[MrBlackhill]

Sometimes vote compass is correct, sometimes it's incorrect.

They do have a strong Liberal bias in how they intepret questions. For example they typically conflate climate change with environment, or gun restrictions with addressing gun crime.
Taking away hunting rifles won't reduce handgun shootings in Toronto.

This year they're pretty good, though I'm not sure which party is against housing affordability.

To be fair, political views don't necessarily align with reality, for example pipelines are considered "anti climate change/anti environment", even if the actual impact is reduced emissions, and less environmental damage.

(I've edited my previous post with I believe to be my most average result)

I'd have to check the methodology. I'm pretty sure we don't want such tool to bias the voting decision for those who don't have a strong political opinion and just rely on such tool. I hope that tool is built on such way that it makes sense statistically in order to remove biases.

 

[MrMatt]

(I've edited my previous post with I believe to be my most average result)

I'd have to check the methodology. I'm pretty sure we don't want such tool to bias the voting decision for those who don't have a strong political opinion and just rely on such tool. I hope that tool is built on such way that it makes sense statistically in order to remove biases.

Previous years it had a pretty ridiculous Liberal bias built in, though it seems to be a bit better.
At least now if you click "don't know" on everything it doesn't offer a recommendation to vote Red.

 

[afulldeck]

That's because the liberal mindset (using current terminology) generally is a movement towards progress and moving society forward. It naturally appeals to younger people and those who envisage a better future. It appeals to the optimistic.

The conservative mindset (in the US & Canadian context anyway) is more regressive by nature. It tries to halt, or at least delay progress. It does not seek new ideas but tries to maintain the status quo and old establishment. Naturally this cannot appeal to upwardly mobile, optimistic and successful young adults in the prime of their lives.

This is a generalization of course but these are underlying themes. It's especially clear on things like environmental policy and also trying to boost the status and power of disadvantaged people. Conservatives tend to either ignore it (couldn't care less about environmental protection) or be downright hostile towards the poor, minority groups, indigenous people, etc

The words progressive and regressive requires the notion of a goal. Your moving step by step towards something or away from something. Although Liberals and Conservative 'claim' to be progressive. I believe both are regressive. For me progressive means as a citizen I can proceed with my dreams without interference other than respecting others who want to proceed with their dreams Hence, to be progressive:

1. moving the population to support itself, rather than infantilizing them
2. making most government superfluous to the population's needs
3. provide a safe environment to complete the above

None of the parties have this goal. They are all in the business of staying in business....

 

[MrMatt]

The words progressive and regressive requires the notion of a goal.

Their goal is complete government control of society, because they think that will be better.
Despite it being worse for almost all of recorded history.

 

[ian]

I had several reasons why I should not vote Liberal. O'Toole gave me no reasons why I should vote Conservative. That was my first conundrum.

My second was bench strength. I did not see it on O'Toole's team and he made no effort to put any on display for me.

Michelle Rempel and Pierre Polievre don't do it for me. The heavy hitters on team Blue were not running in the election. Have to ask myself why they did not.

 

[sags]

It will be interesting to see if O'Toole is allowed to stay and try to move the Conservative Party closer to the center and away from the issues that repel voters.

Or will he be removed and replaced because he tried to move the party to the middle. It will be interesting to watch the internal politics.

 

[MrMatt]

It will be interesting to see if O'Toole is allowed to stay and try to move the Conservative Party closer to the center and away from the issues that repel voters.

Or will he be removed and replaced because he tried to move the party to the middle. It will be interesting to watch the internal politics.

What issues repel voters?
They are artificial wedge issues.

The gun crime in Toronto has nothing to do with hunting rifles, but Trudeau loves to play on ignorance.
Beyond that there isn't much difference, except the right leans stronger for equality and human rights, while the left leans to more government control.

 

[kcowan]

Previous years it had a pretty ridiculous Liberal bias built in, though it seems to be a bit better.
At least now if you click "don't know" on everything it doesn't offer a recommendation to vote Red.

Yes if you go through their weighting criteria, you really see what is behind the questions and cannot represent what you think. They are like the proverbial question: "Have you stopped beating your wife?" Yes/No

 

[MrMatt]

Yes if you go through their weighting criteria, you really see what is behind the questions and cannot represent what you think. They are like the proverbial question: "Have you stopped beating your wife?" Yes/No

Of course not... I'm way better at Euchre.

 

[gibor365]

Conservatives got 300K more popular votes then Liberals and much less seats .... PPC got much more votes than Greens and got no seats!

Election system is completely corrupted!

 

[sags]

What you call "wedge issues", are serious top of mind issues for many Canadians.

Gun control, climate change, abortion rights, social supports, OAS, are not exactly "fluff" issues to them.

The problem for Conservatives is that they are on the wrong side of key issues from most Canadians, but have convinced themselves they can change the minds of the majority if they just keep trying long enough.

 

[gibor365]

What you call "wedge issues", are serious top of mind issues for many Canadians.

Gun control, climate change, abortion rights, social supports, OAS, are not exactly "fluff" issues to them.

The problem for Conservatives is that they are on the wrong side of key issues from most Canadians, but have convinced themselves they can change their minds.

How is your math?! Do you realize that Cons got 300k more popular vote than Libs?!

 

[sags]

Conservatives got 300K more popular votes then Liberals and much less seats .... PPC got much more votes than Greens and got no seats!

Election system is completely corrupted!

Yea, but add all the left leaning parties together in popular vote and they have 70% of the vote. Even the BLOC is a left leaning party.

If there were only 2 parties in Canada like in the US.....Democrats and Republicans, the Democrats would win a majority government in every election.

 

[gibor365]

Yea, but add all the left leaning parties together in popular vote and they have 70% of the vote. Even the BLOC is a left leaning party.

If there were only 2 parties in Canada like in the US.....Democrats and Republicans, the Democrats would win a majority government in every election.

This is all speculations! I know some people who voted NDP just because they hate Trudeau and would never vote for him.
BQ is not left party, they preferred coalition with Conservatives.
If there ere democratic PR list election system, I’m not sure at all that Liberals would be able to firm coalition... and with PR list system. LPC would likely split apart

 

[MrMatt]

What you call "wedge issues", are serious top of mind issues for many Canadians.

Gun control, climate change, abortion rights, social supports, OAS, are not exactly "fluff" issues to them.

The problem for Conservatives is that they are on the wrong side of key issues from most Canadians, but have convinced themselves they can change the minds of the majority if they just keep trying long enough.

But the Liberals aren't for gun control anyway.
Everyone is on board with some sort of climate change action, the difference is that the anti-pipeline stop now plan is making climate change worse, not better.
When you replace a relatively clean natural gas plant in Ontario with a Coal plant in China, you're not coming out ahead.

Everyone is okay with abortion. O'Toole was the only leader out there not wanting to regulate womens bodies, and somehow everyone missed that.
Social supports, like what child care? I can tell you center based care doesn't work for poor people.

 

[MrMatt]

This is all speculations! I know some people who voted NDP just because they hate Trudeau and would never vote for him.
BQ is not left party, they preferred coalition with Conservatives.
If there ere democratic PR list election system, I’m not sure at all that Liberals would be able to firm coalition... and with PR list system. LPC would likely split apart

I actually think if the major parties split apart, it would be better. It would stop stupid poorly vetted and thought out government programs.

 

[gibor365]

I actually think if the major parties split apart, it would be better. It would stop stupid poorly vetted and thought out government programs.

I agree! If major parties got split, we will be able to vote for party we like, and not for party we dislike less. And Our votes won’t go directly to garbage

 

[kcowan]

Social supports, like what child care? I can tell you center based care doesn't work for poor people.

My DIL ran a child care center and it focused on teaching the kids, not babysitting. She eventually closed it after her own kids were beyond the ages of childcare. My other son shared a nanny with their neighbour, both with 2 kids each.

They were against the $10 programs because it would encourage large babysitting operations like Quebec.

 

[MrMatt]

My DIL ran a child care center and it focused on teaching the kids, not babysitting. She eventually closed it after her own kids were beyond the ages of childcare. My other son shared a nanny with their neighbour, both with 2 kids each.

They were against the $10 programs because it would encourage large babysitting operations like Quebec.

You mean the ones where the care providers occasionally kill kids?

Oh and they only work office hours, you work at Tims, or a manufacturing plant, or a restaurant.. too bad, no daycare for you.

We were lucky to get a good daycare, but that was only because we could shift our hours to accomodate them.
Also daycare costs $50+/day just for the most basic aspects of care, pretending it is only $10 devalues the work of the women providing the care.

But what do you expect from those who don't value women?

 

[kcowan]

I suppose our hope is that the province will take the $10 and implement something good for extra cost?