So, no one should be allowed to run against him, without his permission?
Just donated to Critchley. 😄
“These aren’t real candidates. They aren’t campaigning. They aren’t engaging with constituents,” Poilievre wrote.
Boy, that sounds a whole lot like how none of the CPC candidates showed up to any of my local debates or showed up on a single local news or radio program, or took a single interview.
Frankly, I don’t think we should be limited from running for office based on their percieved level of seriousness or that it’s a protest. That’s a slippery slope right there. We can increase the signatures or whatever, but it’s still not going to be particularly useful and will primarily increase the floor of how much money you need to actually campaign.
To be fair. It’s Alberta.
There’s a not insignificant chance that if someone named Peter Polliver was on the ballot, a number of albertans would be too irritated by the original’s quebecois name and immediately vote for the “proper canadian” guy instead.
He is not Quebecois, he does not even speak French with a Quebecois accent.
No. But his name is french, and that would be enough for uneducated Albertans. That’s the joke.
It’s all fake, like his whole persona. He is a Chameleon who has 3 word slogans…
@Sunshine When is this irrelevant, unelectable turd going to shut the fuck up?
So, he wants to improve democracy by being able to pre-approve who is allowed to run against him?
Awwwww, muffin.
It’s not enough that Pierre runs in the safest byelection in the country, the runway has to be bubble wrapped as well.
If we’re opening up the electoral reform can of worms can we get the important parts too? You know, like proportional representation? Or is Poilievre too scared of strong democracy to talk about that?
Eh, Im not conservative but I do think this is a valid bipartisan criticism.
If they pulled this stunt with a liberal leaning byelection Id consider it a greasy trick.
I have no issue with putting a cap on ballot names via some kind of reasonable system (IE if you get more than x candidates, then the top y candidates can only go on the ballot based on who has the most vouches or whatever)
That way you can avoid dozens and dozens of randos flooding the ballot to confuse people. It’s a valid hole to patch in our system that both sides should be on board with fixing in a reasonable way.
I do not think you know how democracy works, putting a cap on anything during an election (other than one vote for one person) is not letting the voice of the people to be heard. Putting a cap on how many forms someone can sign is wrong as well. I personally have never signed any longest ballot paper but I have signed multiple papers for people, I am guessing my place got put down as a willing signature giver as I signed a bunch of PPC papers for Saskatoon people until either the friends trying to get enough signatures ran out or I put up a pride flag. Not that I would ever vote for the PPC but because I believe in democracy, if people want to try their hand go for it.
There is virtually no evidence that anyone who has voted in a riding with a “longest ballot” was ever confused.
Bruce Fanjoy won in the Carleton riding with 50.9% of the vote — a majority. The highest vote count for the any of the independent candidates was a whopping 57 votes — out of 86 060 total votes. That’s a whopping 0.06% of the vote.
In fact if you count only those candidates running either as an independent OR as “Not Affiliated” (so taking out anyone running for a party, including the Rhino Party and Marijuana Party candidates who did worse than a handful of the independent candidates), the longest ballot candidates IN TOTAL had a massive 0.99% of the vote. They didn’t even crack 1%.
Honestly, there are no electoral shenanigans to get worked up over here. The outcome was overwhelming, and Bruce Fanjoy (Liberal) didn’t seem to have any problems getting a plurality of votes to win.
It’s like a built in skill question. If you can’t pick your candidate off a list with several names maybe you shouldn’t vote.
Well, in theory it could be an issue if there were three John Smiths or something all running as independents, but to my knowledge even these extra-long ballots have not produced an example of that yet.
Unlikely and here most people still have a middle name too.
That issue can be solved by means other than saying, “Sorry, there’s already a John Smith on the list, try again next year.” Let’s focus on the real problems.
How about we ban these by-elections that only exist to give a loser a second chance. Idgaf I’d it’s libs, cins, NDP, bloc, crab people, no one should get to run a second time just because they are party leader.
How do we fill the seat then?
The only reason the seat is vacant is because they wanted to give PP another chance. Without that, they still have their MP.
In this case but people vacate for numerous reasons
To add on to this, unless we enact political slavery, which while it might sound fun is not likely to make politicians who are subject to it vote in the best interests of the country, then politicians are going to be able to leave their positions at any time anyways, so a by-election is the only reasonable way to ensure the constituents of their riding are properly represented. And if you put some kind of significant delay before people can run in a by-election keep in mind this one is already going to be about 6 months since the last one, and that becomes less of an impediment the richer you are, meaning it gives an advantage to wealthy parachute politicians with no real benefit to citizens.
Sure. Then you run the election and if anybody else in the area wants to run in the same party as the person who left then the party can put them on the ballot. If not, then no candidate for that party. Don’t drop somebody in from elsewhere. Pretty simple. Just pick a time period that a person needs to have lived in a riding (say, one full election cycle) before running to represent the area.
If the person wins the election and moves (other than to government housing in Ottawa so they can do their job) then they give up their seat.
The person who wins gets it…
Personally I don’t think we should even select a prime minister till after the election so people don’t just vote for the “leader” over the local candidate. PM is chosen by winning party from winning MPs
All MPs vote on who the PM is after the election already, they just usually vote for their party leader
Not to mention this asshole getting a do-over is costing the Canadian taxpayer a bit of money. I expect a personal thank you note for the charity, Poilievre.
The irony of him making his complaint after he moved to this area just so he could guarantee his election. That’s a way bigger problem. Infinitely bigger
I call for Polievre to go fuck himself!
How about we change it so you have to LIVE in the riding you’re running in?
PP is the parachute candidate 🤡
For a year, you know, to establish yourself there
