Canada Kicks Ass
Ignatieff threatens June election

REPLY

Previous  1  2  3  4  Next



herbie @ Sun May 03, 2009 9:27 pm

RUEZ RUEZ:
kenmore kenmore:
So whats your point.. there are lots of people who work or get educated outside the country that does't make them less Canadian.. That argument doesn't wash.. its a tory story.. but hey.. he will chew harper up and spit him out! can you say liberal majority? practice it..

What I can say is Kenmore the hypocrite. You always accuse Harper of being an American wannabe, yet he spent his life in Canada not the USA.


Because a Canadian who wants to be an American is worse than someone who just wants their money....

   



ridenrain @ Sun May 03, 2009 9:38 pm

Iffy spent more time away from Canada than he did in Canada.. and he's now back to lead us? He missed everything that made us who we are today.

This one person one vote thing came way too late.. first Dion now this erant professor..

   



romanP @ Mon May 04, 2009 12:37 am

Arctic_Menace Arctic_Menace:
If we have another election, I'm voting Green party. >_<


Why would you vote for anyone else? Well, okay, there's the Marijuana Party, and the Rhino Party, both of which I will gladly vote for if I can and things are not squaring up reasonably with the Green Party. If that happens, things are going really badly!

But let's be serious. The Green Party is the only truly grassroots party in Canada that is organised enough to some day be elected, and if they don't let the power go to their heads, they could change the face of politics in this country for the (much) better. They are currently the only party that are not just in the race to win for the sake of winning.

   



romanP @ Mon May 04, 2009 12:45 am

Lemmy Lemmy:
ridenrain ridenrain:
Problem is the Greens are just greeenwashed Liberals.


who cares? They're the only "third party" that can make any waves. If the Commies or the Libertarians or the So-Creds or the Christian Family Coalition or the Natural Law Party were in the same position, they'd get my vote. My vote will be an ANTI-LIB, ANTI-CON, ANTI-NDP vote. I don't much care what the 4th party's political platform is, I'm voting for them.


Really? You'd vote for the scummy truly lunatic fringe (including the same people who aren't voting Conservative because Stephen Harper isn't socially conservative enough for them) just to show the bigger scum just how scummy they are? I don't think the results of a win from that would be favourable.

I think you'd be better off campaigning yourself for an independant seat.

If you're going to vote for the underdog, don't just do it out of spite. Do it because you actually think the underdog can make a valuable contribution to the progress of our country.

   



romanP @ Mon May 04, 2009 1:00 am

Gunnair Gunnair:
Lemmy Lemmy:
ridenrain ridenrain:
Problem is the Greens are just greeenwashed Liberals.


who cares? They're the only "third party" that can make any waves. If the Commies or the Libertarians or the So-Creds or the Christian Family Coalition or the Natural Law Party were in the same position, they'd get my vote. My vote will be an ANTI-LIB, ANTI-CON, ANTI-NDP vote. I don't much care what the 4th party's political platform is, I'm voting for them.


You forgot the Rhinos...


Personally, the Rhino Party are the only ones that get an exception to the rule of what I wrote in my previous post. If the Rhino Party ever becomes anything more than a novelty, it should speak volumes about our political system and how it failed. You may all think they're just a funny joke, but you have to understand it's a VERY SERIOUS funny joke. If they were to win an election tomorrow, our country would not go down the toilet, it would go down a rabbit hole.

The sole fact that the Rhino Party has been revived should send up huge red flags about the current failings of politics in Canada. That is not to say that they should not be allowed to be a political party, because politics without a few clowns would be a travesty, but rather that their existence as a political party is a barometer of the times we live in.

That is to say, you should only vote for the Rhinos out of spite for bad politics, because their sole purpose is to make a mockery of bad politics. In the extremely unlikely event that the leader of the Rhino Party should ever become Prime Minister, if you helped that happen, you better be laughing.

And that is what I have to say about the Rhino Party.

   



sandorski @ Mon May 04, 2009 1:52 am

RUEZ RUEZ:
kenmore kenmore:
So whats your point.. there are lots of people who work or get educated outside the country that does't make them less Canadian.. That argument doesn't wash.. its a tory story.. but hey.. he will chew harper up and spit him out! can you say liberal majority? practice it..

What I can say is Kenmore the hypocrite. You always accuse Harper of being an American wannabe, yet he spent his life in Canada not the USA.


..and...

   



Bruce_the_vii @ Mon May 04, 2009 2:33 am

Gunnair Gunnair:
Bruce_the_vii Bruce_the_vii:
ridenrain ridenrain:
Whatever it is you can bet it was once owned by BC, Sask or Alberta.


Reading the newspapers I note BC has gone from a have province to a receiver of transfer payments. And, opps a dazy, so did Ontario. But Saskatchewan went the other way, to a have province. I've lost track of wether or not BC recovered. I doubt it. Meanwhile in Ottawa they could care a less, it's party on.


$1:
During this fiscal year, the federal government will distribute $14.2-billion to every province except British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan and Newfoundland and Labrador. This is the first year Newfoundland is not receiving equalization since the program was introduced in 1957.


http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20090413.wontario0414/BNStory/Front/home

When did BC turn?


Thanks for that Gunnair. Sometimes it's hard to keep up with these things.

   



needy @ Mon May 04, 2009 3:33 am

Bring on an election, it will be the end of another sub par liberal leader. We really don't need another election at this time. This will be about as popular as the proposed coalition was.

   



Lemmy @ Mon May 04, 2009 7:09 am

romanP romanP:
Really? You'd vote for the scummy truly lunatic fringe (including the same people who aren't voting Conservative because Stephen Harper isn't socially conservative enough for them) just to show the bigger scum just how scummy they are? I don't think the results of a win from that would be favourable.


No. By nature of being #4, the Greens AREN'T "lunatic fringe". They're a credible threat.

romanP romanP:
I think you'd be better off campaigning yourself for an independant seat.


I'm an honest man. I wouldn't have a chance of winning.

romanP romanP:
If you're going to vote for the underdog, don't just do it out of spite. Do it because you actually think the underdog can make a valuable contribution to the progress of our country.


That's EXACTLY what I'm doing. The "valuable contribution" that the Greens can make in THIS election, is to take 15% of the popular vote and show the Cons and Libs that they need to change their ways. It's not spite.

**edits for proper citation

   



RUEZ @ Mon May 04, 2009 7:12 am

herbie herbie:
Because a Canadian who wants to be an American is worse than someone who just wants their money....

And of course you can prove Harper wants to be American, and Iggy just want thier money?

   



uwish @ Mon May 04, 2009 7:26 am

Harper may want to be an American but Iggy is already one.

What happened to all the Liberal American bashing?? now all of a sudden it's just okay to have your new leader be something the party despises?

interesting....

   



dino_bobba_renno @ Mon May 04, 2009 8:23 am

One would think it would be pretty hard to use the old "he wants us to be more American" line when you consider that a) Iggy has spent most of his adult living in America and b) Iggy is trying to portray some sort of kindred spirit thing with Obama. The Lib's should just drop the whole anti American bit.

Any ways, on a different note, how prepared are the Libs financially for another election? Last I heard they're still having difficulties paying off their debts from the last leadership race and the last election. IMO the Liberals would be pretty hard pressed to compete with the Conservatives in an election with out money to drive their campaign.

And on the topic of campaigns, where the hell is the Liberals policy with which to go into an election? Sure they can go on about EI but they will hard pressed to make this a central plank if they start drawing criticism for being the ones who originally reformed the system to what it is now. Something I'm sure a well financed Conservative campaign will be quick to pick up on and run with.

Personally I think the Liberals aren't prepared to run an effective campaign and I think they themselves know it. It would fool hearty on their part to try to turn EI into a lone issue by which to trigger an unwanted election. Not to mention that I don't think the Canadian public is familar enough with Iggy yet to feel comfortable handing over the keys to Sussex to him with out question.

   



Streaker @ Mon May 04, 2009 9:53 am

A bigger problem for the Libs than money is that they will need help from the Bloc and NPD to bring down the government, even though they have suddenly become a big threat to those two parties.

   



dino_bobba_renno @ Mon May 04, 2009 10:02 am

Streaker Streaker:
A bigger problem for the Libs than money is that they will need help from the Bloc and NPD to bring down the government, even though they have suddenly become a big threat to those two parties.

Good point :wink:

   



romanP @ Mon May 04, 2009 10:15 am

Lemmy Lemmy:
romanP romanP:
Really? You'd vote for the scummy truly lunatic fringe (including the same people who aren't voting Conservative because Stephen Harper isn't socially conservative enough for them) just to show the bigger scum just how scummy they are? I don't think the results of a win from that would be favourable.


No. By nature of being #4, the Greens AREN'T "lunatic fringe". They're a credible threat.


I'm aware. That's why I continue to vote for them. I'm saying it's probably not a good idea to vote for a party just because they're number four. Number four could also be the Put Cyanide in Children's Toys Party.

$1:
romanP romanP:
If you're going to vote for the underdog, don't just do it out of spite. Do it because you actually think the underdog can make a valuable contribution to the progress of our country.


That's EXACTLY what I'm doing. The "valuable contribution" that the Greens can make in THIS election, is to take 15% of the popular vote and show the Cons and Libs that they need to change their ways. It's not spite.


I don't think you understand what I'm trying to say. I'm talking about a valuable contribution in terms of legislation, financial responsibility and social progress (ie long term goals), not the ability to accept a large number of votes (short term gains).

Anyone who is number four and organised enough could also do some real damage to this country if they were to win a significant number of seats just because people are getting irritated with numbers one, two and three. That is the kind of condition under which I would start voting for the Rhino Party.

   



REPLY

Previous  1  2  3  4  Next