Canada Votes 2006
- Thread starter bonoman
- Start date
The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
unforgettableFOXfire
I serve MacPhisto
- Joined
- Sep 20, 2001
- Messages
- 2,053
Gilles Duceppe is quite the debateur. I thought he took Martin and Harper to task tonight.
What I'd like to see is for Liberally inclined voters who don't want to vote Liberal because of the scandal to vote NDP. I have a nagging suspicion they won't, but I'd like them to. Instead of voting 'with the herd', under the impression that a conservative gov't is a certainty no matter how they vote, I'd like to see more NDP votes instead of simply voting to block the conservatives. What kind of an opinion is that? I vote to cancel out person x's vote instead of voting for the policy I like? I mean, I understand that's the reality of the situation, but come on... Duceppe made a strong case against both Harper and Martin. Layton made a strong case for NDP, Duceppe made a strong case for the Bloc and by default of his dismantling the Tory and Liberal tonight - a strong case for the NDP where the Bloc isn't an option for voters.
I'm voting NDP, and hoping beyond hope that there are people of like mind in my area, not a bunch of people taken in by the Liberal party's fearmongering.
It's not just because of the 'corruption/scandal' jabs either, though, that I want to vote NDP. I mean, I'm a student, I'm an entry-level food service worker. I have nothing to lose if the NDP were to win, and everything to gain. My taxes won't go up, and I'll see social benefits as far as public transport, health care, and university education are concerned. Sure, if the Conservatives get in, I won't see those benefits... but if people voted for the best policy instead of fear of the worst, I see no reason why the conservatives would get in anyway.
On the GST cuts proposed... The whole Conservative GST reduction policy just infuriates me beyond belief that they think people will buy that crock. Like lower-middle-class and low-class Canadians benefit from marginal-at-best cost savings. What, are people like me who make $9k a year, going to do with $90 of savings? Invest it? Buy groceries so they can have an extra couple meals a month? Great. Truly, the conservatives are really championing social equity when people who make $90k or $200k are going to be pissing away that extra money like it's nothing, while that scant scrap of extra money doesn't do much to meet the needs of the people who are supposedly being told they're benefiting from the policy. Argh. Plus, like snowbunny speculated, there's the potential for business to just rip-off the consumer by inflating prices slightly... I mean, really, only the wealthy and corporations will really see any benefit out of that proposed cut at all, and for Harper to stand at his podium with his smug smile and tell Canadians that he's cutting taxes for them is just outrageous.
Sure, the proportion is equal, but the scale of spending versus saving is radically different. A company spending $5million saves $50k. What does that mean? Well, that company could employ another person, it could put it towards paying off debt, it could invest, it could do any number of things... none of these are bad things, and I'm not about to argue that they are. Yes, in an abstract way, they serve to benefit Canadians in small ways... maybe it effectively lowers costs and debts and slows inflation, but maybe it doesn't. It seems a large uncertainty, to take that gamble on a blatant lie. If they're operating their business without that $50k as it is, why do they need the cut? If people making $15k/year can expect at most $150 assuming they spend the entirety of their income... what are they really gaining from that? Nothing. I don't think it's a bad policy, but to criticize the Liberals for "lying" to the country, and then to do the very same is ridiculous. Harper is nothing but an arrogant weasle.
Given the gift of retrospect granted by time passed, I'd still rather have lost $200million to a corrupt liberal government that puts the money back into our economy than have waste $200million (and more) and Canadian lives sending us to war in Iraq as the conservatives would have. That point is moot now, though. But we could have made a worse choice then, and we could still yet make a bad one now. *shrug*
What I'd like to see is for Liberally inclined voters who don't want to vote Liberal because of the scandal to vote NDP. I have a nagging suspicion they won't, but I'd like them to. Instead of voting 'with the herd', under the impression that a conservative gov't is a certainty no matter how they vote, I'd like to see more NDP votes instead of simply voting to block the conservatives. What kind of an opinion is that? I vote to cancel out person x's vote instead of voting for the policy I like? I mean, I understand that's the reality of the situation, but come on... Duceppe made a strong case against both Harper and Martin. Layton made a strong case for NDP, Duceppe made a strong case for the Bloc and by default of his dismantling the Tory and Liberal tonight - a strong case for the NDP where the Bloc isn't an option for voters.
I'm voting NDP, and hoping beyond hope that there are people of like mind in my area, not a bunch of people taken in by the Liberal party's fearmongering.
It's not just because of the 'corruption/scandal' jabs either, though, that I want to vote NDP. I mean, I'm a student, I'm an entry-level food service worker. I have nothing to lose if the NDP were to win, and everything to gain. My taxes won't go up, and I'll see social benefits as far as public transport, health care, and university education are concerned. Sure, if the Conservatives get in, I won't see those benefits... but if people voted for the best policy instead of fear of the worst, I see no reason why the conservatives would get in anyway.
On the GST cuts proposed... The whole Conservative GST reduction policy just infuriates me beyond belief that they think people will buy that crock. Like lower-middle-class and low-class Canadians benefit from marginal-at-best cost savings. What, are people like me who make $9k a year, going to do with $90 of savings? Invest it? Buy groceries so they can have an extra couple meals a month? Great. Truly, the conservatives are really championing social equity when people who make $90k or $200k are going to be pissing away that extra money like it's nothing, while that scant scrap of extra money doesn't do much to meet the needs of the people who are supposedly being told they're benefiting from the policy. Argh. Plus, like snowbunny speculated, there's the potential for business to just rip-off the consumer by inflating prices slightly... I mean, really, only the wealthy and corporations will really see any benefit out of that proposed cut at all, and for Harper to stand at his podium with his smug smile and tell Canadians that he's cutting taxes for them is just outrageous.
Sure, the proportion is equal, but the scale of spending versus saving is radically different. A company spending $5million saves $50k. What does that mean? Well, that company could employ another person, it could put it towards paying off debt, it could invest, it could do any number of things... none of these are bad things, and I'm not about to argue that they are. Yes, in an abstract way, they serve to benefit Canadians in small ways... maybe it effectively lowers costs and debts and slows inflation, but maybe it doesn't. It seems a large uncertainty, to take that gamble on a blatant lie. If they're operating their business without that $50k as it is, why do they need the cut? If people making $15k/year can expect at most $150 assuming they spend the entirety of their income... what are they really gaining from that? Nothing. I don't think it's a bad policy, but to criticize the Liberals for "lying" to the country, and then to do the very same is ridiculous. Harper is nothing but an arrogant weasle.
Given the gift of retrospect granted by time passed, I'd still rather have lost $200million to a corrupt liberal government that puts the money back into our economy than have waste $200million (and more) and Canadian lives sending us to war in Iraq as the conservatives would have. That point is moot now, though. But we could have made a worse choice then, and we could still yet make a bad one now. *shrug*
Otokonoko
The Fly
Don't know how it works in Canada. Here, the ALP tend to spend the big bucks, sticking up for the battlers etc, doing what the people want but can't afford. Then the liberals (conservatives) come in and restore the budget surplus by being the bad guys . . . seems to work OK.
bonoman
Refugee
Dandy:
What you fail to relize is that he is the leader of our country not just another CEO. I couldnt care less who brought up this issue, this issue has been around for years and has pissed me off since I first heard it. As the leader of a country how are you expected to say to business's 'stay in my country, this is best country in the world because X reasons' when you yourself have choosen not to run your company in Canada. As much as i hate harper, and I hate him, I couldnt see him running a company that went offshore for cheaper taxes.
You complain how we should just focus on the platform, i totally disagree. The platform is the most important issue in the election but the leader's values are important too. The leader you are voting for must have a level of honesty, respect. patriotism, and simple love for this country.
Martin has wanted to be PM all his life, that was his ultimate goal, and fair play to him. Its a loafty goal but a goal none the less. But I think Martin wanting to be PM has clouded his judgement on many issues. For example the outragous handgun ban. This ban would do nothing to stem the gun crimes happening in this country (and yes toronto isnt the only place where there are record murders). He is too oportunistic for my liking.
But to deny that we should not have an insight into the prosepective leaders of our country is nonsense.
What you fail to relize is that he is the leader of our country not just another CEO. I couldnt care less who brought up this issue, this issue has been around for years and has pissed me off since I first heard it. As the leader of a country how are you expected to say to business's 'stay in my country, this is best country in the world because X reasons' when you yourself have choosen not to run your company in Canada. As much as i hate harper, and I hate him, I couldnt see him running a company that went offshore for cheaper taxes.
You complain how we should just focus on the platform, i totally disagree. The platform is the most important issue in the election but the leader's values are important too. The leader you are voting for must have a level of honesty, respect. patriotism, and simple love for this country.
Martin has wanted to be PM all his life, that was his ultimate goal, and fair play to him. Its a loafty goal but a goal none the less. But I think Martin wanting to be PM has clouded his judgement on many issues. For example the outragous handgun ban. This ban would do nothing to stem the gun crimes happening in this country (and yes toronto isnt the only place where there are record murders). He is too oportunistic for my liking.
But to deny that we should not have an insight into the prosepective leaders of our country is nonsense.
Last edited:
Zoomerang96
ONE love, blood, life
the conservatives are WAAAY up now.
something like 14 points.
fuck me.
we're gonna have a ma7ority government afterall...
WHAT THE FUCK IS GOING ON?!!?!? WHAT'S HAPPENED?!!??!?!!?
something like 14 points.
fuck me.
we're gonna have a ma7ority government afterall...
WHAT THE FUCK IS GOING ON?!!?!? WHAT'S HAPPENED?!!??!?!!?
Zoomerang96
ONE love, blood, life
A_Wanderer said:The comment was a paraphrase from the 2004 US Election by Cameron Diaz, it was just illustrative of the paranoia presented about conservative politicians. The most amusing thing is the hyperbole presented in this thread, one would think that the election of a (minority) conservative government in Canada would cause the entire hemisphere to implode under the weight of evil
The demands for censorship by deleting posts also do a bang up job in showing how much respect some people have for free speech.
djfeelgood sterling effort defending the contrarian position.
perfect. you want freedom of speech?
here it is. you're the only person to sabotage this thread, and you're not welcome here.
please refrain from posting in this thread.
financeguy
ONE love, blood, life
Zoomerang96 said:
It must be a reaction by the Canadian people against the fanatically liberal media.
Zoomerang96
ONE love, blood, life
melon said:
MA7ORITY GOVERNMENT.
STEPHEN HARPER.
everything that's been accomplished - gone?
is that possible?
clinton wasn't the best, but anything he did to move the country in the right direction has been wiped RIGHT out.
Zoomerang96
ONE love, blood, life
financeguy said:
haha, right.
ladywithspinninghead
Rock n' Roll Doggie Band-aid
The Tories *might* win, but a majority government?
No way.
The polls fail to capture
a) the strategic voters who are comfortable saying they're NDP voters now but come election day will vote for the Liberals - and the better the Conservatives are doing then the more people you will have changing their vote from NDP to Liberals on January 23rd
b) those voters who will say they are voting for any party other than the Liberal party as a means of punishing the Liberals for their scandals. This happened in 2004 so I don't see why it wouldn't happen again.
The only problem I foresee however is that the more popular the Conservatives become in Quebec, as is occuring, the more likely it is that Ontarians will follow suit.
National unity is a big deal here in Ontario and if Ontarians think Quebeckers would actually vote for a federal party in the Conservatives then that ultimately makes Ontarians more comfortable with Conservatives as well.
On a different note, what I found interesting about the link you provided Zoomerang96 is that 52% of Quebeckers would vote for the Bloc and the remainder would vote for a federal party - of those voting for the Bloc, quite a few are actually federalists and not separatists. What this poll tells me is that support for separation has not surpassed the 50% mark, despite all the fearmongering to the contrary in recent months.
No way.
The polls fail to capture
a) the strategic voters who are comfortable saying they're NDP voters now but come election day will vote for the Liberals - and the better the Conservatives are doing then the more people you will have changing their vote from NDP to Liberals on January 23rd
b) those voters who will say they are voting for any party other than the Liberal party as a means of punishing the Liberals for their scandals. This happened in 2004 so I don't see why it wouldn't happen again.
The only problem I foresee however is that the more popular the Conservatives become in Quebec, as is occuring, the more likely it is that Ontarians will follow suit.
National unity is a big deal here in Ontario and if Ontarians think Quebeckers would actually vote for a federal party in the Conservatives then that ultimately makes Ontarians more comfortable with Conservatives as well.
On a different note, what I found interesting about the link you provided Zoomerang96 is that 52% of Quebeckers would vote for the Bloc and the remainder would vote for a federal party - of those voting for the Bloc, quite a few are actually federalists and not separatists. What this poll tells me is that support for separation has not surpassed the 50% mark, despite all the fearmongering to the contrary in recent months.
Last edited:
bonoman
Refugee
We also must relize that if the conservatives numbers go up in Quebec that doesnt really mean that they will win more seats. If they went up ten points in Quebec that will be reflected nationally, but may not materialize in seats.
ladywithspinninghead
Rock n' Roll Doggie Band-aid
bonoman said:
Actually I think the one place in Canada where this wouldn't hold true is Quebec. Strong support for either separation or federalism is usually concentrated in certain areas - so for instance it's more than likely that the surge in the Tories' popularity is occurring in a normally federalist stronghold like perhaps in a riding in Montreal but would not be occurring in a place like Quebec City. So I do believe an increase in Conservative support in Quebec would indeed translate into seats.
Last edited:
snowbunny00774
ONE love, blood, life
Zoomerang96 said:
Did you really mean Clinton??
VintagePunk
Blue Crack Distributor
bonoman said:
And, Ontario is still smarting from the Harris reign of terror.
Is that Conservative increase at the polls post-debate?
ladywithspinninghead
Rock n' Roll Doggie Band-aid
VintagePunk said:
Nope, it's been occurring over the past week or so...
VintagePunk
Blue Crack Distributor
ladywithspinninghead said:
Yes, I'd heard they were leading by 8% over the weekend, but someone mentioned upthread that their lead had risen to 14%...I just wondered if that was as a result of tonight.
snowbunny00774
ONE love, blood, life
bonoman said:
Harper has never been CEO of a multinational company so you are right, he wouldn't. If I was an investor in a company that he took this stand with I don't think I would be very happy as it's not very business savvy is it?
However, in the shipping industry it is THE process and when companies don't use this process they ultimately fold as the price becomes to much to pay in industrialized countries. It is not just taxes...it is wages also. Is it shitty - Yes....Is it the way the shipping industry works - Yes.
Aside - finance guy, what's happening with the Irish Ferries debacle there?
bonoman
Refugee
Well if you cannot run a company that pays fair wages and taxes then I suggest you take your interest elsewhere.
I just finsihed watching the debates and I think Martin really might have turned his campaign around. He seemed like the only leader that didnt have to read what he thought, he said what he thought, which is great. Layton still is to stiff and doesnt present a good debate style and Harper, who has the most to lose not that he's the leader in the polls, looked as if he could think for himself if he tried, very Bushesque.
I would predict the numbers after this debate will swing to more of an even race.
I just finsihed watching the debates and I think Martin really might have turned his campaign around. He seemed like the only leader that didnt have to read what he thought, he said what he thought, which is great. Layton still is to stiff and doesnt present a good debate style and Harper, who has the most to lose not that he's the leader in the polls, looked as if he could think for himself if he tried, very Bushesque.
I would predict the numbers after this debate will swing to more of an even race.
The_Sweetest_Thing
MacPhisto's serving wench
CTV presents all the issues and how each party has responded. It's worth a look:
http://www.ctv.ca/mini/election2006/static/issues/index.html
http://www.ctv.ca/mini/election2006/static/issues/index.html
VintagePunk
Blue Crack Distributor
bonoman said:
I thought the same thing about Martin's style. However, I'm aware of my biases, and so don't put a lot of stock into my impressions. I've also read comments tonight by some political analysts who say that Harper's Bush impression may be appealing to voters who are generally uninformed about his platform, which unfortunately, is probably the majority.
bonoman
Refugee
ya just got through watching the national and they were pretty impressed with harper. What can you do....
VintagePunk
Blue Crack Distributor
I didn't find anything appealing about it, he creeped me the hell out. 
Otokonoko
The Fly
snowbunny00774 said:
I was working in retail when Australia got a GST. I spent the night before it came in changing pricing (a mammoth task!). I noticed that a lot of things went down in price (Coke, for example, went from $1.60 for a 600mL bottle to $1.40 or thereabouts). Within a year, prices had gone back up. Nowadays, you pay about $2.60 - and yet inflation remains low. And retailers still palm off excessive prices as 'because of the GST'.
I don't know why I wrote this. Just seeing the word GST irks me, because it is much more sensible than our old tax system but cops the blame for everything that is wrong in our country.
Otokonoko said:
"Inflation" is a scam. The Fed claims "low inflation" all the time, and, yet, USD $35 in 1982 is now worth $71 in 2005. Of course, all he cares about is beating down wages and deluding the top 1% into continuing to invest in Wall Street, not actually fighting currency devaluation.
Melon
dandy
Rock n' Roll Doggie Band-aid
bonoman said:
i think you misread my post somewhat. i'm not saying we shouldn't have the integrity questions, but i do take issue with the fact that most of the campaigns are negatively focussing on what other leaders/parties want/have done, rather than advancing solid arguments for how they intend to go about running the country. i know there's going to be a bit of this in every election campaign, but when the discrediting and slandering take over the debates, there's clearly a lack of perspective on what's important and what's not. i'd like to see less petty bickering and more genuine debate.
i'm not particularly defending martin, either. that point just particularly irked me. frankly, i'm far more disturbed by harper wanting to go back and rehash the legality of same sex marriage than i am about martin's legitimate international business ventures.
unforgettablefoxfire: great take on the GST reduction issue. i agree completely.
I think somebody slipped Harper a tranquilizer last night. He was creepy calm with that eerie smile on his face.
Apparently around 40% of the voters are undecided at this stage? Our only hope is that they end up voting for anyone but the Conservatives. I kind of doubt a majority because the Bloc will win a ton of seats in Quebec and I don't think that the Conservatives will sweep enough of Ontario. Toronto is a total lost cause for them, it's a question of how much of the 905 region they manage to pick up.
The thing is, Canadians won't tolerate a Conservative government for long, just like Ontario kicked out Mike Harris when he ran us into the ground. The problem is by that time the damage done is huge.
Apparently around 40% of the voters are undecided at this stage? Our only hope is that they end up voting for anyone but the Conservatives. I kind of doubt a majority because the Bloc will win a ton of seats in Quebec and I don't think that the Conservatives will sweep enough of Ontario. Toronto is a total lost cause for them, it's a question of how much of the 905 region they manage to pick up.
The thing is, Canadians won't tolerate a Conservative government for long, just like Ontario kicked out Mike Harris when he ran us into the ground. The problem is by that time the damage done is huge.
djfeelgood
The Fly
Crap, I missed the debate last night cause of dollar beer night...
While I disagree with the tories initial intentions to send troops to Iraq. I do believe we should increase military spending.
Another thing. Dont vote for your PM based on the PM himself. In fact I believe that should play a minimal role. While these guys will be the future ambassadors of our country, they will only say what the people below them say. That is, see who their advisors will be, see who will be working under them.
George Bush gets much more crap thrown on him than he deserves when guys like Cheney and Rumsfeld (back in the day) are the ones who should have faced the firing squad.
Cheers,
Aaron
While I disagree with the tories initial intentions to send troops to Iraq. I do believe we should increase military spending.
Another thing. Dont vote for your PM based on the PM himself. In fact I believe that should play a minimal role. While these guys will be the future ambassadors of our country, they will only say what the people below them say. That is, see who their advisors will be, see who will be working under them.
George Bush gets much more crap thrown on him than he deserves when guys like Cheney and Rumsfeld (back in the day) are the ones who should have faced the firing squad.
Cheers,
Aaron
djfeelgood
The Fly
Harris did wonders for Ontario given that he was handed a plate with Bob Rae's feces on it.
Harris cut welfare rates by 20% and decreased provincial income taxes by 30%. He destabilized the teachers union which is far too powerful. Teachers in my opinion are overpaid and treat teaching youth more as a 'job' job than what it should be, a passion driven job. Not to mention they get 2 paid months off and a pension to die for. In 1997 teachers walked out for 3 weeks. For the love of learning? Bullshit.
Walkerton was dealt poorly in media spotlight and really wasn't a government issue as it was a regional issue. And more importantly concerned a lying water inspector.
Yes, Harris did so many "wonders" for Ontario that the Conservatives are completely decimated in the province. Don't hear a peep out of them these days, because that's the amount of loathing the populace has for them.
It is rare to see that type of defeat.
It is rare to see that type of defeat.
