DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Rant >> Canada's turn for an election
Pages:  
Showing posts 76 - 100 of 186, (reverse)
AuthorThread
09/08/2008 09:08:24 PM · #76
Originally posted by thegrandwazoo:

Originally posted by cpanaioti:

Originally posted by thegrandwazoo:

Another question.

The election in Canada this time is a general election? Is it because of a motion of no confidence?


This is a general election. No, it's not a result of a no confidence motion. The Prime Minister dropped the writ and requested that the Governor General dissolve Parliament and give him permission to call an election.


So he is kinda throwing the dice hoping he stays in power and get his party the majority in parliament?


Sort of but even he's stated that it will probably be another minority.
09/09/2008 12:54:28 AM · #77
Originally posted by thegrandwazoo:

OK see if I got this straight.

Canadian conservative party = US Republicans
Canadian liberal party = US Democrats
New Democratic Party = Socialists

And after reading about Harper I can see why you want that guy out! He seems like a Bush clone and no one wants another Bush around.

Actually that's not altogether a fair assessment. The political landscape in Canada is much different than in the States, and the parties reflect that difference. It's true that the Conservatives are a right-aligned party and the Liberals the opposite but both are largely centrist with the differences playing out in social issues. I would suggest that Canada is more left and liberal than the US. Consider that the split in D vs. R at virtually half doesn't exist here. There is mid thirties support for the right in Canada, the other 65% + going to left liberals. Should the NDP & Liberals ever coalesce, the right in Canada would be permanently done for. That is why many are afraid of a majority Conservative government. It is not representative of the majority of the populace.
09/09/2008 01:03:56 AM · #78
Gotcha, I was reading on wiki and the Canadian liberal party & the NDP seem pretty close. What are the major issues keeping the two apart?

Edit: Crappy grammar.

Message edited by author 2008-09-09 01:20:56.
09/09/2008 03:18:25 AM · #79
Originally posted by thegrandwazoo:

Gotcha, I was reading on wiki and the Canadian liberal party & the NDP seem pretty close. What are the major issues keeping the two apart?

Edit: Crappy grammar.


Mainly that the NDP dont make any illusion that they'd stick to any kind of budget.. They don't fear going 'in the red' to get their programs up and running. The Liberals on the other hand are the ones that actually balanced the budget after the Conservatives made a mess (which rightly started with the liberals (trudeau) - a different generation of liberals mind you, but the conservatives that followed them (mulroney) didn't seem to make much progress in 'fixing' it, and really only made it worse). There's more to it than that, but thats the one reason i'm not voting NDP...
09/09/2008 07:19:39 AM · #80
Originally posted by K10DGuy:

Originally posted by bucket:

The people that are too blame for the next few miserable years are those that elected Dion at the leadership convention...freakin' party politics elected the most bland leader they could find, not exactly exciting the Canadian public like Obama...


I'd have to agree with this sentiment as well.


I agree as well. Dion has the appeal of a two days-old beached slime eel.
09/09/2008 07:29:46 AM · #81
Originally posted by cpanaioti:

Originally posted by Louis:

Originally posted by cpanaioti:

Originally posted by Louis:

Originally posted by cpanaioti:

Also, the Liberals ignored the Military to such an extent that even when deployed ( or to get deployed ) we have had to rely on other countries to supply the transport. What I see the Conservatives doing is bringing the Military up to speed for the current missions that they have to be engaged in thanks to the Liberals.

What? Are you seriously suggesting it was the Liberals that were gung-ho about making ours a combatant as opposed to a peace-keeping army?


Who was in power when the Afghan mission was taken on?

Liberals. They deployed the army in 2002. That doesn't make them a combatant aggressive party. At worst, it makes them the shills of the Americans, at best, they thought it was the right place to go after 9/11.

You don't think Harper is a military-friendly PM, much moreso than any PM in the last twenty-five or thirty years?


Yes if you consider actually funding the military as being more military-friendly.


The funding came in large part once reports came back on how the CDN troops and the DND intrastructure were ill-prepared for Afghanistan. Nothing would have changed if we would have stayed in our own backyard. Afghanistan was the wake up call, not the Tories (or the Libs if they had been in power once the sh*t hit the fan).
09/09/2008 11:17:03 AM · #82
Originally posted by Beagleboy:

Originally posted by K10DGuy:

Originally posted by bucket:

The people that are too blame for the next few miserable years are those that elected Dion at the leadership convention...freakin' party politics elected the most bland leader they could find, not exactly exciting the Canadian public like Obama...


I'd have to agree with this sentiment as well.


I agree as well. Dion has the appeal of a two days-old beached slime eel.

Egad. Have you seen him speak, and have you seen him outside the Tories' ads? I would venture to say, even as the Liberals themselves say, that the public don't know Dion all that well. Before making value judgments based on his haircut, his glasses, or his Francophone accent, I would hope that people would actually read the party platform, look at the budgetary concerns, and make their decision based on that.

I understand that charisma is a vital part of electioneering, and nobody understands that better than the Conservatives, but please. Anybody who votes based solely on the Party leader's resemblance to obscure French cuisine should probably take the time to wonder why that is.
09/09/2008 11:25:39 AM · #83
Originally posted by Louis:

Originally posted by Beagleboy:

Originally posted by K10DGuy:

Originally posted by bucket:

The people that are too blame for the next few miserable years are those that elected Dion at the leadership convention...freakin' party politics elected the most bland leader they could find, not exactly exciting the Canadian public like Obama...


I'd have to agree with this sentiment as well.


I agree as well. Dion has the appeal of a two days-old beached slime eel.

Egad. Have you seen him speak, and have you seen him outside the Tories' ads? I would venture to say, even as the Liberals themselves say, that the public don't know Dion all that well. Before making value judgments based on his haircut, his glasses, or his Francophone accent, I would hope that people would actually read the party platform, look at the budgetary concerns, and make their decision based on that.

I understand that charisma is a vital part of electioneering, and nobody understands that better than the Conservatives, but please. Anybody who votes based solely on the Party leader's resemblance to obscure French cuisine should probably take the time to wonder why that is.


Really if this is the general perseption of the party and it's leader, there is no one to blame but the party itself... it's their job to counter what the conservatives do, it's their job to make us aware that Dion is the best man for the job (not that this is my view), it's their job to get their platform out there in a way that will appeal to the masses... If they can't do that then maybe they're not the best for the job, weather or not their patform is good
09/09/2008 11:32:02 AM · #84
Originally posted by thegrandwazoo:

Gotcha, I was reading on wiki and the Canadian liberal party & the NDP seem pretty close. What are the major issues keeping the two apart?

For one thing, the NDP are further left than the Liberals. They are closer to Europe's various Social Democratic parties. They are probably the most socially progressive of the three parties -- on most issues. They are not afraid to spend tax dollars, but whether this would result in a significant deficit is unclear from the platform. They are aligned with unionized labour in a way that the other parties could never be. They are closer to the Greens than other parties in environmental issues, and they would probably make life difficult for big business (and maybe even small corporate business) in the form of taxation. To me they smack of making social programs very important and heavily subsidized, but that's only an impression I have; I haven't read the platform for this election as yet.

Also, Layton Twits. You get the sense it's really him Twitting. Harper Twits too, but it's obviously some flunky entering info about new ads and "check out our website" and that kind of bland pap.
09/09/2008 11:35:51 AM · #85
Originally posted by Eyesup:

Originally posted by Louis:

Originally posted by Beagleboy:

Originally posted by K10DGuy:

Originally posted by bucket:

The people that are too blame for the next few miserable years are those that elected Dion at the leadership convention...freakin' party politics elected the most bland leader they could find, not exactly exciting the Canadian public like Obama...


I'd have to agree with this sentiment as well.


I agree as well. Dion has the appeal of a two days-old beached slime eel.

Egad. Have you seen him speak, and have you seen him outside the Tories' ads? I would venture to say, even as the Liberals themselves say, that the public don't know Dion all that well. Before making value judgments based on his haircut, his glasses, or his Francophone accent, I would hope that people would actually read the party platform, look at the budgetary concerns, and make their decision based on that.

I understand that charisma is a vital part of electioneering, and nobody understands that better than the Conservatives, but please. Anybody who votes based solely on the Party leader's resemblance to obscure French cuisine should probably take the time to wonder why that is.


Really if this is the general perseption of the party and it's leader, there is no one to blame but the party itself... it's their job to counter what the conservatives do, it's their job to make us aware that Dion is the best man for the job (not that this is my view), it's their job to get their platform out there in a way that will appeal to the masses... If they can't do that then maybe they're not the best for the job, weather or not their patform is good

And it's your job as a voter to get past the personalities and understand the issues and the platforms. If a voter is content to vote based on the Party leader's presented face, that is a bad voter. And I concede that the majority of voters are so predisposed.

If you are suggesting that, should the Party falter at presenting the image of the Leader irrespective of the soundness of the platform and the quality of the government that would result, and that voters should necessarily vote accordingly, then I think that is a sad state of affairs.
09/09/2008 11:44:10 AM · #86
Originally posted by Louis:

Originally posted by Eyesup:

Originally posted by Louis:

Originally posted by Beagleboy:

Originally posted by K10DGuy:

Originally posted by bucket:

The people that are too blame for the next few miserable years are those that elected Dion at the leadership convention...freakin' party politics elected the most bland leader they could find, not exactly exciting the Canadian public like Obama...


I'd have to agree with this sentiment as well.


I agree as well. Dion has the appeal of a two days-old beached slime eel.

Egad. Have you seen him speak, and have you seen him outside the Tories' ads? I would venture to say, even as the Liberals themselves say, that the public don't know Dion all that well. Before making value judgments based on his haircut, his glasses, or his Francophone accent, I would hope that people would actually read the party platform, look at the budgetary concerns, and make their decision based on that.

I understand that charisma is a vital part of electioneering, and nobody understands that better than the Conservatives, but please. Anybody who votes based solely on the Party leader's resemblance to obscure French cuisine should probably take the time to wonder why that is.


Really if this is the general perseption of the party and it's leader, there is no one to blame but the party itself... it's their job to counter what the conservatives do, it's their job to make us aware that Dion is the best man for the job (not that this is my view), it's their job to get their platform out there in a way that will appeal to the masses... If they can't do that then maybe they're not the best for the job, weather or not their patform is good

And it's your job as a voter to get past the personalities and understand the issues and the platforms. If a voter is content to vote based on the Party leader's presented face, that is a bad voter. And I concede that the majority of voters are so predisposed.

If you are suggesting that, should the Party falter at presenting the image of the Leader irrespective of the soundness of the platform and the quality of the government that would result, and that voters should necessarily vote accordingly, then I think that is a sad state of affairs.


no arguement there... but but then again, if a party, regardless of what their platform is, cannot convince the electorate (studied or not) then how are they going to fair as the government, when they must not only convince the puplic of their policies.. but on occasion the world aswell
09/09/2008 12:03:59 PM · #87
Originally posted by Eyesup:

Originally posted by Louis:

Originally posted by Eyesup:

Originally posted by Louis:

Originally posted by Beagleboy:

Originally posted by K10DGuy:

Originally posted by bucket:

The people that are too blame for the next few miserable years are those that elected Dion at the leadership convention...freakin' party politics elected the most bland leader they could find, not exactly exciting the Canadian public like Obama...


I'd have to agree with this sentiment as well.


I agree as well. Dion has the appeal of a two days-old beached slime eel.

Egad. Have you seen him speak, and have you seen him outside the Tories' ads? I would venture to say, even as the Liberals themselves say, that the public don't know Dion all that well. Before making value judgments based on his haircut, his glasses, or his Francophone accent, I would hope that people would actually read the party platform, look at the budgetary concerns, and make their decision based on that.

I understand that charisma is a vital part of electioneering, and nobody understands that better than the Conservatives, but please. Anybody who votes based solely on the Party leader's resemblance to obscure French cuisine should probably take the time to wonder why that is.


Really if this is the general perseption of the party and it's leader, there is no one to blame but the party itself... it's their job to counter what the conservatives do, it's their job to make us aware that Dion is the best man for the job (not that this is my view), it's their job to get their platform out there in a way that will appeal to the masses... If they can't do that then maybe they're not the best for the job, weather or not their patform is good

And it's your job as a voter to get past the personalities and understand the issues and the platforms. If a voter is content to vote based on the Party leader's presented face, that is a bad voter. And I concede that the majority of voters are so predisposed.

If you are suggesting that, should the Party falter at presenting the image of the Leader irrespective of the soundness of the platform and the quality of the government that would result, and that voters should necessarily vote accordingly, then I think that is a sad state of affairs.


no arguement there... but but then again, if a party, regardless of what their platform is, cannot convince the electorate (studied or not) then how are they going to fair as the government, when they must not only convince the puplic of their policies.. but on occasion the world aswell


Yep.
09/09/2008 12:56:10 PM · #88
Originally posted by Beagleboy:

Originally posted by Eyesup:


no arguement there... but but then again, if a party, regardless of what their platform is, cannot convince the electorate (studied or not) then how are they going to fair as the government, when they must not only convince the puplic of their policies.. but on occasion the world aswell


Yep.

Yes, and that's the sad state of affairs I'm bemoaning: a public more concerned with the presentation of the Leader, or his/her alpha personality, than the substance of the Party.
09/09/2008 01:09:58 PM · #89
Incidentally, uninformed voters more concerned with image than substance will be duped by this kind of shameful nonsense.
09/09/2008 01:33:37 PM · #90
Originally posted by Louis:

Incidentally, uninformed voters more concerned with image than substance will be duped by this kind of shameful nonsense.


Asked what he would like Canadians to learn about him, he said, "Almost everything." - If by the time you're running for Priminister people have to be doing all the learning about you... well... what was he doing up to now?

He said he shares the day-to-day problems of all Canadians such as how to pay the bills at the end of the month. - you would think that a would be priminister (on his type of pay) would be able to keep his own budget in check enough that paying the bills isn't a problem....

the real point is that the Liberal have been asleep at the wheel, I don't want to be just learning about the leader now! I want to be learning about what their party is going to bring to the table over the other... Harper we don't have to learn about, Leyton we don't have to learn about... they'e made sure that we know who they are and what they are all about... dion??? well... I still need to learn 'Almost everything' about him before I(or voters in general) can turn to what he brings to the table.
09/09/2008 01:50:58 PM · #91
Originally posted by Eyesup:

I want to be learning about what their party is going to bring to the table over the other...

And what exactly is preventing you from doing that?
09/09/2008 01:55:21 PM · #92
Originally posted by Louis:

Originally posted by Eyesup:

I want to be learning about what their party is going to bring to the table over the other...

And what exactly is preventing you from doing that?


You'd think you know by now what a Liberal government would do.

Concentrate on Toronto, throw a few bones to the Maritimes and ignore the rest. Same old, same old. No offence to any Maritimers who have been recipients of Liberal bones.

Now if Dion comes up with something different then I might consider it though wouldn't hold my breath for a follow through since it would not likely happen. How much of the red book did Chretien and Martin actually implement?
09/09/2008 02:24:18 PM · #93
Originally posted by Louis:

Originally posted by Eyesup:

I want to be learning about what their party is going to bring to the table over the other...

And what exactly is preventing you from doing that?


Sorry... by 'I' I mean 'average Jo blow Voter' Im trying to speak in general rather than specificaly for myself... though the truth still hold for me, I would rather see Dion in the media telling me about what he's and his party is going to do differen, rather than trying to teach me about himself.

That being said of course it's every voters job to dig for themselves, and form an oppinion of ther own... but let's face it... for the vast majority that doesn't happen, and it's the party's job to make sure they get What They Want in the eye's of the media rather thena one the other party's want... if you can't run an effective election as a party why would I believe you can run the country effectivly?
09/10/2008 11:34:11 AM · #94
Layton's big ass. Also illustrates how kindergarten-like Question Period can be.
09/10/2008 12:03:45 PM · #95
Originally posted by Louis:

Originally posted by thegrandwazoo:

Gotcha, I was reading on wiki and the Canadian liberal party & the NDP seem pretty close. What are the major issues keeping the two apart?

For one thing, the NDP are further left than the Liberals. They are closer to Europe's various Social Democratic parties. They are probably the most socially progressive of the three parties -- on most issues. They are not afraid to spend tax dollars, but whether this would result in a significant deficit is unclear from the platform. They are aligned with unionized labour in a way that the other parties could never be. They are closer to the Greens than other parties in environmental issues, and they would probably make life difficult for big business (and maybe even small corporate business) in the form of taxation. To me they smack of making social programs very important and heavily subsidized, but that's only an impression I have; I haven't read the platform for this election as yet.

Also, Layton Twits. You get the sense it's really him Twitting. Harper Twits too, but it's obviously some flunky entering info about new ads and "check out our website" and that kind of bland pap.


To the casual observer, the NDP under Layton would get on well with Obama Democrats, if it weren't for the incisive concessions these have to make to a far more conservative (American) electorate.
09/10/2008 12:04:05 PM · #96
Originally posted by Louis:

Layton's big ass. Also illustrates how kindergarten-like Question Period can be.


Kindergarten? More like pre-nursery school.

I'm going Green this election. I hope i'm not alone in doing so and also hope one or a dozen upsets occur so that our two big parties stop thinking about themselves as immovable from their positions as the two main forces in Canadian politics. We need to step away from this two party flipflopping of power and start getting new ideas into Parliament from other parties. What harm can it do?

Vote Green!
09/10/2008 12:07:52 PM · #97
Originally posted by Jac:

What harm can it do?

The harm is that your Green vote will remove a vote from the Liberals and give it to the Conservatives. Is your Montreal riding usually Bloc or Liberal?
09/10/2008 12:20:25 PM · #98
Originally posted by Louis:

Originally posted by Jac:

What harm can it do?

The harm is that your Green vote will remove a vote from the Liberals and give it to the Conservatives. Is your Montreal riding usually Bloc or Liberal?


My riding is, unfortunately, staunchly conservative. To the point that if you even mention you're voting against the conservatives, people look at you angrily and start whispering about you behind your back.

Other than a massive orwellian re-education program, there's nothing that will change this either. So I have no qualms about voting NDP. I just do it secretly on a local scale. My vote isn't giving a vote to a conservative like it would be in ridings that are far more iffy.
09/10/2008 12:42:37 PM · #99
Originally posted by Louis:

Originally posted by Jac:

What harm can it do?

The harm is that your Green vote will remove a vote from the Liberals and give it to the Conservatives. Is your Montreal riding usually Bloc or Liberal?


It's actually removing the vote from both Liberal and Conservative.

If we are to get away from voting against something rather than for, this is what needs to be done.


09/10/2008 12:46:33 PM · #100
A question about the debate.

Once upon a time, for a party to partake in the debate they had to have official party status in the House of Commons.

Has this changed? Is this what the Greens first challenge was about (previous election)?

If it hasn't changed then the Greens have no leg to stand on, they don't have any type of status in the House as they don't have a seat.

If it has changed, then what's the issue? Taking away precious time from the other participants as the time would have to be divvied up in smaller chunks? Why not just request the networks to extend the broadcast?


Pages:  
Current Server Time: 08/06/2025 02:24:18 PM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/06/2025 02:24:18 PM EDT.