RNN : Canada's "Patriot Act" as a political ploy.

The Real News Network is doing a weekly panel discussion on Canadian issues and it's refreshingly less middling than the media panels we have become accustomed to. 
In today's panel, Leo Panitch and Dimitri Lascaris take on Bill C-51, the tanking tarsands, and the political positioning of the Libs, Cons, and NDP going into the next election. 

Please click through to RNN at the link to show your support for a vid I've only pillaged from their site. 
.

Nah, that's too simple. It would never work.

Rick Mercer on Libs choosing their leader :

"Members of the Liberal party don't actually get to vote for the leader. Oh no, no, no. That would be madness. Instead, they choose a delegate. And when they choose their delegate, they hoist them up on their shoulders and they march them down to the train station and then send them off to Montreal somewhere. And then three days later some guy named Gerard Kennedy makes a back room deal and then suddenly, the guy in third place who can't communicate becomes the leader. Then there's an election. Then they lose.

Here's an idea. From now on in, how about members of the party actually get to vote for the leader? And instead of one of these old fashioned multi-million dollar conventions, do it on the Internet. Hell you can do your banking on the there, you can buy a kidney on there, surely to god you can figure out a way to vote for the leader of a political party on there."

Actually, Rick, at their last convention the Lib delegates held a forum on whether or not to open up the vote to, you know, the members of the Liberal party. Then they voted against it.

Strategic voting - all politics is local

Excellent post from 900 ft Jesus :

How you can be true to your party of choice and still vote strategically

OK, outside of the Libs, who really likes strategic voting?

No one. Every single election we have the Libs shouting at us at last minute: The Cons are coming! The Cons are coming! Vote for us or the Cons will get in!

There are many good arguments against strategic voting. It promotes a two party system by eroding long term support for third parties. It violates your right to vote for your favourite candidate. Faced with the option of strategic voting or having your least favoured candidate get in, many just opt for not voting at all. Your guy doesn't get his $1.67 per vote. And then there's the unabashed crust of the Libs and their Vote for us or the Cons will get in.

Yeah, that's what really burns, isn't it? In our crappy first-past-the-post system, the Libs really own the brand on strategic voting.

But that shouldn't make us stupid about it. Strategic voting means voting for whoever has the best chance of beating the Con candidate in your riding and only if it's a close two-way race, even if they are not your first choice, whether that be Lib, NDP, Green, or Bloc. All politics is local. If the Cons are a lock in your riding, vote for whoever you like. If the Libs, NDP, Bloc, or Greens are a lock in your riding, vote for whoever you like. But if two days before the election you discover you're in a swing riding with your guy 20% down in the polls, vote for whoever is close enough to the Cons to have your vote bring them down.

In the meantime, as 900 ft Jesus says, get out there and fight for your candidate of choice. Vote For Environment has five different major polls for every riding. Look 'em up, check into your riding and then make up your own mind. Democratic Space has a list of swing ridings and their recommendations.

First we get rid of the Cons. Then we get rid of first-past-the-post. Then we can vote with our hearts.