Citizenship

I'm going to start by sharing some of my favorite quotes from today:

"Don't know why everyone is so steamed about the election" 

"Hehehe! But look how good the NDP did!!!" 

"I don't care - they're all gonna fuck us in the ass anyways" 

"There's no way I could vote for that Ignatieff guy!" 

I'm not about to start making the "our democracy is broken" argument - because there is no perfect system (although there are certainly more perfect ones). I don't feel like our democracy is broken - and I also don't think the world is about to end. I'm absolutely concerned about the way that this country is about to be reshaped - but I'll come to that some other time. 

Right now, what worries me more is the appearance of an unplugged electorate. I have a hard time believing that this election was decided by policy. I have an even harder time believing that the election was decided by facts.

I find it more likely that this election was decided by an unengaged and uneducated electorate - and I also don't think this is new for this election, I think it's probably true of every election. I think the fact that this is the third election in five years made it increasingly easy for us as voters to only marginally (if that) take note of the issues or facts. 

This is the part where I feel the obligation to note that your vote is your right. The fact that we can choose to vote in any direction for whatever reason we like is absolutely our right. There are no thought police - in fact we have the freedom to say and do (mostly) whatever we please. 

With that part out of the way

When are people going to start acting like their duty as citizens isn't just to show up and vote on election day - but instead to have something of an understanding of what you're voting for and de facto what you're voting against? I think we can all agree that the person who ends up running this government has a very important job, and has to deal with a lot of very important issues. If we're deciding who's going to hold this job, shouldn't we take some time to learn about these issues and look at the options and then take a look at who has the best solutions to them? Also: If you're not willing to do that - to take 20 minutes of your time to figure that out - shouldn't you just stay home? 

Now I know that I just did something there that's a cardinal sin in the western world. "Voting is your duty - your right - people in China and Syria and Egypt have been dying for this right damn it - how dare you suggest people stay home and NOT VOTE!?!?!?"  

Those people halfway across the world fighting for democratic rights aren't doing so out of blissful ignorance or because they "just don't like the guy". It's usually because they've been marginalized and shut out by a tyrant concentrating wealth and power to a small segment of the country.* 

There are plenty of centre left voters that flipped to the NDP last night. I'd venture that a whole lot of them did so because of the leader and not nearly identical policy. Some of them might have done so because Jack's campaign had a large focus on health care. As one of my friends said to me, "I'm voting NDP because he's going to do something for nurses and my Mom's a nurse." and another, "My Mom is asking what they're going to do for people who have [illness]...". Health care is a provincial jurisdiction though. With the exception of the amount of money that the Government hands out - there's nothing they will do that has any impact on health care employees or specific strategies towards any illness. 

I want to be clear about one thing: My suggestion is not that people stay home and not vote because they don't know these things... my suggestion is that it's time for people to take their citizenship seriously. If I voted for a female candidate because I thought she was hot - I'd certainly raise some eyebrows. However not voting for someone cause you "just don't like them" is perfectly acceptable. "They're all going to fuck us in the ass anyways" -- well, maybe. They'll do it differently though. Depending on the perspective you might be asked to clinch through it. It might last an hour - or it might last 4 1/2 years. You might just be into it too. So at least be aware of the kind of ass fucking you're about to receive.

I understand that this goes directly against my general stance to be realistic instead of idealistic. The most common response to a suggestion like this is, "I don't have the time" or "I just don't care enough". If either of those are true, then yes - I'm suggesting you should stay home. 

The truth is, barring some kind of catastrophe people aren't about to start taking things more seriously. If your world's not flipped upside down - then the status quo is oftentimes acceptable. Sheeple will be sheeple, and votes will be cast for the sole purpose of not wanting to cast another vote for 4 years. Citizenship can be frustrating that way. 

So anyone who has a problem with the result of last night needs not to look at the system, or the parties, or the horrific campaign management by the Liberal party -- no. Instead look to your friends and neighbors, brothers and sisters, parents and grandparents. It was us - the citizens of this country with no time or use for serious citizenship who elected this government. In four years we'll be faced with a slightly different decision - an election coming out of any majority government is inherently a referendum on the job done by that government. However, one thing is certain:

We'll be told many stories then by many different people. Our ability or inability to seek out the truth - to take seriously our democratic duty - will more than likely dictate the result of that election and therefore the very serious issues that our government deals with every day. 

*Canadians can come back and read this sentence in four years again and think about starting their own riot.

It's Very Late

What does it mean?

The people have spoken. Very similarly to 1993 and 1997 a party is going to lead us for the next four years without any checks or balance. We know there won't be 12 seats to flip - so the Conservatives have the stable majority that they've been seeking.

I'm extremely curious to see the polling data over the coming days that outlines who moved where and when and why. I think just from looking at the numbers there were three different big jumps.

1.  Bloc to NDP 
2.  Liberal to Conservative
3.  Liberal to NDP

The truth is, knowing what happened doesn't help us any if we don't know why.

• Did the Bloc vote move NDP because they decided that their interests are best served by being a strong partner in Canada - or because they were tired of the Bloc being ineffective and gaining separatist demands?
• Did centre Liberals get scared by the oncoming NDP wave and flip conservative for fear of the NDP - or did Conservatives effectly target and convince certain voters (yes, some of which are from visible minorities) that Conservative values most closely align with theirs? 
• Did left leaning Liberals not feel represented by their party anymore and flip NDP - or were personality voters just not happy with Harper, out on Iggy, and went Jack.

"Why?" -- That is the important part because the "why" tells what should be next.

• If the NDP are the new voice of Quebec, Liberal strongholds are getting picked off, and Liberals have lost touch with the left - isn't it time for a merge and an emergence of a (mostly) two party system? 
• If the Bloc voters are just fed up, Liberal centrists fear the NDP, and personality voters went Layton - then we just wait for Harper to govern from the right now that he can - and everything swings back Liberal next time so long as they select someone people don't hate... right? 

Probably not. Most likely, it's a combination of all those things... which makes the water awfully muddy. So much will depend on who the Liberals select to lead them - and how Quebec plays out in the next four years. Anything is possible, but centre-left leaning voters need to have a good long think about combining these two parties because the split was in serious play today.

Do we really want to have this same result in four years? As of right now, about 60% of the nation is unhappy and by keeping things the way they are - we risk being no further ahead in four years time. People aren't going to get together on their own and vote strategically within their region. There needs to be a clear choice for the centre-left, and right now there's only a choice for the centre, and a choice for the left. We're probably heading into four years of governing from the right - and this country will never go all the way far left (NDP = Reform/Alliance just on the other side) so lets create another majority option. A party that centre voters still feel represented by but holds true to liberal ideals with social issues, workers rights, but champions education and health care. A party that finds the right way to care for seniors. However, a party that is not completely beholden to unions, and makes having balanced budgets a priority without hiking taxes on middle and low income individuals/business.

The top priority of this new party: Proportional representation.

Then when our parties re-fracture - we can have the government that we vote for.

Harpers Speech

Should include:

• A clear mandate to keep doing the same good things they've done on the economy. 
• Tough on crime. 
• Lower taxes
• From east to west
• Faithful to our friends and commitments
• Health Care 
• An acknowledgement of A) Talking to other leaders and B) Working for every Canadian
• Arctic Sovereignty
• "Strong" Military  

April Blue Jays Wrap Up

If someone told me at the beginning of April that the Blue Jays would be 1 game under 500 when the month ended - I wouldn't have been the least bit surprised. The surprise comes in how we got there. For example: 

• If that same person told me that Travis Snider and Brett Cecil would be in the minor leagues and that they'd be remaking the mistake of having a power prospect DH - I wouldn't believe them. 
• If someone told me the team would be third in the majors in walks, I might have believed them... but if they told me that Jose Bautista would have 30 of those walks since no one will pitch to him and his 9 Home Runs... I probably wouldn't have believed that. 
• If someone told me that the Jays would be third in Stolen Bases - I wouldn't believe them (I call that Cito scarring) -- if they told me it would happen with Rajai Davis playing 9 games in the month, I wouldn't believe them. 

So yes - the Jays are surprising so far - but the results are not. Unless the pitchers decide to stop walking people (2nd most walks issued) - the results won't be much different.

Lets remember though - this is the year to figure out if Litsch, Cecil, Hill, Lind, or Snider really are part of the plan. So if the team finishes 10 games under 500, it's not a big deal - so long as AA has a better idea of what's a mirage, and what is not.  

An Absurd Post-Election Scenario

A Facebook thread made me start plugging away at some post election possibilities. I quickly realized it would be more fun to just make on super absurd scenario, instead of a bunch of mildly absurd ones. Here's the scenario.

• The Conservatives win a minority, and get through the first year with a budget with just enough support to pass
• Stephen Harper is no longer the leader of the conservative party of Canada
• The NDP is either the Official Opposition or the 2nd place finisher in popular vote. 
• Michael Ignatieff is no longer the leader of the Liberal Party of Canada
• Gilles Duceppe is no longer the leader of the Bloc

These are not super far fetched considering the overview we're getting of the new IPSOS Poll. Harper's inability to get a majority will lead him to retirement. Iggy's damaged goods. Gilles has been doing his job a long time, and the mass exodus to NDP means it's time for new blood.

So - this is an exercise in fun, not in realism. I'll make an effort to keep it quasi-realistic* (i.e. Jack Layton will NOT come into the house of commons dressed as a seal and be chased around by Jim Baird as he tries to club him.) but I'm definitely letting my imagination run wild with some of this.


(OH NOES! IT'S A COALITION!)

Conservative Leader: Peter (Hey, I ran one of the merging parties too!) Mckay
Liberal Leader: Justin (Can't you read my last name, of course I'm leader!) Trudeau
Bloc Leader: Some French Asshole

So Peter McKay is in charge. Just for fun I'll say he's started a war with Saudi Arabia (for the sole purpose of confusing the hell out of the United States). He's introducing some kind of new measure that no other party can support (lets say... a 25% tax on any home power costs that aren't originating from oil) and are about to be defeated. Mini-Trudeau and Jack-Off Layton form a new party. We'll call the party "Left Guided Brilliant Tradesmen" or LGBT. So the LGBT's approach the governor general and with the backing (but not unwavering support) of the Bloc attempt to make Jack-Off the Prime Minister. Little do we know that the Governor General actually has a bet with the queen about how many times he can send us to an Election during his reign - so declines that request and sends us back into an election.

This results in Jack-Off leading the LGBT's to a majority government. Peter McKay noted that an election isn't a time to talk about serious issues, and the french asshole was caught waving a Canadian flag. So our new LGBT's are now in charge. The Christian right is super pissed, by the way.

Now the LGBT's want to reopen the constitution to change things to proportional representation. Conservatives and the Bloc are rallying like hell against the idea because it's sure as hell not in their best interest. Of course, this can't get done this way because not enough groups agree. There's issues in the east (like there is now) where fewer people have more representatives. So we go to a national referendum on the issue.

Of course, the result (much like Ontario) is that nothing changes. Some are sheeple, and others know it's in their self interest for things to say the same. Regardless - everything stays the same...

And the Conservatives win the next election. With a very angry Baird in charge.



*This theory lasted about one sentence.

A Completely Biased Political Post

I've grown tired of the local Conservative candidate - and it literally took one day. The straws that broke the camel's back?

• I got two pieces of mail this week. One was a conservative attack piece - the other a defense in the form of a letter from the Liberal candidate. 
• I saw two large lawn signs on one of the busiest intersections in the city that said, "On election day remember Liberals don't support our troops." Attributed to some random group.

On The Mailers

The Conservative piece had two sides to it. On one side - it's the "BRIAN MURPHY WAS ABSENT 35% OF THE TIME BUT STILL COLLECTED 100% OF HIS SALARY" thing. The other side I just found bizarre. See, I'm no campaign manager (obviously) but on the good side I'd have some stuff from our platform that shows how it's going to be awesome for the area. Instead, it just talked about what Robert Goguen had done in the area with various charities or employment and added, "We need Robert Goguen working for us at the Conservative table"

Is it just me - or is this a not so thinly veiled threat? What happens if we don't have Robert Goguen working for us at the Conservative table? Is it the Conservative table and not the house of commons that decides what's best for the country? Is this an acknowledgment that having a member in government creates special treatment? This seems like the appropriate place to direct you to the Parm Gill story. Special mention also goes out to the Tony Clement story. At some point if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck - we can acknowledge that it's a duck. The conservatives may want us to do DNA testing on this thing since they're absolutely certain it's a Moose like they keep saying it is - but just because we don't have DNA evidence doesn't mean we can't call the thing a duck. 

On The Swiftboating*

Has this really made its way to Canada? There's free speech, so I'm not about to start decrying why people can do such things. We know why - it doesn't make it reasonable. During the Bush years - Canadians would yell out over and over again that those kind of dirty tactics would never work here. That we weren't a bunch of sheeple just waiting to be led to slaughter. If Goguen wins this election - I will have lost faith in that. I'd prefer something at least a little funny. "On Election Day - Remember Liberals Hate Puppies!"

I'm sure the Goguen campaign will claim that they were unaware of these feathers on the duck and reiterate that the moose has a right to free speech.

*For those of you that don't know what swiftboating is: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiftboating 

Well this is(n't) new!

The election blog didn't work out... the marketing blog didn't work out... I'm completely incapable of writing about one topic. Therefore - I've re-branded this as "The Chollyer Blog". You'll find stuff about politics, marketing, sports, fantasy sports, drinking, dating, and random absurdity.

I'm not going to make any fanciful promises about posting every day - because that's highly unlikely - however when I have long form thoughts I'll put them here and likely link them on my twitter feed.

The Newest Non-Controversy Of The Election

Twitter is great. I enjoy being able to read what other people have to say (even the sheeple) and I especially like that it forces people to be concise. In and of itself, I feel like that makes me a better writer when I make posts. If I put something together that's 150 characters, I can always seem to find places I could have removed words, or find easier ways to say things. Twitter is constant though. If you have an active account - and are following enough (or the right) people - you're going to be getting multiple updates. In fact, I can see from another tab that while I've been writing this entry, there's been 24 updates. New stuff every minute - awesome right? Mostly.

Michael Ignatieff went to the Ice Dogs game last night and when shown on the Jumbotron was boo'd (and probably cheered too). There were not the usual 45 media at this event with Mr.Ignatieff, and some local reporters and fans tweeted about him being there and being boo'd. This turned into a full on controversy as anyone following my political reporter crush Kady O'Malley can attest. For at least an hour this morning there were calls from "The Twitterverse" of a conspiracy or coverup. Really? I mean REALLY!?

First of all: A politician - any politician - being boo'd at any sporting event isn't even close to surprising. That's not a story. In fact as far as non-stories go it's about on par with the sun rising in the morning. However - we now live in a 24/7 news world, and there's not 168 hours worth of news to keep people's attention out there - so things like this ARE a story now.

For the Mr.Ignatieff's part - he's played it off perfectly.

"Let's get the context right: we're in the middle of the third period in a closely contested game ... and some darn politician pops his head up on the JumboTron — I'd boo. It's Saturday night. They want to watch hockey,"

Me too, Iggy. Me too.