Canadians who are you going to vote for? "Poll"

Actually if the liberals lose this election to the conservitives it's more then likely the party will look to change the leadership. Infact going into this election the general opinion was that either Harper, or Martin, wouldn't be around to see the next one.

I'm not a conservitive myself but I'm looking forward to a potential conservitive minority because it will cause a serious overhaul of the liberal party, something they've been in need of for some time. I think this election and it's outcome have the serious potential to shake things up enough to give Ottawa the new life and politicial debate it's been lacking since Mulroony's tories were wiped out and the right of centre vote became so splintered and regional. No matter what happens in this election the results are going to force us to take another serious look at federalism and the Quebec factor and the whole way Ottawa works. I believe Harper is sincere in his wishes to 'clean up government' and frankly I don't think he's the evil scary bush friendly war monger everyone makes him out to be. Even if he is the conservitives have to face a reality, if they expect to recieve the support of Canadian voters they have to resemble the tories that once formed the government in Ottawa, we won't stand for extremists or neo-cons. And if Harper can deliver on his promise to reform the senate it brings us one step closer to revitalising the entire democratic process.

 

RE: I assume you're refering to the scandal? Like I said before THEY'RE FUCKING CORPORATE BACKED POLITICIANS.

HAH! And the Liberals aren't? Just how many KILOGRAMS of cocaine did they find on Paul Pot's shipping vessel again? Get a grip, they're all vermin. But the Cons want to turn stuff around. Look at what Mike Harris did in Ontario. He inherited a REALLY sh*tty financial situation and turned Ontario around. Yeah, he was Mike the Knife, but check it, after Bob Rae ran up the credit cards what can you do? That alone is proof POSITIVE as to why the NDP should stay where they belong - juggling ferrets and teaching in universities, out of harm's way.

RE: How many of them do you think AREN'T corrupt? Just because the Liberals got caught doesn't mean they've been the only corrupt party. Bad bad reason to vote conservative.

WTF? I mean, seriously, WTF. By that definition everyone's corrupt. Listen, man, you need to shake things up every now and then - and a vote for the Cons means Harper can put Jean Chretien and Paul Pot in JAIL where they belong and try and find the millions the Liberals keep giving themselves.

Make no mistake, if Dithers pulls this one off, Alberta will give Canada the double kickstands and separate. Quebec close behind. Many parts of Canada are SICK of Liberal mafia politics. You potheads in Morontario and Que-ou-sont-mes-subventions-bec might not realise it, but you've gotta have an economy to have the goodies, and under the Liberals we lost health care (Cutbacks in medical schools in 90s ---- whoops, crisis of not enough doctors 16 years later.) and an entire generation (nurses, IT people, etc) who went South under NAFTA because Screwface Chretien said "hi yam nut goan to stan fer diss, hiff you doan like what hi do den go to da STATES".... whoops, we have no tradesmen, we're hurting for experienced trained people.....

But the LIBS did have money to have an actual Mafiosi in their party, teaching them how to cook the books to the tune of BILLIONS. Didn't Screwface paying himself a quarter million of public money teach you morons ANYTHING about how corrupt they got?

RE: Green, on the other hand, has no corporate backing......I'd say the only pure (or at least purest) of the major parties.

Go ahead vote Green. Might as well vote for Martin.

As for the "I don't like his face. He's scary" - Jesus. When they said that about Screwface people objected "hey wait! That's below the belt". And for the record, that was the biggest argument against giving women the vote - that the electorate would stop reading political position papers and worry instead about who has the kindest face or the best hair. Jesus. Thanks, Mistress.

 

RE: Actually if the liberals lose this election to the conservitives it's more then likely the party will look to change the leadership. Infact going into this election the general opinion was that either Harper, or Martin, wouldn't be around to see the next one.

Oh absolutely. Martin will have the knives in his back the moment the Conservative win is announced. There's an old joke from the 80s "how many Liberals does it take to change a light bulb - two one to screw the light bulb in, the other to kick the chair out from under him" - now that was about Turdeau and his hapless minion John Turner, who took the fall. Same here, Screwface handed the reins over to Mr. Dithers just to watch him get bounced out of the party in short order after botching it all.

I'd like to see, within days of a Harper win, police in Shawinigan taking out Screwface in HANDCUFFS saying "get this, you can't interfere with Gomery anymore. Oh yeah, and by the way you're under arrest for embezzlement."

RE: I'm not a conservitive myself but I'm looking forward to a potential conservitive minority because it will cause a serious overhaul of the liberal party, something they've been in need of for some time.

Irony - the Conservatives trimming the GST by 30%. The Liberals can say NOTHING, cause they promised a 100% cut wait ham moment hi never sed dat dat was Tequila Sheila....

RE: I think this election and it's outcome have the serious potential to shake things up enough to give Ottawa the new life and politicial debate it's been lacking since Mulroony's tories were wiped out and the right of centre vote became so splintered and regional.

Well, that split that coalition forever. The old school, old guard Appleby College and McGill elite couldn't rape the middle classes to give tax money to Eatons and what have you anymore. I'd like to see the Liberals smashed into pieces too.... the less government we have the better.

RE: No matter what happens in this election the results are going to force us to take another serious look at federalism and the Quebec factor and the whole way Ottawa works.

Screw Quebec. You've got Alberta to worry about. Quebec threatening to leave is like the 13 year old threatening to move out. Sure, go ahead. Leave the TV. Alberta leaving is like the breadwinner of the family threatening to take off, and there's no family court to award the mom any of his money. Ontario is now a have not province under Dalton the Dolt. That leaves how many productive provinces? ONE. ALBERTA.

RE: I believe Harper is sincere in his wishes to 'clean up government' and frankly I don't think he's the evil scary bush friendly war monger everyone makes him out to be.

They never were. Stockwell was stupid but he wasn't malicious. The Liberals did a good job of making the Cons out to be evil and what have you. They were the ones handing themselves tens of thousands of dollars under the table in brown paper envelopes.

RE: Even if he is the conservitives have to face a reality, if they expect to recieve the support of Canadian voters they have to resemble the tories that once formed the government in Ottawa, we won't stand for extremists or neo-cons.

They have done a VERY good job of turfing the white power types and the Rush Limbaugh dittoheads. Canadians are socially liberal and politically conservative, and I think Harper truly is this way. So was Preston Manning.

RE: And if Harper can deliver on his promise to reform the senate it brings us one step closer to revitalising the entire democratic process.

That is, if he isn't nailed in the pods by the NDP and Liberals. I hope for a Conservative majority, and for handcuffs to be put on Chretien and Martin.

 

Re:Screw Quebec. You've got Alberta to worry about. Quebec threatening to leave is like the 13 year old threatening to move out. Sure, go ahead. Leave the TV. Alberta leaving is like the breadwinner of the family threatening to take off, and there's no family court to award the mom any of his money. Ontario is now a have not province under Dalton the Dolt. That leaves how many productive provinces? ONE. ALBERTA.

The difference however being that Quebec soverignty has always been a populist/cultural movement and even then they havn't managed to take a referendum (like they say though, third times a charm). Another Liberal government would certainly infuriate the oil barrons, evangilists, and hard-line conservitives, and likely frustrate the average Albertan, but soverignty? I don't think they could make it happen because I don't think your average Albertan would stand for it, atleast not yet. I'm not dissmissing thier ability to demand and sway in thier favour a possible constitutional re-negotiation(something the next government will likely be forced to do for many other reasons anyways), but they would be doing so with the other 9 provinces at the table. It likely won't even come to that though, if Harper delivers a solution to the fiscal imbalence amongst the provinces and Ottawa, which seems to be one of his top 3 priorites, that will likely be enough to keep Alberta quiet for a long time comming.

But I think you and I can both agree that if Harper is elected this whole discussion is moot because Ottawa may still be the seat of the government, but Alberta will be it's power centre, and will certainly be treated favourably. Harper knows this is and consequently if you havn't noticed, is focussing in largely on the Quebec vote now. Why? his effort and time would likely be more fruitful if he concentrated on swingin BC or the maritimes rather then hope for the best in a provence where he trails a distant 3rd in most ridings. Because he knows his government is going to need a voice and legitimacy in Quebec. So I feel my point still stands, the PQ will likely be back in power in a years time, everyone is talking about round 3, and the Quebec factor, like it or not, is about to be put back in the limelight (if it isn't already)

 

why wouldn't you vote?

seriously, i am confused

 

I don't think Alberta is really a threat to leave, but there is a large number of people here who completely feel left out in the scheme of things. for example, during the debates in the section on National Unity,was Alberta mentioned once as being alienated? NO! The only time they were mentioned that I can remember (I dind't watch them all though) it was "Western Canada" and they were tlaking about equalisation payments.

Keep in mind not everyone in Alberta is like the poeple they showed on the CBC Road Stories programme. In case anyone missed it they took a Liberal from Ontario and went around Alberta (mostly Calgary) and tlaked with people incluiding a rancher and his fmaily, David Rutherford, and a former ontario Liberal who is not a Tory. But yeah, the rancher said "oh yeah, poeple here pull themselves up by their boot straps. we don't need governmetn help. if you get inot tough times, you work through it." Personally, I think that is BS cause when the Mad Cow crisis hit, ranchers were wanting grain faster than you can say 2-tier health care.


Also, for all you conservative nay-sayers, harper isn't planning on privatisation of health care, he wants it so you can go outside your medical district so that you can get faster care.

 

If i could it would be like NDP or Green but they don't have any chance of winning in my county .. The Bloc will probably win again ..

 

RE: The difference however being that Quebec soverignty has always been a populist/cultural movement and even then they havn't managed to take a referendum (like they say though, third times a charm).

Well, do keep in mind Quebec could NEVER stand on its own two feet. The threats are completely irrelevant and moot.

RE: Another Liberal government would certainly infuriate the oil barrons, evangilists, and hard-line conservitives, and likely frustrate the average Albertan, but soverignty? I don't think they could make it happen because I don't think your average Albertan would stand for it, atleast not yet.

The dirty little secret is this: support for Alberta separation is right now at about 48%.

RE: It likely won't even come to that though, if Harper delivers a solution to the fiscal imbalence amongst the provinces and Ottawa, which seems to be one of his top 3 priorites, that will likely be enough to keep Alberta quiet for a long time comming.

Well, sure. Giving them a voice and some degree of authority over what's being paid for is only fair.

RE: But I think you and I can both agree that if Harper is elected this whole discussion is moot because Ottawa may still be the seat of the government,

Unless, big unless, the other three parties gang up on Harper, or as I said, the Liberals pull off the win.

RE: Why? his effort and time would likely be more fruitful if he concentrated on swingin BC

BC has its own set of problems, and besides, if you thought Harper's FRENCH was bad, imagine how bad his Hindi and Cantonese are.

RE: or the maritimes

Seven seats? With ridings full of drunken welfare rejects? Nope, the only Newfies and other cod gobblers the CA needs to work on are those who hitchhiked out to Alberta in the hope of finding work.

RE: rather then hope for the best in a provence where he trails a distant 3rd in most ridings. Because he knows his government is going to need a voice and legitimacy in Quebec.

I'd have the most respect for him if it was like "OK, we'll hire the civil service in Alberta, fire all you Frenchies and give you Quebec as a country."

RE: So I feel my point still stands, the PQ will likely be back in power in a years time, everyone is talking about round 3, and the Quebec factor, like it or not, is about to be put back in the limelight (if it isn't already)

Enough about Quebec, seriously you guys, put up or shut up. As Gilles said when it came to SSM, "it's been decided! dey should accept dat!'

 

RE: I don't think Alberta is really a threat to leave, but there is a large number of people here who completely feel left out in the scheme of things.

Well sure. Ottawa is like "hey, send us all your oil money. Then shut up."

RE: for example, during the debates in the section on National Unity,was Alberta mentioned once as being alienated? NO! The only time they were mentioned that I can remember (I dind't watch them all though) it was "Western Canada" and they were tlaking about equalisation payments.

Alberta gets mentioned a lot by Liberals. What was Screwface's quote? "Hi doan like dem sorda people. Hime joking. Hime serious" or whatever?

RE: Keep in mind not everyone in Alberta is like the poeple they showed on the CBC Road Stories programme. In case anyone missed it they took a Liberal from Ontario and went around Alberta (mostly Calgary) and tlaked with people incluiding a rancher and his fmaily, David Rutherford, and a former ontario Liberal who is not a Tory. But yeah, the rancher said "oh yeah, poeple here pull themselves up by their boot straps. we don't need governmetn help. if you get inot tough times, you work through it." Personally, I think that is BS cause when the Mad Cow crisis hit, ranchers were wanting grain faster than you can say 2-tier health care.

Well, do consider that if Alberta COULD go it alone it would do very well. Selling grain on the open market rather than to Ontario. Ontarians don't HAVE to sell grain at the Wheat Board price, they can sell it in the US if the price is higher. Try that in Alberta and you get put in the clink. Oh, and did I mention the NEP?

RE: Also, for all you conservative nay-sayers, harper isn't planning on privatisation of health care, he wants it so you can go outside your medical district so that you can get faster care.

Yeah, but what else can the Liberanos campaign on? "Scary Harper! Bush in disguise! OOGA BOOGA BOOGA!"

 

How Much Money Has Been Stolen From Albertans?

In "A Regional Analysis of Fiscal Balances under Existing and Alternative Constitutional Arrangements," a paper by Mansell and Schlenker (1992), they study the fiscal balances by province. In other words, they measure how much more money is taxed from a province than it receives in government spending. They study the fiscal balances from 1961 to 1989. Here are their numbers. Two provinces, Alberta and British Columbia, are net contributors to Confederation (in other words, Ottawa takes more money from Albertans and British Columbians than they return in services). Even though British Columbia has been a net contributor, you cannot compare Alberta to British Columbia in terms of what they contribute. Since 1961, Alberta has contributed over $147 billion, while British Columbia only contributed just over $10 billion. Every other province, including Ontario, has stolen this wealth from Alberta. And only one province, Alberta, has always been a net contributor in EVERY year. So much for helping out in bad times, assholes. Here are the actual numbers, in millions of 1990 dollars:
Year Balance Year Balance Year Balance
1961 20 1971 847 1981 23,213
1962 0 1972 931 1982 16,914
1963 95 1973 1,990 1983 8,450
1964 278 1974 8,930 1984 7,145
1965 383 1975 8,363 1985 5,881
1966 516 1976 7,323 1986 2,067
1967 632 1977 7,613 1987 1,430
1968 665 1978 6,755 1988 1,629
1969 1,013 1979 11,397 1989 1,950
1970 917 1980 20,402 TOTAL 147,747
$147.747 billion in 1990 dollars is equivalent to $191.165 billion in 2003 dollars (SOURCE: Bank of Canada).

 

PS this was cut and pasted, the "assholes" comment in the original remains, but is not intended to be construed as pertaining to yall

 

Wow, I didn't know the wheat board didn't aply to Easterners...

Hey, do you remember what the big stink was a few seasons ago over the wheat board (other than just general criticism). Did they lower their price or somethign, I can't remember why but all I remember was a bunch of news stories on it

 

Martin's not getting much of a reception. The Conservative platform is very fiscally dodgy, not even considering the vaguer policy pricetags on things like their (trojan horse) health commitments.

Martin is, reasonably, focusing on the probability of a Harper deficit even though Harper's program plans are pretty terrible (sounds like someone I know south of the border.) But it's not resonating. The news revolves around idiocy like Strategic Counsel's increasingly dramatic pro-Tory polls; with relatively little discussion of the fact that SC is the brainchild of a many-time Conservative election strategist, pollster and general honcho.

It's a very vague, dreamland kind of election. Canadians are saying in polls that they want Liberal policies under new management, and the Conservative tranquilizer campaign is effectively telling them that's what they'll get, unless they scrutinize more closely. Given the interminable good times in Canadian politics, our voting public just doesn't seem that savvy this time around.

Martin should be, and is, pointing out the contradictions and flaws in Harper's platform. People just aren't caring. My own riding appears, so far as I can tell, to be solidly NDP, so there's not a heck of a lot I can do but watch the bow start to sink into the waves.

The political conversations that academics and political junkies have about assymetrical federalism, objective alliances, legislative initiative, vote-splitting, electoral reform and so forth are irrelvant in terms of mass-media coverage and mass opinion. People are "for" our idea of healthcare but understand it in a vague enough fashion - and understand the Conservative party leadership poorly enough - to think that it's safe.

Martin is advocating a platform for good government, while Harper has promulgated a fiscally hazy, not-quite-correctly costed, flashy collection of soundbites; the picador's cape, if you like, to keep the electoral initiative under control in conjunction with our bored media.

Simultaneously, the simplistic and repeated charges of general evil and immorality he's been making about all Liberals for the past year or more have gradually had a predictably effective, Karl Rove style impact on the Liberals; they're unable to staunch the bleeding and the wound opened with the specious Goodale accusation made by the NDP.

Just as a large number of Americans believed in a 9/11-Iraq connection even though the White House no longer actually made that specific allegation, many Canadians associate the sponsership scandal and Gomery with Martin beyond what the Conservatives claim. The Rovian tactic of "speak loudly and slowly and repetatively to the largest number of the stupidest people" would seem to have application here.

Of course, the Democrats didn't have to fight off 3 different Ralph Naders simultaneously.

 

Alberta can afford Conservative ideology for now because of their resource-driven prosperity. You can't simply inflate the model nationwide, because we haven't found a giant diamond mine on Baffin Island.

 

the senate is almost at it's cap of 113 members; even if Harper uses the Governor General's Section 26 powers to pack it with wild abandon, the Liberals have a majority.

The Liberal Party thus has the power to block all federal legislation for the forseeable future - at the risk of immediately causing a huge constitutional crisis which could lead to the Conservatives having their best shot ever of creating an deadlock-generating elective Senate with broad popular support.

Even if the Conservatives win a minority, they can also face a vote of non-confidence at any given time.

 

Sorry for the spam. I'd like to be able to post in the politics forum some day.

 

I learned something so it cannot be spam.

 

http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&pubid=968163964505&cid=113

U.S. conservatives hoping Harper's Tories win


"Social conservatives are thrilled." wow

"And Republicans understand, said analyst David Biette, that Canadian Conservatives are a different breed."

In other words they will be your bitches.

"For Robert Knight, who's with the evangelical group Concerned Women for America, the most interesting thing about the election campaign has been the Liberal party's reaction to the possibility of a Conservative win."

I saw this group on C-span they are such morons.

"There is a feeling that under a Harper government, the speeding train heading for a social wreck would at least be slowed, if not reversed."

What the fuck?


"Right-wing commentator Patrick Basham said the pleasure of a Harper win among American conservatives will be emotional."

I wonder why?

 

Its simply ridiculous to draw some 'nefarious' comparison between Harpers Conservatives and US Repubicans as if being 'conservative' is enough to bring up some questions.
Let me say that its 'no more or less' a 'coincidence' that the US Democratic Party is 'like the Liberals'.
Why stop at comparing to the USA anways?
So Harper is just like.. mmmm... Marga-ret That-cher hmmmmm?
Surprise.. most western nations have some sort of version of 'right wing' or 'left wing' traditions.
conservative vs liberal sort of concepts.

Like languages - you cant just 'literally translate' the concepts anyways.
'Conservative' in Canada will often mean something else than it would through American eyes and so on.
Harper would DEFINATELY NOT be considered a 'Right Wing Republican' at all 'if' we imagine him somehow being transplanted down South.
American Politicians would probably consider him something like a 'conservative Democrat' and he would not even come close to a 'Far Right' anything by US ways of thinking.

But hey... Martin paid off the deficit alright.. no, actualy me and unemployed people did.
He paid it off by taking away money from unemployed peoples UI cheques.
Cheers to Gilles Duceppe for repeatedly explaining that to the Public.
The only time in my life I ever collected on Unemployment and thats when they took money from me to pay off the deficit then buy themselves bribes, payoffs and 'grants' for friends.

Not even the harshest right wing Republicans in the USA would EVER have the balls to try and pull that off.
Americans (to their credit) would RIOT in the streets over that!
Our Liberal PM did it unapologetically.
And he accuses Harper of being harsh to the poor?
Go figure.

 

No, it doesn't. An Ontario farmer can choose whichever market offers a higher price. Albertans will be JAILED for doing so.

They jailed some guys from Alberta for selling wheat directly to the US, like Ontarians can.

They want social liberalism and fiscal conservatism. That's what they hoped for with Martin, what they got instead was handing the chequebook over to the NDPers for support at any price, and
promises of the farm. And CORRUPTION.

There are no contradictions. Once you stop THIEVING from the public purse, you have money to spare.

Let me see, Alberta promoting a two-tier system is US Republicanism but Ontario doing the same thing is OK? Gimme a break. That dog won't hunt. We need to deal with serious issues,
like totally lopsided representation, corruption, thievery, etc. And massive underfunding to medicare.

Martin is a liar and a thief. Notice you're still paying GST?

No, it's just that scandal after scandal can't be ignored. When the theivery becomes THAT pervasive that they find new acts of that kind DAILY...

GOOD! I hope they do it, that way the electorate will get UTTERLY sick of the Liberals and hand Harper the total MAJORITY he needs.

What he won't do is offer the NDP anything they want and Belinda Stronach a plum appointment to keep power at any cost.

Absolutely. We are for abortion and SSM. All Harper wants to do is clarify that with a FREE VOTE, just like how Mulroney SETTLED IT that we truly want abortion, with a free vote.