So who are you Canucks voting for on Monday?

[Michael]

The PC were nothing until they broke through in Quebec. You need Central Canada votes to win a majority.

Michael

(I always voted Liberal in the Quebec provincial elections, but voted PC federally. Haven't kept up voting as I've been gone too long)

 

[3chordcharlie]

Well it's not so good.. the NDP lost a lot of seats on the last polls to be counted, and the Liberals + NDP are 1 seat short of a majority... the BQ is going to get a lot out of that 1 seat 🙁

 

[StageLeft]

If I was there I'd have voted conservative, though I know little about them, so I can't say that I'd keep that opinion if I actually looked into them. I do know that the liberals need to take a break, and at face value I agree with a lot of what the conservatives propose, while disagreeing with others. The libbies are stagnant though.

 

[3chordcharlie]

Originally posted by: Skoorb
If I was there I'd have voted conservative, though I know little about them, so I can't say that I'd keep that opinion if I actually looked into them. I do know that the liberals need to take a break, and at face value I agree with a lot of what the conservatives propose, while disagreeing with others. The libbies are stagnant though.

The liberals are stagnant, and I'm glad they didn't win a majority. The Conservative party is a 'new' party, with most of it's roots in a neo-con, socially regressive party that never managed much popularity in most of Canada.

I'm disappointed that the BQ will have so much power, because the NDP fell one seat short. The BQ is a separatist and/or regional advocacy party that only claims to represent the interests of about 20% of Canadians.

My guess is Canadians will be voting again within a year... so we'll see how that goes.

 

[LocutusX]

it`s disappointing seeing so many AT canucks viewing the CPC as a socially regressive neo-con party. there`s nothing socially regressive about them since they would never have touched social issues. it was pure media spin that made the CPC look like a socially-regressive party, nothing more. I thought you guys were smarter than to buy into the negative liberal attack ads. they had NOTHING good to say about Martin, they were ALL themed around: don`t vote for Harper, he`s Dubya in disguise!

and calling the Libs a fiscally conservative party.... puh-leaze!
guess you guys haven`t heard of all the waste from the gun registry, the HRDC `boondoggle` (sorry for the screwed-up quotes, i`m on a french machine atm), AdScam, etc. have you forgotten about the auditor-general`s report already?

another point i should make is that a liberal minority will be propped up by the dippers (NDP) meaning they would move far far away from the supposed `fiscal conservatism`you guys claim they have... and move back into the Trudeaupian arena of left-wing liberalism. yuck! have you heard any of the things Layton`s said? he`s a complete wingnut!


Harper himself is a pro-choice libertarian. its true that there are a number of so-cons in the party, but most of their Ontario candidates weren`t so-cons (example: belinda stronach, all of the candidates in the 905 belt of the GTA who were coincidentally all immigrants and non-white).

at the end of the day, you shouldn`t write off the CPC since the Tories finally have 100 seats - a first since the Mulroney regime. the trend has been UPWARD (not downward) since the collapse of Mulroney`s PC party. when the next election is called (approx. 2 years) expect the CPC to make further gains. i think they might even win a majority if Mike Harris takes over...

 

[LocutusX]

i should also point out that the closest equivalent to the Republican party in Canada isn`t the new CPC... but rather the Liberals. that might sound odd, but it basically revolves around which party in Canada represents the `ruling class`- that`s definitely the Liberals in cda (and GOP in usa).

Ikraam Saeed, an excellent liberal blogger from Montreal wrote an article comparing the Bush clan to the Martin clan. worth a read, if you can find the link. i`m at work, damn french keyboard.

 

[3chordcharlie]

So despite the wasted money on the gun registry (hahaha, half of it because Albertans engaged in civil disobedience and forced delays and extensions... nothing like self-fulfilling prophecies), the Liberals still managed to balance the budget and restore Canada to something resembling fiscal health - they've even managed some modest tax cuts the past few years... sounds pretty tax and spend to me.

The CPC has way too much root in the old reform party, from its leader, to many candidates, to campaign managers, policy writers... they made a valiant effort to censor themselves throughout the election campaign, and fortunately people in the east and in ontario didn't buy it.

Don't confuse the media and advertisements for being the same thing. The media had nothing good to say about Martin OR Harper. The liberal ads bordered on being over-the-top, but essentially did nothing but quote Harper and his other candidates, and extrapolate on their throw-away, misguided comments. This is a few steps short of an 'attack'. In fact, by consistently referring to the new CPC as "the Tories" the media did Harper the biggest favour possible in terms of misleading the public (if you think I'm being unfair, consider your reaction to me insisting that they are the reform party).

The PC Party was deeply divided over the merger issue, and when it was done, many MPs and candidates stayed on despite being dissatisfied with the new party, presumably hoping to improve it form within. I won't be convinced that anything has changed until there is at a minimum a new leader who is not rooted in the reform party.

I'm not terribly happy to see the balance of power shift to the NDP, and I'd have happily voted for Joe Clark's Tories, but they don't exist anymore.

 

[LocutusX]

3chordcharlie,

i'll only address one point for now. you really think the majority of the $2B wasted on the gun registry was because of Albertan civil disobedience? come on, don't be silly.

---

as an aside, let me say that since the formation of Reform, that "type" of party in Canada has only gotten more and more *moderate* as time progressed. And now, with the Liberals going to lean left to appease the NDP, the CPC can comfortably occupy the right-of-centre position ("Red Toryism") which Paul Martin wishes he could have taken... but now can't.

the first Muslim in the house of commons was a Tory (Rahim Jaffer), and the first husband-and-wife team in the commons is now a Tory couple (Nina Grewal, Gurmant Grewal). hmm... wow, they're both visible minorities! but yeah, Harper's party is STILL the party of racist bigots... whatever :disgust:

 

[3chordcharlie]

As I said, the CPC is not Tory.

They are pretty clear, even when they try to obfuscate, that many of Canada's social programs, and many of our rights, are not safe should they come to power.

Between new spending and tax cuts, the CPC platform was the most expensive offered by any of the parties, and can't really be interpretted as other than a deficit platform.

IF I'm ever convinced that the CPC has truly moved to the right-of-center position the liberals occupied from 1993 to the present time, I'll think about voting for them. For now I am simply thankful that Harper is not going to be Prime Minister in the next little while.

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: LocutusX
it`s disappointing seeing so many AT canucks viewing the CPC as a socially regressive neo-con party. there`s nothing socially regressive about them since they would never have touched social issues. it was pure media spin that made the CPC look like a socially-regressive party, nothing more. I thought you guys were smarter than to buy into the negative liberal attack ads. they had NOTHING good to say about Martin, they were ALL themed around: don`t vote for Harper, he`s Dubya in disguise!

and calling the Libs a fiscally conservative party.... puh-leaze!
guess you guys haven`t heard of all the waste from the gun registry, the HRDC `boondoggle` (sorry for the screwed-up quotes, i`m on a french machine atm), AdScam, etc. have you forgotten about the auditor-general`s report already?

another point i should make is that a liberal minority will be propped up by the dippers (NDP) meaning they would move far far away from the supposed `fiscal conservatism`you guys claim they have... and move back into the Trudeaupian arena of left-wing liberalism. yuck! have you heard any of the things Layton`s said? he`s a complete wingnut!


Harper himself is a pro-choice libertarian. its true that there are a number of so-cons in the party, but most of their Ontario candidates weren`t so-cons (example: belinda stronach, all of the candidates in the 905 belt of the GTA who were coincidentally all immigrants and non-white).

at the end of the day, you shouldn`t write off the CPC since the Tories finally have 100 seats - a first since the Mulroney regime. the trend has been UPWARD (not downward) since the collapse of Mulroney`s PC party. when the next election is called (approx. 2 years) expect the CPC to make further gains. i think they might even win a majority if Mike Harris takes over...

Yes, the Liberals are Fiscally Conservative. They're the ones who tackled Deficit spending. They're the ones who have given us 6ish consecutive years of Surplusses. They're the ones who are paying off the Debt. They're the ones who had the gonads to cut Politically Sensitive programs(which both the NDP and Conservatives tried to criticize them for) in order to acheive Fiscal Stability. They're the ones who turned Canada into one of the fastest growing G8 economies. They're the ones who created 100ks of Jobs(the PCs predicted 10% Unemployment until 2000). They're the ones decreasing Tax Rates. If that's not Fiscal Conservatism, what is?

The biggest problem with the Conservatives is that they are so new they haven't even had a Policy Convention yet. The Policies proposed during the election campaign were thrown together without input from the Party as a whole, probably their biggest mistake, though they didn't really have time due to the quickness of the Election(I suspect Martin had that in mind to some degree).

Another problem for the Conservatives was their Economic/Revenues/Expenditures forecasts where totally whack. Even the NDP was forecasting more conservatively and basing their Programs upon more reasonable Forecasts. The Conservatives were setting themselves up for failure with their high Tax Cuts and high spending proposals(though I agree with some of those, specifically Military spending). For me the final straw was the Bush like economic view,(along with Harpers' seeming willingness to get involved with Iraq, just because) a dramatic action then wait for the theoretical reaction with a much improved end result. Unfortunetly that isn't working in the US, we don't need that kind economic policy considering the Solid footing we've worked and sacrificed hard to acheive. If it ain't broke, don't fix it and as such the Canadian Economy ain't broke, it's one of the healthiest in the World and improving annually.

 

[LocutusX]

Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie
IF I'm ever convinced that the CPC has truly moved to the right-of-center position the liberals occupied from 1993 to the present time, I'll think about voting for them. For now I am simply thankful that Harper is not going to be Prime Minister in the next little while.

The Liberals did NOT occupy the right-of-centre position from 1993 to present time (you should have said "End of Chretien's term"). Even Warren Kinsella admits that they were a left-of-centre party! Only after the Martinites started raising hell did it start drifting towards the centre. For as long as Chretien had his steady hand at the helm, it was left of centre. I don't think ANYONE would call Chretien's term "right of centre". Not even the Toronto Star! :disgust:

 

[LocutusX]

Originally posted by: sandorski
Yes, the Liberals are Fiscally Conservative. They're the ones who tackled Deficit spending. They're the ones who have given us 6ish consecutive years of Surplusses.

Ever checked to see where those surpluses were coming from? Martin was overcharging for EI, and using that surplus to pay for other things. The Auditor-General identified that questionable behaviour, so did Gilles Duceppe who recently even spoke out about sponsoring a bill to prevent that sort of misuse.

I'm not as confident as you about the Canadian economy. We *are* slipping in the UN living standards index.

 

[3chordcharlie]

Originally posted by: LocutusX

Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie
IF I'm ever convinced that the CPC has truly moved to the right-of-center position the liberals occupied from 1993 to the present time, I'll think about voting for them. For now I am simply thankful that Harper is not going to be Prime Minister in the next little while.

The Liberals did NOT occupy the right-of-centre position from 1993 to present time (you should have said "End of Chretien's term"). Even Warren Kinsella admits that they were a left-of-centre party! Only after the Martinites started raising hell did it start drifting towards the centre. For as long as Chretien had his steady hand at the helm, it was left of centre. I don't think ANYONE would call Chretien's term "right of centre". Not even the Toronto Star! :disgust:

You're still confusing social conservatism with fiscal conservatism. The Chretien Liberals made deep cuts and asked Canadians to make significant sacrifices to ensure the long-term fiscal health of the country, which is more than can be said for 8 years of Mulroney. Since 'Center' is a pretty vacuous construct, I just adopted your interpretation - there's no question that Chretien's government was fiscally to the right of Mulroney's tax, spend, and sell plan, therefore right-of-center is a pretty reasonable description.

Martin, Chretien, and the gang should have rasied taxes and lowered EI premiums years ago, to make the budget balance conceptually as well as it does numerically. But using the money to pay down debt was certainly a good plan, whatever the 'tax' was called. It's one of the reasons I prefer the new Ontario Health Premum to a general tax increase - if the money is directed properly from tax-payer to programs, accountability can be improved, and people have a better idea where their taxes are going.

 

[LocutusX]

Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie
You're still confusing social conservatism with fiscal conservatism. The Chretien Liberals made deep cuts and asked Canadians to make significant sacrifices to ensure the long-term fiscal health of the country, which is more than can be said for 8 years of Mulroney.

Well, not quite. I mean, do you consider Mulroney a so-con? I don't believe he was. Otherwise why would Westerners have started the Reform party? Mulroney was a bit of an enigma. He identified himself with Thatcher and Reagan, yet he was definitely to-the-left of both leaders, especially in social terms!

I mean, his son is the host of that evil, scandalous, morally bankrupt Canadian Idol for chrissake! 😉

 

[3chordcharlie]

Originally posted by: LocutusX
Well, not quite. I mean, do you consider Mulroney a so-con? I don't believe he was. Otherwise why would Westerners have started the Reform party? Mulroney was a bit of an enigma. He identified himself with Thatcher and Reagan, yet he was definitely to-the-left of both leaders, especially in social terms!

I mean, his son is the host of that evil, scandalous, morally bankrupt Canadian Idol for chrissake! 😉

An enigma... wrapped in a shroud of the worlds rich and elite 🙂

I've never figured out the reform party... I suppose after 20 years it has finally reached relevence (in an admittedly softened form), but I can't help but think greater involvement with the PCs, especially once the vaccuum opened up in 1993 would have been more productive as a way to enhance western interests.

Reality (TV) bites... there's really no two ways about it 😉

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: LocutusX

Originally posted by: sandorski
Yes, the Liberals are Fiscally Conservative. They're the ones who tackled Deficit spending. They're the ones who have given us 6ish consecutive years of Surplusses.

Ever checked to see where those surpluses were coming from? Martin was overcharging for EI, and using that surplus to pay for other things. The Auditor-General identified that questionable behaviour, so did Gilles Duceppe who recently even spoke out about sponsoring a bill to prevent that sort of misuse.

I'm not as confident as you about the Canadian economy. We *are* slipping in the UN living standards index.

Yes, we are slipping, mostly due to cutbacks to Social Programs, which are etting gradual yet steady increases to restore them.

Where the Surplusses are coming from is somewhat moot, though you are correct, it shouldn't be from EI. I also agree with 3Chord on the idea of Targeted Fees/Taxes, it would cut down on waste, though certain Fees/Taxes might need regular adjustment Up/Down depending on the Targets need(s).

 

[3chordcharlie]

Yeah I was as disgusted as anyone to find out UI/EI payments go straight into General Revenue :|

I don't *think* the Chretien Liberals started this, I have a feeling it was always that way, it's just this is the first time inflows and outflows from Unemployment have been so out of whack that people noticed.