Talk:Politics of Ontario

Yikes, the section on the Common Sense Revolution and following seems to be pretty pro-Conservative. It dismisses criticisms against them with little to no justification. A lot of the phrases criticisms as "attempts" or "claims". Far from objective. After some further investigation on my part, I will probably revise this section.

Good please do, I originally wrote this article trying to give a fair and balanced account of the successes and failures, praises and criticisms of Ontario's influential Premiers over the last half century; ie. Drew, Frost, Robarts, Davis, Peterson, Rae, Harris, Eves and McGuinty. It looks like a pretty big Mike Harris fan took liberty amongst themselves to rewrite my article - Chris Gilmore

I find what was written about the Liberal return to power in terms of neutrality, is not neutral at all. Obviously some heavily pro-Liberal supporter has written that section. The talk about a 'hidden defecit' is laughable. A projected defecit is not the same as a hidden defecit. Furthermore, there have been a number of credible reports suggesting that the Progressive Conservative government had begun work on scaling down the defecit before they lost power, and it has failed to be mentioned here. And constant reference to the 'Harris-Eves' Tories seems to be trying to link Harris to the actions of the party a year after he retire, which to me is a blatant attack on Harris and to link him to the unpopular initiatives started under Eves, like the selling of the 407.

How we elect a party leader ?
There should be some mention of how a political leader is elected.

May I suggest something that includes some key points...

Ie. The membership, (must buy a membership and vote at the local level to elect a representative), then a provincial meeting is held to elect a winner. Run-off elections are held to ensure that the winner gets 50% of the vote.....

--Caesar J. B. Squitti :  Son of Maryann Rosso and Arthur Natale Squitti 15:19, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Windsor a Union Bastion?
I question the neutrality of this statement: "especially Windsor, which is a union bastion and thus an NDP stronghold".

If that were true, then why has Windsor voted Liberal in the past few provincial elections? I suggest that the reason the NDP get elected at the federal level has more to do with immigrants than with Windsor being a supposed 'union bastion'. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mousky67 (talk • contribs) 03:16, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Possible bias
The discussion at the end of the article suggests that voters will naturally choose the Conservatives unless swayed by outside forces — for example, it claims that Kingston and Ottawa don't vote Conservative because of "unions" and "activists". That's a pretty strange claim, and I think it needs to be backed up by some sources with a lot of solid statistics. Do Ontario voting patterns (especially for the Liberals) really correlate well with union activity? What about income and education levels (from reading the article, it seems that places with higher incomes are higher levels of education are less likely to vote Conservative, but a claim like that would also need solid backing). David (talk) 02:33, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
 * See Verifiability David (talk) 02:35, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

I added a section on the teacher strike of 1997 to counter the conservative bias. The strike was the biggest in North American history and a major incident which occurred under the government of the Progressive Conservatives. I would also like to see a section on the Days of Action against the same gov't. These were major protests for Ontario. Nothing like that has been seen since. TurtleMelody (talk) 04:11, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

removing POV tag with no active discussion per Template:POV
I've removed an old neutrality tag from this page that appears to have no active discussion per the instructions at Template:POV:
 * This template is not meant to be a permanent resident on any article. Remove this template whenever:
 * There is consensus on the talkpage or the NPOV Noticeboard that the issue has been resolved
 * It is not clear what the neutrality issue is, and no satisfactory explanation has been given
 * In the absence of any discussion, or if the discussion has become dormant.

Since there's no evidence of ongoing discussion, I'm removing the tag for now. If discussion is continuing and I've failed to see it, however, please feel free to restore the template and continue to address the issues. Thanks to everybody working on this one! -- Khazar2 (talk) 12:10, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

Progressive Party described as both centrist and rightwing
In the section near the bottom that talks about federal politics, we have these two statements right now: "against a "divided right" between the centrist Progressive Conservative Party and strongly conservative Canadian Alliance" and "However, the merger of these two right-wing parties into the new, right-wing Conservative Party of Canada". It sounds like the PC party is being described as both centrist and rightwing in the same paragraph. It'd be nice to have this cleared up to be consistent. 184.148.114.186 (talk) 23:09, 1 February 2022 (UTC)