Roundup: Sore loserism and entrails

Posted on by

If you had any money riding on who would be the first to whine that Thursday’s election result was a signal that we need electoral reform, and if you chose Elizabeth May, well, collect your winnings. I spent much of Friday responding to this nonsense, but I will reiterate a couple of points – that if you blame the system because your party did not do better, you’re already missing the point. We’ve seen it happen time and again that when a party has a message that resonates, it’s the non-voters who come out, not the committed party base, and we had increased turnout on Thursday night which meant that people were motivated to throw the bums out. Similarly with Trudeau in 2015 – a significant uptick in voter turnout because they had something that they wanted to vote for/throw the bums out. This matters, and whinging that the system isn’t fair is missing the point entirely. The system works. It needs to be allowed to function the way it was intended. What doesn’t help is using a false number like the popular vote in order to make it look like the system is unfair in order to justify your disappointment is the epitome or sore loserism.

https://twitter.com/MikePMoffatt/status/1005214910966452224

In terms of reading Thursday night’s entrails, here’s Paul Wells taking a detailed look at the three campaigns and how each succeeded and failed in their own ways. CBC has a look at how Ford’s use of simple and vague messaging made him look sensible to an angry population. Robert Hiltz looks at the ways in which the Liberals defeated themselves by their craven attempts to hold onto power. Nevertheless, Wynne’s surprise concession days before the election may actually have saved the seats the Liberals did win, according to exit polling done, so that particular strategic calculation may have actually paid off.

Jen Gerson wonders if Doug Ford’s win isn’t akin to a Monkey’s Paw curse – getting what you wish for at a terrible price. Andrew MacDougall wonders what Ford’s win means for modern conservatism given that Ford isn’t really a small-c conservative, nor were his outlandish promises. Similarly, Chris Selley looks at the phenomenon of Ford Nation, the Harper Conservatives that surround him, and the way that Andrew Scheer has suddenly attached himself to the cause. Andrew Coyne (once you get past the griping about the electoral system) warns politicians and pundits not to overread Thursday’s results (hey federal Conservatives and your crowing in QP on Friday – this especially means you), and further wonders if Ford will pull a “cupboard is bare” routine to keep carbon pricing to use the revenues. Jason Kirby mocks up what Ford’s first speech might look like, by referencing earlier speeches about bare cupboards.

Good reads:

  • At the G7 meeting in Charlevoix, Justin Trudeau and Donald Trump traded some friendly barbs, and then hinted at speeding up NAFTA talks.
  • Canada has also firmly rejected Trump’s suggestion that Russia be re-admitted in to the G8.
  • Canada looks to be set to announce a $400 million contribution to a fund to send girls in the poorest parts of the world to school as part of a G7 announcement.
  • Here’s a look at how Trudeau may have to deal with Ford’s win in Ontario, and no, the government isn’t budging on carbon pricing.
  • Conservative amendments to the gun control bill were defeated at committee, and it’s now back to the House of Commons.
  • Stephane Perrault is now officially the new Chief Electoral Officer, while Heather Lank has been nominated as the new Parliamentary Librarian.
  • Here’s a look at how unprecedented 46 Senate amendments to a bill would have been four years ago. (Really, it was 17 amendments as 29 were from government).
  • Senators are saying that they’re unlikely going to pass the elections bill before the fall. (I’ve also heard this from my own Senate sources).
  • Andrew Scheer is demanding a renegotiation of the Safe Third Country Agreement, as though the Americans are actually interested in doing so. (Good luck with that).
  • Here is a look at the “smear campaign” that has befallen Michaëlle Jean as she stands for re-election as secretary general of the Francophonie.
  • Kevin Carmichael talks to Christine Lagarde about how protectionism is threatening to undo a decade of work in getting global economies back to growth.
  • Chantal Hébert doesn’t see any predictions from the Ontario election that can apply to the upcoming race in Quebec.

Odds and ends:

Tristin Hopper lists the kinds of Canadian-made technologies used by Americans for their national security, putting a lie to Trump’s claims that we’re a threat.

Help Routine Proceedings expand. Support my Patreon.