Quit whining.


From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Robo
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4168

posted 29 June 2004 08:45 PM      Profile for Robo     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Garth Brasseur:
One thing I'd be interested in knowing is what would have happened in Saskatchewan if instead of having 8 urban/rural split ridings, there were 6 all-urban ridings?

An early report from the federal Electoral Boundaries Commission for Saskatchewan did propose 3 seats with no or minimal rural components. The most prominent person I recall lobbying against that report was Dick Proctor. His efforts helped restore the boundaries to ones very similar to the ones that existed in the previous sitting of Parliament.

Incumbents often react badly to changes to their constituency boundaries, even whent the changes are likelt to be better for the incumbent.

It's not just our folks. Liberal Janko Peric was defeated by about 200 votes last night. He fought the Ontario Report that would have put all of the rural municipalities in Waterloo Region in Kitchener-Conestoga. He succeeded in getting the Township of North Dumfries to the Cambridge riding - and almost certainly lost that Township by more than 200 votes last night.

Politicians typically are not good political organizers. But I would have thought that Dick would have been.


From: East York | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged
Tim
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3145

posted 29 June 2004 09:36 PM      Profile for Tim     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Dick Proctor is an excellent political organizer, (among other things he is a former provincial secretary and federal secretary). And losing him as an MP is a tremendous blow.

The main reason for his criticism of the redistribution proposal was that his riding would have gone from just south of Saskatoon to the U.S. border. (It was to be called Long Lakes, but he dubbed it Long Drives.) But he wasn't the only one. It seems the Alliance got organized to oppose the move, and the commission was lobbied to include the urban/rural ridings on the grounds that separating them would polarize urban/rural relations in the province (or something to that effect; I didn't look at the report again). While the commission didn't necessarily agree, the lack of arguments on the other side made it difficult for them not to restore the existing boundaries.

In any case, to answer Garth's original question, I'm not convinced it would have made any difference, with the exception of one Saskatoon riding. I don't know about the Regina urban riding (where I assume Goodale would have run), but in Saskatoon there would have been three ridings: one on the west side and two on the east side (more or less; the boundary wasn't actually on the river). From the Saskatoon results I've seen, while we did well in the Saskatoon part of Saskatoon Rosetown Biggar, this is cancelled out by a poor showing in Saskatoon Wanuskewin (west side). There's a fairly even three-way split in the Saskatoon part of Saskatoon Humboldt (north-east). And we did poorly in Blackstrap, too (south-east). The boundaries don't match exactly, and I haven't seen complete results, but my sense is that we wouldn't necessarily have done any better in urban-only ridings.


From: Paris of the Prairies | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
wei-chi
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2799

posted 29 June 2004 09:55 PM      Profile for wei-chi   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Swirly: Saskatoon Meewasin.
From: Saskatoon | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
lonecat
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5460

posted 29 June 2004 10:48 PM      Profile for lonecat   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Swirly: The Battlefords
From: Regina | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 29 June 2004 11:17 PM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
The main reason for his criticism of the redistribution proposal was that his riding would have gone from just south of Saskatoon to the U.S. border. (It was to be called Long Lakes, but he dubbed it Long Drives.)

Big deal! People run for Parliament in ridings like Western Arctic or Nunanvut or Yukon that are larger than the European continent.


From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Vansterdam Kid
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5474

posted 30 June 2004 02:41 AM      Profile for Vansterdam Kid   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by wei-chi:


Now, now Kaitlin, that same monster was unleashed by Calvert last time around, shutting out the Liberals provincially. We don't want to be hypocritical, do we?

[ 29 June 2004: Message edited by: wei-chi ]


To be fair from what I understand the last provincial election the Sask Liberal campaign was atrocious. They seemed to think they had a chance to win dozens of seats and possibly form a decent sized caucus when in reality 4 seats would have been a very good result for them. Also there's the fact that Karawacki himself was in a very close three-way race for his own seat yet for some reason he thought he would automatically win it -- when one takes a look at the federal campaign Layton made damn sure he popped back into T-Dan. to debate Mills whenever he had the chance. I would just say that the federal NDP has to try-try again. I think the difference with the Sask NDP campaign was they were at least realistic they knew that four seats would be a decent result -- with two of them being very close results. And eight seats would have been fantastic but probably un-realistic (those being Palliser, Regina Q-A, Regina LL-C, Saskatoon H, Saskatoon R-B, with an outside shot at Prince Albert and Churchill).

Seriously though how is the Provincial gov't doing, from what I understand it's not un-popular nor is it having problems like say the Rae or Clark governments in Ontario and BC respectively so what’s the problem with it? Did it really negatively affect the NDP's chances in Saskatchewan or is the government simply tired from being in power for so long and did people really want a change? Because the Conservative vote actually went down -- so did the NDP but only by a mere 3% this is just rather strange -- then again with a 4% split or less in 10 ridings in favour of the NDP in BC the NDP would have ended up with another 10 ridings.


From: bleh.... | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
Vansterdam Kid
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5474

posted 30 June 2004 02:51 AM      Profile for Vansterdam Kid   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Too be fair Swirlygirl's argument is fair at least in relation to a few ridings. Look at New-Westminster Coquitlam in BC Dave Haggard, a former Union boss so he should be somewhat centre-left at least, had to have 'taken' some votes away from Steve McClurg the NDP candidate who lost the riding to Paul Forseth of the Conservatives by 45 votes.
From: bleh.... | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
Lord High Commisioner
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6372

posted 30 June 2004 03:09 AM      Profile for Lord High Commisioner        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Kaitlin Stocks:
Clap. Clap. Clap. Thank you Liberals for telling everyone to strategically vote in SK, thus electing a slate of blue trash. I am in disbelief that several good friends of mine lost their jobs tonight. Good politicians. Good wokers. Good New Democrats. All because of the fucken Liberal "strategic voting" monster. Oh well. At least Axworthy lost. But... God. I am broken right now. My province clearly doesn't know how to vote.

Allo allo allo Kaitlin,

The Lord High Commisioner here. So some of your good friends lost their jobs last night. TOO DARN BAD!! Maybe these low laying leaches should attempt to get work in the "real world." This is politics and nothing is set in stone. I wish those people luck in getting decent employment in the tight Regina labour market. It's a good thing the NDP is in provincially as these people won't have to sling burgers at Rotten Ron's or sell cigarettes at the Corner Gas.

I myself have gained from Lorne Nystrom losing. I have gained an MP that will do meaningful work on the hill; not like Lorne trying to abolish the senate. Yeah, let's give the PM even more power!!

Do not attibute the losses in Saskatchewan to strategic voting. People here actually voted for the local CANDIDATE vice the PARTY LEADER. If anything this was the least strategic vote that has occured in years in Saskatchewan and Canada

Kaitlin, maybe you should give your head a shake. The people in Canada voted for who they thought would do the best job. The results showed me that in the ridings where the incumbant lost, the majority of the electorate voted against the incumbants. If the incumbant only got 35% of the vote, 65% of the people can't be wrong.

The people of Canada have spoken Kaitlin. DEAL WITH IT!!

To the people of Canada chosing their best local representitive,

Cheers!

The Lord High Commisioner


From: Outer Mongolia | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
sgm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5468

posted 30 June 2004 04:45 AM      Profile for sgm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Posted by Lord High Commisioner:

quote:

The results showed me that in the ridings where the incumbant lost, the majority of the electorate voted against the incumbants. If the incumbant only got 35% of the vote, 65% of the people can't be wrong.

You are a brilliant political analyst. Why hasn't one of the major parties snapped you up?


From: I have welcomed the dawn from the fields of Saskatchewan | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
lonecat
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5460

posted 30 June 2004 04:53 AM      Profile for lonecat   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Davidbcalec:

Seriously though how is the Provincial gov't doing, from what I understand it's not un-popular nor is it having problems like say the Rae or Clark governments in Ontario and BC respectively so what’s the problem with it? Did it really negatively affect the NDP's chances in Saskatchewan or is the government simply tired from being in power for so long and did people really want a change? Because the Conservative vote actually went down -- so did the NDP but only by a mere 3% this is just rather strange -- then again with a 4% split or less in 10 ridings in favour of the NDP in BC the NDP would have ended up with another 10 ridings.


To be as diplomatic and polite as possible, I can vouch by way of anecdote that the Calvert Government is wildly unpopular right now. The 2004 provincial budget is reviled for its tax increases, and lack of a commitment to reform property taxes.

Then there is the provincial economy. Career opportunities are not abundant in the cities, even for those with post secondary educations. The rural economy as in freefall.
While the economic situation is not the provincial government's fault, the government is blamed for the situation.

If I had any criticism, it would be the lack of a plan to help rural people rebuild their shattered economy. Perhaps that is a challenge the government would see fit to tackle. A few years ago, the NDP did respond to protests over crumbling highways by making a 10 year commitment to spend at least 2.5-billion dollars to fix the highways. Judging by all of the highway construction that is underway, I would say highways are no longer a challenge for the government. I no longer hear complaining about the highways!


From: Regina | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
Vansterdam Kid
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5474

posted 30 June 2004 05:05 AM      Profile for Vansterdam Kid   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
True government is always blamed but really Saskatchewan is in a real bind they are right next to Alberta -- with the economic power of that province it's difficult to compete. Some in BC don't seem to realize this as well. Although I have another question re: the Sask NDP are there any up and comers other than Kaitlin Stocks and her bitter rival Erin Wier that are any standouts that can carry the banner so to speak?

(on edit obviously there are other economic difficulties just wanted to mention that before i'm flammed for over simplifying)

[ 30 June 2004: Message edited by: Davidbcalec ]


From: bleh.... | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
Gnote
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5321

posted 30 June 2004 05:12 AM      Profile for Gnote     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Davidbcalec:
Although I have another question re: the Sask NDP are there any up and comers other than Kaitlin Stocks and her bitter rival Erin Wier that are any standouts that can carry the banner so to speak?

Before I say what I must...I am in no way shape or form a right-winger. I voted yesterday for Layton's NDP.

The only way that the Sask NDP will be improved is if they lose about 75% of their seats in the next election. The members of the NDP now are concerned with only one thing: holding on to power. They will do whatever it takes (sounds sorta familiar). They need their cabinet to be completely wiped out, especially Cline, Sontaag and the rest of the old guard. They will not renew if there is even a shread of hope left. They must be defeated AND demoralized.


From: Saskatoon SK | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
Wilf Day
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3276

posted 30 June 2004 10:16 AM      Profile for Wilf Day     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Based on the popular vote, Saskatchewan deserved 6 Conservative MPs, 4 Liberals and 4 New Democrats.

Say you had 7 local MPs -- 6 Conservatives and 1 Liberal -- and 7 provincial or regional MPs. They would have been 3 Liberals and four New Democrats.

And no one would be saying the West are all a bunch of bigots and conservatives.

So join Fair Vote Canada.


From: Port Hope, Ontario | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
NP
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 226

posted 30 June 2004 10:21 AM      Profile for NP   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Lord High Commisioner:

I myself have gained from Lorne Nystrom losing. I have gained an MP that will do meaningful work on the hill; not like Lorne trying to abolish the senate. Yeah, let's give the PM even more power!!


bwahahaha

That piece of garbage Scheer is going to do useful work??? Like what??? Banning homosexuality?

For all your bluster about getting "real" jobs, I think it's important to note that the two new young Conservative SK MPs have never held real jobs for any length of time.


From: The city that rhymes with fun | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
lonecat
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5460

posted 30 June 2004 08:30 PM      Profile for lonecat   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
The NDP Government needs two economic plans that mesh together - one for the cities and one for the rural areas. Both plans need federal and local input. Without these bold moves, the NDP Government will continue to come under heavy fire. The economic situation is the biggest challenge facing the Calvert Government.
From: Regina | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
dark_blue
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5387

posted 01 July 2004 01:36 AM      Profile for dark_blue     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Banning homosexuality?


From: Calgary | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
Albireo
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3052

posted 01 July 2004 02:30 AM      Profile for Albireo     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Wilfred Day:
Based on the popular vote, Saskatchewan deserved 6 Conservative MPs, 4 Liberals and 4 New Democrats.

Say you had 7 local MPs -- 6 Conservatives and 1 Liberal -- and 7 provincial or regional MPs. They would have been 3 Liberals and four New Democrats.

And no one would be saying the West are all a bunch of bigots and conservatives.

So join Fair Vote Canada.


Indeed. The results from SK are an absurdity. The Conservatives won 41.8% of the votes and 92.9% of the seats. The Liberals won 27.2% of the votes and 7.1% of the seats. The NDP won 23.4% of the votes and 0% of the seats.

The First Past the Post system takes the majority of votes and throws them in the garbage.


From: --> . <-- | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
NP
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 226

posted 01 July 2004 03:30 AM      Profile for NP   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by dark_blue:


you can roll your eyes all you want, but when a guy is the communications director for an MP who states to the media that he is in favour of banning homosexuality... there is atleast a logical link.

Unlike Scheer, who based his entire campaign on a disgraceful lie that Lorne supports child pornography.


From: The city that rhymes with fun | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
dark_blue
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5387

posted 02 July 2004 12:28 AM      Profile for dark_blue     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
when a guy is the communications director for an MP who states to the media that he is in favour of banning homosexuality... there is atleast a logical link.

A link, but no acuall proof he would himself ban it.


From: Calgary | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 02 July 2004 12:44 AM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
If the Conservative Party wants to have ANY chance of ever winning an election in Canada, they need to purge all these social conservative loons. All the crackpot fundamentalists Christians and anti-gay and anti-abortion freaks ought to be rounded up, put on an ice floe and cast off into the Arctic Ocean never to be seen again.

But, I kinda hope they keep these crazies since it will help ensure that they remain unelectable forever!


From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
dark_blue
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5387

posted 02 July 2004 01:28 AM      Profile for dark_blue     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
If the Conservative Party wants to have ANY chance of ever winning an election in Canada, they need to purge all these social conservative loons. All the crackpot fundamentalists Christians and anti-gay and anti-abortion freaks ought to be rounded up, put on an ice floe and cast off into the Arctic Ocean never to be seen again.

Yup. It was the extremist who screwed up the election, and Klein.


From: Calgary | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
saskganesh
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4203

posted 04 July 2004 07:19 PM      Profile for saskganesh     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by lonecat:
The NDP Government needs two economic plans that mesh together - one for the cities and one for the rural areas. Both plans need federal and local input. Without these bold moves, the NDP Government will continue to come under heavy fire. The economic situation is the biggest challenge facing the Calvert Government.

they have a rual plan, but i have no idea how its playing out.

http://www.agr.gov.sk.ca/acre/default.asp


From: regina | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged
Kaitlin Stocks
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3766

posted 05 July 2004 04:27 PM      Profile for Kaitlin Stocks   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I made a boo boo... read down a bit more

[ 05 July 2004: Message edited by: Kaitlin Stocks ]


From: The City That Rhymes With Fun... | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged
josh
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2938

posted 05 July 2004 04:29 PM      Profile for josh     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Don't worry Kaitlin, he's no longer among the living.
From: the twilight zone between the U.S. and Canada | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
paxamillion
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2836

posted 05 July 2004 04:33 PM      Profile for paxamillion   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
The Lord High Commisioner here.

And he claimed he had no issues. LOL!


From: the process of recovery | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
Kaitlin Stocks
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3766

posted 05 July 2004 04:34 PM      Profile for Kaitlin Stocks   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Lord High Commisioner:

Allo allo allo Kaitlin,

The Lord High Commisioner here. So some of your good friends lost their jobs last night. TOO DARN BAD!! Maybe these low laying leaches should attempt to get work in the "real world." This is politics and nothing is set in stone. I wish those people luck in getting decent employment in the tight Regina labour market. It's a good thing the NDP is in provincially as these people won't have to sling burgers at Rotten Ron's or sell cigarettes at the Corner Gas.

I myself have gained from Lorne Nystrom losing. I have gained an MP that will do meaningful work on the hill; not like Lorne trying to abolish the senate. Yeah, let's give the PM even more power!!

Do not attibute the losses in Saskatchewan to strategic voting. People here actually voted for the local CANDIDATE vice the PARTY LEADER. If anything this was the least strategic vote that has occured in years in Saskatchewan and Canada

Kaitlin, maybe you should give your head a shake. The people in Canada voted for who they thought would do the best job. The results showed me that in the ridings where the incumbant lost, the majority of the electorate voted against the incumbants. If the incumbant only got 35% of the vote, 65% of the people can't be wrong.

The people of Canada have spoken Kaitlin. DEAL WITH IT!!

To the people of Canada chosing their best local representitive,

Cheers!

The Lord High Commisioner


Well, Mr. Commissioner (of what I don't care to know)... What do you propose? MPs and MLAs are NO LONGER allowed to have ANY support staff AT ALL. None whatsoever - becuase, that's not a real job. As in any job, I'm sure you'd know, someone's gotta do it. And how dare you call those jobs "not real world"??? These are some of the most "real" jobs around - talking to people on a daily basis about things that are meaninful to them - Helping people out with issues, being the middle man (or woman) between a constituent and an elected official. I can't imagine some of the things that those office workers have heard. But of course, poverty and discrimination aren't really REAL, are they?

as for the senate - so you'll be happy seeing your tax dollars going towards do-nothing senators? I love watching them sit and drink in a private bar on Parliament hill, for free, doing absolutley NOTHING. NOTHING.

And how do you explain the votes then, if it were not for strategic voting? Hmm? The Tory vote in this province went DOWN, however, they gained seats. The Liberal vote went UP, the same percentage that the NDP vote went DOWN. If that's not strategic voting, I'm on caaa-rack.

Yes, I am giving my head a shake. I shake at this 25 year old boy who thinks he can do a better job than Lorne Nystrom - and I'm shakin my head at you too, because you think you GAINED from this travesty. I hope you enjoy when, on behalf of SK, this guy stands up in his seat in the House of Commons, and says, "Mr. Speaker, Lets put all the fags on a boat, and send them to the south pole!" Lyin Scheer will do a spectacular job of representing you in Parliamnet, you right wing nut.

And going back to you being wrong about the strategic voting, *ugh*. And people in Canada did vote for who they thought would do a better job, and thank god all those old-boy Tory's listened to Joe Clark, otherwise the whole damn country would be painted blue, and not just the "strategic vote prairies".


From: The City That Rhymes With Fun... | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged
lonecat
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5460

posted 06 July 2004 05:26 AM      Profile for lonecat   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by saskganesh:

they have a rual plan, but i have no idea how its playing out.

http://www.agr.gov.sk.ca/acre/default.asp


Yes, much thanks saskganesh, I am aware of this plan. I confess that i forgot all about it.
Unfortunately, none of us have been updated about this plan since well before the last provincial election.
All good plans are not only launched, but monitored and updated at regular intervals. This is all part of the accountability process.
Hopefully, we can find out soon if the ACRE committee is doing any meaningful work.


From: Regina | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 06 July 2004 11:49 AM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Jeffrey Simpson points out the following in his analysis of the NDP being shut out in Sask.

quote:
A final factor helps the Conservatives: the electoral boundaries. Saskatchewan persists in affixing large rural areas to chunks of cities, rather than splitting the rural and urban ridings.

The Conservatives, with their huge rural support, therefore win these mixed urban-rural ridings.


I've said it before and I'll say it again. The NDP was STUPID not to lobby for the proposed new electoral map in Sask. that would have created 6 purely urban seats instead of 8 mixed urban rural seats.

Just think. If that new map had been in effect in this election, Proctor could have run in a new purely urban seat in the northwest third of Regina and won easily. Nystrom probably would have won running in a purely urban Northeast Regina seat and I'll bet that Nettie Wiebe could have won in a totally urban seat on the east side of Saskatoon and who know how Gruending might have done.

By my estimate, the proposed newe map could have given the NDP 3-4 seats in Sask. instead we got ZERO. Heads should roll over this!


From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
josh
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2938

posted 06 July 2004 11:56 AM      Profile for josh     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Why didn't they? Especially since they have a prominent provincial role.
From: the twilight zone between the U.S. and Canada | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
Rich L
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4915

posted 06 July 2004 12:07 PM      Profile for Rich L     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Stockholm:
I've said it before and I'll say it again. The NDP was STUPID not to lobby for the proposed new electoral map in Sask. that would have created 6 purely urban seats instead of 8 mixed urban rural seats.

By my estimate, the proposed newe map could have given the NDP 3-4 seats in Sask. instead we got ZERO. Heads should roll over this!


The riding boundaries could work both ways. With the NDP's current level of support, the NDP lead in the urban regions didn't exceed the Con's lead in the rural areas, and so the NDP lost seats. If the NDP's support had been 10% higher, the boundaries might have worked in their favour, allowing the NDP to win all of the urban-rural seats and giving them representation of something like 8 seats (in that case, urban-only seats would work against the party).

As long as the NDP is in power provincially, the NDP federal support in Sask is likely to stay at a modest level and it will be tough to make the boundaries work for them.


From: Winnipeg | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged
josh
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2938

posted 06 July 2004 01:37 PM      Profile for josh     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I think there's validity to two other points Simpson makes:
quote:

Howard Leeson, a political scientist at the University of Regina, argues that rural depopulation and bigger farms have led away from social-democratic populism, which relied on government and institutions such as the Wheat Pool and the Canadian Wheat Board.

"The social-democratic variety of populism is dependent in part on the maintenance of a large number of small rural landholders. Larger farmers tend to develop more orthodox views," he wrote in a book he edited, Saskatchewan Politics.

. . . .

As long as the NDP had about it the aura of the social gospel, it appeared safely God-fearing in rural areas. Now, the NDP is a secular party supporting gay marriage and abortion, and is led by a bicycle-riding greenie from downtown Toronto, a politically lethal combination in the rural prairies.


http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ArticleNews/TPStory/LAC/20040706/COSIMP06//


From: the twilight zone between the U.S. and Canada | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
Tim
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3145

posted 06 July 2004 01:39 PM      Profile for Tim     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I don't know about Regina, but from the numbers I know about for Saskatoon I think the NDP would have won 1 seat at best (Nettie Wiebe's, and even that would have been close). On the west side (which is one seat), good numbers in Saskatoon Rosetown Biggar are offset by a poor showing in Saskatoon Wanuskewin. The third seat is (more or less) the Saskatoon portion of Blackstrap, where we didn't do well either. Potentially, of course, we'd do better with urban seats, but we'll have to wait for the poll-by-poll results to see if that would have been the case this time.

As for why the NDP didn't lobby for the new boundaries, I have no idea what the background is. But the boundaries commission noted that it's a lot easier to make submissions opposing the proposals than supporting them, and I believe they made some recommendations about changing the consultation process to account for that.

[edited to fix incorrect reference to Wanuskewin]

[ 06 July 2004: Message edited by: Tim Hutchinson ]


From: Paris of the Prairies | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
Kaitlin Stocks
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3766

posted 06 July 2004 03:32 PM      Profile for Kaitlin Stocks   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Bicycle-riding greenie? Whomever could you be talking about!?!?

I do recall when the boundaries were tentatively redrawn. I remember... the Proctor's making a huge fuss about it. Publically. I have never spoken to them privatley about this, but I think the conversation is due.

Dick was very concerned that he would lose HIS riding of Palliser, which would be more or less correct. However, I believe he felt it was quite a personal attack on him, so he fought to keep his riding, which was eventually at his detriment.

I can nearly guarantee that we would have won two of the three all urban Regina ridings. (after all, this is a "red city" founded on government workers...) And possibly the east side of Saskatoon... However crazy some of those voters are. I mean, they DID elect Pankiw at one point...


From: The City That Rhymes With Fun... | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged
lonecat
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5460

posted 06 July 2004 07:45 PM      Profile for lonecat   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Hmmmmm...Lorne Nystrom may or may not have won under purely urban lines.
For example, in the poll where I live, the Liberal candidate won the poll (the Grits had never won this poll before) - the Liberals got 86 votes, Nystrom 64, and the Conservatives 55.
In another poll near Imperial School in a low income neighbourhood, the Conservatives got 59 votes, Nystrom 58, and the Liberals 56.

So, Nystrom may or may not have benefitted from a purely urban constituency.

[ 06 July 2004: Message edited by: lonecat ]


From: Regina | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 06 July 2004 08:34 PM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I would guess that in the rural parts of Nystrom's riding the vote probably went something like 60% Conservative and 20% each for the Liberals and NDP.
From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
NP
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 226

posted 06 July 2004 09:51 PM      Profile for NP   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by lonecat:
Hmmmmm...Lorne Nystrom may or may not have won under purely urban lines.
For example, in the poll where I live, the Liberal candidate won the poll (the Grits had never won this poll before) - the Liberals got 86 votes, Nystrom 64, and the Conservatives 55.
In another poll near Imperial School in a low income neighbourhood, the Conservatives got 59 votes, Nystrom 58, and the Liberals 56.

So, Nystrom may or may not have benefitted from a purely urban constituency.

[ 06 July 2004: Message edited by: lonecat ]



Nystrom won urban Regina.


From: The city that rhymes with fun | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
lonecat
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5460

posted 07 July 2004 12:47 AM      Profile for lonecat   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
True Noah, Nystrom did win in urban Regina.
The point I was trying to make is, that the way the election went, you never can tell what will happen in any given seat at any given time, that is all.
For example, this constituency, with roughly similar boundaries, elected Lorne in 2000, and in 1997. Simon de Jong was also elected in 1993, and in many elections before that with different boundaries.

As for the rural part of the seat, I wouldn't be too quick to write it off.
The NDP enjoys strong traditional support in the rural portion of Regina Qu'Appelle - the town of Wynyard has been in the CCF/NDP column solidly since the 1940's, and other towns like Raymore and Indian Head are always loyal to the party as well.

I am not convinced rural Saskatcheawn is anti-NDP. I would argue rural people are more volatile in their voting patterns, given that the province's rural economy is collapsing. It happens to be collapsing at a time when the NDP Government is in power. There is no connection between the two, but the government still gets blamed anyhow.
As I have mentioned in other threads, there is no magic bullet in this situation, or an awful lot the government can do, except work with rural people on a meaningful, active plan to rebuild the shattered economy.


From: Regina | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 07 July 2004 12:57 AM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Its interesting that all over the western world an urban rural gap is opening up in voting patterns. In the US, it wasn't so long ago that states like Minnesota and Wisconsin were solidly Democratic and the Democrats were very competitive in states like South Dakota and Montana that had some of that old Prairie populism a la Saskatchewan. Now Montana and SD are totally rock ribbed GOP as is West Virginia and the Dems have to fight like dogs to hang on to Minnesota! But at the same time Illinois and California and New Jersey - which used to be GOP-leabning swing states - are now solidly Democrat due to the impact of Chicago, SF, LA and the New York suburbs in jersey.

In the UK, the Conservative have almost no urban seats at all, yet there are still a coupel fo rural seats in East Anglia that are Tory that went Labour in the 60s!

If I have to choose between winning seats in the cities or in the counyry, I will choose the urban seats. That is where the future lies.


From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
sgm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5468

posted 07 July 2004 03:23 AM      Profile for sgm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
On the same page as the Simpson article we've been talking about was one by Preston Manning in which he says this:

quote:

Saskatchewan understands the economic and social policies of the NDP better than any other province. It gave all but one of its seats to the new Conservatives, none to the NDP.



The numbers, of course, don't really bear out the implied story here, which would seem to be one of turning away from the NDP to the new Conservatives.

The NDP vote was down in the province, but so was the right-wing vote. Harper won fewer votes than Day did in 2000, and considerably fewer still than Day and Clark combined scored in 2000.

I did a bit of number crunching today and found that even if you assume all of Devine's, Pankiw's and Spencer's vote would have been won by Harper had none of them run, the new Conservative party would still have won some 8700 votes fewer than the Alliance did in 2000.

The real growth stories were the Liberals, and Greens/Independents/Others, considering that "Others" )(i.e. non Alliance, Liberal, PC, or NDP) scored something less than 1% provincially last time.

No sharp turn away from NDP policies towards the Conservative party here, in my view.


From: I have welcomed the dawn from the fields of Saskatchewan | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
steam.machine
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4916

posted 07 July 2004 03:39 AM      Profile for steam.machine     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
I am not convinced rural Saskatcheawn is anti-NDP. I would argue rural people are more volatile in their voting patterns, given that the province's rural economy is collapsing. It happens to be collapsing at a time when the NDP Government is in power. There is no connection between the two, but the government still gets blamed anyhow.
As I have mentioned in other threads, there is no magic bullet in this situation, or an awful lot the government can do, except work with rural people on a meaningful, active plan to rebuild the shattered economy.

That's a pretty good analysis Lonecat. I would add that the anger at the NDP is based a lot on desperation as their small farms and towns fade away and young people move away. They feel that they are helpless in stopping that trend.

Throw in the closing of hospitals and schools, the tearing out of railway lines and elevators and it makes for a very bleak future for those who cherish the rural way of life.

Many rural people in SK are mad at the NDP because they felt betrayed and hurt by the Romanow Government. They had high hopes for Mr. Romanow in 1991 and although they realized the need for restoring financial managment, they didn't expect to be taking the brunt of it.

Having said that, I agree that the NDP isn't written off in rural Saskatchewan. I think many people are looking for the Government to show that they are listening and offering a helping hand to revitalize rural Saskatchewan. Calvert has actually done a good job in that respect as the rural vote for the NDP did go up in many ridings in the last election.

However the NDP in Saskatchewan has a long way to go in restoring that goodwill in rural Saskatchewan. But there's no better time than now to start that process, cause they can't hold on to every urban seat forever, especially if they are competing with the Liberals for the urban vote.


From: Calgary | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca