Quantcast
Connect with us

Vote-splitting fears raised in final days of Canada election

Published

on

In the dying days of what Justin Trudeau described as one of the “nastiest” election campaigns in Canadian history — with plenty of mudslinging, attack ads and misinformation — he played up fears on Thursday of vote-splitting handing victory to his rival Andrew Scheer and the Conservatives.

Policy announcements gave way to calls to vote strategically to keep Trudeau’s Liberals in power and prevent a rollback of his progressive policies by the Tories.

ADVERTISEMENT

Pollsters predict a minority government — either Liberal or Conservative — resulting from the October 21 ballot.

Attack ads accused Liberals of seeking to legalize hard drugs and the Tories of allowing assault rifles on Canadian streets — claims that are flat out wrong or exaggerated, respectively.

And jabs multiplied.

“It is very possible that Canadians will wake up on the 22nd (of October) with a Conservative government that has made eliminating the only real plan that Canada has ever had to fight climate change its top priority, and which will cut spending and bring back austerity measures,” Trudeau warned during a whistle-stop in Trois Riviere, Quebec.

Trudeau, hurt by a blackface makeup scandal revealed mid-campaign and lingering negative sentiments over his firing of Canada’s first indigenous attorney general, lost ground in the home stretch to a surging New Democratic Party (NDP), whose leader Jagmeet Singh impressed Canadians with his strong debate performances.

ADVERTISEMENT

The reanimated separatist Bloc Quebecois, which had been declared dead — along with Quebec’s independence movement — two elections ago when it was reduced to a mere handful of seats in parliament, has also eaten into the Liberals’ onetime lead.

Trudeau and Scheer, whose own lackluster campaign cost his Conservatives too, are now neck and neck, each with 31-32 percent support.

If these numbers hold up, neither party which alternately ruled Canada since Confederation in 1867 will win a majority mandate.

ADVERTISEMENT

Whichever wins the most seats in parliament out of 338 up for grabs would have to ally with one or more smaller parties to prop up its minority government.

– ‘Coalition’ not a dirty word –

ADVERTISEMENT

“The choice in this election is very clear: a Trudeau-NDP coalition that will work in concert to raise the carbon tax, adding thousands of dollars to your bills, or a Conservative majority government that will eliminate the carbon tax,” said Scheer.

“We’re asking Canadians for a strong Conservative majority mandate.”

Trudeau urged voters notably in the key battleground of Quebec to elect a progressive government, not a “progressive opposition.”

ADVERTISEMENT

Taking aim at Scheer, he called out the Conservatives this week for running “one of the dirtiest, nastiest campaigns based on disinformation that we’ve ever seen in this country.”

He also warned that electing a Conservative government hellbent on scrapping environmental protections enacted by the Liberals would be “truly unfortunate” for the global climate fight.

On Wednesday, Trudeau got a boost from former US president Barack Obama who urged Canadian voters to back Trudeau for a second term, calling him an “effective leader who takes on big issues like climate change.”

“The world needs his progressive leadership now,” Obama said in a tweet.

ADVERTISEMENT

Yves-Francois Blanchet, leader of the Bloc, which is only fielding candidates in Quebec but is nipping at the Liberals’ heels in the province, has said he would not support the Tories’ scrapping of the carbon tax, making any alliance with Scheer unlikely.

Singh too has ruled out supporting a Conservative minority government, saying: “We’re going to always fight Conservatives because we don’t believe in their cuts to services.”

Hitting back at Tory fear-mongering over a possible Liberal-NDP tie up, he said in response to a reporter’s question that “coalition” is not a dirty word.

He dismissed Trudeau’s calls to vote strategically, urging Canadians: “Do not vote out of fear.”

ADVERTISEMENT


Report typos and corrections to: [email protected].
READ COMMENTS - JOIN THE DISCUSSION
Continue Reading

Facebook

‘This is not about tweets!’ GOP lawmaker deflects wildly when asked about Trump’s attacks on Yovanovitch

Published

on

Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-NY) on Friday was not happy to be asked about President Donald Trump's tweets attacking former American ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch.

During a press conference that occurred after the day's impeachment hearings, Stefanik tried to make the case that nothing in Yovanovitch's testimony provided any reason to impeach the president.

She was thrown off her game, however, when a reporter asked her whether the president's tweet harmed her party's ability to send a consistent message.

"We're not here to talk about tweets but impeachable offenses!" she angrily replied. "Let me answer your question. These hearings are not about tweets. They are about impeachment of the president of United States. This is a constitutional matter."

Continue Reading

Facebook

‘I demand to speak!’ Republican bursts into anger over Adam Schiff’s closing remarks

Published

on

Republican Rep. Mike Conaway (TX) was not pleased that House Intelligence Committee chairman Adam Schiff (D-CA) got the last word at the second public impeachment hearing on Friday.

During his closing remarks, Schiff said Trump had engaged in "an effort to coerce, condition or bribe a foreign country into doing [his] dirty work."

"The fact that they failed in this solicitation of bribery doesn’t make it any less bribery. Doesn’t make it any less immoral or corrupt. It just means it was unsuccessful. And to that we owe other dedicated public servants who blew the whistle. Had they not blown the whistle we wouldn’t be here and I think it is appalling that my colleagues continue to want to out this whistleblower so that he or she can be punished by this president," Schiff said.

Continue Reading
 

Facebook

‘I’m sorry — is there a question there?’ Yovanovitch snaps back at Jim Jordan’s jumbled posturing

Published

on

As questioning of former Ukraine ambassador Marie Yovanovitch resumed on the second day of the House's public hearing in their impeachment inquiry, Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) tried to suggest that there was a culture of anti-Trump sentiment amongst elements of the Ukrainian government and its US envoys.

Jordan then questioned Yovanovitch as to why she didn't try to intervene to make the environment less politicized.

"One of the things we've heard so much over the last six weeks in depositions, and frankly in the hearing on Wednesday, is how important bipartisan support is for Ukraine," Jordan said addressing Yovanovitch. "Democrats and Republicans agree they want to help Ukraine, in fact, [Ambassador Bill Taylor] said, 'Ukraine's most strategic asset is this bipartisan support...'"

Continue Reading
 
 
Help Raw Story Uncover Injustice. Join Raw Story Investigates for $1 and go ad-free.
close-image