Have a Drink Hoss!

Written By: - Date published: 10:26 am, October 21st, 2015 - 55 comments
Categories: labour, political parties - Tags: , , ,

So, by my understanding, in ‘three party’* Canada, the New Democratic Party sought the center and nosedived. Simultaneously, the Liberals moved left and soared.

In ‘two party’ England and Wales, Labour sought the center and bumbled and scraped the ground looking for lift off. Meanwhile, in the very same election in ‘three party’ Scotland where the SNP went left, the SNP soared while Labour got more or less wiped out.

What’s the question hoss? (hint) You’re looking thirsty hoss.

* I mean the number of major parties.

55 comments on “Have a Drink Hoss! ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. dukeofurl 1
    21 October 2015 at 10:42 am

    And the independence AND left leaning BQ were virtually irrelevant.

    The idea that NDP moved to the centre is a bit tenuous. There are many many policies that are to the left of the Liberals.

    eg C$15 ph minimum wage,

  2. dukeofurl 2
    21 October 2015 at 10:54 am

    Some sort of glitch here has deleted my edit with more policies and links.
    http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/elections/party-platform-comparison/article26758784/

    Ending Keystone XL pipeline.

    Increasing taxes on companies and ending stock options tax breaks ( this is how they balance the budget)

    Increasing assistance for low income families

  3. vto 3
    21 October 2015 at 11:01 am

    That is what happens when you do / don’t act with the conviction of your beliefs…

  4. ScottGN 4
    21 October 2015 at 11:02 am

    Trudeau only really outflanked the NDP on the left over one issue and that was his intention to run 3 years of budget deficits in order to finance infrastructure spending mostly across Canada’s cities. The Liberal’s had realised that in an era of stagnant growth, zero inflation and rock bottom interest rates the threat of budgets deficits no longer has any sting.
    While Trudeau’s polling rise can be measured from this announcement that’s not why the Liberals won yesterday. Canadians overwhelmingly wanted a new prime minister and a change of tone from government and when the NDP started to falter in their stronghold of Quebec (thanks to the Tories inexplicable decision to re-ignite the niqab controversy thus upending the delicate three-way split that had delivered them a majority at the previous election) voters realised that only the Liberals could deliver that change.

    • dukeofurl 4.1
      21 October 2015 at 11:17 am

      See reference above about increasing taxes to ‘balance the budget’

      • Colonial Viper 4.1.1
        21 October 2015 at 1:36 pm

        Balancing the budget is a right wing agenda.

        • dukeofurl 4.1.1.1
          21 October 2015 at 1:54 pm

          Not really, the so called balance or surplus is imaginary, as they still need to borrow heaps to pay the bills.

          Ask Bill about the $6 billion he is borrowing to get his ‘small surplus’ and NDP were increasing their revenue to get theirs and do doubt borrowing heaps as well.
          The liberals were not going to increase taxes for business or profits on buying stocks so that according to Bill is a ‘shift to the left”?

        • David H 4.1.1.2
          22 October 2015 at 8:25 am

          Surely that’s. Attempting to balance the Budget is a right wing agenda. The left, just get it done

      • Bob 4.1.2
        21 October 2015 at 2:08 pm

        Don’t forget the tax cuts for the middle tax bracket (up to $89,401pa.), dropping the retirement age back to 65, and effectively Working for families for households earning up to $200k (not $100k like the NZ version): https://www.liberal.ca/files/2015/10/A-new-plan-for-a-strong-middle-class.pdf
        These are the people that seem to be forgotten about by Labour, the Middle Class, this is where the votes are.

        • Draco T Bastard 4.1.2.1
          21 October 2015 at 2:38 pm

          At those figures you’re not talking middles class but the top 1%.

          • Bob 4.1.2.1.1
            21 October 2015 at 2:47 pm

            Really? http://transportblog.co.nz/tag/central-city/
            Look at the second graph in this piece, I think your view on ‘Middle Class’ is completely at odds with reality. Don’t feel too bad though, Labour seems to have the same views as you.

            (Sorry about the source, can’t believe I have to use a council transport blog for this but the Stats NZ site is horrible now!)

            • Draco T Bastard 4.1.2.1.1.1
              21 October 2015 at 3:29 pm

              Admittedly Stats NZ website is now arse but you failed to link to anything remotely related to the discussion. The Auckland Transport Blog focusses upon Auckland.

              Try this one instead (That should open a PDF document).

              • Bob …
                21 October 2015 at 3:43 pm

                Have a look at my link again, the Purple bars in the graph represent the NZ median household incomes. The Salvation Army link you sent through relates to Wealth (not what we are discussing) and per capita income (a useless measure when it comes to tax).

    • Liberal Realist 4.2
      21 October 2015 at 5:23 pm

      +1 bang on.

  5. Kevin 5
    21 October 2015 at 11:41 am

    I think the result in Canada and prior to that Scotland, goes to prove that the natural inclination for people is socialism, and I do not mean this in the political sense. The majority of us choose to live in communities of other people, we like being amongst other people and everyday in our work situations we work and co-operate with other people.

    The challenge for political parties then is to transfer this to the political realm and provide policies that reinforce ‘socialism’ where co-operation and working together achieves results that benefit everyone.

    When you pander to a specific demographic, baby-boomers for example, and enact policy that benefits them directly but to the detriment of others you establish a following that can be hard to dismantle politically. They are a large portion of the population and their sense of entitlement is pretty well embedded into their psyche.

    When you see a gradual destruction of the middle class which encompasses many of the baby boom generation maybe it starts to hit home to those people, and they finally start questioning their own selfish motivations?

    Just an opinion…

    • Grindlebottom 5.1
      21 October 2015 at 12:20 pm

      Is part of the problem young people are demanding change to a more equitable sharing of wealth & opportunity, and better treatment of the unfortunate such as the unemployed, sick and homeles? How do you get them engaged in learning and debate about political alternatives, and in actually voting? Especially when they probably see little real difference between the two main parties.

      • dukeofurl 5.1.1
        21 October 2015 at 12:37 pm

        Are they ?
        Thats the largest group that dont vote, so not much evidence of ‘demanding change’
        As for getting involved in political alternatives, it doesnt seem they interested at all.

        • Colonial Viper 5.1.1.1
          21 October 2015 at 1:38 pm

          That’s why Labour has ditched reaching out to the “Missing Million.”

          • BM 5.1.1.1.1
            21 October 2015 at 1:39 pm

            Yep, it’s a waste of time and resources.

            • Colonial Viper 5.1.1.1.1.1
              21 October 2015 at 1:51 pm

              Then they should come out and just say it, instead of pretending to care what ordinary NZers below the median of society think.

              • Grindlebottom …
                21 October 2015 at 3:03 pm

                That’ll teach me to proof read properly before posting next time.

                My opening post should’ve read:

                “Is part of the problem not enough young people are demanding change…”

          • Ch-ch Chiquita 5.1.1.1.2
            21 October 2015 at 4:18 pm

            Then why dont they go left of Labour and vote greens?

      • b waghorn 5.1.2
        21 October 2015 at 7:28 pm

        Its a shame about mana they were the only outfit that had a chance of waking up a lot of none voters ,and you can bet the ones who had got on the mana train and got sold out for $3 million are unlikely to vote again.

      • Smilin 5.1.3
        21 October 2015 at 8:55 pm

        I suppose if the thinking of the under 30s was allowed to cast caution to the wind and jeopardise their futures by an all out revolt against the monetarists who have their lives hog tied by finance and intelligence robots. These monetarists are the Gestapo of the under 30s self determination. The vote might begin to have some true meaning if they got a 60s style counterculture movement working again .
        Quite honestly the 35 to 55s who have all the power to control the younger and older generations really need their cage rattled big time, they are so convinced their cruisey bs lifestyle of all that money can buy will always be there
        These controllers nearly had to pay up in 2008 except arch whingers like our PM got in and let them off the hook .Goes to show ya the truth about those who have the money have the power and it lives on in Infamy
        Bloody fascists most of them or some form of rightwing control freak mentality

    • The Other Mike 5.2
      21 October 2015 at 3:15 pm

      Yeah… agree. See what is happening in the USA too with Bernie Sanders lighting a big fire in the bellies of disenchanted (and disenfranchised!) voters.

      HE is resonating with young people as well.

      Labour is due a left turn.

      • Colonial Viper 5.2.1
        21 October 2015 at 3:53 pm

        The careerists in Labour prefer to stay on the good side of the corporate elite and the 1% rather than be on the good side of the bottom 50%.

        • kenny 5.2.1.1
          21 October 2015 at 8:10 pm

          Problem is there are no Left wingers in the Labour caucus, at least I can’t think of any. Even Andrew Little is too centrist for my liking.

          Maybe Ruth Dyson.

          • dukeofurl 5.2.1.1.1
            22 October 2015 at 11:38 am

            You mean far left ?
            You are looking in wrong party. Plenty of people like that stand for parliament but win a handful of votes.
            Its not a viable choice.

  6. Ad 6
    21 October 2015 at 1:05 pm

    That’s like hoping Winston Peters loses 30 years, fronts mild left before the election, Labour tanks to under 20%, and every 70yr housewife throws their knickers so Tom Jones-like Winnie gets to be Prime Minister.

    Yeah nah.

    • Colonial Viper 6.1
      21 October 2015 at 1:39 pm

      Or maybe Labour could get a clue when its staring them in the face, and stop shadowing National in the centre-right.

  7. weka 7
    21 October 2015 at 1:41 pm

    Hoss? Is that a Bonanza reference? (it’s gone right over my head).

  8. Colonial Viper 8
    21 October 2015 at 1:42 pm

    But, Tony Blair!

    As if that war monger, highly paid bankster servant, should be an example to what remains of the Labour Party.

  9. Tory 9
    21 October 2015 at 4:06 pm

    The Lib Dems of Canada are essentially a centralist party, not unlike Labour of NZ. You cannot compare the politics of overseas FPP elections with NZ and make the same conclusions (i.e. the more left parties move, the greater the vote).
    NZ MMP has for a long time seen the vote pretty evenly split between left and right, elections are decided with single digit percentages. Compared to the old FPP elections we do not see the extremes occur (such as when a party votes collapses totally).
    NZ is a prime example of centralist parties capturing the vote (such as National). Sure the hard left and hard right supporters will espouse the various conspiracy theories regarding their own views but the reality is there is bugger all difference between NZ Labour and NZ National and believe it or not, that is what the population vote for,

    • Colonial Viper 9.1
      21 October 2015 at 4:15 pm

      lol Tory, National are a neoliberal corporation loving party. Nothing centrist about them – apart from being focussed on the centre of the 1% that is.

      Time to shift politics to the left.

      • kenny 9.1.1
        21 October 2015 at 8:30 pm

        But who is going to do it? Not the Greens. Social Credit is the nearest, but how much support do they get!? Good left-wing policies but they are almost off the radar, so there is a party out there but left-wingers choose to ignore it.

      • Bob 9.1.2
        22 October 2015 at 10:55 am

        “Nothing centrist about them”
        Come on CV, you know that’s bullshit.
        – Increase to benefits above the rate of inflation for the first time in god knows how long
        – Breakfast in schools
        – Increase in Early childhood care
        – Increase in paid parental leave
        – Increase of free healthcare to 13 y/o’s (from either 3 or 4 y/o’s when they took office)
        – Increases in the minimum wage above the rate of inflation every year (from $12 when they took office, to $14.75 now)

        I know I am missing plenty of other examples too.
        You may not like to think of National as centrist, but this government has proven itself to be different to National parties of old.

    • Bill 9.2
      21 October 2015 at 6:11 pm

      Then do the comparison of an mmp system. The SNP touts itself as left leaning social democratic (the message); has formed the the Scottish government these past 8 years (currently a majority government); and is sitting at something like 60% in the polls for nest years’s elections with both the Tories and Labour nose-dived and dead at 20% (+/- 5%) .

  10. Tory 10
    21 October 2015 at 4:39 pm

    CV, you see here in ‘lies’ the problem, what is a centralist party? National is loosing support (i.e. me) to a Right leaning party like Act as their policies are simply a mirror of Labour (and vice versa). FPP is a system that rewards the centre, look how much $ KDC threw at the election yet he got no where (and don’t serve me that conspiracy theories regarding polling etc). National sit at 47%, that is the centre of NZ politics, like it or hate it.

    • Colonial Viper 10.1
      21 October 2015 at 4:49 pm

      National sit at 47%, that is the centre of NZ politics, like it or hate it.

      National are a right wing pro-corporate party which tends to the needs of the 1% and are driven by the dictats and interests of the 0.01%.

      Like it or hate it, that’s a fact.

    • Bill 10.2
      21 October 2015 at 6:19 pm

      It’s only ‘the center’, or ‘safe zone’ of what’s on offer. A bit like going to a restuaraunt and finding that the menu consists only of various ice creams. Want a proper meal? Tough. Not on offer. And all the waiters around race to tempt you with their favorite chefs glorious vanilla…

      Not well put, but I think you’ll get the point.

  11. Tory 11
    21 October 2015 at 4:52 pm

    So 47% of the voting population agree, that’s called the centre

    • McFlock 11.1
      21 October 2015 at 5:03 pm

      Voting population. You forget about the third of the registered voter population too alienated from the process to vote.

      But then admitting that national only has the support of a third of the population doesn’t fit the tory delusion.

      • Bob 11.1.1
        22 October 2015 at 12:58 pm

        “But then admitting that labour only has the support of a fifth of the population doesn’t fit the leftie delusion”
        FIFY

        • One Anonymous Bloke 11.1.1.1
          22 October 2015 at 1:07 pm

          🙄

          “….but, but. but, he did it too!”

        • McFlock 11.1.1.2
          23 October 2015 at 12:15 pm

          For future reference, “FIFY” is an acronym for “fixed it for you”.

          Anyway, the gap between 30% and 50% is 20%.
          The gap between one third and one fifth is 13%.
          And, of course, Labour will be part of a real coalition government, rather than the support of trace-element sycophants in rotten boroughs to carry them over the threshold.

          Your point of view has almost halved the success requirement for the left in the next election. Thanks Bob, I feel much more optimistic. And you suck at spreading alarm and despondency.

  12. Bill 12
    21 October 2015 at 6:02 pm

    Ah, the joys of putting up a quick post and having to disappear for the day. A couple of points.

    1. Whether any particular party is genuine with its messaging is, for the sake of this post, beside the point; it’s the message that voters vote on.

    2. this comes from 1. The stated direction of travel (genuine or otherwise) is what counts electorally.

    3. Voters can only choose from the options on offer. In a ‘two party’ situation, if one party is moving to the center, then voters have no choice beyond ‘the real McCoy and the ‘me too’ option. Hardly inspiring and kinda predictable as far as results go.

  13. DS 13
    21 October 2015 at 7:34 pm

    Can we all just agree that the end of Harper is the best political news to come out of the Anglosphere in years?

    (Incidentally, I’m not sure Scotland is three party. It went from being One Party state Labour to One Party state SNP).