Saturday, 10 March 2012
Call out to Elmwood-Transcona Readers
You seem to insinuate that there was a significant change in seats in Winnipeg, when in fact there were only two seats that changed. One seat that the Tories had been targeting for years and another where people got fed up with the useless tool 'Maloway'.Now, bgilchrist - who goes on to claim that (what he interprets as the thesis of ) my post "shows a complete ignorance of both provincial and federal politics in this country" - claims that Maloway is a useless tool and that's the sole reason why he was voted out. No voter suppression could have anything to do with it, supposedly. I'll ignore the other claim that seats the Tories target wouldn't be good candidates for voter suppression1.
Now, I know at least one Federal Conservative candidate has said that people should vote for him to get top-notch attention from the Conservative Government. I'd hope this isn't the "usefulness" (which Maloway supposedly lacks) bgilchrist has in mind. What other "uselessness" could he have in mind - what other comparisons are there? Was Maloway that much more ineffectual than his predecessor or MPs in neighbouring ridings? How steep was Maloway's federal politics learning curve or complacency? Are there any actual public indicators we have to intersubjectively measure an MP's "effectiveness"?
So, I'll ask the people of Elmwood-Transcona to explain why they voted, how much the "uselessness" of Maloway factored in, and if it'd make any sense in a race as close as the graph below indicates to, I dunno, suppress the vote of the other guy!
|Jim Maloway (NDP) vote share compared to Lawrence Toet |
Image Source: Constructed by "the Analyst".
Data Source: Canada Votes 2011
1 As, you know, they're sorta close races - where a little voter suppression can go a long way in ensuring the "target" is met.↩