The Election Day Fast Approaches

The Liberals main party platform has many benefits but it also has many disadvantages. The Liberals have proposed to raise taxes for the Canadian upper class. But lower the taxes of the Canadian middle class. I predict that the majority of the Liberal party’s supporters consist of middle class and working class citizens, as it most benefits them. Although lowering the taxes of the middle class and working class was an amazing idea to gain more supporters, raising taxes of the upper class was not such a good idea. The Liberal party is losing votes (and possibly the support, financial and otherwise) of the upper class. If the liberals were to lower the taxes of the middle and working class but keep the upper class taxes the same, I feel that the liberals would gain a significant amount of supporters.

For example, in order to win provincial elections in Alberta, a politician’s main focus are the big cities, Edmonton and Calgary, and perhaps a few smaller cities, but since the values and needs of Albertans, to a certain extent, tend to be similar throughout the province, the party running for office does not need to worry about pleasing everybody’s need. Also, both the Liberals and the Conservatives aim to grow the Canadian economy. Both the Conservatives and the Liberals aim to expand the economy through the creation of jobs, the investment in research and development and providing opportunities and training in trades. However, even though some of the ways by which both parties attempt to achieve the growth of the economy are similar, there are also some differences. For example, the conservatives aimed to give reduce the GST in order to allow citizens keep money in their pocket and to help them adjust to the rising costs of

Now that you are up to date with currents events I will briefly touch on some strong point of the Canadian democratic system. Citizens in Canada indirectly hold power in a free electoral system and are given better representation and more freedoms for their citizens than other systems of government. The freedom of speech, freedom of political expression, and the freedom of the media allow citizens to vote in favour of their own interest. Democracy in Canada is rooted on the grounds of equal rights; this gives people equality before the law, human rights, free and fair elections and so on. In comparison to the Third World, power is in the hands of the “Big Men”, the police and army are the ones who hold control not the people and where corruption is a norm, Canada may look like a utopia. Another strong point in the Canadian political system is everyone no matter race or sex has the right to vote as long as you are a Canadian citizen over the age of eighteen. Until the 60s/70s parties would make up electoral boundaries this was done to increase the number of votes in that location this is called gerrymander, this was unfair because certain parties had an advantage over others. However, now under the Electoral Boundaries Commissions this problem does not occur and no party has the upper hand over another. Interestingly the

The electoral system in Canada is also known as a “first past the post” system. “First past the post” means the candidate with the highest number of votes wins the congressional seat, whereas the other candidates with a lower number of votes don’t get any representation. There are many cons to this system that will be highlighted throughout this essay. I will argue that the electoral system requires reform due to the discrepancies between the percentage of popular votes and the number of seats won. Canada’s electoral system has many problems and is not seen as fully democratic since it has provided poor representation for both candidates that win and lose. Candidates can win seats with less than 50% of votes, meaning that even if the majority of the nation, or province did not vote for the candidate they still win the election as they consume the highest number of votes among the parties. FPTP allows two people in different ridings to get the same number of votes with the outcome of one winner since the distribution of votes and seats are unequal. The system can also encourage strategic voting such as not voting for whom you think is the best fit but voting for the candidate that seems most likely to win in order to beat candidate you dislike. FPTP leads to an imbalance of power and has the potential for corruption.

Justin Trudeau is said to have revolutionized the structure of the Canadian Parliament this past November with his policy for a gender-balanced cabinet. For the first time in Canadian history, the Canadian Government sits with a 50% female, and a 50% male cabinet as a reflection of Canada’s diversity (Murphy). Yet what may have stunned citizens even more than the country’s step towards gender equality, was Prime Minister Trudeau’s explanation for the gender parity: “because it’s 2015” (Murphy). Despite it being the 21st century, a century that strives for gender equality in all areas of life, the political arena still “appears somewhat stuck in time” (The Canadian Press). That is to say, gender equality in the political sphere is far from

Canada’s friendly neighbor to the South, the US, has an electoral system that is composed of 3 separate elections, one of them deciding the head of state. The president elected by the people and he or she is the determining person of the country’s political system. In the US runs like a majority system” In Canada, however, elections are held slightly differently. Citizens vote for a Member of Parliament in a 308-seat house and candidates win not by a majority, unlike in the US, but by a plurality. This means that a candidate can actually win by simply having more votes than the other candidates. This method of representative democracy, in general, does not cause too much controversy in a global scope but has

The issue of electoral reform has become more important than ever in Canada in recent years as the general public has come to realize that our current first-past-the-post, winner-take-all system, formally known as single-member plurality (SMP) has produced majority governments of questionable legitimacy. Of the major democracies in the world, Canada, the United States, and the United Kingdom are the only countries that still have SMP systems in place. Interestingly enough, there has been enormous political tension and division in the last few years in these countries, culminating with the election results in Canada and the USA this year that polarized both countries. In the last year we have seen

Recently, the presidential debate in the United States of America has been a major event covered in the news, and has become somewhat of a problem in the world. Accordingly, Kimberley McLeod, in “When Canada Goes Viral: The Canada Party and the Circulation of Political Satire”, has shed light on a youtube video in which Brian Calvert proposed Canada as a potential presidential candidate. The article outlines the issues that Americans have with the current presidential candidates and how Canada would be a beneficial choice. This essay comprehensively demonstrates Canada’s view on the American political system through its satirical video, many primary and secondary credible sources, and the highly developed paragraph structure used throughout the entirety of the essay.

The Liberals reached out of to all Canadians, whereas the Conservatives focused on more particular groups, evident throughout their campaign in Quebec. By trying to impress the Quebec voters with his stand against the niqab, Harper lost votes from those who want the niqab. The ratio of voters for the niqab is much greater as many Canadians value the Charter and going against niqabs would lead to its infringement. The liberals may have went for the niqab and may have unimpressed some Québec voters, however they campaigned with a positive vision that brings Canadians together whereas Harper campaigned by separating Canadians. Along with poor decisions made by Harper’s government, the Senate spending scandal provided the public with doubts about Harper’s credibility because it was he who had chosen the senators. Thus, Harper unknowingly provided reasons for voters to develop distrust, ultimately leading to his defeat in the campaign. As A. Downs (2010) said, “voters evaluate party promises and governmental performance to make their choices of

Fred Cutler and Matthew Mendelsohn’s article “Unnatural Loyalists or Naive Collaborationists? The governments and Citizens of Canadian Federalism”, delved into a compelling analysis of Canadian citizens and federalism. In a country of much diversity, as discussed in lecture, it is difficult for citizens to hold the ‘right’ government accountable because of the blame shifting each level of government does. To give an illustration, this article briefly touches upon the propaganda the provincial and federal government use to shift blame on one another for policies such as healthcare and education. However Cutler and Mendelsohn go one step further and analyze if Canadian citizens are able to judge policies without allowing their provincial status

Opposing the belief that a dominating leader is running Canada, Barker brings up several key realities of the Canadian government. He gives examples of several “… instances of other ministers taking action that reveal the limits prime-ministerial power,” (Barker 178). Barker conveys the fact that Canada is not bound by a dictatorial government, “…it seems that the prime minister cannot really control his individual ministers. At times, they will pursue agendas that are inconsistent with the prime minister’s actions,” (Barker 181). Both inside and outside government are a part of Canada and they can remind the prime minister that “…politics is a game of survival for all players,” (Barker 188). Barker refutes the misinterpretation of the Canadian government by acknowledging that a prime-ministerial government existing in Canada is an overstatement.

Brian and his party arrogance, foolishness, indifference, uncaring attitude and as well as his progressive Conservative political party ceased to exist. In a matter of time Brian Mulroney became from one the best Prime Minister Canada has ever had to one of the “worst” Prime Minister’s Canada has ever had. Historically Conservative leaders oppose the initiative but this time Brian Mulroney was for the initiative. Brian Mulroney said in his pre-election that “ if it affects Canada, we will have none of it.” Mulroney later then proved that he is a man of his word and fixed this issue

There is a fundamental problem with the democratic process in Canada. This problem is rooted within our electoral system. However, there is a promising solution to this issue. Canada should adopt the mixed-member proportional representation electoral system (MMP) at the federal level if we wish to see the progression of modern democracy. The failure to do so will result in a stagnant political system that is caught in the past and unable to rise to the contemporary challenges that representative democracies face. If Canada chooses to embrace the MMP electoral system it will reap the benefits of greater proportionality, prevent the centralization of power that is occurring in Parliament and among political parties through an increased

Canada is one of the largest and most culturally diverse countries in the world. These characteristics make the democratic governing of the country a difficult task. A democratic model is needed that respects the fundamental rights and freedoms of various diverse cultures, and unites these cultures over a huge land mass as Canadians. To do this the Canadian government is one which is pluralist. Pluralism is the ideology that groups, (in Canada's case political parties), should rule in government. These parties help protect the fundamental rights and freedoms of everyone living in Canada, regardless of their ethnicity, or religious beliefs. The role political parties play in Canada is vital for

Canada has been an independent nation for over 150 years, so it makes sense that there has been numerous changes in the government, since the government has to reflect its society, and as time changes so does its government. However, some ideologies do not believe it should change in order to keep up with its time. Oxford Dictionary states that the definition of an ideology is “A system of ideas and ideals, especially one which forms the basis of economic or political theory and policy.” There are various forms of political ideologies; conservatism and liberalism are being brought up for discussion about what makes conservatives and liberals so different in Canada. Throughout the years, the Canadian government has rotated between liberalism and conservatism, these ideologies share some similarities; however, it can be argued that the significant differences are their political, social, and economic views.