[Canada] Canadian Politics Redux

[crazy canuck]

I'm gonna let other tell me whom to vote for as well. But not Languish.

I go here:

http://www.strategicvoting.ca/

That doesn't help a voter trying to decide between the Conservatives and another option

[Josephus]

I'm gonna let other tell me whom to vote for as well. But not Languish.

I go here:

http://www.strategicvoting.ca/

That doesn't help a voter trying to decide between the Conservatives and another option

Always go with the other option.

[crazy canuck]

 

[Barrister]

I'm gonna let other tell me whom to vote for as well. But not Languish.

I go here:

http://www.strategicvoting.ca/

That doesn't help a voter trying to decide between the Conservatives and another option

Right is right.  Always remember that.

[crazy canuck]

Latest Nano poll shows the Liberals surging, NDP continuing their Josephus trajectory and the Conservatives standing still.  What effect will the TPP have ?

[Rex Francorum]

This poll puts Liberals in the lead...there's still hope

http://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/election/liberals-tories-in-tight-race-ndp-support-falls-to-election-low-in-latest-tracking-1.2591615

Sorry, I am allergic to the Liberal party.

[viper37]

Can't stand the thought of Prime Minister Trudeau, again.

[Malthus]

And then I hear more about the Conservative drug policy.

I am very conflicted.


Edit: so let's try this.  Languishites, give your best arguments for why I should vote for the party of your choice.  Don't try to appeal to my own economic self interest.  My vote will go to the party who has the best policies for the Country.

Heh. I'm conflicted too. Here's my best shot for the Conservatives:

(1) The Cons are wrong on all sorts of stuff - that latest Terrorism citizenship thingie, the Niquab thingie, "old stock Canadians", etc. However, all that stuff, wrong and annoying as it is, is basically cosmetic - its stuff they have dreamed up specifically for electioneering, and even if it isn't, it is mostly about symbolic issues, or matters of tone (the Cons look sadly like pandering to nativist Canadian bigotry). It is unlikely to have much actual effect on the country.

(2) In contrast, the Cons are right about some (literally) meat and potatoes issues - namely, trade policy. The NDP is saying they won't even honour any treaty signed now, in the election period. More free trade will certainly gore some oxes (particularly, supply management for milk), but those oxes are long overdue for goring - and not getting on board would be a major disaster, economically. The Cons and Libs both recognize this (allegedly), but the NDP doesn't. This makes voting NDP a bad idea.

(3) Vote Liberal, and you get Justin. That's one area where Con attacks have substance - he's simply not PM material. When he talks, you can see the strings working. Harber's a wannabe dictator and a bastard, no error - Justin looks like a pleasant fellow. But can Justin make difficult decisions on his own? I suggest that he can't (or at least, if he goes 'off script', he's likely to screw things up).

(4) Therefore, the Cons have drawbacks that are mostly in issues that are relatively symbolic and minor (although infuriating), while the NDP and Libs have drawbacks in areas that are major and substantive (trade and leadership, respectively).

(5) What gives pause in this analysis is that the Cons simply seem worn out and increasingly prone to that corruption that always overtakes Canadian parties in office too long. 

[crazy canuck]

I am looking at it in a similar way.  Although I put more importance on the matters that are symbolic because I think it does give a idea of how day to day decisions are made.  The answer my local Liberal Candidate for the Justin issue seems to be that under a Liberal government MPs will be given more power.  We have heard this before but I don't think Justin is the kind of leader who can impose his will on his caucus so it might actually happen this time around.

The NDP have lost any chance of getting my vote by objecting to the TPP without reading it.

Its between the Liberals and Conservatives.

[Josephus]

My mother just phoned me and told me she's thinking about voting for Harper. I need to straighten her out.

[viper37]

From Toronto:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=14&v=oGiN-_6Qk_E

In all honesty, lots of people probably answered right but he didn't include them.  It's humor, after all.

[Admiral Yi]

I liked the Kenny Rogers response.

[viper37]

(1) The Cons are wrong on all sorts of stuff - that latest Terrorism citizenship thingie, the Niquab thingie, "old stock Canadians", etc. However, all that stuff, wrong and annoying as it is, is basically cosmetic - its stuff they have dreamed up specifically for electioneering, and even if it isn't, it is mostly about symbolic issues, or matters of tone (the Cons look sadly like pandering to nativist Canadian bigotry). It is unlikely to have much actual effect on the country.

I partly disagree with that assessment.  Yes, they are symbolic issues.  But you need to draw a line in the sand, otherwise religious extremists always push the boundaries further.  Imho, the Conservatives don't go far enough, but I can't expect more from this party.
The Libs are even worst, and the NDP will do whatever Mulcair thinks will gain him votes.  He almost backtracked on the niqab issue last Sunday (technically, the tv show was recorded on wednesday).  Instead of seeing the exercices of a free choice (it is not), he is now "uncomfortable with the wearing of the niqab".  He'll say just about anything to get votes, even reprising the old Liberal practice of having two discourse, one in French for Quebec, one in English for the ROC.

(4) Therefore, the Cons have drawbacks that are mostly in issues that are relatively symbolic and minor (although infuriating), while the NDP and Libs have drawbacks in areas that are major and substantive (trade and leadership, respectively).

They have a huge drawback on science, and shutting down scientific speech.  That his a huge bother to me, especially the budget cuts in fundamental research.  However, such cuts began with the Liberals, the Cons just pushed them further.

(5) What gives pause in this analysis is that the Cons simply seem worn out and increasingly prone to that corruption that always overtakes Canadian parties in office too long. 

The Liberals are already prone to corruption, they don't even need more power to become more corrupt.  The NDP depends on the big unions for their power and they'll do anything to please them.  They even started before the Cons on the illegal spending and use of public funds for their party.  On this aspect, they are exactly the same as the Liberals.

While it does not matter to you guys at all, the other big reason I can not vote Liberal is because they believe in an extremely centralized Canada.  The NDP has given no indication they are really different.  Centralization has been bad for Canada.  Under Liberal rule, there were two independance referendums (0 threat under various Conservative governments, that's not a coincidence), there were regional parties, and fringe independantist movements in the west, Alberta, namely.  All their rule has contributed to is the fracture of Canada.
The Cons are far from perfect, they're just miles ahead of the LPC (that's not setting the bar very high).  Besides, another Trudeau for Canada would be a disaster, we all know it, even Josephus, even if he doesn't want to admit it.

[viper37]

[crazy canuck]

From Toronto:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=14&v=oGiN-_6Qk_E

In all honesty, lots of people probably answered right but he didn't include them.  It's humor, after all.

Funny stuff.  The two girls were outside Ryerson.  hopefully not studying journalism...