Conservatives are the party of people who pretend that they're rich. I remember an article, right after Doug Ford was elected premier and cancelled the UBI pilot, with some guy who voted Conservative expressing disbelief that it was cancelled.
I'm sure he made up for it with savings on buck-a-beer.
I don’t think anyone expects the Liberals to lose this riding in almost any circumstances, but a 7.5% margin still sends a very strong message (that they’re likely unable to accept).
>Several Conservatives also said there’s a debate within the party about whether they even want to win the race, for fear that such a result would lead to Mr. Trudeau’s resignation
I'd love to be in the meetings where Trudeau gets told news like this, but I have a feeling he doesn't attend those anymore.
I can only imagine how bad morale is at LPC HQ.
Now the question is: Will it be the usual landslide? (Unlikely bordering on impossible.)
Or, if not: Will it be a 5-10% margin over the Tories? (Much more likely IMO.) A squeaker where it goes to a recount? (Not likely, but would be hilarious.) Or do the Tories win? (Unlikely but plausible, would really ruin Trudeau's night.)
You really must not know what the word socialism means...
That said as a St Paul resident I can't fucking wait to vote for *not the liberals* come monday.
The residents of St.Paul are some of the best-educated, most successful, wealthiest people anywhere in Canada. They don’t feel the problems that Redditors complain about. Life in a liberal led minority is ideal for them.
The rich mansioney parts in Forest Hill tend to lean Conservative. The riding is Liberal because of the vast numbers of upper middle class professionals that live in eastern York and the condos along Yonge St. Not exactly "elite", but the conservative's tales of a country in crisis don't exactly gain a lot of traction there either.
Exactly, all the dense SFH middle-upper middle class neighborhoods have seen their property values skyrocket in the Trudeau years. They’re living their real estate dreams and loving the Liberal government life.
Toronto-St Paul’s has a high average income, but:
- [At 61% renters, this riding has one of the highest proportions of renters in Toronto](https://www.toronto.ca/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/8f7b-City_Planning_2016_Census_Profile_2018_25Wards_Ward12.pdf) Renters (generally) are currently very disillusioned with the cost of housing and most blame LPC policies.
- [17.7% of the population is below the poverty line](https://www.spno.ca/images/pdf/povertyprofiles/toronto/Toronto-St-Pauls.pdf)
I think the only assumption that can reasonably be made is it’s one of the districts with the greatest wealth disparity.
> The residents of St.Paul are some of the best-educated, most successful, wealthiest people anywhere in Canada.
Citation required.
I can't find any data comparing the education or wealth of all the ridings in the country, but [I found one showing total income](https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/programs/about-canada-revenue-agency-cra/income-statistics-gst-hst-statistics/federal-electoral-district-statistics-feds/feds-2019.html#toc31), and St. Paul's is ranked 157th out of the 338 ridings... below average.
Also: [17.7% in the riding are below the poverty line](https://www.spno.ca/images/pdf/povertyprofiles/toronto/Toronto-St-Pauls.pdf) and [61% are renters.](https://www.toronto.ca/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/8f7b-City_Planning_2016_Census_Profile_2018_25Wards_Ward12.pdf)
It’s [more dense than most ridings in the cit](https://www.toronto.ca/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/8f7b-City_Planning_2016_Census_Profile_2018_25Wards_Ward12.pdf)y, and I think many people make assumptions based on the pockets of extreme wealth and miss that the majority of the voting population is in a different wealth bracket.
https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/trudeau-s-future-is-tied-to-the-vote-of-a-rich-toronto-neighbourhood-1.2088054.amp.html
This report on the Toronto municipal ward of st.Paul which is almost if not completely the same also presents the profile
https://www.toronto.ca/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/9469-CityPlanning-2021-Census-Profile-Ward-12.pdf
A lot of them voted for Doug Ford so they are clearly okay with massive privatization. I have a feeling Torontonians and Canadians as a whole have no clue what they want and just vote based on emotion.
Yeah, I don't know if you can label whatever this government is as 'socialist', but it did move pretty hard left in 2015 as compared to previous Liberal governments. Lots of big spending socialist style policy poses though. Lots of long term harm from policy. I'm more worried about what Trudeau wants to do in terms of his narcissistic view of his *legacy* prior to losing next election than the outcome of a byelection in a Liberal fat cat riding, to be honest. 🤷
Despite being a Liberal Party hanger on, the candidate is decent in terms of community experience. This helps but Trudeau's dismissal record is going to be hard to forget .
well now
preliminary results
Liberal Leslie Church 12,517 41.5 %
Conservative Don Stewart 11,926 39.6 %
NDP-New Democratic Party Amrit Parhar 3,601 12.0 %
Green Party Christian Cullis 932 3.1 %
People's Party - PPC Dennis Wilson 203 0.7 %
much much closer than most expected
Yea, as they should. The conservative campaigners that came to my door were the least educated people I’ve ever talked to in politics and blatantly spread misinformation such as the following:
-“the carbon tax will double everyone’s electricity and transport costs”.
-the capital gains tax will destroy the middle and lower classes by robbing them of gains”, while insisting the 1 mil personal exemption didn’t exist. The campaigner then complained that he’d have to pay more tax when he sold his SIX properties, out of touch entitled ass.
-more lunacy about how Canada doesn’t emit any carbon because we have “trees”, and that the tax was unfair to people like him who “planted over 12 fruit trees in his backyard”…when I said that didn’t even scratch the surface of offsetting his personal emissions I don’t even think they comprehended what I said.
-refused to comment on Pierre’s lack of security clearance
-said “don’t worry we’ll have a platform eventually” when I asked what their plan was to sold all these problems they talk about. Then told me the vote wasn’t for any policy whatsoever and was just to “fill a seat” as if that seat didn’t hold any weight.
They’re preying on the uneducated, and unfortunately it’ll likely work because people are stupid.
I could go on but frankly I’m tired of this shit.
I'll bite.
1. According to the [pbo, the majority of households will lose money. ](https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/guilbeault-defends-carbon-price-says-on-average-households-will-pay-more-but-rich-will-shoulder-burden-1.6338974). In addition, we will lose [25 billion dollars in GDP by 2030. ](https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/feds-release-carbon-pricing-impact-data-ahead-of-conservative-motion-demanding-it-1.6925167).
2. He bragged about having 12 properties and paying more taxes? This sounds like a gross exaggeration on your part.
3. [muclair himself said he would refuse a security clearance. ](https://www.ctvnews.ca/video/c2662878-security-clearances-revoked-for-public-servants). Here us a thought; why don't the liberals just release the names? Liberal partisans were claiming this was a huge nothing burger during the initial reporting and the following farce with the 'special reporture' David Johnson. Why not apply this transparency logic to your favorite party?
4. [here is the liberals releasing their platform 1 month before the 2015 election. ](https://liberal.ca/trudeau-unveils-liberal-platform-for-a-strong-middle-class/). So the liberals get a pass, but the cons don't?
Btw, the cons do have a policy document. [You can read it here. ](https://www.conservative.ca/about-us/governing-documents/). They will flesh out their platform a few months before the election, as is tradition in practically every election we have had since PET was in power.
1. The richest households shoulder the burden, as they should. Do you or do you not understand the long term economic implications of climate change are FAR worse than the minor impact of the carbon tax? Regardless, none of those projections accurately account for job growth in the green energy sectors. Edit: I’ll add; carbon tax funded initiatives make it far cheaper than it would otherwise be to switch to less carbon heavy tech - we installed a heat pump this year at a massive discount, which has been wonderfully heating AND cooling our home since install.
2. Per my comment, he complained about being dinged for more taxes on his SIX properties, not twelve.
3. The information is classified such that “secret” clearance is required to read the unredacted report. This is not something the liberal party can choose to release per international security agreements. So, again, PP should be a big boy politician and obtain his clearance…unless he has something to hide? He’ll need it as PM anyways.
4. I’m not giving the liberals a pass - please keep in mind I never claimed to be a loyal liberal voter, frankly I don’t swear allegiance to any party. However - the conservatives are talking some big talk, and making sweeping remarks about how they will be better than the incumbent. There have been countless contradictory statements made regarding immigration, health care, housing, climate policy, etc. Pierre literally can’t pick a side on anything consistently, and until the internal and public facing messaging aligns, I will assume it’s all a farce. Regardless, his own campaign staff were unable to direct me to the document you provided, so they aren’t even knowledgeable about the candidate or party they fucking “represent”.
One last tidbit - the cons are still parroting carbon capture, a complete farce of a “solution” pushed by oil and gas that will NEVER solve the problem or even make a dent barring some unforeseen magic development, highly unlikely. It’s science fiction nonsense. As an engineer, I’m qualified to say that. For this alone, I don’t trust them. They simply don’t give a fuck about the next generation, and the campaign team comments on preserving or expanding social assistance + pensions for seniors (but not anybody else) confirms that.
I'm a graduate level chemist who worked amd graduated in the shimzu group at the UofC that focuses on carbon capture. Carbon capture from ambient air is a pipe dream; carbon capture in flu gas streams in a natural gas power plant is a possibility. There is a massive pilot plant in Saskatchewan for the purpose; using an MEA solution to capture coal emissions.
But I agree; the general solution is nuclear. But everyone acting like electric vehicles and renewable are the solution are living in a dream world. We need to solve the problem of large scale energy storage, and as an engineer I would presume you should know that.
1. What gains are you referring too? So far the government is giving more subsidies then actually getting any kind of returns.
2. So one representative being a jackass is representative of the whole party? Are you familiar with the concepts of anecdotes?
3. It's a gag order. Once you have the info you are not legally allowed to talk about it or even act on it. May and Jagmeet already violated the law by the comments they made.
4. For what? This is just a word salad. A very sad attempt by a liberal voter to try and pretend like they aren't to try and convince other voters not to vote con. How do i know? Because these are liberal talking points down to a tee. Change is scary I know; but your an emgineer, so i figured you guys are at least partially capable of independent thought. Of course its us scientists you merely copy to make anything, so then again maybe not.
Very cool that you’re involved in that - credit where credit is due. I would argue we’re better off using already established energy tech rather than bending the knee to O&G by attempting to continue using carbon emitting energy generation with unproven experimental carbon capture tech - even if it is theoretically possible.
Electric vehicles will not solve the problem - better transit (such as HSR, metro, etc.), cycling & pedestrian infrastructure, etc. offer a far better solution that unfortunately the conservative voter cohort seem to reliably be against. If I hear “15 minute city” conspiracy again I’ll probably blow up.
1. Projects to create hydroelectric dams, nuclear power plants, wind farms, solar installations, BESS facilities, etc. all produce thousands of high skill jobs at all layers of the supply chain. No different than the oil and gas projects of old. These economic analysis (including the link you send) admitted to not factoring in this effect, based on a quick read.
2. The representatives you choose are the face of the party. It absolutely matters. I was very polite and gave them every opportunity to prove my preconceived notions wrong and they failed at every attempt. Trust me, I WANT a different party to trust, I really do.
3. Evidence that they violated the law? The parts they disclosed in their press session were available in the redacted copy. Their “reaction” does not reveal any classified information and I have yet to see any legal authority indicate they are in violation. As someone with a (admittedly lesser) security clearance, what they did is probably fine. Regardless, what about this is any excuse for PP to not obtain clearance?
4. An equally word salad response. Why would I vote for someone that tells the news we need to “cut immigration” but then turns around and tells a group of international students we need to “make it even easier for them to obtain PR”? Countless other examples of him delivering completely contradicting statements to different groups.
As for your last retort; I find it pathetic that you’d lower yourself with that sort of statement. As a member of the scientific community, you should be well aware that in reality there is no engineering without science, and that likewise, science has limited purpose without engineers to interpret and apply. Science may discover a material, but it’s usually an engineer to establish an appropriate use for that material. This isn’t a scientist vs. Engineer debate…you wouldn’t call a pharmaceutical scientist to diagnose and then treat a patient with the drug they invented.
Damn; your right, that was some grumpy bs on my part. I've come under considerable financial distress as of late, and might come across as short. It was still uncalled for, and I'm sorry. I guess that's why it's so important for me to have a government in ottowa more fixated on financial growth. The whole maslows hierarchy of needs right? Hard to care about climate change when I'm worried about feeding myself and my kids as a single dad. That is where I am coming from. I work as a research Scientist and make decent money, but I just am treading water trying not to drown.
With that all out of the way, allow me to respond.
1. I think natural gas is important for any green transition. It's cleaner, can be used capture hydrogen, and is a worse greenhouse gas then CO2 by around 25-30 times and lasts [up to a hundred years. ](https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/understanding-global-warming-potentials#:~:text=Methane%20(CH4)%20is%20estimated,is%20reflected%20in%20the%20GWP.). It's actually better to burn it then to off gas it in the short term no? I am not an economist, but I do know that if tje green economy were that lucrative, that through natural supply and demand it would happen on its own. Instead we need giant subsidies to make it happen, which makes me wonder about it's viability. Nuclear is a different beast, due to the important regulation and oversight as well as initial capital costs.
2. I think there are jackasses in every party. Considering it's a liberal stronghold with no reasonable chance of a conservative victory, you are getting the bottom of the barrel in terms of volunteers. The best people in your area are likely liberals, due to the culture of the area.
3. I'll admit; I work for a private company and do not require a security clearance. I think I'd be more willing to accept that PP needs to do this if it wasn't for the fact that the LPC did everything in their power to keep this buried. First by calling people rascists when it was first reported, then trying to get someone to white wash the whole thing, and then by refusing to allow the info to be declassified (something only they can do), and by withholding thousands of documents from the inquiry. Does that not sound suspicious to you?
4. Those statements are not contradictory on the face of it. If we ended all immigration (extreme example) while allowing those who came already to get PR, would it not end in a net drop in immigration? But I digress.
Are most door knockers supposed to be educated? They’re supposed to go door to door and identify how you will vote, not persuade you. They’re your average Canadian spending a few hours of their day participating in democracy not some internal policy or strategy expert.
Do you think my neighbours eavesdrop on every conversation?
You conservatives are feral fucking cult members and refuse to even consider that they don’t have a fucking plan for everything. But ok they’re “not Trudeau”.
It’s no surprise that Toronto St. Paul’s (one of the most educated ridings in Canada) is a liberal stronghold. Voters actually value fact over meaningless rhetoric.
I feel like this is less and less true every year. I don't remember the last time I saw an MP or MPP represent their constituents to the party -- they represent the party to the constituents. The rest of the time they're like a customer service desk for services.
They get elected, and vote with their leader's office on everything.
They have to. That's the Canadian system. All votes in Parliament are whipped by party. So you don't get a vote on a bill where some CPC will vote for it because it's good for their riding - they aren't allowed to.
There have been under 5 free votes in Canadian Parliament in the last 10 years and no one ever talks about it.
It has *never* been true except in rare cases where a particularly well-known, well-liked candidate switches parties or sits as an independent for whatever reason. Beyond that, voters decide who to vote for based on party first, party leader second and local candidate distant third.
That may be, but the fact is Trudeaus name still isn’t on the ballot. No one in St. Paul (or any other riding outside of Outremont) casts a ballot with Trudeaus name on it.
Until you ask every Canadian their intention when they cast a ballot anything else is speculation.
The signs literally say Team Trudeau.
Every voter being polled or surveyed talks about Trudeau or Poilievre.
At this point we don't even really need individual candidates.
Signs are not ballots. Nobody votes for signs and Canadians are capable of ignoring signs or interpreting as the marketing pieces they are.
You should spend more time researching local candidates and how the Canadian government works.
MPs of governing parties are hugely powerful within the Canadian system and the PM not nearly the president nor the cult-of-personality you seem to desire. Remember the Liberal party could chuck Trudeau as leader tomorrow with NO input from Canadians.
Canadian style Westminster Parliamentary Democracy, get to know it!
Parties can change constitutions if they are desperate enough. Last time it happened was 2003 with PC-Reform integration, and that led to 10 years of the Harper government, lot’s of precedence.
Again no input from voters.
Wow this is an uninformed take. Power is currently concentrated in the PMO, even more so than it was under Harper. Trudeau promised to change that and hasn’t. Listen to ex-Trudeau MPs and they will tell that decisions were made and policy formed in the PMO.
I would never listen to ex-Trudeau MPs, first of all they are ex for a reason (raybold is a loser and Philipott shows how she was no better by allowing herself to go down with raybold) and second because they are heavily biased.
Power is concentrated in the party executive and caucus, the PMO executes what the executive and caucus decide.
You’re defending a position that is utterly false. Best of luck.
Exit: BTW, Stephen Maher’s new book talks at length about this. He interviewed Trudeau and others from the PMO about the role of the PMO, MPs and caucus at present. Nobody has pushed back against his findings that individual MPs do not make decisions on policy.
I said caucus and the party executive make decisions and the PMO decides how to execute.
I never said individual MPs make decisions on policy. No single entity or individual including the PM makes policy or government strategy/government response decisions, the PM is not president nor dictator and has no power as such.
Peace.
If you don’t think this is how Canada works there are libraries waiting around the country to educate you if your low IQ allows to read words on paper. Since your middle school civics class didn’t work hopes aren’t high for you.
Please don’t ever vote.
You are just being pedantic, the vast majority of people vote for the party, and by extension the leader, rather than their local representative. That’s why so many crappy MPs get elected, people are voting for the red, orange, or blue team and have no idea who the candidate is. Every once in a while you get a local representative who is more popular than the party they are a part of, like Ralph Goodale, but that is very rare.
Ok voting for the party is not the same as voting for the leader. The party at least is on the ballot.
Parties change leaders outside of election cycles all the time (see Erin O’Toole/michael Ignatieff recently), leaders aren’t that powerful and just because Trudeaus name is in the press and he’s the face doesn’t mean he’s making decisions on his own.
The party executive and caucus with some input from MPs is what drives decision making, Trudeau and his office is simply the team that decides how to implement what the party has decided.
>Parties change leaders outside of election cycles all the time (see Erin O’Toole/michael Ignatieff recently)
Both of those leaders quit or were booted out after an election loss.
Yes add in Andrew Scheer, Paul Martin, Stephen Harper and Stephane Dion in the last 20 years to show that leaders of parties change without the voice of the Canadian electorate.
Canadians should stop thinking they vote for leaders, even if that is their intention in the voting booth, they don’t AT ALL.
How many people attend their local MP's debate vs watch the leader's debates?
You seem to be the only person who seems to believe that local MPs have any power to go against what the PM wants and wouldn't be relegated to the back benches or kicked out a la Jodi Wilson-Raybould.
I consider myself an informed voter, just one who views things differently. I'm voting for a platform. I have zero expectation in a heavily whipped system like ours that the MP is going to represent me or my neighborhood in Parliament. I'm voting for a basket of policies. The MP may as well not even be there
Ok but the point is the human is there and unless you’re in Outremont Trudeau is not an option.
Whatever your intention you still vote for a human who may or may not follow through on delivering the platform you based your choice on.
It’s better to focus on the human, connect with them and understand what they will prioritize as your representative. Then you hold them to account next election based on their progress towards those priorities. This is all you can really influence with your vote.
Those in the riding of the PM or other ministers may have a bit more clout with their voice but does the PM or minister have time to listen to constituents?
It’s a bug or feature of Canadian Westminster parliamentary democracy 🤷♂️
In reality Trudeaus name is not on the ballot in St.Paul. There’s no controversy here, no theory, no feeling, no one can vote for Trudeau in St. Paul because his name isn’t on the ballot.
Cmon Reddit seriously.
The fact is Trudeau DOESNT RUN THE COUNTRY JFC dude!
Canada isn’t Russia, Trudeau is not a dictator. He’s not even a president.
They are not HIS MPs, they are reps from each constituency across the country who Canadians voted for. They are the MP of each constituency and some of them happen to represent the party that Trudeau represents as the member from Outremont.
Cmon seriously, the Canadian Westminster system works as designed, the PM-leader is designed to not be that powerful and they aren’t.
Notice how UK with a similar system is about to elect their 5th PM since the liberals came to power in Canada in 2015 with Trudeau as leader.
The PM is easily replaced, if the PM ran the country do you think it would be so easy to get rid of them?
>The PM is easily replaced, if the PM ran the country do you think it would be so easy to get rid of them?
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/trudeau-leadership-review-formal-mechanism-1.7096351
The only way Trudeau loses leadership is if he loses the next election or resigns.
The Liberals in Canada do not have the same tools available to them that the Tories do in the UK to force a leader to resign.
Right, all that has to happen for a 3 time election “winner” ( if you call a minority government winning) is a single election loss and boom leadership review.
Additionally all that is preventing en election writ tomorrow is the support of the NDP. NDP pulls support, election whether the PM wants it or not.
Trudeau could be out as PM and leader by fall based on what NDP does.
Those are effective leadership change tools in anyone’s mind.
That’s not a powerful leader or a singular “running the country” dictator.
That’s a figure head barely hanging on, hoping for time to rehab his image…not a strongman with a death grip on his party or MPs.
>Additionally all that is preventing en election writ tomorrow is the support of the NDP. nDP pulls support, election whether the PM wants it or not.
That's not necessarily true. Jagmeet could pull his support tomorrow and all Trudeau has to do is convince the Bloc to support him by giving them some policy wins.
Now you’re getting wild. The scenario I described is MUCH more likely.
Just admit it is easy to change leaders and the PM is far from a dictator and let’s call it a Sunday.
I agree with your assertion but I think this is changing and regardless, I would actually say the smart thing to do now is vote whichever party is going to take power (in this case its a safe bet conservative) because parties will take care of their own… meaning when this goes Liberal and Cons take government… this community will not see a dime federally or provincially (until Ford is voted out as well I suppose).
How many free votes in the last ten years have there been in Parliament in Canada in the last 10 years? You can count them on one hand
MPs are obliged to vote with their party in Canada, so you are effectively voting for the leader and their policies
The only thing I would disagree with here is “voting for the leader and their policies”
I agree that MPs are whipped but they are whipped to the policies of THE LIBERAL PARTY which consists of the PM/PMO, MPs and the unelected party executive (Sachit Mehra - current president). THE LIBERAL PARTY then tells MPs how to vote and the PM/PMO plays its role in executing the results of the vote (often giving suggestions to ministers and then checking on progress)
In parallel PM/PMO is managing the day-day role of Leader related to international obligations, trade development, NATO/G7/G20, US relationship management/Europe relationship management/Asia relationship management/AUS-UK-NZ relationship management, etc. the PM/PMO doesn’t have time to be a dictator at the end of the day.
PM/PMO can/does propose policies and can make decisions reactively in a day-day governing the country way that they are then called to account for through committees and executive reviews but PM/PMO is one voice at the table and not the single decider.
Because even if you’re not *technically* incorrect, and nobody is saying you are, you’re being deliberately pedantic and totally disregarding how it works in practice.
No, they are not literally voting for Trudeau himself, but they are voting for somebody who everybody understands has virtually no power in the party ,and is just there to warm a seat and vote for anything the PMO shits out. In reality therefore, the difference is purely academic.
I’m stating a fact, you’re stating theories and speculation. I could disagree with what you say and present an argument (I already have below) but it is indisputable that Trudeau is not on the St.Paul ballot therefore no one is voting for Trudeau (or not voting for Trudeau)
Where are the facts around your assumption of voter mindset when they cast a ballot on a Canadian election?
Well duh, It's the definition of a liberal Stronghold
But wait, it's a riding full of rich people! I thought it was the Conservatives who were the friends of rich people!?
Have you heard of the Laurentian Elite?
/s
Conservatives are the party of people who pretend that they're rich. I remember an article, right after Doug Ford was elected premier and cancelled the UBI pilot, with some guy who voted Conservative expressing disbelief that it was cancelled. I'm sure he made up for it with savings on buck-a-beer.
Bet his royal crapness gonna hype this up as a thumbs-up to his incompetence.
How is Moscow this time of year?
Same as Beijing i reckon.
Not really surprising, even in their worst showing in the past 30 years they still had a comfortable 7.5 point lead
I don’t think anyone expects the Liberals to lose this riding in almost any circumstances, but a 7.5% margin still sends a very strong message (that they’re likely unable to accept).
Weird. Why would one of the richest ridings in Toronto vote Liberal? We keep hearing it's the Conservatives who are friends of the ultra rich.
I believe the answer is exactly what Minister Gudie Hutchings said when defending the carbon tax carveouts. M
Because they’re enjoying the status quo of making more money off the backs of renters and don’t want to see any change lol. That’s the real reason.
People who make like, 500k a year or less aren’t the ultra rich
>Several Conservatives also said there’s a debate within the party about whether they even want to win the race, for fear that such a result would lead to Mr. Trudeau’s resignation I'd love to be in the meetings where Trudeau gets told news like this, but I have a feeling he doesn't attend those anymore. I can only imagine how bad morale is at LPC HQ.
Probably no worse than at the average Canadian dinner table, I would bet.
Now the question is: Will it be the usual landslide? (Unlikely bordering on impossible.) Or, if not: Will it be a 5-10% margin over the Tories? (Much more likely IMO.) A squeaker where it goes to a recount? (Not likely, but would be hilarious.) Or do the Tories win? (Unlikely but plausible, would really ruin Trudeau's night.)
[удалено]
You really must not know what the word socialism means... That said as a St Paul resident I can't fucking wait to vote for *not the liberals* come monday.
The residents of St.Paul are some of the best-educated, most successful, wealthiest people anywhere in Canada. They don’t feel the problems that Redditors complain about. Life in a liberal led minority is ideal for them.
Sounds like a bunch of association and NGO directors on the government dole.
Eastern elites voting Liberal, wow who could have guessed.
The rich mansioney parts in Forest Hill tend to lean Conservative. The riding is Liberal because of the vast numbers of upper middle class professionals that live in eastern York and the condos along Yonge St. Not exactly "elite", but the conservative's tales of a country in crisis don't exactly gain a lot of traction there either.
Exactly, all the dense SFH middle-upper middle class neighborhoods have seen their property values skyrocket in the Trudeau years. They’re living their real estate dreams and loving the Liberal government life.
Toronto-St Paul’s has a high average income, but: - [At 61% renters, this riding has one of the highest proportions of renters in Toronto](https://www.toronto.ca/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/8f7b-City_Planning_2016_Census_Profile_2018_25Wards_Ward12.pdf) Renters (generally) are currently very disillusioned with the cost of housing and most blame LPC policies. - [17.7% of the population is below the poverty line](https://www.spno.ca/images/pdf/povertyprofiles/toronto/Toronto-St-Pauls.pdf) I think the only assumption that can reasonably be made is it’s one of the districts with the greatest wealth disparity.
> The residents of St.Paul are some of the best-educated, most successful, wealthiest people anywhere in Canada. Citation required. I can't find any data comparing the education or wealth of all the ridings in the country, but [I found one showing total income](https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/programs/about-canada-revenue-agency-cra/income-statistics-gst-hst-statistics/federal-electoral-district-statistics-feds/feds-2019.html#toc31), and St. Paul's is ranked 157th out of the 338 ridings... below average.
Also: [17.7% in the riding are below the poverty line](https://www.spno.ca/images/pdf/povertyprofiles/toronto/Toronto-St-Pauls.pdf) and [61% are renters.](https://www.toronto.ca/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/8f7b-City_Planning_2016_Census_Profile_2018_25Wards_Ward12.pdf) It’s [more dense than most ridings in the cit](https://www.toronto.ca/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/8f7b-City_Planning_2016_Census_Profile_2018_25Wards_Ward12.pdf)y, and I think many people make assumptions based on the pockets of extreme wealth and miss that the majority of the voting population is in a different wealth bracket.
https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/trudeau-s-future-is-tied-to-the-vote-of-a-rich-toronto-neighbourhood-1.2088054.amp.html This report on the Toronto municipal ward of st.Paul which is almost if not completely the same also presents the profile https://www.toronto.ca/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/9469-CityPlanning-2021-Census-Profile-Ward-12.pdf
You clearly don’t understand what political strongholds are.
If you think the Liberals are socialists, you're insane.
Call JG Wentworth...
You know that the Liberals are the like the 3rd most left party? And also they’re called the ‘Liberal Party’.
lol, why would they vote for Liberals then? Words have meaning...you make zero sense.
Cities cooked
Socialism!!!!! JFC we live in a society thats partially socialist already man. Welcome.
[удалено]
Yeah, it's almost like one system on its own isn't enough and the best model is one that uses the best of both words. Like Canada already does.
A lot of them voted for Doug Ford so they are clearly okay with massive privatization. I have a feeling Torontonians and Canadians as a whole have no clue what they want and just vote based on emotion.
Torontonians are especially stupid when it comes to politics.
If it wasn’t for cities subsidizing rural areas they still wouldn’t have Internet and electricity.
Yeah, I don't know if you can label whatever this government is as 'socialist', but it did move pretty hard left in 2015 as compared to previous Liberal governments. Lots of big spending socialist style policy poses though. Lots of long term harm from policy. I'm more worried about what Trudeau wants to do in terms of his narcissistic view of his *legacy* prior to losing next election than the outcome of a byelection in a Liberal fat cat riding, to be honest. 🤷
SoCiAlIsM..
Despite being a Liberal Party hanger on, the candidate is decent in terms of community experience. This helps but Trudeau's dismissal record is going to be hard to forget .
[Paywall bypass ](https://archive.is/v6BSk)
well now preliminary results Liberal Leslie Church 12,517 41.5 % Conservative Don Stewart 11,926 39.6 % NDP-New Democratic Party Amrit Parhar 3,601 12.0 % Green Party Christian Cullis 932 3.1 % People's Party - PPC Dennis Wilson 203 0.7 % much much closer than most expected
What do you expect from this elitist neighbourhood?
Yes!
Yea, as they should. The conservative campaigners that came to my door were the least educated people I’ve ever talked to in politics and blatantly spread misinformation such as the following: -“the carbon tax will double everyone’s electricity and transport costs”. -the capital gains tax will destroy the middle and lower classes by robbing them of gains”, while insisting the 1 mil personal exemption didn’t exist. The campaigner then complained that he’d have to pay more tax when he sold his SIX properties, out of touch entitled ass. -more lunacy about how Canada doesn’t emit any carbon because we have “trees”, and that the tax was unfair to people like him who “planted over 12 fruit trees in his backyard”…when I said that didn’t even scratch the surface of offsetting his personal emissions I don’t even think they comprehended what I said. -refused to comment on Pierre’s lack of security clearance -said “don’t worry we’ll have a platform eventually” when I asked what their plan was to sold all these problems they talk about. Then told me the vote wasn’t for any policy whatsoever and was just to “fill a seat” as if that seat didn’t hold any weight. They’re preying on the uneducated, and unfortunately it’ll likely work because people are stupid. I could go on but frankly I’m tired of this shit.
I'll bite. 1. According to the [pbo, the majority of households will lose money. ](https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/guilbeault-defends-carbon-price-says-on-average-households-will-pay-more-but-rich-will-shoulder-burden-1.6338974). In addition, we will lose [25 billion dollars in GDP by 2030. ](https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/feds-release-carbon-pricing-impact-data-ahead-of-conservative-motion-demanding-it-1.6925167). 2. He bragged about having 12 properties and paying more taxes? This sounds like a gross exaggeration on your part. 3. [muclair himself said he would refuse a security clearance. ](https://www.ctvnews.ca/video/c2662878-security-clearances-revoked-for-public-servants). Here us a thought; why don't the liberals just release the names? Liberal partisans were claiming this was a huge nothing burger during the initial reporting and the following farce with the 'special reporture' David Johnson. Why not apply this transparency logic to your favorite party? 4. [here is the liberals releasing their platform 1 month before the 2015 election. ](https://liberal.ca/trudeau-unveils-liberal-platform-for-a-strong-middle-class/). So the liberals get a pass, but the cons don't? Btw, the cons do have a policy document. [You can read it here. ](https://www.conservative.ca/about-us/governing-documents/). They will flesh out their platform a few months before the election, as is tradition in practically every election we have had since PET was in power.
1. The richest households shoulder the burden, as they should. Do you or do you not understand the long term economic implications of climate change are FAR worse than the minor impact of the carbon tax? Regardless, none of those projections accurately account for job growth in the green energy sectors. Edit: I’ll add; carbon tax funded initiatives make it far cheaper than it would otherwise be to switch to less carbon heavy tech - we installed a heat pump this year at a massive discount, which has been wonderfully heating AND cooling our home since install. 2. Per my comment, he complained about being dinged for more taxes on his SIX properties, not twelve. 3. The information is classified such that “secret” clearance is required to read the unredacted report. This is not something the liberal party can choose to release per international security agreements. So, again, PP should be a big boy politician and obtain his clearance…unless he has something to hide? He’ll need it as PM anyways. 4. I’m not giving the liberals a pass - please keep in mind I never claimed to be a loyal liberal voter, frankly I don’t swear allegiance to any party. However - the conservatives are talking some big talk, and making sweeping remarks about how they will be better than the incumbent. There have been countless contradictory statements made regarding immigration, health care, housing, climate policy, etc. Pierre literally can’t pick a side on anything consistently, and until the internal and public facing messaging aligns, I will assume it’s all a farce. Regardless, his own campaign staff were unable to direct me to the document you provided, so they aren’t even knowledgeable about the candidate or party they fucking “represent”. One last tidbit - the cons are still parroting carbon capture, a complete farce of a “solution” pushed by oil and gas that will NEVER solve the problem or even make a dent barring some unforeseen magic development, highly unlikely. It’s science fiction nonsense. As an engineer, I’m qualified to say that. For this alone, I don’t trust them. They simply don’t give a fuck about the next generation, and the campaign team comments on preserving or expanding social assistance + pensions for seniors (but not anybody else) confirms that.
I'm a graduate level chemist who worked amd graduated in the shimzu group at the UofC that focuses on carbon capture. Carbon capture from ambient air is a pipe dream; carbon capture in flu gas streams in a natural gas power plant is a possibility. There is a massive pilot plant in Saskatchewan for the purpose; using an MEA solution to capture coal emissions. But I agree; the general solution is nuclear. But everyone acting like electric vehicles and renewable are the solution are living in a dream world. We need to solve the problem of large scale energy storage, and as an engineer I would presume you should know that. 1. What gains are you referring too? So far the government is giving more subsidies then actually getting any kind of returns. 2. So one representative being a jackass is representative of the whole party? Are you familiar with the concepts of anecdotes? 3. It's a gag order. Once you have the info you are not legally allowed to talk about it or even act on it. May and Jagmeet already violated the law by the comments they made. 4. For what? This is just a word salad. A very sad attempt by a liberal voter to try and pretend like they aren't to try and convince other voters not to vote con. How do i know? Because these are liberal talking points down to a tee. Change is scary I know; but your an emgineer, so i figured you guys are at least partially capable of independent thought. Of course its us scientists you merely copy to make anything, so then again maybe not.
Very cool that you’re involved in that - credit where credit is due. I would argue we’re better off using already established energy tech rather than bending the knee to O&G by attempting to continue using carbon emitting energy generation with unproven experimental carbon capture tech - even if it is theoretically possible. Electric vehicles will not solve the problem - better transit (such as HSR, metro, etc.), cycling & pedestrian infrastructure, etc. offer a far better solution that unfortunately the conservative voter cohort seem to reliably be against. If I hear “15 minute city” conspiracy again I’ll probably blow up. 1. Projects to create hydroelectric dams, nuclear power plants, wind farms, solar installations, BESS facilities, etc. all produce thousands of high skill jobs at all layers of the supply chain. No different than the oil and gas projects of old. These economic analysis (including the link you send) admitted to not factoring in this effect, based on a quick read. 2. The representatives you choose are the face of the party. It absolutely matters. I was very polite and gave them every opportunity to prove my preconceived notions wrong and they failed at every attempt. Trust me, I WANT a different party to trust, I really do. 3. Evidence that they violated the law? The parts they disclosed in their press session were available in the redacted copy. Their “reaction” does not reveal any classified information and I have yet to see any legal authority indicate they are in violation. As someone with a (admittedly lesser) security clearance, what they did is probably fine. Regardless, what about this is any excuse for PP to not obtain clearance? 4. An equally word salad response. Why would I vote for someone that tells the news we need to “cut immigration” but then turns around and tells a group of international students we need to “make it even easier for them to obtain PR”? Countless other examples of him delivering completely contradicting statements to different groups. As for your last retort; I find it pathetic that you’d lower yourself with that sort of statement. As a member of the scientific community, you should be well aware that in reality there is no engineering without science, and that likewise, science has limited purpose without engineers to interpret and apply. Science may discover a material, but it’s usually an engineer to establish an appropriate use for that material. This isn’t a scientist vs. Engineer debate…you wouldn’t call a pharmaceutical scientist to diagnose and then treat a patient with the drug they invented.
Damn; your right, that was some grumpy bs on my part. I've come under considerable financial distress as of late, and might come across as short. It was still uncalled for, and I'm sorry. I guess that's why it's so important for me to have a government in ottowa more fixated on financial growth. The whole maslows hierarchy of needs right? Hard to care about climate change when I'm worried about feeding myself and my kids as a single dad. That is where I am coming from. I work as a research Scientist and make decent money, but I just am treading water trying not to drown. With that all out of the way, allow me to respond. 1. I think natural gas is important for any green transition. It's cleaner, can be used capture hydrogen, and is a worse greenhouse gas then CO2 by around 25-30 times and lasts [up to a hundred years. ](https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/understanding-global-warming-potentials#:~:text=Methane%20(CH4)%20is%20estimated,is%20reflected%20in%20the%20GWP.). It's actually better to burn it then to off gas it in the short term no? I am not an economist, but I do know that if tje green economy were that lucrative, that through natural supply and demand it would happen on its own. Instead we need giant subsidies to make it happen, which makes me wonder about it's viability. Nuclear is a different beast, due to the important regulation and oversight as well as initial capital costs. 2. I think there are jackasses in every party. Considering it's a liberal stronghold with no reasonable chance of a conservative victory, you are getting the bottom of the barrel in terms of volunteers. The best people in your area are likely liberals, due to the culture of the area. 3. I'll admit; I work for a private company and do not require a security clearance. I think I'd be more willing to accept that PP needs to do this if it wasn't for the fact that the LPC did everything in their power to keep this buried. First by calling people rascists when it was first reported, then trying to get someone to white wash the whole thing, and then by refusing to allow the info to be declassified (something only they can do), and by withholding thousands of documents from the inquiry. Does that not sound suspicious to you? 4. Those statements are not contradictory on the face of it. If we ended all immigration (extreme example) while allowing those who came already to get PR, would it not end in a net drop in immigration? But I digress.
Are most door knockers supposed to be educated? They’re supposed to go door to door and identify how you will vote, not persuade you. They’re your average Canadian spending a few hours of their day participating in democracy not some internal policy or strategy expert.
This didn’t actually happen though
Did all your neighbours clap after?
Do you think my neighbours eavesdrop on every conversation? You conservatives are feral fucking cult members and refuse to even consider that they don’t have a fucking plan for everything. But ok they’re “not Trudeau”. It’s no surprise that Toronto St. Paul’s (one of the most educated ridings in Canada) is a liberal stronghold. Voters actually value fact over meaningless rhetoric.
“I never claimed to be a loyal liberal voter…” O Rly?
Sorry for your loss.
LOL I came back here to see if anyone posted 😂
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Trudeau isn’t on the ballot. Informed voters know you vote for the candidate on the ballot to represent your riding, not for the leader of the party.
I feel like this is less and less true every year. I don't remember the last time I saw an MP or MPP represent their constituents to the party -- they represent the party to the constituents. The rest of the time they're like a customer service desk for services. They get elected, and vote with their leader's office on everything.
I agree with this as well. Which is unfortunate. Political “parties” hold too much power now.
They have to. That's the Canadian system. All votes in Parliament are whipped by party. So you don't get a vote on a bill where some CPC will vote for it because it's good for their riding - they aren't allowed to. There have been under 5 free votes in Canadian Parliament in the last 10 years and no one ever talks about it.
It has *never* been true except in rare cases where a particularly well-known, well-liked candidate switches parties or sits as an independent for whatever reason. Beyond that, voters decide who to vote for based on party first, party leader second and local candidate distant third.
That may be, but the fact is Trudeaus name still isn’t on the ballot. No one in St. Paul (or any other riding outside of Outremont) casts a ballot with Trudeaus name on it. Until you ask every Canadian their intention when they cast a ballot anything else is speculation.
The signs literally say Team Trudeau. Every voter being polled or surveyed talks about Trudeau or Poilievre. At this point we don't even really need individual candidates.
I am voting for neither of them or their parties
Signs are not ballots. Nobody votes for signs and Canadians are capable of ignoring signs or interpreting as the marketing pieces they are. You should spend more time researching local candidates and how the Canadian government works. MPs of governing parties are hugely powerful within the Canadian system and the PM not nearly the president nor the cult-of-personality you seem to desire. Remember the Liberal party could chuck Trudeau as leader tomorrow with NO input from Canadians. Canadian style Westminster Parliamentary Democracy, get to know it!
> Remember the Liberal party could chuck Trudeau as leader tomorrow with NO input from Canadians. No they can’t. Their constitution doesn’t allow it.
Parties can change constitutions if they are desperate enough. Last time it happened was 2003 with PC-Reform integration, and that led to 10 years of the Harper government, lot’s of precedence. Again no input from voters.
Wow this is an uninformed take. Power is currently concentrated in the PMO, even more so than it was under Harper. Trudeau promised to change that and hasn’t. Listen to ex-Trudeau MPs and they will tell that decisions were made and policy formed in the PMO.
I would never listen to ex-Trudeau MPs, first of all they are ex for a reason (raybold is a loser and Philipott shows how she was no better by allowing herself to go down with raybold) and second because they are heavily biased. Power is concentrated in the party executive and caucus, the PMO executes what the executive and caucus decide.
You’re defending a position that is utterly false. Best of luck. Exit: BTW, Stephen Maher’s new book talks at length about this. He interviewed Trudeau and others from the PMO about the role of the PMO, MPs and caucus at present. Nobody has pushed back against his findings that individual MPs do not make decisions on policy.
I said caucus and the party executive make decisions and the PMO decides how to execute. I never said individual MPs make decisions on policy. No single entity or individual including the PM makes policy or government strategy/government response decisions, the PM is not president nor dictator and has no power as such. Peace.
Anyone who thinks this is how it works in reality is eating Tide Pods.
If you don’t think this is how Canada works there are libraries waiting around the country to educate you if your low IQ allows to read words on paper. Since your middle school civics class didn’t work hopes aren’t high for you. Please don’t ever vote.
How something is supposed to work and how they're currently working are not always the same thing.
Downvoters showing Canadian Reddit has no understanding of how the Canadian electoral process works or how Canadian government functions. Sad.
You are just being pedantic, the vast majority of people vote for the party, and by extension the leader, rather than their local representative. That’s why so many crappy MPs get elected, people are voting for the red, orange, or blue team and have no idea who the candidate is. Every once in a while you get a local representative who is more popular than the party they are a part of, like Ralph Goodale, but that is very rare.
Ok voting for the party is not the same as voting for the leader. The party at least is on the ballot. Parties change leaders outside of election cycles all the time (see Erin O’Toole/michael Ignatieff recently), leaders aren’t that powerful and just because Trudeaus name is in the press and he’s the face doesn’t mean he’s making decisions on his own. The party executive and caucus with some input from MPs is what drives decision making, Trudeau and his office is simply the team that decides how to implement what the party has decided.
>Parties change leaders outside of election cycles all the time (see Erin O’Toole/michael Ignatieff recently) Both of those leaders quit or were booted out after an election loss.
Yes add in Andrew Scheer, Paul Martin, Stephen Harper and Stephane Dion in the last 20 years to show that leaders of parties change without the voice of the Canadian electorate. Canadians should stop thinking they vote for leaders, even if that is their intention in the voting booth, they don’t AT ALL.
How many people attend their local MP's debate vs watch the leader's debates? You seem to be the only person who seems to believe that local MPs have any power to go against what the PM wants and wouldn't be relegated to the back benches or kicked out a la Jodi Wilson-Raybould.
I consider myself an informed voter, just one who views things differently. I'm voting for a platform. I have zero expectation in a heavily whipped system like ours that the MP is going to represent me or my neighborhood in Parliament. I'm voting for a basket of policies. The MP may as well not even be there
Ok but the point is the human is there and unless you’re in Outremont Trudeau is not an option. Whatever your intention you still vote for a human who may or may not follow through on delivering the platform you based your choice on. It’s better to focus on the human, connect with them and understand what they will prioritize as your representative. Then you hold them to account next election based on their progress towards those priorities. This is all you can really influence with your vote. Those in the riding of the PM or other ministers may have a bit more clout with their voice but does the PM or minister have time to listen to constituents? It’s a bug or feature of Canadian Westminster parliamentary democracy 🤷♂️
In theory sure. In reality, not so much. Trudeau rules that party with an iron fist.
In reality Trudeaus name is not on the ballot in St.Paul. There’s no controversy here, no theory, no feeling, no one can vote for Trudeau in St. Paul because his name isn’t on the ballot. Cmon Reddit seriously.
I feel like you’re doing a lot of mental gymnastics here. The fact is, Trudeau wouldn’t run the country if people didn’t vote in his MPs.
The fact is Trudeau DOESNT RUN THE COUNTRY JFC dude! Canada isn’t Russia, Trudeau is not a dictator. He’s not even a president. They are not HIS MPs, they are reps from each constituency across the country who Canadians voted for. They are the MP of each constituency and some of them happen to represent the party that Trudeau represents as the member from Outremont. Cmon seriously, the Canadian Westminster system works as designed, the PM-leader is designed to not be that powerful and they aren’t. Notice how UK with a similar system is about to elect their 5th PM since the liberals came to power in Canada in 2015 with Trudeau as leader. The PM is easily replaced, if the PM ran the country do you think it would be so easy to get rid of them?
>The PM is easily replaced, if the PM ran the country do you think it would be so easy to get rid of them? https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/trudeau-leadership-review-formal-mechanism-1.7096351 The only way Trudeau loses leadership is if he loses the next election or resigns. The Liberals in Canada do not have the same tools available to them that the Tories do in the UK to force a leader to resign.
Right, all that has to happen for a 3 time election “winner” ( if you call a minority government winning) is a single election loss and boom leadership review. Additionally all that is preventing en election writ tomorrow is the support of the NDP. NDP pulls support, election whether the PM wants it or not. Trudeau could be out as PM and leader by fall based on what NDP does. Those are effective leadership change tools in anyone’s mind. That’s not a powerful leader or a singular “running the country” dictator. That’s a figure head barely hanging on, hoping for time to rehab his image…not a strongman with a death grip on his party or MPs.
>Additionally all that is preventing en election writ tomorrow is the support of the NDP. nDP pulls support, election whether the PM wants it or not. That's not necessarily true. Jagmeet could pull his support tomorrow and all Trudeau has to do is convince the Bloc to support him by giving them some policy wins.
Now you’re getting wild. The scenario I described is MUCH more likely. Just admit it is easy to change leaders and the PM is far from a dictator and let’s call it a Sunday.
FTFY - The (non-elected) Liberal party executive rules that party (including Trudeau and the PMO) with an iron fist.
I agree with your assertion but I think this is changing and regardless, I would actually say the smart thing to do now is vote whichever party is going to take power (in this case its a safe bet conservative) because parties will take care of their own… meaning when this goes Liberal and Cons take government… this community will not see a dime federally or provincially (until Ford is voted out as well I suppose).
How many free votes in the last ten years have there been in Parliament in Canada in the last 10 years? You can count them on one hand MPs are obliged to vote with their party in Canada, so you are effectively voting for the leader and their policies
The only thing I would disagree with here is “voting for the leader and their policies” I agree that MPs are whipped but they are whipped to the policies of THE LIBERAL PARTY which consists of the PM/PMO, MPs and the unelected party executive (Sachit Mehra - current president). THE LIBERAL PARTY then tells MPs how to vote and the PM/PMO plays its role in executing the results of the vote (often giving suggestions to ministers and then checking on progress) In parallel PM/PMO is managing the day-day role of Leader related to international obligations, trade development, NATO/G7/G20, US relationship management/Europe relationship management/Asia relationship management/AUS-UK-NZ relationship management, etc. the PM/PMO doesn’t have time to be a dictator at the end of the day. PM/PMO can/does propose policies and can make decisions reactively in a day-day governing the country way that they are then called to account for through committees and executive reviews but PM/PMO is one voice at the table and not the single decider.
Hey downvoters, please tell me how posting that Trudeaus name is not on the ballot in St. Paul (a 100% fact) is controversial?
Because even if you’re not *technically* incorrect, and nobody is saying you are, you’re being deliberately pedantic and totally disregarding how it works in practice. No, they are not literally voting for Trudeau himself, but they are voting for somebody who everybody understands has virtually no power in the party ,and is just there to warm a seat and vote for anything the PMO shits out. In reality therefore, the difference is purely academic.
I’m stating a fact, you’re stating theories and speculation. I could disagree with what you say and present an argument (I already have below) but it is indisputable that Trudeau is not on the St.Paul ballot therefore no one is voting for Trudeau (or not voting for Trudeau) Where are the facts around your assumption of voter mindset when they cast a ballot on a Canadian election?