Dogbert 0 Report post Posted November 30, 2005 I honestly really enjoy elections, in that the politics involved is pretty hilarious and entertaining. It's a gigantic waste of money, but the time spent = more funny for me. I'm not sure how many seats the Tories will really lose in BC. Gurmant Grewal will almost certainly lose in Surrey, his wife probably isn't too popular now as well in her riding. But they have few urban BC seats as it is; the rural areas will almost certainly stay blue, and that's where the Tory base in BC is. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Grewal isn't running, so they might have a shot, if only a minimal one. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Red Hot Thumbtack In The Eye 0 Report post Posted December 2, 2005 During this election period for Canada there will be more usefull discussion and idea presentation that what we'd see in the paranoid and insane American political system. I fear, however, that since people nowadays have a need for Left or Right politics to build our identities around, a lot of the potentially usefull thought and change will be lost inside that black hole of misdirection. I still trust my fellow Canadians enough to not let this insanity escalate to the levels seen in the Liberal Democratic system of America, but i fear that many will miss out on the great possibilities for thought provided by the seeming re-emergence of the separatists, and renewed attention for a "third way" group (not that it's a really large difference). I'll likely be keeping my tv off during this ordeal, other than the great 5 hour block of Star Trek eps that Spike shows each day. All in all...embrace pessimism and vote green. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CanadianGuitarist 0 Report post Posted January 6, 2006 The Tories have pulled ahead, 38-35 on the national scale. My cautious optimism: They pulled ahead with two weeks to go in 2004. It was a downward slide from there. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Red Baron 0 Report post Posted January 9, 2006 You know, most the people I've talked to couldn't care less about this election. I mean there is no real issue for an election. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Dogbert 0 Report post Posted January 9, 2006 It's now 37-29 for the Conservatives. Hopefully, Harper can show well in the debates tonight, as I'm sure everyone will be attacking Martin. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lord of The Curry 0 Report post Posted January 9, 2006 Ok, I'm officially kinda scared that Harper could take it now. Martin will be doing everything he can to convince voters that Harper is going to turn us into America Jr. at the debate tonight. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CanadianChris 0 Report post Posted January 9, 2006 Problem is, not enough people will be watching the debate for it to matter, and even if they were, the format of the debate makes it impossible for Martin to land the kind of knockout punch that Mulroney landed on John Turner in 1984. Everyone's just going to be restating their platforms over and over, and no one's going to find out anything more than they would have from reading the newspaper for the last month. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Dogbert 0 Report post Posted January 10, 2006 Martin's getting hammered out there. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Slayer 0 Report post Posted January 10, 2006 Everyone's just going to be restating their platforms over and over, and no one's going to find out anything more than they would have from reading the newspaper for the last month. You guys really have become like us Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Dogbert 0 Report post Posted January 10, 2006 Every time Martin tries to attack Harper, one of the leaders flings his attack back in his face and shows that what he's saying tonight is the opposite of what he's said and done in the past. It's a gong-show out there. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The Czech Republic 0 Report post Posted January 10, 2006 I always want to know more about Canadian politics. What is Canada's right wing like in relation to ours, and why is it so reviled by everyone outside Alberta? Are those oil equalization payments a big issue or something? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Dogbert 0 Report post Posted January 10, 2006 Essentially, it's reviled because of yours. The CPC is oft-mentioned in the same breath as the Republicans in the States; people are afraid that the Tories would turn Canada into what we're seeing politically down south. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The Czech Republic 0 Report post Posted January 10, 2006 Well, would they? I'd like to think neoconservatism hasn't oozed north yet. I don't think Canada needs to be America Jr. or the 51st state or any of that, but the superiority complex has gotta go; Canada and the United States really should be working together and getting along, since we need each other and all that jazz. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Red Baron 0 Report post Posted January 10, 2006 True, but its never going to work. Canadians have an inferioty complex of that Americans couldn't give two shits about Canada. You can go to Buffalo to find that out yourself. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The Czech Republic 0 Report post Posted January 10, 2006 Is Canada REALLY as perfect as it appears to be on the surface? I've never bought all the "whyyyyy can't we beeeeee like Caaaaanada" talk from the left, because I figured that they've gotta have their own problems in spite of it all, and that it's natural for things to run smoother than they do here when you're dealing with a population that's only a tenth of ours. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RavishingRickRudo 0 Report post Posted January 11, 2006 No, it's all a ruse put on by our PR dept. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CanadianGuitarist 0 Report post Posted January 12, 2006 Essentially, it's reviled because of yours. The CPC is oft-mentioned in the same breath as the Republicans in the States; people are afraid that the Tories would turn Canada into what we're seeing politically down south. Apparently Harper has said we wouldn't recognise Canada when he's done with it. He's also said, I'm told, that he inspired Bush. This not-withstanding clause thing could potentially be a shot in the foot for Martin. I've also been told that he's said it because Harper wants to use it to ban abortion and Martin thinks that Harper will screw himself this way....Apparently Martin's alleged banning of the clause would never happen anyway, nor should it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
KGB 0 Report post Posted January 12, 2006 Essentially, it's reviled because of yours. The CPC is oft-mentioned in the same breath as the Republicans in the States; people are afraid that the Tories would turn Canada into what we're seeing politically down south. Apparently Harper has said we wouldn't recognise Canada when he's done with it. He's also said, I'm told, that he inspired Bush. This not-withstanding clause thing could potentially be a shot in the foot for Martin. I've also been told that he's said it because Harper wants to use it to ban abortion and Martin thinks that Harper will screw himself this way....Apparently Martin's alleged banning of the clause would never happen anyway, nor should it. All the stuff said about the Conservatives above are just liberal allegations, like always. Apparently, Hitler... er, Harper will use the military to turn Canada into a police state, according to a revulsive (and downright disrespectful to our military, who've been disrespected long enough) liberal attack ad that was quickly pulled a couple days ago (yet the French version was still up after the English one was taken off). Harper has said he has no interest in doing anything with abortion and won't use the NWSC to overturn gay marriages. Martin has said he would use NWSC in the past, especially to prevent the courts from forcing churches to marry gays. It doesn't look good for the Liberals right now. Here's an article that rips into the Liberals, including quite a few parodies of the infamous pulled-ad. Liberals hide methodology in the madness Don Martin, National Post Published: Thursday, January 12, 2006 OTTAWA - The colourfully cantankerous radio host urged me to stick around for his take on a Liberal ad attacking Stephen Harper's military plan. "We've got a wild four minutes off the top," Lowell Green cackled as he settled into the host's chair at Ottawa's CFRA. And, sure enough, to the whoop of incoming choppers and spatter of gunfire with REM's End of the World as We Know It for a soundtrack, Green cupped his hands and hollered out a warning that Harper storm troopers were besieging the capital. "Run for the hills," he urged his listeners. It was great satire of Paul Martin's commercial whack job on the Conservatives, delivered with Green's signature bombast as he went on to denounce the Prime Minister as a chronic liar unworthy of holding public office. He's sure gonna miss those Liberals if they're defeated. The offending Liberal ad was clearly made on the cheap, which is only fitting for a cheap shot yanked before it was aired. It opens as a grey blur that slowly morphs into a photo of Harper's face while a female coos the script. "Stephen Harper actually announced he wants to increase military presence in our cities. Canadian cities. Soldiers with guns. In our cities. We did not make this up." Actually, they did. Harper wants 100 regular and at least 400 reserve personnel to be stationed near major cities. But those soldiers would enter the cities bearing snow shovels or sandbags instead of semi-automatics, deployed to help residents cope with natural calamities. To suggest they'd goose-step into city cores, jackboots clicking on the sidewalks, is more a slur on the military than a slam against Harper. Besides, and I am not making this up, it's hard to find a major Canadian city without a nearby army, navy or air force presence today. Little would change under the Harper proposal. Now, spare no pity for the Conservatives as the campaign deteriorates into a final dirty dozen days focused on the Liberals' offensive final offensive. It was Harper's team who went negative first with a warning that the Liberals would go negative next, complete with a camera zooming in on a photo of Paul Martin's face on a bad day. But let's pause to wonder if there's not some bizarre Liberal methodology to the madness. The attack ads may be controversial, but they've been replayed endlessly in the media for two days now, generating thousands of dollars in free campaign publicity. Couple that with Martin's nutty vow in the middle of Monday's debate to rip up the Constitution's notwithstanding clause (the first policy not leaked in advance, by the way) and it's clear the Liberals are reclaiming the news agenda, if only under the most dire and dubious circumstances. Still, signs of collapse, frustration and rage against their dark prospects persist, graphically manifested by the outburst of public profanity on national television by one of the Liberals' main spin doctors (yes, that's you, former CBC reporter Susan Murray) (and I wish I was making this up). And a funny thing happened on the way to the party's platform launch on day 44 of the campaign: It was leaked to Alberta's most vociferous Liberal-bashing magazine, the Western Standard (I am still not making this up). In the document, we learn there's $14-billion worth of surplus cash just itching to be devoted to the final purchase of wavering votes, a squandering limited only by Martin's willingness to trash whatever's left of his former finance minister reputation for fiscal prudence. The way I calculate it, that total divided by the national population would give every Canadian $437, which would exceed Alberta's $400 "prosperity cheque." Gosh, who needs Ralph Klein when you've got Ralph Goodale? There's a risk the last-gasp fabricating, smearing and bribing will help the Liberals tourniquet their terminal hemorrhage in the polls. My bet is the Conservatives' current 10-point lead is as wide as it's going to get before the election and may indeed narrow in the days ahead. But one of their own says that anyone sticking a fork in the Liberal campaign today would find this goose already cooked. "The Liberals have no workers on the ground," frets Carolyn Parrish, the Liberal MP banished from the caucus. "They're smelling a Tory victory and nothing will scare off workers faster than a campaign that's losing." And, for the last time, I am not making this up. THEY'RE MAKING THIS STUFF UP A Liberal party television ad attacking Stephen Harper for proposing to station troops near Canadian cities has quickly inspired parodies on a number of blog sites. A few examples: President Kennedy is gunned down in Dallas, Texas. George W. Bush's home state. Where a lot of wealthy American right-wingers live. Some say the fatal shots were fired from a grassy knoll. Where was Stephen Harper that day? He isn't saying. Choose your Canada. - - - Little Susie Smith, a seven year-old girl in Brampton, Ontario, has her bicycle stolen. A pink bicycle. With little streamers on the handlebars. And who just happened to be campaigning in Brampton that day? Stephen Harper. That's who. We're not making this up. Choose your Canada. - - - Stephen Harper drinks Merlot. With a lamb entree. In our cities. In Canada. - - - Inability to write complete sentences. Because of no Day Care Program. Right here in this ad. In Canada. - - - Just now at the Subway on Bank St. I was buying my lunch and there ... in line ... standing in front of me ... was a soldier. In our cities. In Canada. A soldier. He seemed to be ordering the six-inch ham and turkey. With chipotle sauce. In Canada. We're not making this stuff up. - - - Stephen Harper has a dog. You know who else had a dog? Hitler. Adolf Hitler. That's who. Did Stephen Harper train his dog to attack racial minorities on command? We don't know. He's not saying. Choose your Canada. - - - Stephen Harper ate at a Tex-Mex place once. You know what the "Tex" in Tex-Mex stands for? Texas. George W. Bush's home state. And you know who else would have liked Tex-Mex food if he were alive today? Adolf Hitler. We're not making this up. Choose your Canada. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
KGB 0 Report post Posted January 12, 2006 NDP article, says by removing the NWSC, Martin is putting public health-care at risk (an angle that left-voters might want to consider when deciding between NDP and Liberal) http://www.ndp.ca/page/3024 Martin willing to put public health care at risk Wed 11 Jan 2006 | Printer friendly Paul Martin's last-minute scheme to withdraw the federal government's ability to use the notwithstanding clause has raised new questions about his willingness to defend public health care. In an exchange with reporters in Toronto today, Martin admitted as much: Question (Gloria Galloway, Globe and Mail): What are you going to do if the Supreme Court decides that you have to set up a parallel system [of health care] to protect security of the person? Prime Minister Paul Martin: I think that quite clearly one is going to fight very hard in front of the Supreme Court. I'm just going to go back to the basic principle. I do not believe that a prime minister should be in a position to pick and choose the rights that you will have and the rights that you will not have. I don't believe that a prime minister can cherry pick rights. I think in the kind of country that we have and certainly in the kind of country we're evolving in to, the unequivocal protection of charter rights is essential. That's the principle that I will stand behind. Question: With all due respect, I don't think you answered my question. If the Supreme Court ruled you had to do that and you have no notwithstanding clause, are you going to do it? Prime Minister Paul Martin: with all due respect, I have answered your question. If the notwithstanding clause does not exist then the decision of the Supreme Court and its interpretation of the charter is the one that will stand. I can't be much clearer than that. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest CWMwasmurdered Report post Posted January 12, 2006 Jack Layton has really impressed me lately. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Red Baron 0 Report post Posted January 12, 2006 True, but I like having money when I retire, and not to work at Walmart at 70. Anyways there are two debates for the college on both our campus (one in each riding, Welland and Niagara falls). Our law class is invited to the debate and ask questions. Somebody has to take down Rob Nicholson who is an asswipe that doesn't fucking care about anything and Mel Grunstein who is getting support from old people which Port Colborne has and deadbeat farmers. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CanadianGuitarist 0 Report post Posted January 12, 2006 True, but I like having money when I retire, and not to work at Walmart at 70. Anyways there are two debates for the college on both our campus (one in each riding, Welland and Niagara falls). Our law class is invited to the debate and ask questions. Somebody has to take down Rob Nicholson who is an asswipe that doesn't fucking care about anything and Mel Grunstein who is getting support from old people which Port Colborne has and deadbeat farmers. I'll suck your dick if Maloney doesn't win your riding...don't quote me on that, Dave still owes me a teabagging for Tampa's Cup win two years ago. Even with all the support from Niagara Falls, Nicholson always takes his riding on the strength of 85% of Fort Erie voting CPC. Since my voter card still says Niagara Falls, I'll vote there, as Liberal Lastewka appears poised to take St. Kitts again. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Red Baron 0 Report post Posted January 13, 2006 In recent polls it shows that Grunstein is leading in the Welland riding because its almost a dead split between Mulroney and DiBartomoleo. Don't worry, Grunstein can't handle flack especially when it comes to Canadian Identity and partnership ties with the United States. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Red Hot Thumbtack In The Eye 0 Report post Posted January 14, 2006 http://infection.limagery.net/choice.pdf Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Your Paragon of Virtue 0 Report post Posted January 14, 2006 The more Tack posts in the CE folder, the more I think he should stop. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Your Paragon of Virtue 0 Report post Posted January 14, 2006 The more Tack posts in the CE folder, the more I think he should stop. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Your Paragon of Virtue 0 Report post Posted January 14, 2006 I don't understand the correlation between the NWSC being stopped and the Libs getting rid of our healthcare. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Red Hot Thumbtack In The Eye 0 Report post Posted January 14, 2006 The more Tack posts in the CE folder, the more I think he should stop. Why's that? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Dogbert 0 Report post Posted January 14, 2006 http://www.ctv.ca//servlet/ArticleNews/sto...ion2006&no_ads= In politics, that's called a target demographic. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CanadianGuitarist 0 Report post Posted January 14, 2006 http://www.ctv.ca//servlet/ArticleNews/sto...ion2006&no_ads= In politics, that's called a target demographic. Sooooooooo conflicted about it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites