Last Leg

Canadians expect a few things from government: a strong economy, participation on the world stage, and a fair and just society at home. Over nine years Stephen Harper has proven unable to provide these things as Prime Minister.

Canada's international reputation is a tattered shell of what it was. Once rightly thought of as reasonable and progressive in global politics, we are now the country that reneges on international agreements like Kyoto, denies refugees, and no longer has any clout or respect at the United Nations. How far we have come from Lester Pearson getting the Nobel Peace Prize for using UN peacekeepers to resolve an international crisis. I wonder if Canadians still wear a maple leaf when backpacking across the world.

Canadians have always counted on our common values for our sense of identity. Being Canadian is less about where we came from or what our ancestors did, and more about who we are and what we are like. Our sense of fairness, openness, tolerance: universal health care, embracing multiple cultures. Our Charter of Rights and Freedoms is admired across the world. We are proud of being a decent people. Stephen Harper has eroded this pride like a cancer. His willingness to use racial tactics to divide us against ourselves in the niqab debate and the "barbaric cultural practices" hotline are only the most recent examples. Canada is a less tolerant and more hateful country after nine years of Harper.

Yet somehow Harper is seen as a sound economist. A spate of endorsements, all from Postmedia-controlled papers, were variations of how the Conservatives are the only party capable of managing the economy. (As in the spring Alberta election, all Postmedia papers were directed to endorse the conservative leader. These unsigned endorsements read like forced confessions and usually contradict the opinions of the local journalists.) The Globe and Mail endorsed the Conservatives based on their fiscal record, while hilariously calling on Harper to resign.

It's time to kick this last leg of the stool out from Stephen Harper and the Conservatives. They are not good at managing our money. They are not good at creating growth, or exports, or jobs. This article shows Harper's dismal record in all economic areas as compared to all other Canadian prime ministers over the past several decades. The full report that this article is based on also shows how Canada has lagged most other countries during Harper's tenure. He has mismanaged the economy while being credited for the opposite.

On this last day of a long and ugly campaign, media with a conservative agenda will continue to perpetuate the myth of Harper's able management of the economy. But the independent media and free thinking voters should be aware of the facts, not just the popular assumption. Harper has destroyed our reputation and identity as Canadians, and created a climate of fear and hatred. Without the false perception of his financial competence, he doesn't have a leg to stand on.

Easy as ABC

With one week to go until the federal election, the "Anyone but Conservative" vote is shaping up. In Canada's multi-party, first past the post system, talk of strategic voting always comes up. Until a better electoral system is implemented (such as the preferential ballot), voters will have to decide how to make their vote count best. Strategic voting means trying to prevent particular party or candidate from winning by voting for someone who may not be your first choice. A vote for someone polling a distant third place is better spent on a candidate in a winnable position.

Most Canadians (about 62%) are voting to get rid of Harper; who gets voted in matters less. There are differences between the Liberal and NDP platforms, but they are close enough to each other and are both starkly different from the Conservatives (I'm substituting the Harper government's actions as their platform instead of what they promise they will do, because they tend to lie a lot). So, if most non-Conservative votes are transferable between the other parties, strategic voters should be monitoring the polls to avoid wasting votes on 3rd-place candidates with virtually no chance of winning.

In the wake of recent political change at the provincial level (an election also about turfing an out of touch and corrupt conservative regime that overstayed its welcome) a few Liberal and NDP candidates have realistic chances of success across Alberta. My own riding, Edmonton Riverbend, has never once elected a Liberal or New Democrat, but this could change with strategic voting. A poll from mid-September has the Conservatives leading the 2nd place NDP 44 to 34 percent, with the Liberal candidate trailing at 18 percent. An unscientific tally of lawn signs confirms the NDP is way ahead of the Liberals. If that same 62% of ABC voters swings from supporting a distant third candidate to the non-Conservative with a realistic shot at winning, Edmonton Riverbend could elect its first progressive MP. Two other local ridings (Edmonton Centre and Edmonton Manning) have very similar breakdowns.

Ali Kashani did a great job of identifying sixteen ridings across Canada where NDP-Liberal vote-splitting threatens to give Conservatives victory. In addition, in all ridings - an even eight apiece for Liberals and NDP - the third place candidate is clearly behind the frontrunners. Dr. Kashani calls on the NDP and Liberal parties to cooperate for their own mutual benefit, by standing down in half these ridings in order to win the other eight. Despite the obvious strategic logic, it is unlikely either party would consider doing so. But individual voters certainly could affect the same result by voting strategically.

Canadians who want to heave Steve should not nitpick about minor differences between Liberals and New Democrats. Find a local poll, or simply count lawn signs, and figure out who the two top contenders are. Then vote for the one who isn't Conservative. It's that easy.