CBC Vote Compass 2011
Lemmy @ Sun Mar 27, 2011 6:22 pm
ShepherdsDog ShepherdsDog:
seems to me it was the left that brought up the topic last time round. They were trying to use it as a scare tactic...the big bad evil Conservatives were going to roll back the rights of women if they gained power. The Conservatives responded, 'no, we aren't.'
No, no, no. The "last time round" was the Conservatives' announcement that foreign aid would be cut if it was being used to perform Third World abortions. The "round" before that was the right-wing fundies getting uppity over Morgentaler's appointment to the Order of Canada. The natural reaction from the progressives is to ask if there is an anti-abortion agenda. Kudos to Harper for saying "no", but it was still his side that brought it up.
Khar @ Sun Mar 27, 2011 7:21 pm
The fundamentalists do not represent the Conservative party, and there were people who were cheering the moment Morgentaler got into the Order of Canada in addition to the criticisms -- both sides immediately reacted, and while Harper said that he did not support a divisive placement into the Order of Canada, he did not condemn it either.
On the other issue mentioned (which played an integral part of the affair Sheperd mentioned), I'm going to play Devil's Advocate in large part because I cannot find a full list of what lost funding, when only 11 of the 140 CIDA-led "democracy groups" (out of all the groups they fund) have mentioned losses. What's worse is that I cannot find information about the effectiveness of these agencies either, or even where CIDA's money went overall for the 2009-2010 year, since it's not up yet. I am very uncomfortable discussing that until the facts come out in some form, whether budget changes or effectiveness reports, and so forth, since the only people who said it was for supporting abortions that they lost funding was the groups who lost funding (and, of course, the opposition, which should, since they are there to call the government into account). This was denied, with reasons stating budget cuts and questions of effectiveness of the organizations mentioned in the article.
I think advocacy for abortions is important, and I wish we had a strong body or a good amount of funding available in some form to make sure there was political pressure to make abortions legal (and hence, safer) in more countries. It could be that this cut did only happen to parties supporting womens abortions in developing countries but until we see those values we simply can't put this to rest. Admittedly, I feel the entire situation was political and polarized in the media -- the articles at the time were worded more along the lines of "oh my dear lord, someone said fuck" and "clearly this is just another part of the hidden agenda" then actually discussing the issue at hand. Much like a lot of articles on the G-8 and G-20 meetings, what was important, what messages were given and such were overshadowed and didn't get the face time they deserved, or Canadians needed, in the media.
Again, I'm playing Devil's Advocate a bit here.
dino_bobba_renno @ Mon Mar 28, 2011 8:33 am
andyt andyt:
If you click on the CPC icon in the graph, you can go thru each question and see how they answered it.
Well, I finally got into the survey today and I took andyt’s advice and clicked on the icons to see what the stated party positions were. I found most of the Conservative markings to be fair for the most part but when I checked the Liberal positions I found what I would deem to be some discrepancies. Maybe if some of the Liberals in the crowd here could comment on them.
*Just a note, my replies weren’t based on my personal beliefs, I was just trying to get the most sever “Conservative” reading I could just to see where would it put me on the graph.
**It is not my intent to bash any party here, I just don’t agree with where some parties have been placed on the graph supplied by the CBC. I’m just looking for discussion on that topic so don’t get your knickers in a knot and go around negging people just because you misinterpreted the point I’m trying to get at (Lemmy).
To me it seems that the Liberals have been advocating for a withdrawal of our forces after the 2011 date. Iggy, who in my mind hasn’t been overly clear on this even stated a while ago that continuing in a training role would be difficult without a proper replacement for Canadian troops by the NATO allies who would stabilize the country enough to carry out that training (something I would have to agree with him on). Now that in no way is an endorsement to pull troops out right away, in fact most calls for an immediate pull out have come from the NDP but the Liberals have been pushing for a firm pull out date and have been for the most part not been overly supportive of a continued role. For that I would say their party position should have been marked as “somewhat” disagree” not “strongly disagree”.
I’m not sure how they scored a “strongly disagree” on the carbon tax question. Did that idea get thrown out with Dion? If it’s a non issue (i.e. its not in the current platform) then why did the conservatives get scored on issues that are not in their platform?
Ok, this one mystifies me, when your Leader is running around campaigning on a Federal Child Care plan how do you score “neither agree nor disagree”?
Again, when your party is advocating lowering the required weeks to access EI how do you score a “neither agree nor disagree”?
Now this one I can kind of reason in my mind but I still don’t feel it is correctly answered to correlate with the parties position. I believe the Liberals position has been that any type of tax they would introduce would be offset by job creation or something to that effect which would nullify any additional costs placed on consumers. Personally I don’t think they should have been scored in the “neither agree nor disagree” but rather the “some what agree” category.
As I mentioned I didn’t feel that the Conservative questions were inappropriately answered but I did notice that they positions seemed to correlate more with what would be considered “traditional values” as opposed to the party’s actual platform. In my eyes that same standard isn’t applied on the Liberal positions. Thoughts?
Guy_Fawkes @ Mon Mar 28, 2011 8:45 am
I think it was in an effort to manipulate where the parties place on the chart, so that people will feel better about where they place. As with any pre-election poll, the results are bollocks.
dino_bobba_renno @ Mon Mar 28, 2011 8:52 am
Guy_Fawkes Guy_Fawkes:
I think it was in an effort to manipulate where the parties place on the chart, so that people will feel better about where they place. As with any pre-election poll, the results are bollocks.
Exactly! While this is more of "just for the fun of it" xercise I think it was their intent to make most people believe that they are closer to the Liberal possition than they really are and to portray the Conservatives as being a"extreme" right of center party.
OnTheIce @ Mon Mar 28, 2011 9:21 am
![[B-o]](./images/smilies/drinkup.gif "Drink up")
raydan @ Mon Mar 28, 2011 9:24 am
Québec not important!!!
Fuck you, OnTheIce... 
Lemmy @ Mon Mar 28, 2011 10:04 am
dino_bobba_renno dino_bobba_renno:
**It is not my intent to bash any party here, I just don’t agree with where some parties have been placed on the graph supplied by the CBC. I’m just looking for discussion on that topic so don’t get your knickers in a knot and go around negging people just because you misinterpreted the point I’m trying to get at (Lemmy).
I've plus repped you in the past. Have you me? Nope.
dino_bobba_renno @ Mon Mar 28, 2011 10:12 am
Lemmy Lemmy:
dino_bobba_renno dino_bobba_renno:
**It is not my intent to bash any party here, I just don’t agree with where some parties have been placed on the graph supplied by the CBC. I’m just looking for discussion on that topic so don’t get your knickers in a knot and go around negging people just because you misinterpreted the point I’m trying to get at (Lemmy).
I've plus repped you in the past. Have you me? Nope.
I just did, happy now?
The reason I probbly haven't repped you has more to with the fact that I haven't been on that much in the last year, not for any personal reason
Timetrvlr @ Mon Mar 28, 2011 10:53 am
I'll admit it, I'm to the left in that I believe that Canada's government should serve the needs of the Canadian people, not the corporations and not the war-mongers.
All of my answers were far to the Left on their chart but they placed me in the Green camp. Not me,I'd never vote for any candidate sponsored by Elizabeth May!
BartSimpson @ Mon Mar 28, 2011 11:19 am
I did my part to make Montreal skew to the right. 
ttruscott @ Mon Mar 28, 2011 1:09 pm
They cook the results....
dino_bobba_renno @ Mon Mar 28, 2011 1:11 pm
ttruscott ttruscott:
They cook the results....
I hope they serve them with gravy and veggies
dino_bobba_renno @ Mon Mar 28, 2011 1:49 pm
Lemmy Lemmy:
Unsound Unsound:
Seems that it most often comes up when lefties try to scare people with their whole "Harper has a hidden agenda" schtick.
Bullshit. It's ancient history to everyone but Conservatives and it's they who keep bringing it back up.
Harper can’t be trusted on abortion, death penalty: Liberals
$1:
Liberal House leader David McGuinty said Harper’s social beliefs are only being held in check through a minority government.
"I don’t think Mr. Harper can be trusted on significant issues like abortion, capital punishment and for that matter, even gun control," he told reporters.
"I don’t think Mr. Harper can be trusted on significant issues like abortion, capital punishment and for that matter, even gun control," he told reporters.
http://www.torontosun.com/news/canada/2011/01/19/16946951.html
Dion raises abortion issue
$1:
Stephane Dion has challenged the prime minister to clarify his view on abortion, threatening to reignite the debate as Canada careens towards an election.
http://www.canada.com/story_print.html?id=5feda77d-3abf-416c-89ac-d787a35766a7&sponsor=
Liberals raise 'hidden agenda' fears over Tory abortion stance
$1:
Mr. Ignatieff had already back in February staked out a relatively bold position on the abortion debate. After Mr. Harper announced that he would champion at the G8 an initiative to improve maternal and infant health in the developing world, the Liberals immediately demanded it include funding abortions; predicting it wouldn’t, Mr. Ignatieff suggested the Conservatives were following the playbook of former U.S. president George Bush, who cancelled foreign aid for abortions.
http://www.nationalpost.com/news/Liberals+raise+hidden+agenda+fears+over+Tory+abortion+stance/2958274/story.html
Ignatieff pokes abortion issue in search for a few votes
$1:
Mr. Harper didn't say a word about abortion in his proposal. It wasn't raised as an issue. The Conservatives, in four years in power, have not shown a scintilla of interest in unleashing the demons of abortion. So, just to make sure no one tried to play games with such a delicate matter, Mr. Ignatieff did it himself, bringing it up in front of a bunch of reporters while surrounded by members of his caucus.
http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fullcomment/archive/2010/02/03/ignatieff-pokes-abortion-issue-in-search-for-a-few-votes.aspx
Will Michael Ignatieff's abortion gambit work?
$1:
As crass as it sounds, there is a potential side benefit for the Liberals in stirring this up.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/ottawa-notebook/will-michael-ignatieffs-abortion-gambit-work/article1458312/
Conservative bill closes door on fetal rights (CBC)
$1:
““What is on our agenda is being tough on crime and punishing criminals and what is not on our agenda is re-opening a debate on abortion. That clarity I think is helpful for Canadians, especially as we go into a period where they might be forced to make a choice.” - Kory Teneycke
“I think it is a cynical pre-election ploy to hide the fact that Mr. Harper has never publicly stated where he publicly stands on a woman’s constitutional right to control her own body,” said Marc Leblanc.
“I think it is a cynical pre-election ploy to hide the fact that Mr. Harper has never publicly stated where he publicly stands on a woman’s constitutional right to control her own body,” said Marc Leblanc.
http://www.canada.com/topics/news/natio%20...%20e442dedc58
Prime Minister Harper: No abortion law even if Conservatives win majority
$1:
CBC’s Peter Mansbridge asked Harper a number of questions about what would be different if the Conservatives attained a majority government.
Mansbridge asked, “Would you reopen the abortion issue?” Harper replied, “No, no, I’ve spent my political career trying to stay out of that issue.”
Mansbridge asked, “Would you reopen the abortion issue?” Harper replied, “No, no, I’ve spent my political career trying to stay out of that issue.”
http://www.lsn.ca/news/prime-minister-h%20...%20win-majori
Liberal women join to denounce Harper on abortion
$1:
Minister of State (Public Health) Carolyn Bennett, joined former Liberal cabinet ministers on Tuesday to denounce Harper over his stance on abortion and the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/200%20...%2040608.html
Lemmy @ Mon Mar 28, 2011 2:22 pm
Totally disingenuous, as ALL of those stories are REACTIONS, not "bringing it up". 