Wednesday, 18 January 2012

United Review 1: In Support and Against 'Man U'

(Sneaky Man U usage, hmmm? You think Manchester United's copy write protection would extend to cover my little theft? Not bloody likely, eh, wot?

Its not an admission of theft, Legal. Just stirring the fun pot, s'all.)

Let's begin a year long review of the reasons why, and why not, to Unite all other political factions in Manitoba to run against the NDP Government, including some how's and why's for the whole thing, with an article on the heart of the for-and-against argument, and a big fat run on sentence. Run-on having been accomplished, let's proceed with the rest.

A. Why Not to Unite

Coming together under one roof, so to speak, has one serious drawback; the people you suddenly find yourself shoulder to shoulder with.

I heard this at just such a party (in my mind...)

'So Jon says to James, 'I really did like your carr-uncy idea. Barter with vegetables might spark rural entrepreneurs to supply more local produce.' And Hugh says, 'But Jon, how the hell do we list that on the Exchange...?' James says, 'Carbon Credits, Hugh. Carbon Credits.' Then James looks at Jon and rolls his eyes, you know that look.....

Who's gonna blink, folks? Who will give up on their core beliefs to pitch in with the 'other guys'? It's like the geeks and the hippies and the jocks all coming together in some raucous teen dramady where the pimply-faced factions unite to stop something... something important to them all..... something they never faced before in their pampered, sheltered childhoods. A coming of age story in Keystone rather than Devon.

What could spur such famous foes to pitch the big United tent and play the most important game of their lives, together, as a team?

Watch your coming of age teen dramadies, kiddies. Its all about the love interest they share. She who crosses all cliques, who digs nobel response from pocket protector, jock strap, and jean jacket. The lady with the secret which, once revealed, spurs even the most hardened clique leader to secret meeting with his most bitter, bitter rivals. (Uh, yeah, ladies, trade genders in the above as you wish. Its a device, not a male dominated society admission. Cool, thanks.)

So, gentle reader, ask yourself this; what could our three leaders love so selflessly that they would turn from tradition and historic trajectory towards a sardine can full of bitter enemies?

Go on, ask yourself.

If you can't find an answer, don't worry. You are in good company, as it appears that no-one knows.


So, the main argument against 'Man U' (aka The Manitoba United Party) is this: The established parties and their leaders do not seem to love anything more than their own interests.

Heartbreaking. And I mean that most sincerely.

To be sure, all other complex, persnickety, pesky problems involving uniting into one party flow from this lack of selfless, sacrificing, super-love to unite them. Trapped in their cliques, the Keystone High School kids are doomed to forever lose the big homecoming game to the Dipper High team, and the head cheerleader will once again lose the bet and have to... ummm... I guess this is a family blog, you'll have to imagine what she has to do (hint: it ain't pretty.)

Lets see if we can help those Keystone High kids this time.

B. Why to Unite

(Cue Holly Cole, 'My Foolish Heart: "This time its loooovvee.... this time its love, My, Fooooo-lish, Heaaart...."

I love her so much.)

Anyways, let's cut to the chase on 'why to unite' against the NDP (aka The Kings and Queens of Orange).

NEWSFLASH: First-Past-The-Post Voting System Corrupting Democracy in Keystone Province, Plethora of Parties Leads to Appointment of New Monarchy

Ummm... Natural Ruling Party? Heard of it? Do you get what they mean when they call themselves (or are called) the natural ruling party either Federally or Provincially? Remember when they used to say 'I rule by rights given to me by God..."

Natural Ruling Party means that, by pandering to a rock-solid core of their most zealous supporters, that party can defeat the other parties through vote splitting. Every time, forever, or until the cows come home with the flying pigs in tow.

That such a party exists means that a core principle has been cut from the Democratic Apple, being, that there is a GOVERNMENT IN WAITING WHO IS HER (HIS) MAJESTY'S MOST LOYAL OPPOSITION*.

The test of the true mettle of those drawn to politics is never found in the hall of power. It is found in the vestibule, the gallery, the groundswell, the answer to the cry of the mother who weeps for a child cruelly mistreated by The Government.

The test for those crazy Keystone High School kids isn't how well they would govern. It is how well they react to the condition which causes them to always fail separately. They are tested best when they are powerless.

It is why they are the most loyal, serving the Queen (King) despite not being in power. In fact, such service is the highest form, the most nobel, and that service is relied upon most heavily by the Queen (King) for the democratic system to function as intended.

Without such selfless service, the party in power stays in power, indefinitely, and they can do whatever the hell they like, right? I mean, not to put to fine a point on it, but that is a fact, right?

Further, and listen closely: by failing in their duty to Her Majesty, the Keystone kids are actually letting vile usurpers walk right in the front door of the palace. By failing to provide an alternative to the NDP government, the other parties are causing, in effect, a new Monarchy to form.

(Yes, this is why I have been calling them the Kings and Queens of Orange. Now you get it, right? Good.)

Her Majesty is to represent her office as best she can. Her office represent the highest form of nobility, the best of us, our pinnacle, our ideal. She travels, speaks, signs, presides over, causes, and inspires the rest of us to do the very best we can for her most sacred trust: the well being of her Citizens.

Her Citizens are our children. They are our wives, our husbands, mothers, fathers, friends and foes, families and the family-less. Rich, poor, and all gradients in between. They is us, all of us.

So by failing to selflessly love her Majesty's office, the Keystone kids remain powerless to stop the vile usurpers in the Natural Ruling Party. The new Kings and Queens serve only their friends, and not 'the people', because they can, and because it works for them in the first past the post system. Yes, same for the Federal King, his Highness Harper. Same thing, same results.

In Manitoba, the homecoming game is lost, the cheerleader (yes, folks, its the Queen) has her fate sealed, and the kids hang their heads, in shame, once again. Damn. If only....

(Now tell me, doesn't this sound like a much better description of what is happening in Manitoban politics today than the other pundits have poured out thus far? Thanks. I need the stroking.)

So, why unite?

To save the Queen, 'natch. I'm telling you, its always about that selfless love thing.

In Summation: 

This last Manitoba Provincial election taught all three losing parties that they cannot form government under these current conditions. Yes, blame the voting system, but also blame those who played right into it.

To continue along this path, I am of the opinion that the three parties (you like this James? I'm totally including you guys, and I mean it) are committing an act that will, in the future, be seen as nothing short of treasonous. Continuing on this way is against the Queen, her subjects, and against democracy.

And now the hammer: either we abandon, wholesale, the Keystone leaders and their cliques in order to form a new United party, or we are just as guilty as they are, and shame on us.

That is... unless they see clearly the folly of their ways, get together, and pitch the tent.

(The big game is 3.5 years away, boys. Do not wait until it is 2 years away, or it could be too late.)

NEXT UP: The Rod Rouge plows 9.5 years into the future to find the United Party un-United, but in a very different (see: non-treasonous) way. 

Oh, those crazy Keystone kids!!

PS: I'm going to work hard over the next year. Oh, boy, would I ever appreciate more links on folks' blogs....

* Stylin' formatting inspired by the Black Rod's Blog, All Rights Reserved.

Wednesday, 11 January 2012

NDP vs. Manitoba United Vote Count in 2011 Election

Nearly a month to add this up. That's not all I did, but hell's, that's a lot of adding, folks. In my spare time I did this. I reek of dedication, right? Thanks.

Below you will find all NDP seats won by them in the 2011 Manitoba Provincial Election.

At the head of each riding result listed below you will find the "NDP to United" vote count (eg. 1234 to 4321)

('United? wass'at mean, precious...?' you ask. 'All other votes', I say... for now....)

We'll start with this list, and go forward publishing various articles regarding:

1. A new United Party called.... The Manitoba United Party.

2. Inclusion of the Lib's, PC's, and Greens!! (Whoo-hoo!! Start the fireworks!!!)

3. The necessity of including, as a fundamental unwavering election promise, the revamping of the current election system, to be completed 2 years before the subsequent election.

But for now, to the list below, and a general observation.

Obviously, my magic number (7) required to flip from NDP to 'United' is not mathematically present in the list below. We clearly win Tyndall Park, St. Norbert, St. James, and Kirkfield Park. That's cool, but we're 3 shy of a victory. Poor us, hmm?

But check this out.... look at the spitting distance test in each remaining riding. Ask, hey... did the United vote come within spitting distance of winning in Transcona, The Maples, Swan River, Southdale, Selkirk, Seine River, Riel, Radisson, Logan, Kildonan, Kewatinook, Interlake, Gimli, Fort Rouge, Fort Richmond, Fort Garry Riverview, Flin Flon, Elmwood, Dawson Trail, Dauphin, or Brandon East?

Well? Did they?

Depends on how far y'all spit, but given I am gob-blessed and can spit 10% of a vote count if justice is on my side and the sun is just right, then 'hell's yeah' is the answer in many of the ridings listed above.

Waaayyy more potential winners than makes up the magic number, if 10% is a good spitting distance, and even 1/2 came through on the good side.

Hmmmm... I say. Are we resonant, folks? Hmmmm... all at the same time.

Lets explore, yes?

NEXT UP: a list of factors to write on, and on, and on about regarding particular and general influences of a United Vote, both up or downwards, on the next general election.


Wolseley 4229 to 2755

Candidate Name Party Votes
BEDDOME, James GPM 1,368
TURKA, Harpreet PC 850
STEWART, Eric V.T. Lib. 517

Tyndall Park  2596 to 3152

Candidate Name Party Votes
SEVILLANO, Roldan C. Lib. 2,007
AGLUGUB, Cris PC 908

Transcona 4488 to 3219

Candidate Name Party Votes
REID, Daryl NDP 4,488
STAPON, Craig PC 2,668
McLEOD-JASHYN, Faye Lib. 551

Thompson 2586 to 1188

Candidate Name Party Votes
ASHTON, Steve NDP 2,586
CAMPBELL, Anita PC 1,068
DILLEN, Ken Lib. 120

The Pas  2995 to 1074

Candidate Name Party Votes
WHITEHEAD, Frank NDP 2,995
McDONALD, Alfred PC 959
TESSEMA, Girma Lib. 115

The Maples 3894 to 3619

Candidate Name Party Votes
SARAN, Mohinder NDP 3,894
TOMAS, Jose Dakila C. PC 1,943
SARINAS, Pablito Lib. 1,395

Swan River 4280 to 3342

Candidate Name Party Votes
POWELL, Dave PC 3,078
COOK, Reynold Lib. 264

St.Vital 5023 to 3337

Candidate Name Party Votes
ALLAN, Nancy NDP 5,023
BROWN, Mike PC 2,876
WOLBERT, Harry Lib. 461

St. Norbert 3966 to 4818

Candidate Name Party Votes
GAUDREAU, Dave NDP 3,966
VELTHUYS, Karen PC 3,935
LAURENDEAU, Marcel Lib. 883

St. Johns 4157 to 2145

Candidate Name Party Votes
LARKIN, Ray PC 1,405
WEINBERG, Alon David GPM 392
MUELLER, Trevor Lib. 348

St.James 4432 to 4476

Candidate Name Party Votes
CROTHERS, Deanne NDP 4,432
GILLINGHAM, Scott PC 3,414
ALLARD, Gerard Lib. 685
VANDALE, Trevor GPM 377

St.Boniface 5914 to 2673

Candidate Name Party Votes
SELINGER, Greg NDP 5,914
CLARK, Frank PC 1,537
GROSS, Brad Lib. 606
LANDRY, Alain GPM 530

Southdale  5662 to 5225

Candidate Name Party Votes
SELBY, Erin NDP 5,662
EASTMAN, Judy PC 4,898
SINGH, Amarjit Lib. 327

Selkirk 4279 to 3359

Candidate Name Party Votes
DEWAR, Greg NDP 4,279
BELL, David K. PC 3,008
COURCHENE, Marilyn Lib. 351

Seine River 5500 to 4864

Candidate Name Party Votes
OSWALD, Theresa NDP 5,500
STEEVES, Gord PC 4,569
OSINAME, Troy Lib. 295

Rossmere 5392 to 4137

Candidate Name Party Votes
BRAUN, Erna NDP 5,392
SIDHU, Kaur (Karl) PC 3,430
BELLIVEAU, Rene Lib. 356

River Heights (Just for fun...)

Candidate Name Party Votes
GERRARD, Jon Lib. 4,756
MORANTZ, Marty PC 3,389
MANNING, Dan NDP 1,843
CAMERON, Elizabeth May GPM 370

Riel 5352 to 4396

Candidate Name Party Votes
MELNICK, Christine NDP 5,352
SQUIRES, Rochelle PC 3,916
GILARSKI, Cheryl Lib. 480

Radisson 5033 to 4094

Candidate Name Party Votes
JHA, Bidhu NDP 5,033
PENNER, Desmond PC 3,588
ROBERT, Shirley Lib. 506

Point Douglas  3806 to 1350

Candidate Name Party Votes
CHIEF, Kevin NDP 3,806
VERNAUS, John PC 917
BOURGEOIS, Mary Lou Lib. 257
PUN, Teresa GPM 176
RANKIN, Darrell CPC-M 38

Minto 3615 to 1773

Candidate Name Party Votes
SWAN, Andrew NDP 3,615
SQUANCE, Belinda PC 833
WOODSTOCK, Don Lib. 609
DYCK, Harold GPM 331
CARR, Cheryl-Anne E CPC-M 56

Logan 2985 to 2096

Candidate Name Party Votes
CHAN, Joe Lib. 868
KRAWETZ, Tyrone PC 840
ANDREWS, Kristen GPM 335

Kirkfield Park - 4928 to 5613

Candidate Name Party Votes
BLADY, Sharon NDP 4,928
de GROOT, Kelly PC 4,907
BOKHARI, Syed Lib. 367
GRAY, Alanna GPM 339

Kildonan - 4808 to 3271

Candidate Name Party Votes
CHOMIAK, Dave NDP 4,808
PENNER, Darrell PC 2,880
SAGRIOTIS, Dimitrius Lib. 391

Kewatinook - 2043 to 1532

Candidate Name Party Votes
ROBINSON, Eric NDP 2,043
BIRCH, Michael PC 1,389
GREEN, Philip GPM 94
WOODFORD, Orville Lib. 49

Interlake - 3374 to 3312

Candidate Name Party Votes
LUPKY, Steve PC 2,903
ZASITKO, John Ind. 215
RATT, Albert Lib. 194

Gimli - 5012 to 4716

Candidate Name Party Votes
BJORNSON, Peter NDP 5,012
WHARTON, Jeff PC 4,210
WHITEMAN, Glenda GPM 309
EINARSSON, Lawrence Lib. 197

Fort Rouge - 4501 to 4286

Candidate Name Party Votes
HOWARD, Jennifer NDP 4,501
HESSE, Paul PC 2,031
DOMINIQUE, Sonny Lib. 1,778
WEEDON, Stephen GPM 477

Fort Richmond - 4026 to 3505

Candidate Name Party Votes
IRVIN-ROSS, Kerri NDP 4,026
McCAFFREY, Shaun PC 2,908
HILES, Dustin Lib. 369
McINTYRE, Caitlin GPM 226

Fort Garry-Riverview - 5146 to 4117

Candidate Name Party Votes
ALLUM, James NDP 5,146
RABB, Ian PC 3,052
FREEDMAN, Kevin Lib. 666
BACK√Č, Daniel GPM 399

Flin Flon - 1901 to 1411

Candidate Name Party Votes
PETTERSEN, Clarence NDP 1,901
HEINE, Thomas Lib. 510
HARVIE, Saara GPM 110

Elmwood - 3864 to 3212

Candidate Name Party Votes
MALOWAY, Jim NDP 3,864
HUTTEN, David PC 2,399
DRATOWANY, Anthony Lib. 467

Dawson Trail - 4291 to 3875

Candidate Name Party Votes
LEMIEUX, Ron NDP 4,291
TETRAULT, Laurent (Larry) PC 3,554
HOSKINS, Sandra Lib. 321

Dauphin - 4463 to 3679

Candidate Name Party Votes
McKINNEY, Lloyd J. PC 3,356
FRIESEN, Tamela GPM 199
TESSEMA, Sisay Lib. 124

Concordia - 4008 to 2348

Candidate Name Party Votes
WIEBE, Matt NDP 4,008
WARRAICH, Naseer PC 1,803
OYELERU, Isaiah Lib. 237

Burrows - 3063 - 2099
Candidate Name Party Votes
WIGHT, Melanie NDP 3,063
NEGRYCH, Rick PC 1,314
MOTKALUK, Twyla Lib. 629

Brandon East - 3864 to 3168

Candidate Name Party Votes
CALDWELL, Drew NDP 3,864
WADDELL, Mike PC 2,711
CAMERON, Shaun Lib. 280
FLEURY, Vanda GPM 177

Assiniboia - 5095 to 3656

Candidate Name Party Votes
RONDEAU, Jim NDP 5,095
AUCH, Susan PC 3,258
SHENG, Anlina GPM 204
BOKHARI, Moe Lib. 194