2015 Canadian Federal Election

[Kong Wen]

While calling the election at this point is obviously premature and meant to be provocative, here's an opinion piece in the Star that touches on a point I was making before, focused in the light of the Syrian refugee crisis and sharpened by criticism following Harper's inadequate response.

Generally, polls are tight across the board.

[TheGreatNads]

That opinion piece is pretty silly. The most desperate refugees who are at risk of death are pretty much never the ones who make it all the way to North America(for obvious reasons). The ones who make it out are invariably much better connected and not desperate, and are more likely not to be refugees in any meaningful sense with a few exceptions. The most desperate are the ones in neighboring countries.

Despite all this sentinmental talk about helping refugees, it is Europe's irresponsible immigration policy that is responsible for a large number of the deaths. According to the U.N.'s own figures, 2,500 people have died or gone missing this year trying to get to Europe, another 3,500 the year before. You could drop a few bombs in Syria and you wouldn't kill that many people. It's amazing to me people can get all moralizing while totally ignoring the consequences of their proposals.

I blame Europe's failure to act quickly in the opposite direction as that advocated in the article for this. If you want to prevent kids from dying on dangerous journeys, don't incentivize and encourage people to take those dangerous journeys. Australia did just that in December 2013 and they haven't had any people dying on boats since. But people don't like it because sending back asylum seekers is just a bummer, even if it does save lives. From reading the New York Times and other outlet's coverage you would think the lack of deaths was a bad thing. There's nothing worse than a policy you don't like actually working.

But 6,000 people dead isn't really the point anyway, it's purely the sentiment of the matter. 6,000 dead people is a small price to pay for people to feel good about themselves. These refugee images are also a convenient excuse to attack a hated politician(on the flimsiest of grounds in this case). Gee I wonder if I scour Richard Gwyn's archives if I'm going to see him shedding the same tears for refugees in the Congo or Rwanda for example. I bet not. The insincerity of this piece. The chances of Canada making a significant impact on anything happening in Syria is nil. But hey, if you want to increase the amount of middle class Syrians in the country, go ahead, it probably won't do you any harm. But it's not going to lead you back to a mythical golden age where Canada and it's peace loving national character are the moral light of the world. Give me a break.

[VictorViper]

Referencing insensitive sentiments on genocide as compared to the refugee situation, belittling a major point of national pride and identity (and ironically so, given prior comments that nothing is broken beyond repair). Canada is not America in critical ways you clearly have no understanding or perspective on.

[TheGreatNads]

belittling a major point of national pride and identity (and ironically so, given prior comments that nothing is broken beyond repair)

Calling certain parts of Canada's "national pride and identity" to quote you, "mythical," (to quote me) and suggesting Canada is not likely to be broken beyond repair sounds pretty consistent to me.

[VictorViper]

I said you were belittling it. My point stands.

[TheGreatNads]

Also, since it was mentioned in the Gwyn article, and it's been mentioned in the thread at other times, something must be said about this UN peacekeeping business. It's true that Harper has cut down on Canadian participation in UN peacekeeping missions, and people have rightly criticized that. However, there's a tendency especially in media reports to make it sound as if Harper is primarily responsible for Canada's fall from grace in this regard, and that isn't really accurate. The biggest cuts happened in the mid to late 1990s and Canada's ranking in terms of peacekeeping support mostly declined throughout that period continuing to the present day. That's not to downplay that what Harper did was bad, but to say that this tendency predates his time as Prime Minister, even if it's true that Harper made things worse than a different candidate would have.

I was relying on data from this page btw: http://www.un.org/en/peacekeeping/resou ... hive.shtml

[VictorViper]

The big difference between Chrétien (yay) and Martin (yuck), and Harper is that the last liberal leaders had been cutting back on military spending, but not otherwise repurposing our armed forces. Harper has spent tremendous amounts in military spending while maintaining the decline of peacekeeping missions. The lightning purchases will never be used for peacekeeping and (I hope) will never be used for defense.

[Jordan]

As an American, I just want Harper to win because I will enjoy reveling in all the butthurt that ensues, especially among the Canadians with whom I regularly speak with. I barely know anybody who likes Harper or even tolerates him. I've heard that he has more support among West Coast Canadians, but it seems like his unpopularity grows with every term he spends in office.

I actually think that despite his massive unpopularity, he has a shot at winning just because of what I perceive as a divide in the left vote. I think a lot of voters are torn between Muclair and Trudeau, which I also think plays right into Harper's hands. If that vote gets split and he still gets a majority, he can win like he did in that one election with Jack Layton and Ignatieff (iirc).

[The Shoemaker]

As an American, I just want Harper to win because I will enjoy reveling in all the butthurt that ensues, especially among the Canadians with whom I regularly speak with. I barely know anybody who likes Harper or even tolerates him. I've heard that he has more support among West Coast Canadians, but it seems like his unpopularity grows with every term he spends in office.

I actually think that despite his massive unpopularity, he has a shot at winning just because of what I perceive as a divide in the left vote. I think a lot of voters are torn between Muclair and Trudeau, which I also think plays right into Harper's hands. If that vote gets split and he still gets a majority, he can win like he did in that one election with Jack Layton and Ignatieff (iirc).

And I hope Trump wins

It is a concern that the vote might be split. I've heard a lot of people say they're not a fan of Harper, but they've never voted Liberal or NDP and they're not going to start now. I don't know if most people view the election more based on parties over figure heads, but I feel like what parties stood for in the past doesn't matter anymore, because those parties will generally sway towards the direction of the public opinion anyways. So I look more at what each canidate could do with their leadship, rather than what stance the parties are known for taking.

[The Shoemaker]

Good old Reddit.