Canadian Election 2011

[sandorski]

It's rather difficult to assess the centrism of Harper. Mainly because he's had no choice in the matter. In the Old days, PCs and Libs were definitely both Centrist with slight Right/Left lean.

 

[Imp]

He is, and the Conservatives have been moving more to the centre in recent years. Compared to the GOP, the Conservatives are downright liberal.

Harper makes a lot of stupid errors that get him into trouble. Still, I think Canada has been far better off. We weathered the recession better than most countries. Plus Canada has a much higher standing in the world than under the previous government. He's one of the few leaders to continually speak against rights abuses in the People's Republic of China. Afghanistan has been a huge boon to us on the international stage as well. When the Liberals sent them in, they didn't even have the proper equipment.

Iggy on the other hand is a typical tax and spend liberal. Us in Ontario have weathered eight years under the worst premier in resent memory. Statistically, not just my opinion. His brother is one of Iggy's right hand men. They're both painted with the same brush. It worries me that they would even entertain the possibility of allying with the Bloc. The Liberals support a weak, wishy washy foreign policy and an elitist, anti-libertarian domestic policy. Canadians like them because they tell them what to do without rocking the boat. They've always been a fair weather party.

Both the Liberals and NDP have very costly platforms. The country cannot afford them. Not now, not in the foreseeable future. Everyone knows tax revenues are forecast to drop as the boomers retire. Instituting multi-billion dollar programs that only benefit a minority of people is downright foolish and irresponsible. That's what got Portugal, Ireland, and Greece into so much trouble. Spending now means serious austerity measures later. Maintaining the status quo is at least somewhat sustainable.

Where to start...

I don't really see what Harper did to help Canada's economy. Last I read, IIRC, Chretien (elitest Liberal) was the one who instituted most of the major bank regulations that helped them weather the recession. Otherwise, I don't see what he did that helped boost our economy or make it better. Everyone and their mother did stimulus spending worldwide.

Canada on the world stage. Yes, Harper has made a name for us, now we're like the U.S. minus any power and influence. We don't even have enough friends to vote for us to get on the Security Council, instead borderline bankrupt Portugal gets a seat. Taking a stand against China but incapable of doing anything. Hosting the Dalai Lama to piss off China, a huge trading partner. Harper's antagonized a lot of people. It's a stand alright, but with a population of 30 million, a military of ~100k (85k full-time?), what's the point except to play politics?

Tax and spend Liberal? Harper lowers corporate taxes, spends over a billion on 2 summits, lavishes a conservative riding with perks. Liberals have done the same, but let's not pretend the Conservatives are any better.

Ontario's McGuinty is the worst ever? Worse than Mr. Harris, the guy who resigned to "be with family", downloading social services to municipalities, along with other programs. Mass cull of government employees then hire them back for double as consultants? Selling the 407 for pocket change? Hospital closures, healthcare lay offs? Cancellation of the Eglinton subway (dirty Toronto...)? McGuinty the worst? Really?

Allying with the Bloc? Harper proposed the same thing in 2004. His buddy Duceppe remembers that, and it was brought up a lot just before the government was brought down.

 

[dennilfloss]

Stephen Harper & Tony Clement remind me of Prince John and the Sheriff of NOTT.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8DCneMP6YRM

 

[ShawnD1]

People don't realize the Liberals and Conservatives are +/- 2% in their spending plans. People also don't realize that the government actually has relatively little impact on the economy in Canada (unless they suddenly change government spending/taxes by like 20%).

Actually that kinda is the difference for some of these parties. NDP wants to raise corporate tax from something like 17% to 19%. That really is a 10-20% increase. Before your company was paying $17 tax and now pay $19 tax, $2 change / $17 original * 100 = 12% tax hike.

Conservatives are pushing more toward US style law enforcement. The amount of money the US spends on law enforcement is unbelievable. That would easily jump the cost of law enforcement by 20%.

On a provincial level, Alberta's healthcare was slashed by more than 20% when king Ralph made a serious effort to balance the budget without raising taxes.



So yes, the varying governments really do make huge 20% changes to things. It really does matter who wins elections. Since Harper came to power, the national sales tax dropped by 29%. Going from 7% to 5% is a 29% decrease.

 

[sdifox]

That 2% drop in GST got us where we are today. I am all for tax cuts if they are financially viable.

 

[tokie]

Actually that kinda is the difference for some of these parties. NDP wants to raise corporate tax from something like 17% to 19%. That really is a 10-20% increase. Before your company was paying $17 tax and now pay $19 tax, $2 change / $17 original * 100 = 12% tax hike.

Conservatives are pushing more toward US style law enforcement. The amount of money the US spends on law enforcement is unbelievable. That would easily jump the cost of law enforcement by 20%.

On a provincial level, Alberta's healthcare was slashed by more than 20% when king Ralph made a serious effort to balance the budget without raising taxes.



So yes, the varying governments really do make huge 20% changes to things. It really does matter who wins elections. Since Harper came to power, the national sales tax dropped by 29%. Going from 7% to 5% is a 29% decrease.

Those aren't the percentages I mean. I was talking about changing the path of government spending/taxing by ~20%. The government has revenues of ~$220 billion, and a similar amount in taxes. Changes in spending/taxing of $30 billion or more would be significant. Harper's GST cut got somewhat close to that, but still not quite.

The way you quoted the 20% would be a net difference of ~$5 billion. $5 billion is peanuts compared to the $1.1 trillion Canadian economy.

 

[Martin]

I rather liked the last question of the debate, it seemed to say all you really need to know.

Q: You've all pledged to continue increasing healthcare funding by 6%, 2-3 times faster than the rate of economic growth. How will you pay for that?

Layton: We have to choose. Raise corporate taxes, no superprisons, spend on healthcare and other social programs.

Ignatieff: We have to choose. Stop cutting corporate taxes, no superprisons, no ferrari jets, spend on healthcare and other social programs.

Harper: We don't have to choose. We will lower taxes, spend on healthcare, spend on jets, spend on prisons, and we'll have a surplus.



Honest question to Conservatives here: Which one of these is the adult answer to the question?

 

[desy]

Considering health is only 9% of the budget because its a PROVINCIAL responsibility same as education, I don't think it would be very hard to increase it 6% by redirecting funds.
That would be 1/2 of 1% of the total Federal budget to get it 9.5%
http://www.fin.gc.ca/tax-impot/2010/html-eng.asp

 

[Imp]

I rather liked the last question of the debate, it seemed to say all you really need to know.

Q: You've all pledged to continue increasing healthcare funding by 6%, 2-3 times faster than the rate of economic growth. How will you pay for that?

Layton: We have to choose. Raise corporate taxes, no superprisons, spend on healthcare and other social programs.

Ignatieff: We have to choose. Stop cutting corporate taxes, no superprisons, no ferrari jets, spend on healthcare and other social programs.

Harper: We don't have to choose. We will lower taxes, spend on healthcare, spend on jets, spend on prisons, and we'll have a surplus.



Honest question to Conservatives here: Which one of these is the adult answer to the question?

But but but Harper stood his ground like a leader... I was watching CBC for "regular joe" reactions, and that was one of the comments. The young'uns apparently love Layton too. I like Layton , I just don't care for his ideology. He'll pull a David Miller, and while Miller had vision, he was your dirty "tax and spend Liberal" (pretty sure he was "NDP", way further left...).

 

[ShawnD1]

But but but Harper stood his ground like a leader... I was watching CBC for "regular joe" reactions, and that was one of the comments. The young'uns apparently love Layton too. I like Layton , I just don't care for his ideology. He'll pull a David Miller, and while Miller had vision, he was your dirty "tax and spend Liberal" (pretty sure he was "NDP", way further left...).

Everyone knows that a real leader never changes their position as new information is available. What is this evolution nonsense you speak of?

 

[sdifox]

ahahahahahahaha


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qItqs4HO6hc&feature=player_embedded#at=107

 

[iGas]

ahahahahahahaha


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qItqs4HO6hc&feature=player_embedded#at=107

Awesome!

Stephen Harper steals speech from Starwars "TheDarkSide"

 

[dennilfloss]

I have to tweet that video. It's AWESOME!

 

[sdifox]

more lulz

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/...-asks-for-ethnic-costumes-for-harper-photo-op

April 13, 2011
Kenyon Wallace
A Conservative candidate in the GTA is at the centre of a growing controversy after his office asked multicultural groups in the riding if they would like to wear “ethnic costumes” to a photo op with Stephen Harper.
The Star obtained an email sent by a campaign worker for Etobicoke Centre candidate Ted Opitz in which community groups are told Harper’s visit to the riding Thursday night creates a photo opportunity.
“We … are trying to create a photo-op about all the multicultural groups that support Ted Opitz our local Conservative candidate and the Prime Minister,” reads the email sent Tuesday night by Zeljko “Zed” Zidaric with the subject line: “Opportunity – Thursday night with the Prime Minister.”
“The opportunity is to have up to 20 people in national folklore costumes which represent their ethnic backgrounds. These people will sit in front row behind the PM – great TV photo op (sic).”
The email continues: “We are seeking representation from the Arab community. Do you have any cultural groups that would like to participate by having someone at the event in an ethnic costume? We are seeking one or two people from your community.”
In an email to the Star, Opitz said the message was sent by a campaign staffer without his knowledge.
“I do not support its characterization or intent,” Opitz said.
A spokesperson for the Conservative Party of Canada characterized the email as a “mistake.”
“It was a mistake sent out by a local campaign staff person,” said Ryan Sparrow. “The national campaign does not endorse this email and it is completely inappropriate.”
Opitz, a lieutenant-colonel in the Canadian military, is the senior regional advisor to Immigration Minister Jason Kenney.
It’s unknown how many recipients the email had, but it has already elicited reaction in ethnic communities.
Sukhminder Hansra, publisher and editor-in-chief of the Punjabi Daily newspaper, said he feels the email suggests the Conservatives are attempting to use different ethnic communities for political gain.
“If they’re going as far as bringing people in, asking them to dress certain ways for photo opportunities, that’s going a little bit too far,” Hansra told The Star. “It’s a major concern. The community is not there to be used for political gain. It’s as simple as that.”
Ironically, one of the recipients of the email was the Canadian Arab Federation (CAF), a group singled out by Kenney in 2009 for what he called its “hateful sentiments” toward Israel and Jews. The immigration minister subsequently cut $1.2 million in funding for the Federation’s language and job search workshops for newcomers.
“To parade people from ethnic communities in traditional costumes is such a superficial way for the prime minister to serve his own interests without looking seriously at the issues which concern these communities,” said CAF president Khaled Mouammar. “It’s disgusting actually.”
Liberal Party multiculturalism critic Rob Oliphant characterized the email as an extension of the Conservatives’ “very ethnic” ridings strategy.
In early March, a funding request from Immigration Minister Jason Kenney’s office detailing the party’s plan to target minorities through advertising in local media made headlines for its description of 10 ethnically diverse ridings — five of which are in the GTA. The document, entitled Breaking Through, Building the Conservative Brand, was written on Kenney’s MP letterhead and sought $200,000 in donations to target “very ethnic” ridings. The letter was made public after it was accidentally sent to NDP MP Linda Duncan. Kenney’s office apparently confused her with Conservative MP John Duncan.
Kenney later apologized, while the staffer responsible for the letter resigned.
“There is a kind of amateurish naivety to what the Conservatives are doing,” Oliphant said. “When I read this email from Optiz’s office, it sounded like a costume party. It sounded closer to Halloween than to a federal election. People don’t wear costumes, they wear clothes.”
“For someone to be inviting people to dress up for the prime minister in an ethnic costume for a photo op is the height of patronizing, pandering and belittling the contributions of new Canadians.”
But the email isn’t the first time during the election the Conservatives’ tactics to court votes has raised the ire of opposition parties.
Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff chastised Harper for referring to immigrants as “you people, you people who come from other lands” during a rally in Mississauga, Ont., last month.
“What an unbelievable way to talk about the Canadian people,” Ignatieff told a crowd of Liberal supporters during a campaign event in Toronto. “We have got to put an end to the language of divisions.”
Hansra said it is too early to judge how publicity surrounding the controversial email from Opitz’s office would affect Conservative support in Toronto’s South Asian community. He said Harper’s three visits to Brampton since the writ was dropped have helped the party brand.
“We just have to see how the campaign unfolds,” he said.

 

[Number1]

I have to tweet that video. It's AWESOME!

As a card carrying liberal and the biggest lying piece of work that has ever graced these forum, you give the liberals a bad name, not that it is a bad thing.

I once thought that Iggy would revitalize the liberals and bring in some much needed leadership. So far he has been a complete failure. Just look at the polls. Even the NDP is gaining on them.

 

[Imp]

ahahahahahahaha


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qitqs4ho6hc&feature=player_embedded#at=107

lololol...

 

[Blintok]

love the Jack Layton NDP commercials...the ones where he looks off to the side. i guess to make him look intelligent or something. but it makes him look like a moron.. HEY stupid who the fuck you looking at!! i am over here dummass.
He was a moron when he was in Toronto city gov...still is

 

[sdifox]

this is ridiculous.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...n-harpers-five-question-limit/article1985570/

William Kaplan

Stephen Harper’s five-question limit

WILLIAM KAPLAN

Special to Globe and Mail Update

Published Friday, Apr. 15, 2011 2:00AM EDT


Five questions. That’s right. The Prime Minister has told journalists travelling on his campaign tour that he will only answer five questions a day.
On the last day of March, reporters in Halifax – standing behind a yellow barricade at least a dozen feet away from Stephen Harper – called out to him to explain why only five questions. He refused to respond. Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff and NDP Leader Jack Layton answer all the questions they’re asked, the reporters pointed out. Why had Mr. Harper limited reporters to five questions a day? He refused to explain. “If there’s another subject, I’ll answer it,” he told them.
When the reporters properly pushed back, getting into a bit of a shouting match with the Prime Minister, he again refused to elaborate. “If there are other subjects I’m not addressing, I’ll take them. What’s the subject? One subject.” Mr. Harper was then asked a question about Libya. He answered it and walked away.
So there we have it: The Prime Minister who promised more openness and accountability, who’s been in power for five years, has told the press to get used to it – you can cover my campaign, but you can ask only five questions.
Members of the media were predictably indignant. Paul Wells, of Maclean’s, speaking on April 5 on a morning radio show, lamented the restriction: “The fact is we can’t ask the Prime Minister about real situations that concern real people, we can’t press the Prime Minister for straight answers on things like the cost of his programs, promises he made in the past he hasn’t kept, things like that.”
Journalists play a vital role in our society. We depend on them to ask questions and demand answers. Mr. Harper and the other party leaders are running for the highest office in the land. Even opposition MPs are allowed to ask follow-up questions in the House of Commons. But not reporters covering the Conservative campaign.
The only astonishing thing is that the media are taking it. They are playing along, accepting the unacceptable.
It’s the middle of an election campaign. Reporters are not only entitled to ask the Prime Minister about his record and accomplishments, they’re required to do so. It may be good politics for Mr. Harper to build a bubble around his campaign, and throw a blanket on the media. After all, the Conservatives are leading in the polls. But what’s incomprehensible, inexplicable in fact, is that the media have accepted it. True, when the policy was announced, some journalists objected. Their complaints were ignored, then it was on to the next scripted stop.
Ask any reporter. Since Mr. Harper took office, the bureaucrats have stopped talking to journalists because they fear reprisals. Many government MPs won’t return telephone calls if it’s the news calling. Cabinet ministers regularly refuse to comment. The Harper government has established more roadblocks to access to information than any other government since the act was put on the books.
Mr. Harper’s refusal to provide information to Parliament on the cost of his law-and-order initiatives is just the latest in a long list of his top priority: information control. How long are reporters going to allow themselves to be pushed around? When are they going to say, “We’ve had enough”?
One online commentator suggested that the Tory campaign plane be called No Question Air (No Questionnaire would also work). If the Prime Minister doesn’t want to answer questions – maybe he thinks an election is not the right time to answer questions – then reporters should stop covering his campaign and focus on the others. Then, on election day, Canadians can decide whether to vote for the guy who refused to answer questions.
William Kaplan’s latest book, Canadian Maverick: The Life and Times of Ivan C. Rand, won the David W. Mundell Medal for excellence in legal writing.

 

[sdifox]

The Iggy radio commercial about his mother's Alzheimer is getting on my nerves. Did they just make 1 radio ad?

 

[Imp]

The Iggy radio commercial about his mother's Alzheimer is getting on my nerves. Did they just make 1 radio ad?

I'm proud that hte Liberals have at least one commercial running somewhere. Watching TV, you wouldn't think there was even an election. There are some NDP ads, and the same 10 Conservative ads run over and over again. The kicker is these are some of the same ads that run throughout the year, before there was officially an election.

And what is it with left-wing bashing in the Toronto Star comments section? It's not remotely this bad on the CBC site. Both can be said to be 'left-tainted'.

 

[sdifox]

I'm proud that hte Liberals have at least one commercial running somewhere. Watching TV, you wouldn't think there was even an election. There are some NDP ads, and the same 10 Conservative ads run over and over again. The kicker is these are some of the same ads that run throughout the year, before there was officially an election.

And what is it with left-wing bashing in the Toronto Star comments section? It's not remotely this bad on the CBC site. Both can be said to be 'left-tainted'.

maybe the conservatives did hire a bunch of people to post comments

 

[dennilfloss]

Take that, president of China!

http://jmortonmusings.blogspot.com/...tml?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

 

[sdifox]

Take that, president of China!

http://jmortonmusings.blogspot.com/...tml?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

convinience of photoshop removes people's common sense.

 

[SickBeast]

I rather liked the last question of the debate, it seemed to say all you really need to know.

Q: You've all pledged to continue increasing healthcare funding by 6%, 2-3 times faster than the rate of economic growth. How will you pay for that?

Layton: We have to choose. Raise corporate taxes, no superprisons, spend on healthcare and other social programs.

Ignatieff: We have to choose. Stop cutting corporate taxes, no superprisons, no ferrari jets, spend on healthcare and other social programs.

Harper: We don't have to choose. We will lower taxes, spend on healthcare, spend on jets, spend on prisons, and we'll have a surplus.



Honest question to Conservatives here: Which one of these is the adult answer to the question?

I agree that the jets and prisons are stupid. To me, they might be able to get away with cutting taxes and generating a surplus if they can grow the economy properly and find inefficiencies in government.

That said, I'm probably going to vote Green. I know I can't stand Harper, Ignatieff seems ok but somewhat weird, and Layton, well, he's got all of the qualities of a great leader, but his socialist bend turns me off to the point of not being able to vote for him.

The establishment seems intent on squashing the Greens like an insect. They kept Elizabeth May from the debates, and you rarely see the media covering them.

I say that they are the party of the future.

 

[Imp]

I agree that the jets and prisons are stupid. To me, they might be able to get away with cutting taxes and generating a surplus if they can grow the economy properly and find inefficiencies in government.

That said, I'm probably going to vote Green. I know I can't stand Harper, Ignatieff seems ok but somewhat weird, and Layton, well, he's got all of the qualities of a great leader, but his socialist bend turns me off to the point of not being able to vote for him.

The establishment seems intent on squashing the Greens like an insect. They kept Elizabeth May from the debates, and you rarely see the media covering them.

I say that they are the party of the future.

More power to you for voting Green. I considered it many moons ago, went to see their party platform and thought it was too left-wing for me. It felt further left than NDP.