Canadian Election [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Canadian Election

FormerRafaFan
05-02-2011, 06:14 PM
Will Harper get a majority or a minority government this time? Hopefully a minority government!

What do you think?

BigJohn
05-02-2011, 08:15 PM
I don't think he'll get a majority. I hope not. Or maybe that is what this country needs: 4 years of Tory tyranny. That should be enough to stop this nonsense.

It is unbelievable people still support Harper after so many crisis: the incredible Helena Guergis debacle, first as an incompetent minister then kicked out over crazy allegations brought up by the Prime Minister's Office, Rahim Jaffer, the flip-flop about the senate, Dimitri Soudas (many times in hot water) Bev Oda lying to Parliament (not), everything about Bruce Carson, being the first and only party ever found to be in contempt of Parliament, merely days before the beginning of the campaign, americanizing Canadian politics with negative attack ads, taking only 4 questions each day of the campaign, no follow up question allowed so he could just say whatever he wants... And yet, the Prairies will be almost all blue again. They are special.

Or will there truly be a huge Orange realignment? Many polls show that the NDP might have the best results of their history. Official opposition for the first time, not bad. They were closing in fast on the Conservatives in the polls.

Maybe the polls underestimated the electoral machines of the Liberals and the Bloc Québécois (only in Québec), who were just passed by the NDP these last few weeks. The Greens, never worth mentioning until the last elections, have plummeted and are even less of a factor

It will be an interesting night for sure. As usual, whatever happens in Ontario will be key. As it stands, Tories were in the lead there, but they do not seem to have gained any popular support since last election.

Last National poll:

CON 36%
NDP 33%
LIB 19%
GRN 6%
BQ 5%

These are historic lows for the Liberals and the BQ.

Blarghman
05-02-2011, 09:33 PM
I voted :cool:

I'm afraid Harper will win a narrow majority, but hopefully he won't. The only really interesting thing to me for tonight is whether the NDP's rise in Quebec polls is actually going to materialize in votes. If it's real, the Bloc could be all but dead by tomorrow morning, probably the biggest change in Canadian politics since '93. In English Canada, I think things will be virtually the same, with the Cons doing a little better, but not enough.

Probably my riding will be Conservative, though :o

buddyholly
05-02-2011, 09:34 PM
Whatever moves the markets up.

Now that Canada is recognised as the country that best dealt with the recession I think the Tories deserve a majority.

ibreak4coffee
05-03-2011, 12:30 AM
If this ends up as another minority government, you wonder if we're ever going to break the cycle

Kat_YYZ
05-03-2011, 01:15 AM
I don't think he'll get a majority. I hope not. Or maybe that is what this country needs: 4 years of Tory tyranny. That should be enough to stop this nonsense.

It is unbelievable people still support Harper after so many crisis: the incredible Helena Guergis debacle, first as an incompetent minister then kicked out over crazy allegations brought up by the Prime Minister's Office, Rahim Jaffer, the flip-flop about the senate, Dimitri Soudas (many times in hot water) Bev Oda lying to Parliament (not), everything about Bruce Carson, being the first and only party ever found to be in contempt of Parliament, merely days before the beginning of the campaign, americanizing Canadian politics with negative attack ads, taking only 4 questions each day of the campaign, no follow up question allowed so he could just say whatever he wants... And yet, the Prairies will be almost all blue again. They are special.

Or will there truly be a huge Orange realignment? Many polls show that the NDP might have the best results of their history. Official opposition for the first time, not bad. They were closing in fast on the Conservatives in the polls.

Maybe the polls underestimated the electoral machines of the Liberals and the Bloc Québécois (only in Québec), who were just passed by the NDP these last few weeks. The Greens, never worth mentioning until the last elections, have plummeted and are even less of a factor

It will be an interesting night for sure. As usual, whatever happens in Ontario will be key. As it stands, Tories were in the lead there, but they do not seem to have gained any popular support since last election.

Last National poll:

CON 36%
NDP 33%
LIB 19%
GRN 6%
BQ 5%

These are historic lows for the Liberals and the BQ.
:worship:
My thoughts exactly, sir.
Let's bring on total hell, so we can bring about the backlash. Seems like there's no other way :shrug:

http://images.icanhascheezburger.com/completestore/2008/11/3/128702056904950129.jpg

ibreak4coffee
05-03-2011, 02:17 AM
Looks like Bush-lite is going to get his majority :sad:

Blarghman
05-03-2011, 02:20 AM
Pretty ugly results :sad: Hard to believe so many people vote for Harper.

ibreak4coffee
05-03-2011, 02:22 AM
What's even more amazing is that the NDP looks like they will win 100+ seats in parliament :eek:

I met Jack Layton in 2005 in one of my old jobs and I couldn't believe anyone would chose him as a party leader. Now he's going to be the official opposition leader :eek::eek::eek:

Its all up to you BC.... :)

buddyholly
05-03-2011, 02:45 AM
Good.

I can go to bed early.

buddyholly
05-03-2011, 02:48 AM
Pretty ugly results :sad: Hard to believe so many people vote for Harper.

It still fascinates me how many people are so self-focused as to think that any deviation from their own opinion is an error.

Kat_YYZ
05-03-2011, 02:54 AM
What's even more amazing is that the NDP looks like they will win 100+ seats in parliament :eek:

I met Jack Layton in 2005 in one of my old jobs and I couldn't believe anyone would chose him as a party leader. Now he's going to be the official opposition leader :eek::eek::eek:

Its all up to you BC.... :)
Why do you say that?

Blarghman
05-03-2011, 02:56 AM
It still fascinates me how many people are so self-focused as to think that any deviation from their own opinion is an error.

When did I say that? I just don't get the appeal of Harper, and would rather he didn't win.

BigJohn
05-03-2011, 03:02 AM
Quebec voted NDP, Ontario did not follow and went Conservatives.

The liberals on the brink of extinction... This is sad because that party made what Canada is today.

This is pretty shocking.

ibreak4coffee
05-03-2011, 03:12 AM
Olivia Chow winning again in my old Trinity-Spadina riding... god she was running while I was still a student :lol:

buddyholly
05-03-2011, 03:14 AM
When did I say that? I just don't get the appeal of Harper, and would rather he didn't win.

When you said ''hard to believe''

Canada's parties are pretty much to the centre, so it should be easy to believe any result.

Snowwy
05-03-2011, 03:14 AM
Pretty ugly results :sad: Hard to believe so many people vote for Harper.

Why is it hard to believe? Jack Layton could have had power. Everyone who DIDN't vote for the Conservatives should be shaking their head. And this is from a guy that makes fun of Mr. Harper ALL the time. I will probably never vote Conservative again in my life, but the leaders of the other parties are even more questionable. We really need an Obama

ibreak4coffee
05-03-2011, 03:16 AM
Why do you say that?

He wasn't polished, didn't have a good grasp of the issues we were discussing, and was wearing the cheapest suit I think I've ever seen :lol:

Don't get me wrong I have nothing against him. He just didn't scream "big stage". I thought at the time Alexa McDonough was better leadership material for the long-term.

Regardless, its astounding he's gone from almost 2% to over 100 seats in parliament.

buddyholly
05-03-2011, 03:16 AM
Olivia Chow winning again in my old Trinity-Spadina riding... god she was running while I was still a student :lol:

My new riding. She is off to Ottawa now, to the official opposition leader's residence.

buddyholly
05-03-2011, 03:19 AM
He wasn't polished, didn't have a good grasp of the issues we were discussing, and was wearing the cheapest suit I think I've ever seen :lol:



It just got crumpled in the massage parlour.

ibreak4coffee
05-03-2011, 03:19 AM
When you said ''hard to believe''

Canada's parties are pretty much to the centre, so it should be easy to believe any result.

Everyone believes to an extent or in full that their views are right. Is this a surprise? Otherwise no need for politics.

ibreak4coffee
05-03-2011, 03:20 AM
My new riding. She is off to Ottawa now, to the official opposition leader's residence.

Canada's greatest riding.

ibreak4coffee
05-03-2011, 03:22 AM
Canada's parties are pretty much to the centre, so it should be easy to believe any result.

I wouldn't necessarily call former elements of the Canadian Alliance "centrist"

buddyholly
05-03-2011, 03:24 AM
Everyone believes to an extent or in full that their views are right. Is this a surprise? Otherwise no need for politics.

I don't think so. While I believe the Tories are best for me, I don't think they are best for, say, a salesperson.

Lee
05-03-2011, 03:26 AM
I thought Canada lacked political leaders while I lived in Canada and obviously got worse since I left :o

Harper did not impressed me at all before he became leader of PC (and I was from Calgary). I really can't believe he lead PC to 2 minority govt. and now form a majority.

Kat_YYZ
05-03-2011, 03:27 AM
He wasn't polished, didn't have a good grasp of the issues we were discussing, and was wearing the cheapest suit I think I've ever seen :lol:

Don't get me wrong I have nothing against him. He just didn't scream "big stage". I thought at the time Alexa McDonough was better leadership material for the long-term.

Regardless, its astounding he's gone from almost 2% to over 100 seats in parliament.

oh, okay. I thought you were gonna say something horrible, like he eats kittens or is dumber than Bush jr. :lol:

I think seeming down-to-earth must be part of his schtick, no? Working man's party and all that. Well, some people like that, anyways :shrug:

I was so mad at him for toppling Paul Martin; Layton is really the architect of the Liberal party demise (well, that and them making bad picks for party leader/PM candidate). But I can't really blame him; he's there to help the NDP and himself, not the Liberals. It's taken some time (and lots of pain for Canadians, under Harper), but his gamble seems to be paying off now. You have to break some eggs to make an omelette.

Blarghman
05-03-2011, 03:27 AM
Why is it hard to believe? Jack Layton could have had power. Everyone who DIDN't vote for the Conservatives should be shaking their head. And this is from a guy that makes fun of Mr. Harper ALL the time. I will probably never vote Conservative again in my life, but the leaders of the other parties are even more questionable. We really need an Obama

Definitely agree that none of the leaders are capable, that's why I would have liked another minority, keep them all in check to some extent.

buddyholly
05-03-2011, 03:27 AM
I wouldn't necessarily call former elements of the Canadian Alliance "centrist"

Olivia was up against a Marxist/Leninist. Don't know the vote count on that yet. (OK, there are 100 Marxist/Leninists in Trinity-Spadina.)

Ignatieff about to lose his seat.

Blarghman
05-03-2011, 03:29 AM
When you said ''hard to believe''

Canada's parties are pretty much to the centre, so it should be easy to believe any result.

I guess I just see all the things that BigJohn mentioned at the start of this thread, and don't see how it is that people can say 'more of that, please'. Sure, the other parties have big flaws too, but i don't understand why people weren't more unhappy with the Harper government.

buddyholly
05-03-2011, 03:32 AM
The country came through the recession better than any other developed nation. That alone is reason enough to not rock the boat.

ibreak4coffee
05-03-2011, 03:39 AM
The country came through the recession better than any other developed nation. That alone is reason enough to not rock the boat.

That's because of laws and institutions and a banking system put in place over decades even centuries, not because of Harper (or Chretien or Martin or anyone else). Maybe electing Layton would have rocked the boat, but not another minority government. And when the global economy takes off again, people in Canada will start again complaining how Canada's more conservative system is lagging behind the rest of the world :)

You've described yourself in previous threads as libertarian on social issues. These views aren't exactly shared by a large part of the Conservative Party.

Kat_YYZ
05-03-2011, 03:39 AM
The country came through the recession better than any other developed nation. That alone is reason enough to not rock the boat.

That's a terrible argument! Our government (and others) are encouraging Egyptians/Libyans/Syrians and others to topple their governments -- even though they don't know what will replace them -- while telling it's own people to fear change and not change even to a known, familiar alternative. It's comical.

ibreak4coffee
05-03-2011, 03:41 AM
oh, okay. I thought you were gonna say something horrible, like he eats kittens or is dumber than Bush jr. :lol:

I think seeming down-to-earth must be part of his schtick, no? Working man's party and all that. Well, some people like that, anyways :shrug:

I was so mad at him for toppling Paul Martin; Layton is really the architect of the Liberal party demise (well, that and them making bad picks for party leader/PM candidate). But I can't really blame him; he's there to help the NDP and himself, not the Liberals. It's taken some time (and lots of pain for Canadians, under Harper), but his gamble seems to be paying off now. You have to break some eggs to make an omelette.

No like I said I have nothing against Layton. I used to be involved in politics and then in policy development, particularly foreign policy. I agree 100% with the NDP on social issues but their stance on free trade to me for a country of Canada's size and charateristics is not optimal. And Layton at the time didn't have any strong experience on foreign policy or trade issues.

ibreak4coffee
05-03-2011, 03:42 AM
Olivia was up against a Marxist/Leninist. Don't know the vote count on that yet. (OK, there are 100 Marxist/Leninists in Trinity-Spadina.)

Ignatieff about to lose his seat.

You don't get along with the U of T faculty, do you? :lol:

Blarghman
05-03-2011, 03:44 AM
The country came through the recession better than any other developed nation. That alone is reason enough to not rock the boat.

So giving the conservatives their first majority in more than 20 years, making the NDP official opposition and decimating the Liberals isn't rocking the boat enough for you? :p

buddyholly
05-03-2011, 03:47 AM
That's a terrible argument! Our government (and others) are encouraging Egyptians/Libyans/Syrians and others to topple their governments -- even though they don't know what will replace them -- while telling it's own people to fear change and not change even to a known, familiar alternative. It's comical.

I think you are confused a bit. The government was urging Middle East countries to change to something better.
On the home front, all the other Parties were telling Canadians to change. But if the Tories asked the Canadian people to topple the government, that would be comical.

ibreak4coffee
05-03-2011, 03:49 AM
Duceppe can't even bring himself to congratulate Harper by name :haha:

buddyholly
05-03-2011, 03:54 AM
You've described yourself in previous threads as libertarian on social issues. These views aren't exactly shared by a large part of the Conservative Party.

In countries like Canada you can pretty much do what you like socially. Doesn't matter which party. Which is why my voting preference is made on fiscal policies. It does not make me happy to vote for a party led by an evangelical, but I think the Tories will do the best for me. The NDP was still going on about climate change and carbon taxes and the ''horrible tar sands''. No thanks. They would ruin the economy.

Kat_YYZ
05-03-2011, 04:00 AM
I think you are confused a bit. The government was urging Middle East countries to change to something better.
On the home front, all the other Parties were telling Canadians to change. But if the Tories asked the Canadian people to topple the government, that would be comical.

no, no, I understand the difference... they are not democracies and all that.

I'm just saying that if you have to use the "oooh change is scary :scared:" boogeyman to frighten voters away from other parties (rather than explaining why the other parties' policies are bad), it's pretty sad.

buddyholly
05-03-2011, 04:08 AM
no, no, I understand the difference... they are not democracies and all that.

I'm just saying that if you have to use the "oooh change is scary :scared:" boogeyman to frighten voters away from other parties (rather than explaining why the other parties' policies are bad), it's pretty sad.

Or even explaining why your own party is good. But that is the way it goes in the age of Twitter. Everything is a soundbite, people only listen for 167 characters.

buddyholly
05-03-2011, 04:09 AM
Why did you delete the youtube? The blue T-shirts waving phalluses in the background were pretty funny.

ibreak4coffee
05-03-2011, 04:12 AM
Why did you delete the youtube? The blue T-shirts waving phalluses in the background were pretty funny.

Had to figure out how to embed it properly into the post - done.

W-P08sAY1P4

Blarghman
05-03-2011, 04:26 AM
It really is amazing to see just how hard the Liberals got crushed. Sort of reminiscent, though not quite as severe, of the way the PCs were in the late 90s; reasonable showing out east, and then just a handful of seats in old strongholds. Wonder who they will pick as their next leader? Goodale? Trudeau? Brison? Rae? Dion again? Not a lot of other well-known names left, maybe it would serve them better to go with someone from outside the house, though I can't imagine who could dig them out of this deep a hole.

buddyholly
05-03-2011, 11:07 AM
I spent some hours around Trudeau last year on Canada's Test the Nation's IQ. (I was on the Atheist team that was narrowly defeated by the Nerds). If they pick Trudeau as leader then they can anticipate losing the other33 seats next time around.

Does this really mean Quebecers at last are rejecting independence?

scoobs
05-03-2011, 11:09 AM
Good old First past the post wins again. Clear leftist majority but the vote splits and the Right ride right through it.

buddyholly
05-03-2011, 11:21 AM
If the left want to bicker among themselves, then they have no-one to blame but themselves. The way that Layton skewered the Liberal leader in the debate was enough to decide my vote. There was no love there, so a coalition of the left would have been bad for Canada.

Garson007
05-03-2011, 11:25 AM
Good old First past the post wins again. Clear leftist majority but the vote splits and the Right ride right through it.
:yeah: That's not the end of it, of course. The entire senate is elected based on the whims of the prime minister. Where's the democracy in that? Where is the representation?

BigJohn
05-03-2011, 11:42 AM
Good old First past the post wins again. Clear leftist majority but the vote splits and the Right ride right through it.

That is what happened to the right a few times when there were 2 right wing parties here. Then there was a merger.

Harper might have the most seats, but his platform has been rejected by 60% of the population, since all other parties are on the left/center left.

Shit is about to hit the fan, Canadians have given Harper 4 years of dictatorship.

buddyholly
05-03-2011, 11:48 AM
That is what happened to the right a few times when there were 2 right wing parties here. Then there was a merger.

Harper might have the most seats, but his platform has been rejected by 60% of the population, since all other parties are on the left/center left.

Shit is about to hit the fan, Canadians have given Harper 4 years of dictatorship.

Have to laugh at those sour grapes. Canadians have actually given Harper 4 years of democracy. Everyone knows how democratic elections work. Proportional representation always leads to ineffective government. It is a nice idea, but not effective.

The left/centre left can coalesce anytime they want. Clearly they do not consider themselves compatible.

In 2000 the Liberals got 172 seats with a similar % of the vote than this time around for the winner. Did the shit hit the fan?

Garson007
05-03-2011, 12:09 PM
Proportional representation always leads to ineffective government. It is a nice idea, but not effective.
What makes you say that?

Ravel
05-03-2011, 01:14 PM
There were plenty of ridings in Ontario where the NDP surge siphoned off votes from the Liberal party where the Liberals were favored to win. The conservatives were right there to come from behind and take these ridings as the NDP and Liberal split the left vote. That's a majority of the reason why the Cons got majority.

The fall of the Liberals in a once Liberal dominated province in addition to the surge of the NDP only helped the conservatives in a lot of those ridings. The NDP last night consistently got 20%-30% of the vote in ridings where the Liberals were favored and the Conservatives were second or vice versa. In previous elections, that very same NDP had maybe single digit % support in those ridings?? Some previously close two horse races were suddenly becoming three.

Had there not been that NDP surge in Ontario, a lot of those Conservative seats that were needed to form their Majority would have stayed Liberal red.

canuckfan
05-03-2011, 01:21 PM
The country came through the recession better than any other developed nation. That alone is reason enough to not rock the boat.

A classic case of "repeat a lie often enough and it becomes the truth". I mean, Australia didn't even have a recession...

Ravel
05-03-2011, 01:21 PM
Since it's gonna be a majority and there's unlikely gonna be a major shakeup., I hope Layton and the whole NDP party as a whole can hone up and gain some valuable experience as the official opposition. They're new and need to prove themselves that they are a true Leading opposition

That way, they can be more prepared, get more support and hopefully as a party take away power from the Cons in the next election. They have plenty of time...

FormerRafaFan
05-03-2011, 01:43 PM
A classic case of "repeat a lie often enough and it becomes the truth". I mean, Australia didn't even have a recession...

Exactly! Canada has an unemployment rate of nearly 10 %, a HUGE national debt and provinces almost going bankrupt. Not to mention the fact that the middle class gets smaller and smaller while there's more poor people for each passing day. This has only gotten worse over the last couple of years with a con government and Harper as the prime minister. The population was stupid enough to ignore all of these facts and re-elect him, but now with a majority government! This means he has even more power to fuck up the country, and like it isn't fucked up enough? That the people could support Harper after all the times he have messed up, after ruining the Canadian economy.. it's just mindblowing.

I feel for you, the next 4 years are not going to be easy. You have my sincere sympathies. But then again.. a country is no better than their elected leader. You were stupid enought to elect him, so now you have to face the concequences.

canuckfan
05-03-2011, 01:49 PM
Exactly! Canada has an unemployment rate of nearly 10 %, a HUGE national debt and provinces almost going bankrupt. Not to mention the fact that the middle class gets smaller and smaller while there's more poor people for each passing day. This has only gotten worse over the last couple of years with a con government and Harper as the prime minister. The population was stupid enough to ignore all of these facts and re-elect him, but now with a majority government! This means he has even more power to fuck up the country, and like it isn't fucked up enough? That the people could support Harper after all the times he have messed up, after ruining the Canadian economy.. it's just mindblowing.

I feel for you, the next 4 years are not going to be easy. You have my sincere sympathies. But then again.. a country is no better than their elected leader. You were stupid enought to elect him, so now you have to face the concequences.

7.7%

Garson007
05-03-2011, 01:53 PM
There were plenty of ridings in Ontario where the NDP surge siphoned off votes from the Liberal party where the Liberals were favored to win. The conservatives were right there to come from behind and take these ridings as the NDP and Liberal split the left vote. That's a majority of the reason why the Cons got majority.

The fall of the Liberals in a once Liberal dominated province in addition to the surge of the NDP only helped the conservatives in a lot of those ridings. The NDP last night consistently got 20%-30% of the vote in ridings where the Liberals were favored and the Conservatives were second or vice versa. In previous elections, that very same NDP had maybe single digit % support in those ridings?? Some previously close two horse races were suddenly becoming three.

Had there not been that NDP surge in Ontario, a lot of those Conservative seats that were needed to form their Majority would have stayed Liberal red.
First Past The Post; the joke that is.

buddyholly
05-03-2011, 01:58 PM
I was tempted to a lengthy reply, but :lol: seems to be appropriate here. While Harper may be against abortion and gay marriage on religious grounds, Canada is not. He has the option not to get divorced and marry another man.

I am much better off now than I was a few years ago.

I guess you are just another left wingnut who thinks every election that they don't approve off must be because people don't know what is good for them. That attitude seems to be on the rise. Juvenile frustration I suppose. You will grow out of it.

buddyholly
05-03-2011, 02:01 PM
First Past The Post; the joke that is.

Unless you have quotes about your outrage when the Liberals got an even bigger majority with the same popular vote, I have to treat your posts as a huffyfit.

Ravel
05-03-2011, 02:02 PM
At the time of writing, these were the actual seats won and leading for each party:

CON 167, NDP 102, LIB 34, BQ 4, GREEN 1

If the seats were won in proportion to the votes that were cast, the numbers would look like this:

CON 122, NDP 95, LIB 59, BQ 19, GREEN 13

According to these results, the Conservatives have won 54.22% of the seats with only 39.62% of the votes, one of the least legitimate majorities in Canadian history.

“This is a classic phony majority,” said Bruch, “and leaves us with a government that is completely unaccountable to Parliament. As long as they maintain rigid party discipline, nothing bad can happen to them for four years.”

http://www.fairvote.ca/en/Canadians-cheated-again-by-voting-system

The liberals got screwed big time.

buddyholly
05-03-2011, 02:03 PM
What makes you say that?

I just think that a collection of fringe parties in parliament slows down legislation.

Garson007
05-03-2011, 02:46 PM
I just think that a collection of fringe parties in parliament slows down legislation.
I think it creates a more representative assembly of national demographics. I.e. An actual democracy. My earlier jibe at FPTP was because it's undemocratic, not because the liberals lost.

buddyholly
05-03-2011, 04:14 PM
http://www.fairvote.ca/en/Canadians-cheated-again-by-voting-system

The liberals got screwed big time.

So you would agree that in 2000 the Conservatives were screwed even more. So this is just the levelling of the playing field.

BigJohn
05-03-2011, 04:27 PM
Have to laugh at those sour grapes. Canadians have actually given Harper 4 years of democracy. Everyone knows how democratic elections work. Proportional representation always leads to ineffective government. It is a nice idea, but not effective.

The left/centre left can coalesce anytime they want. Clearly they do not consider themselves compatible.

In 2000 the Liberals got 172 seats with a similar % of the vote than this time around for the winner. Did the shit hit the fan?

No. Harper was acting like a dictator even with a minority government. Now he has carte blanche.

And no, the shit did not hit the fan with the Liberals, because the Liberals were at the center and the opposition was both at left and right. This is a right wing government who, even if it clearly does not have the support of the majority of the population, will implement a series of profound and radically social conservative measures, something that Canadians do not want. The were acting like a dictatorship even without a majority. Surely you must be joking.

All other parties are on the left (Libs center left, NDP left, Bloc left, Green left) The left won the most votes. This is a disaster. The senate will be stacked with Tories that will create problems long after the PC will lose its next election. Federal judges will also become more conservative, this will be an almost complete americanization of Canadian politics AND justice system.

And even if the Harper government will not reopen issues like gay marriage and abortion, it will certainly not prevent MPs from proposing bills that will abolish the right of gays to marry and women to get abortions, and allow Parliament to vote on these issues.

But if the economy goes well, what's the problem? :rolleyes:

ibreak4coffee
05-03-2011, 04:30 PM
It was classic stuff from Harper limiting all journalists to 5 questions at campaign stops (and not necessarily providing 5 answers).

Sarah Palin would be proud

scoobs
05-03-2011, 04:40 PM
Your election sounds like a virtual rerun of ours last year, except that the Tories failed to get an absolute majority, went into coalition with the Lib Dems, who have basically allowed the Tories to be as right wing as they like. And on Thursday we're about to reject the opportunity to change our voting system from the one that screwed you over. Politics is fun, isn't it?

buddyholly
05-03-2011, 04:58 PM
And no, the shit did not hit the fan with the Liberals, because the Liberals were at the center and the opposition was both at left and right. This is a right wing government who, even if it clearly does not have the support of the majority of the population, will implement a series of profound and radically social conservative measures, something that Canadians do not want. The were acting like a dictatorship even without a majority. Surely you must be joking.

All other parties are on the left (Libs center left, NDP left, Bloc left, Green left) The left won the most votes. This is a disaster. The senate will be stacked with Tories that will create problems long after the PC will lose its next election. Federal judges will also become more conservative, this will be an almost complete americanization of Canadian politics AND justice system.



And even if the Harper government will not reopen issues like gay marriage and abortion, it will certainly not prevent MPs from proposing bills that will abolish the right of gays to marry and women to get abortions, and allow Parliament to vote on these issues.

But if the economy goes well, what's the problem? :rolleyes:

The sky is falling! The sky is falling!

If the NDP had got into power without a majority of the popular vote would you be whining like this? Or jubilant?

All of a sudden democracy is bad when the people don't vote like you think they should? The Canadian electorate knew full well that there were 3 parties. And if the Liberals and NDP can't agree on anything why would anyone want to see them running the country anyway? I actually think you are wrong to keep insisting the Liberals and NDP are close. I would say the NDP had a radical socialist agenda that most Canadians don't want. The only reason the NDP got so many seats was that Quebec finally tired of the BQ

The biggest disaster would have been an NDP government with a bunch of beginners. Let them prove themselves over the next four years.

Garson007
05-03-2011, 05:13 PM
And on Thursday we're about to reject the opportunity to change our voting system from the one that screwed you over.
I really hope the referendum comes out with a yes. It will allow the USA to start looking at their own political systems. More importantly though, it's a promising step towards proportional representation for the UK and a no vote will mean another fourty years before the question is raised again. I cannot for a life of me understand how someone who calls themselves a supporter of democracy can support anything but a proportional system. The irony concerning the USA is not lost on me.

Lee
05-03-2011, 05:20 PM
I really hope the referendum comes out with a yes. It will allow the USA to start looking at their own political systems. More importantly though, it's a promising step towards proportional representation for the UK and a no vote will mean another fourty years before the question is raised again. I cannot for a life of me understand how someone who calls themselves a supporter of democracy can support anything but a proportional system. The irony concerning the USA is not lost on me.

What does the vote in UK have anything to do with USA? :confused:

ibreak4coffee
05-03-2011, 05:22 PM
I really hope the referendum comes out with a yes. It will allow the USA to start looking at their own political systems.

You think the US is going to take a look at their dysfunctional political system because of what the UK - or anyone else for that matter - does?

:haha::haha::haha:

scoobs
05-03-2011, 05:30 PM
I really hope the referendum comes out with a yes. It will allow the USA to start looking at their own political systems. More importantly though, it's a promising step towards proportional representation for the UK and a no vote will mean another fourty years before the question is raised again. I cannot for a life of me understand how someone who calls themselves a supporter of democracy can support anything but a proportional system. The irony concerning the USA is not lost on me.
It won't come out as Yes. It will be No, probably comfortably so.

Garson007
05-03-2011, 05:30 PM
If all your friends start to change their views on life, sooner or later you're going to try and think about what they are doing. Politics are no different.

Lee
05-03-2011, 05:34 PM
If all your friends start to change their views on life, sooner or later you're going to try and think about what they are doing. Politics are no different.

Don't think it is going to happen in US. In addition, the system in US is quite different from UK :shrug:

ibreak4coffee
05-03-2011, 05:35 PM
If all your friends start to change their views on life, sooner or later you're going to try and think about what they are doing. Politics are no different.

You don't change based on what your friends are doing when you have an unshakeable belief you have nothing to learn from them.

You can't change when you don't pay attention to what they are doing in the first place.

And you won't change when you are utterly convinced that you have built the greatest political system - and country - the world will ever see

BigJohn
05-03-2011, 06:35 PM
The sky is falling! The sky is falling!

If the NDP had got into power without a majority of the popular vote would you be whining like this? Or jubilant?

All of a sudden democracy is bad when the people don't vote like you think they should? The Canadian electorate knew full well that there were 3 parties. And if the Liberals and NDP can't agree on anything why would anyone want to see them running the country anyway? I actually think you are wrong to keep insisting the Liberals and NDP are close. I would say the NDP had a radical socialist agenda that most Canadians don't want. The only reason the NDP got so many seats was that Quebec finally tired of the BQ

The biggest disaster would have been an NDP government with a bunch of beginners. Let them prove themselves over the next four years.

I forgot how big of a troll you are.

Canadian democracy is not perfect, when we elect a majority government, it is 4 years of party dictatorship. When that dictatorship was from the center (Liberals or the Mulroney era PC), no arm was done. Harper is far right, in the Canadian political spectrum. It is the party of Big Oil companies and of the religious right.

Canada has lost international prestige under Harper. It will continue to do so.

Under Harper, more money goes to security and criminal justice, less money goes to the environment and the arts. I could not disagree more with the policies of that government. 60% of Canadians like me also voted for left wing platforms.

buddyholly
05-03-2011, 06:41 PM
Is it the Conservative's fault that the left can't get their act together? If the Liberals and NDP are one and the same thing, as you seem to think, then why aren't they one party? You seem to be blaming the Conservatives for left wing disarray. They knew exactly what was going to happen before the election, yet Layton did a terrific job of demoloshing Ignatieff in the debate. Suicide politics I guess.

I don't even know what a troll is.

BigJohn
05-03-2011, 06:52 PM
You seem to be blaming the Conservatives for left wing disarray.

When did I do that?

I don't even know what a troll is.

I completely believe you.

buddyholly
05-03-2011, 07:45 PM
When did I do that?



I completely believe you.

OK then, you are blaming the left, or the voter, or whomever. But somebody has to take responsibility for a disaster, right? My point is, there is no blame, because it is your personal taste to define the result a disaster. Others may think it a triumph.

Where do I get a definition?

Garson007
05-03-2011, 07:53 PM
But somebody has to take responsibility for a disaster, right?
Of course. The electorial system is responsable, not the votes of the people. The people voted for what they thought was their best chance of representation, in other words being democratic.

It's a disaster because it's unrepresentative of the given demographic.

buddyholly
05-04-2011, 10:27 AM
Of course. The electorial system is responsable, not the votes of the people. The people voted for what they thought was their best chance of representation, in other words being democratic.

It's a disaster because it's unrepresentative of the given demographic.

You don't know that. I could never vote NDP, for me the choice was Liberal or Conservative. But Big John just assumes every Liberal vote was a vote for the left. That is not so.

Unfortunately, giving people a free choice does not mean they vote for their best chance of representation. In Quebec an NDP candidate was elected who is an assistant manager of a university pub. She doesn't speak French, so could not communicate with her potential constituents who are 95% francophone. So she spent the campaign on vacation in Las Vegas. This woman could not run without the approval of the NDP leadership. That would give me a lot of doubt about the capability of the NDP to govern a country.

It actually seems as if most people voted in this election to tell the Liberals that they did not want an election and please get lost.

BigJohn
05-04-2011, 09:49 PM
You don't know that. I could never vote NDP, for me the choice was Liberal or Conservative. But Big John just assumes every Liberal vote was a vote for the left. That is not so.



The Liberals are at the center-left in the Canadian political spectrum. Historically, they have "borrowed" every popular policy from the NDP and made it their own. You might be tempted to say that they did the same with the PC, but the pre-Reform party was firmly on the center right.

Now about that

I would say the NDP had a radical socialist agenda that most Canadians don't want. The only reason the NDP got so many seats was that Quebec finally tired of the BQ


Nationally, the Conservatives got 39% of the votes, the NDP 30%. Less than 10% difference. Could it be that the Conservatives have a radical right wing agenda that most Canadian don't want? 60% is most Canadians last time I checked.

And that NDP got good results because Quebec got tired of the Bloc tidbit? Sure, but Quebec also rejected the Conservatives. More than 83% of Quebecois voted for someone else than Harper.

If anything, that should settle the "is Quebec a distinct society" debate. Anyone doubts that anymore?

buddyholly
05-05-2011, 12:30 AM
If anything, that should settle the "is Quebec a distinct society" debate. Anyone doubts that anymore?

The voters sure seem to be a distinct society. One NDP candidate is assistant manager at a university pub. Since she doesn't speak French she couldn't campaign, so spent the campaign period in Las Vegas. But the voters put their X there anyway. I wonder what they thought when they found out who they had elected.

All the talk of percentages doesn't impress me. It has always been whoever gets the most votes. The Liberals know it and the NDP know it. If they felt they were as close in their policies as you claim then they should have combined. But they both ruled that out.

buddyholly
05-05-2011, 12:33 AM
Of course. The electorial system is responsable, not the votes of the people. The people voted for what they thought was their best chance of representation, in other words being democratic.

It's a disaster because it's unrepresentative of the given demographic.

Sounding like a broken record. If it wasn't a disaster when the Liberals ruled with 40% of the vote, it isn't a disaster now.

BigJohn
05-05-2011, 01:17 AM
The voters sure seem to be a distinct society. One NDP candidate is assistant manager at a university pub. Since she doesn't speak French she couldn't campaign, so spent the campaign period in Las Vegas. But the voters put their X there anyway. I wonder what they thought when they found out who they had elected.

All the talk of percentages doesn't impress me. It has always been whoever gets the most votes. The Liberals know it and the NDP know it. If they felt they were as close in their policies as you claim then they should have combined. But they both ruled that out.



Haha. What a clever remark on distinct society right there. Pretty douchey. But it was to be expected. Quick review: different language, different arts and culture (movies, music, TV, theater...) different political priorities: Quebec has voted radically different than the Rest Of Canada every elections in the last 20 years, but let's focus on that one shady NDP elected MP...

I am less impressed with the critical thinking happening with Alberta voters: 66% voted Conservatives. (also have been electing Tory provincial governments since 1971)

I forgot. Talk of percentages doesn't impress you... when discussing electoral results. :rolleyes:

buddyholly
05-05-2011, 12:32 PM
I wasn't focusing on it - other than finding it shocking that they voted for a candidate who does not speak French and did not campaign. With all the other students elected I am assuming that the NDP gave themselves no chance this time around and was putting up some young Party members to give them some experience for the future. Nothing wrong with that but I am sure that if they had known what was coming they would have thought more about their candidates.

Not sure what you mean about Alberta. You seem to think there is something wrong with voting Conservative and therefore it follows that there is something wrong with the electorate there. Why would they vote for the NDP and run the risk of economic ruin?

Lee
05-05-2011, 01:32 PM
Haha. What a clever remark on distinct society right there. Pretty douchey. But it was to be expected. Quick review: different language, different arts and culture (movies, music, TV, theater...) different political priorities: Quebec has voted radically different than the Rest Of Canada every elections in the last 20 years, but let's focus on that one shady NDP elected MP...

I am less impressed with the critical thinking happening with Alberta voters: 66% voted Conservatives. (also have been electing Tory provincial governments since 1971)

I forgot. Talk of percentages doesn't impress you... when discussing electoral results. :rolleyes:

What's wrong with electing a Tory provincial government since 1971? Last I check, Alberta is the only province in Canada that has no provincial tax.

And for 66% voted Conservatives: most won't vote for NDP or green party (oil and gas is BIG industry there, second to cattle ranching) and many still believe Trudeau's Liberal government screw Alberta :shrug:

buddyholly
05-05-2011, 03:39 PM
I was also wondering about what he meant. I finally decided he was doing that blinkered leftist thing of just assuming that anyone who was not leftist was not thinking straight. In which case there seems little point in any discussion. He does seem to be fooling himself though, to propose that Albertans should should wise up and change their voting habits, just because although everything is going so well there, it is not very wise for them to vote against what he knows is just wrong.

Anyway I think the discussion got bogged down in not separating this election from a general proportional representation argument. I would assume the left has had plenty of opportunity to change Canada's electoral process, so no use whining about it now in one specific election. His insistence that the NDP and Liberals are one and the same is not logical. If the NDP had been the front runner in this election the Liberals would no doubt have been trumpeting their centre-right credentials. But the Liberals thought they were up against the Conservatives so this time around changed their colours to centre-left. The voters have probably had enough of that.

BigJohn
05-05-2011, 11:18 PM
What's wrong with electing a Tory provincial government since 1971? Last I check, Alberta is the only province in Canada that has no provincial tax.

And for 66% voted Conservatives: most won't vote for NDP or green party (oil and gas is BIG industry there, second to cattle ranching) and many still believe Trudeau's Liberal government screw Alberta :shrug:

What is wrong with electing majority Tory governments since 1971? Is this a real question?

Alberta has no provincial taxes because of the oils sands, that is a no brainer. Despite the current wealth in Alberta, it still ran deficits when oil and gas prices dropped a few years back. Not good management.

Unfortunately, like you pointed out, Alberta is close to Big Oil, and unlike Newfoundland or Norway, Alberta did not negotiate good deals with oil companies. Most oil sand production is from foreign companies: very little profit stays in Alberta. When the oil will be all gone, Albertans will be left with very little other than their personal savings and a big mess to clean up.

And if Albertans are still pissed about the NEP, well that is what being part of a federation is about. The wealth is redistributed. Albertans might dislike Trudeau, he is our greatest Prime Minister.

Lee
05-06-2011, 03:52 AM
What is wrong with electing majority Tory governments since 1971? Is this a real question?

Alberta has no provincial taxes because of the oils sands, that is a no brainer. Despite the current wealth in Alberta, it still ran deficits when oil and gas prices dropped a few years back. Not good management.

Unfortunately, like you pointed out, Alberta is close to Big Oil, and unlike Newfoundland or Norway, Alberta did not negotiate good deals with oil companies. Most oil sand production is from foreign companies: very little profit stays in Alberta. When the oil will be all gone, Albertans will be left with very little other than their personal savings and a big mess to clean up.

And if Albertans are still pissed about the NEP, well that is what being part of a federation is about. The wealth is redistributed. Albertans might dislike Trudeau, he is our greatest Prime Minister.

1. Oil sand is NOT the reason Alberta does not have provincial tax. Oil sand is only part of the oil and gas industry. Not even the major part.
2. Let Albertans to worry about the big cleanup and their saving accounts. Contrary to the big brothers in the east believes, there are people in Alberta who know what they are doing and the consequence. They are not a bunch of under educated red-necks.
3. There is nothing wrong to run a deficit budget, especially when your 2nd biggest income is at its bottom. The bottom line is, the province manages not to use sales tax to maintain its budget. And yes, Albertans themselves have a good laugh at how the government used to spend money like there is no tomorrow. The best one was while the Premier dedicated the opening of a new road in rural Alberta which goes to nowhere, he said why don't we build a hospital at the end of the road ;) They learned their lesson.
4. The dislike ran deeper than just Trudeau and the NEP. With Ontario and Quebec, the two eastern provinces with the huge population, the distribution of power is uneven in the federation. Thus, the distribution of wealth within. Why the government has such tight control on the result of election on election day? Because many times, voters in the west didn't bother to vote once a political party swept Ontario and Quebec because their votes mean nothing.

Lee
05-06-2011, 04:10 AM
Anyway, I am away from Canada and her political climate for a long time even though I spent time there every summer. But my friends and relatives mostly prefer a majority government so the gals and guys in Ottawa will actually sit down and get something down. They are the more down to earth and bottom-line types, I guess. And yes, they are sick and tired of elections after elections in the recent years.

btw, BigJohn may think I am a diehard Tory but I actually once a member of the provincial Liberal party and voted for Liberal even I knew my candidate would be defeated by a Tory. :shrug: But that is democracy.

Action Jackson
05-06-2011, 04:16 AM
There aren't going to change from first past post system to proportional voting. Alberta is conservative, rain is wet there are always areas like this.

Coalition governments aren't the end of democracy, this is what the voters want up to the pollies to make it work.

BigJohn
05-06-2011, 09:31 AM
1. Oil sand is NOT the reason Alberta does not have provincial tax. Oil sand is only part of the oil and gas industry. Not even the major part.
2. Let Albertans to worry about the big cleanup and their saving accounts. Contrary to the big brothers in the east believes, there are people in Alberta who know what they are doing and the consequence. They are not a bunch of under educated red-necks.
3. There is nothing wrong to run a deficit budget, especially when your 2nd biggest income is at its bottom. The bottom line is, the province manages not to use sales tax to maintain its budget. And yes, Albertans themselves have a good laugh at how the government used to spend money like there is no tomorrow. The best one was while the Premier dedicated the opening of a new road in rural Alberta which goes to nowhere, he said why don't we build a hospital at the end of the road ;) They learned their lesson.
4. The dislike ran deeper than just Trudeau and the NEP. With Ontario and Quebec, the two eastern provinces with the huge population, the distribution of power is uneven in the federation. Thus, the distribution of wealth within. Why the government has such tight control on the result of election on election day? Because many times, voters in the west didn't bother to vote once a political party swept Ontario and Quebec because their votes mean nothing.


As of 2011, oil sands are more than 50% of the oils and gas revenue of the province.

So the Albertan dislike of central Canada has to do with the fact that more people live there combined with the concept time zones? Well I am not the one who brought up the under educated red-necks, but...

buddyholly
05-06-2011, 12:39 PM
C'mon Lee, surely you can figure out that every Tory voter is an under-educated red-neck by definition. It just is.

Lee
05-06-2011, 05:31 PM
hehe! While I still lived in Calgary, the city has the highest percentage of population in Canada with a degree ;) Not sure if it is still the same after a huge influx of people from the east for the last 10 years :shrug:

buddyholly
05-06-2011, 07:24 PM
Being educated, happy and relatively well-off is no reason at all not to vote for the left parties.

BigJohn
05-06-2011, 07:43 PM
C'mon Lee, surely you can figure out that every Tory voter is an under-educated red-neck by definition. It just is.

Again: when did I say that exactly?

I forgot again:

http://punditkitchen.files.wordpress.com/2010/10/4c6a274b-5324-4b3b-a5bc-57e094abe35b.jpg

BigJohn
05-06-2011, 07:50 PM
hehe! While I still lived in Calgary, the city has the highest percentage of population in Canada with a degree ;) Not sure if it is still the same after a huge influx of people from the east for the last 10 years :shrug:

No need to be so mean to the nice people of Newfoundland.

buddyholly
05-07-2011, 01:19 PM
As of 2011, oil sands are more than 50% of the oils and gas revenue of the province.

So the Albertan dislike of central Canada has to do with the fact that more people live there combined with the concept time zones? Well I am not the one who brought up the under educated red-necks, but...

I need more explanation - if the above does not relate Albertans to red-necks.

BigJohn
05-07-2011, 07:24 PM
I need more explanation - if the above does not relate Albertans to red-necks.

The explanation is I never said what this implies:

C'mon Lee, surely you can figure out that every Tory voter is an under-educated red-neck by definition. It just is.

It is a pretty sucky way to debate, twisting the meaning of what your opponent says. Straight out the Conservative/Republican playbook. Classy. :yeah:

BigJohn
05-07-2011, 09:46 PM
The Conservatives are like Nickelback. I don't know anyone who like them but somehow they seem to do well.

http://failbook.failblog.org/2011/05/07/funny-facebook-fails-thoughts-on-the-canadian-election/#comments

ibreak4coffee
05-07-2011, 09:47 PM
http://failbook.failblog.org/2011/05/07/funny-facebook-fails-thoughts-on-the-canadian-election/#comments

:lol:

Now that's funny.

buddyholly
05-07-2011, 11:10 PM
The explanation is I never said what this implies:



It is a pretty sucky way to debate, twisting the meaning of what your opponent says. Straight out the Conservative/Republican playbook. Classy. :yeah:

If you are too embarrassed to say what your posts mean, I have to interpret for myself. Who are the under-educated rednecks you refer to? You said ''under-educated rednecks, but........''
Why can't you finish the sentence?

BigJohn
05-08-2011, 12:28 AM
If you are too embarrassed to say what your posts mean, I have to interpret for myself. Who are the under-educated rednecks you refer to? You said ''under-educated rednecks, but........''
Why can't you finish the sentence?

You have the tendency to make a comment on only one sentence in a misleading way like I said before, and you're still doing it right now about that post.

Now it is nice to see you can admit I said nothing like every Tory voter is a redneck. Don't twist my words, and please stop trying to "interpret" what I meant since you are not that gifted at that (some would call it libel). It was not that difficult to understand to start with.


News flash: there are rednecks in Alberta, birthplace of the Reform Party. Support for the Reform and its agenda retrograde social conservative agenda did not appear out of thin air. This current brand of PC is diluted Reform. And yes, there was a lot of redneckism in the Reform Party.

It remains to be seen if some of the most controversial policies of the Reform will be reintroduced or not. Harper said it was not going to be the case, but since this government has lied quite a few time before...

buddyholly
05-08-2011, 10:43 AM
You have the tendency to make a comment on only one sentence in a misleading way like I said before, and you're still doing it right now about that post.

Now it is nice to see you can admit I said nothing like every Tory voter is a redneck. Don't twist my words, and please stop trying to "interpret" what I meant since you are not that gifted at that (some would call it libel). It was not that difficult to understand to start with.


News flash: there are rednecks in Alberta, birthplace of the Reform Party. Support for the Reform and its agenda retrograde social conservative agenda did not appear out of thin air. This current brand of PC is diluted Reform. And yes, there was a lot of redneckism in the Reform Party.

It remains to be seen if some of the most controversial policies of the Reform will be reintroduced or not. Harper said it was not going to be the case, but since this government has lied quite a few time before...

More waffle. But why would poor, working class farmers vote Conservative when it is the left who really has their interests at heart? Oh wait, the Leftist ''thinkers'' have only scorn for the real working class. What could you seriously expect a handful of inexperienced, pseudo-intellectual students in Quebec to do for some farmers in Alberta, anyway? Recommend good hotels in Las Vegas, maybe.

BigJohn
05-08-2011, 01:25 PM
More waffle. But why would poor, working class farmers vote Conservative when it is the left who really has their interests at heart? Oh wait, the Leftist ''thinkers'' have only scorn for the real working class. What could you seriously expect a handful of inexperienced, pseudo-intellectual students in Quebec to do for some farmers in Alberta, anyway? Recommend good hotels in Las Vegas, maybe.

Please do continue to exhibit your Republican/Conservative debating tactics.

You try to corner me with the redneck thing, I show you redneckism, why it is real and why it is still a concern. What do you do? Of course disregard my point and go back to your silly diversion about that one NDP MP.

You debate like a reproducing unintelligent donkey.

buddyholly
05-09-2011, 03:56 AM
My debating tactics are to make the other guy lose his cool and revert to personal insults as a defense. So far, so good.

I don't think you have shown me redneckism at all. From what you have offered I have seen no evidence that all the rednecks in Alberta did not in fact vote NDP. All you have done is try to impose your imagined stereotypes.

BigJohn
05-09-2011, 10:38 AM
My debating tactics are to make the other guy lose his cool and revert to personal insults as a defense. So far, so good.

I don't think you have shown me redneckism at all. From what you have offered I have seen no evidence that all the rednecks in Alberta did not in fact vote NDP. All you have done is try to impose your imagined stereotypes.

Hahaha. When did I lose my cool? Because of the dumbass remark? It was a comment on your trollish debating style, that you just by the way admitted practicing. Obviously obvious.

As far as imagined stereotypes, I believe that your comments on Quebec are fine examples of that.

buddyholly
05-09-2011, 12:48 PM
I can't find any comments on Quebec. But nevermind, we seem to be the only people opening this thread. A strong hint that nobody else cares.

BigJohn
05-09-2011, 10:00 PM
These are two comments on Quebec, dissing it's voters and its MPs:

The voters sure seem to be a distinct society. One NDP candidate is assistant manager at a university pub. Since she doesn't speak French she couldn't campaign, so spent the campaign period in Las Vegas. But the voters put their X there anyway. I wonder what they thought when they found out who they had elected.



But why would poor, working class farmers vote Conservative when it is the left who really has their interests at heart? Oh wait, the Leftist ''thinkers'' have only scorn for the real working class. What could you seriously expect a handful of inexperienced, pseudo-intellectual students in Quebec to do for some farmers in Alberta, anyway? Recommend good hotels in Las Vegas, maybe.


Could it be that more likely than not, you have never lived in either Quebec, or Alberta for that matter?

buddyholly
05-10-2011, 05:11 PM
More likely.

I certainly was dissing the MPs. The voters just seem to have had a brain cramp that day. How else could one explain voting for someone who never set foot in the riding and can't speak the language?

BigJohn
05-10-2011, 10:52 PM
More likely.

I certainly was dissing the MPs. The voters just seem to have had a brain cramp that day. How else could one explain voting for someone who never set foot in the riding and can't speak the language?

So to a certain extent, you might be talking through your hat about these two provinces. And you are again dissing Quebec MPs, some of them being quite qualified, and Quebec voters. No matter what, I still think Brosseau cannot be as bad as some Conservative, even ministers. Bernier, Guergis, Oda come to mind.

How else can these election results be explained in Quebec? How about a complete rejection of what the 3 pre-election main federal parties present in Quebec? A big no to the Liberals, a massive no to the BQ, and a gigantic NO THANKS to Harper.

A vote for change. And a vote for Layton.

4 years from now, Quebec could vote for the Conservatives. It will depend on how Harper and Layton perform.