Thanks for putting together this evidence - very interesting, even if it's not definitive. I think the GVR vote-intention visualizations ("Change in GVR CPC Vote Intention from 2019 to 2021") are a bit messed up.
As a federal Liberal myself, I think the other thing to note is that China's government *attempting* to influence Canadian elections would still be bad even if it was unsuccessful, and any such attempts should be opposed by all parties.
I would suggest the author of this piece and all Canadians buy a copy of the new book "Willful Blindness" by an "investigative reporter" named Sam Cooper. His investigation started with the high cost or real-estate in Vancouver considering the average wage and it produced how deeply imbedded the drug cartel and nefarious backers are in places such as Vancouver (Richmond, home of the River Walk Casino, to which there has been the on going Cullen Inquiry). He explains the known money laundering in the Casinos and the connections to the Circle Boys and the CCP. He reports the same problems are prevalent in Markham and many other cities across Canada.
Their are Senate and Parliamentary Members, Provincial Governments, Ministers and members within Provincial Governments, municipal politicians, public servants, lawyers, real estate companies, banks, and media who have been complicit in the deaths of millions of Canadians from drug over doses. Either they looked the other way, ignored, or just did not care about the social, mental, and physical health of the people in this country. The news media of today are not journalists but writers who are fed the news of the day by the publisher who is politically invested in a narrative of those they support and those who support him. This is why the talent and work of a true investigative journalist is a treasure and why Sam Cooper stands far apart from the majority of those we see today. His work is impeccable. He has the proof behind his words as well.
The author is wrong. Ethnic Chinese voters in the BC Lower Mainland were scared to death by the China government’s disinformation campaign. Long time Conservative voters were crying about not being “able” to vote for the Party ‘this time’.
I’m having trouble understanding this article. I have no insider knowledge of ethnic Chinese voters in Canada, so if the article turns on that, that may explain my lack of comprehension.
The conclusion seems fairly clearly stated, it appears in the (editor’s) article’s title. The Chinese government (probably) didn’t sabotage the Cons/O’Toole’s chances in the 2021 federal election. Or more definitively stated later in the article by the author: “one thing that was not the cause was foreign interference by China (or a Chinese-aligned proxy)”.
The article claims to be about deciding whether Chinese government influence and misinformation or negative Cons messaging is responsible for the evident shift in behaviour of ethnic Chinese voters in the federal election.
First, it’s not clear why these are treated as mutually exclusive interpretations. Why can they both not be true? This latter option is not addressed.
The focus of the article is around the evidence that the concentration of the swing from Cons to the Libs was in ridings with a concentration of Cantonese, vs Mandarin, speakers, thus, suggesting that this internal cultural distinction played a role in the election results.
What is strange about this article is the following intermediate conclusion.
"If foreign interference was successful, we should have seen equivalent swings against the CPC in both Mandarin- and Cantonese-speaking communities."
Why? No evidence is offered in the article for this statement.
We are told there was a difference in voting behaviour along these internal cultural lines, why could this difference not be also relevant to interpreting the causes of that behaviour? Again, no evidence offered. And again, it remains unclear why Chinese government influence versus CPC party messaging are functioning as mutually exclusive here.
Given these causal options being offered, Chinese government influence versus negative Cons messaging, this article seems to provide no evidence for its conclusion. The statement of the conclusion seems to be the important thing, the evidence offered seems to amount to little more than surrounding noise.
In other words, the article leads one towards the question, in any strategic information system who benefits from the production of noise?
I think the last couple of years have implanted - for reasons pretty obvious - the general impression that Right shades over to Alt-Right, makes some common cause with them, has a hard time rejecting them from company.
With America, that's putting it very mildly - their mainstream conservative party is now avowedly anti-platform, anti-immigrant, anti-POC, albeit with some thinly-coded language. In Canada, the Conservatives stuggled valiantly to toss out everybody with even a whiff of Bernier about them, gladly surrendered that three percent or so of normally-don't-vote types that went to the PPC.
But, if you were a person of colour with a choice, and no special preference for Liberals over Conservatives, you'd feel it was leaning in the right direction to lean away from Conservatism in general. This isn't strong enough to overcome a clear preference - northeast Calgary is now 80% POC, but it's also bedrock Conservative, because, well, Calgary.
But where the Conservatives did not have a strong hold on opinion, the general bad odor that conservatism has aquired with POC shifted things at least a few percent, I'm sure.
I think the reason is much simpler, like in America city voters are liberal while rural voters are right wing . There is very little the conservatives can do the win the cities over. Perhaps a good article might be why are cities are woke while the countryside is right wing.
"Cantonese speakers concerned by the Conservatives’ own bullish rhetoric on Canada-Chinese relations was the main driver of vote switching from the Conservatives to the Liberals in the GTA and GVR" OR maybe those people had other concerns with the Conservative platform, or the party itself. I find it hard to believe that that many people only vote with one issue in mind.
Thanks for putting together this evidence - very interesting, even if it's not definitive. I think the GVR vote-intention visualizations ("Change in GVR CPC Vote Intention from 2019 to 2021") are a bit messed up.
As a federal Liberal myself, I think the other thing to note is that China's government *attempting* to influence Canadian elections would still be bad even if it was unsuccessful, and any such attempts should be opposed by all parties.
I would suggest the author of this piece and all Canadians buy a copy of the new book "Willful Blindness" by an "investigative reporter" named Sam Cooper. His investigation started with the high cost or real-estate in Vancouver considering the average wage and it produced how deeply imbedded the drug cartel and nefarious backers are in places such as Vancouver (Richmond, home of the River Walk Casino, to which there has been the on going Cullen Inquiry). He explains the known money laundering in the Casinos and the connections to the Circle Boys and the CCP. He reports the same problems are prevalent in Markham and many other cities across Canada.
Their are Senate and Parliamentary Members, Provincial Governments, Ministers and members within Provincial Governments, municipal politicians, public servants, lawyers, real estate companies, banks, and media who have been complicit in the deaths of millions of Canadians from drug over doses. Either they looked the other way, ignored, or just did not care about the social, mental, and physical health of the people in this country. The news media of today are not journalists but writers who are fed the news of the day by the publisher who is politically invested in a narrative of those they support and those who support him. This is why the talent and work of a true investigative journalist is a treasure and why Sam Cooper stands far apart from the majority of those we see today. His work is impeccable. He has the proof behind his words as well.
The author is wrong. Ethnic Chinese voters in the BC Lower Mainland were scared to death by the China government’s disinformation campaign. Long time Conservative voters were crying about not being “able” to vote for the Party ‘this time’.
This is pure BS. there is no reason why HK Cantonese speakers would vote for the Liberals.
I’m having trouble understanding this article. I have no insider knowledge of ethnic Chinese voters in Canada, so if the article turns on that, that may explain my lack of comprehension.
The conclusion seems fairly clearly stated, it appears in the (editor’s) article’s title. The Chinese government (probably) didn’t sabotage the Cons/O’Toole’s chances in the 2021 federal election. Or more definitively stated later in the article by the author: “one thing that was not the cause was foreign interference by China (or a Chinese-aligned proxy)”.
The article claims to be about deciding whether Chinese government influence and misinformation or negative Cons messaging is responsible for the evident shift in behaviour of ethnic Chinese voters in the federal election.
First, it’s not clear why these are treated as mutually exclusive interpretations. Why can they both not be true? This latter option is not addressed.
The focus of the article is around the evidence that the concentration of the swing from Cons to the Libs was in ridings with a concentration of Cantonese, vs Mandarin, speakers, thus, suggesting that this internal cultural distinction played a role in the election results.
What is strange about this article is the following intermediate conclusion.
"If foreign interference was successful, we should have seen equivalent swings against the CPC in both Mandarin- and Cantonese-speaking communities."
Why? No evidence is offered in the article for this statement.
We are told there was a difference in voting behaviour along these internal cultural lines, why could this difference not be also relevant to interpreting the causes of that behaviour? Again, no evidence offered. And again, it remains unclear why Chinese government influence versus CPC party messaging are functioning as mutually exclusive here.
Given these causal options being offered, Chinese government influence versus negative Cons messaging, this article seems to provide no evidence for its conclusion. The statement of the conclusion seems to be the important thing, the evidence offered seems to amount to little more than surrounding noise.
In other words, the article leads one towards the question, in any strategic information system who benefits from the production of noise?
bs
I think the last couple of years have implanted - for reasons pretty obvious - the general impression that Right shades over to Alt-Right, makes some common cause with them, has a hard time rejecting them from company.
With America, that's putting it very mildly - their mainstream conservative party is now avowedly anti-platform, anti-immigrant, anti-POC, albeit with some thinly-coded language. In Canada, the Conservatives stuggled valiantly to toss out everybody with even a whiff of Bernier about them, gladly surrendered that three percent or so of normally-don't-vote types that went to the PPC.
But, if you were a person of colour with a choice, and no special preference for Liberals over Conservatives, you'd feel it was leaning in the right direction to lean away from Conservatism in general. This isn't strong enough to overcome a clear preference - northeast Calgary is now 80% POC, but it's also bedrock Conservative, because, well, Calgary.
But where the Conservatives did not have a strong hold on opinion, the general bad odor that conservatism has aquired with POC shifted things at least a few percent, I'm sure.
I think the reason is much simpler, like in America city voters are liberal while rural voters are right wing . There is very little the conservatives can do the win the cities over. Perhaps a good article might be why are cities are woke while the countryside is right wing.
"Cantonese speakers concerned by the Conservatives’ own bullish rhetoric on Canada-Chinese relations was the main driver of vote switching from the Conservatives to the Liberals in the GTA and GVR" OR maybe those people had other concerns with the Conservative platform, or the party itself. I find it hard to believe that that many people only vote with one issue in mind.