apollo19

I would have thought Global would have been more popular in BC, although I don't neccesarily think that is because of their news -- but rather the viewership carried over from BCTV along with all the staff. CBC is clearly to the left on issues -- what other kind of station would allow George Strombowhatshisname to host a Bush-bashing show? CTV and the Globe and Mail I always though to be a mix of liberals and conservatives, and I guess it is true.

Well, I can only speak of experience of the BC NDP government during the '90s. They pissed away money, they gave too much to unions, they did a terrible job of making the Island Highway, they let the Lower Mainland infrastructure rot and decay because it was Liberal/Conservative. Heck, they wouldn't even have won their second term if it went according to popular vote -- the Liberals beat them in that, but NDP got more seats. Basically, this is the logic of the NDP: let's start an industry of our own (fast-ferry building) where only unions are allowed to work, make pro-union laws so everyone else gets screwed, spend a couple hundred million to keep our supporters happy, and let our opponents supporters drown in the debt we make.

Uhh, you know Canada could not have gone. We had no way of getting our troops there, we has insufficient troops due to the main role in Afghanistan, and our troops were generally ill-equipped (when did they get desert camoflauge?). If Canada had gone, there was no doubt they would have recieved casualties as a result of having insufficient equipment to do the job for them -- it wasnt peacekeeping and patrolling like Afghanistan, it was an actual invasion. That required lots of troops to enter the country at once and make the takeover quick, which Canada could not have done.

You really have to take a look at who Paul Martin really is in order to understand his positions. There are two versions of him: the one the Liberal Party and advisors like Scott Reid tell him to be (like get left votes from the NDP, be anti-american), and the unedited unscripted person who he really is (a corporate type who doesn't want SSM and supported a Canadian role in Iraq). I favour Martin when he says what he honestly believes in, not what the Liberal party tells him to say. Since he was asked by a high-school student and it was unscripted, my take is that this is his actual view -- and not that of the Liberal party. But, we all know he can't afford to put his honest agenda out there or the knives will come from the party.

I think that the main reason people believe that the Liberals represent both English and French is that they want to believe in a Canada like that. A happy, united, merry Canada where everyone is happy and everyone gets along, like they "always have". This way, people can ignore the problems of constitutional debate and ignore people who honestly do not want to be a part of this country anymore. It seems we are stuck on a weird track in this country -- basically, nothing can happen to Quebec unless the PQ comes in, which would be in 2008. Now we have a federal election where the Liberals will lose seats in Quebec, and as a country, we are basically like a chicken running around without a head. People have become too accustomed to the status quo, and they think that is the Federal government's responsibility to fund things like Health Care and other provincial responsibilities -- someone needs to hold up the BNA Act and show everyone what this country was supposed to be like. But, I doubt anyone will do that -- so for now, enjoy the ride.

I suspect this topic is an attempt to insult Martin, but it still goes back to the private-public health care argument. A good article on this debate: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/sto...ISSUE05/TPStory I can understand conservatives viewpoints on this issue, that is allowing people to purchase extra healthcare with their own money, but I don't quite understand the left's stance on this issue. It is known that private clinics operate in Canada, and they make a profit by selling services to the public system, through the means of contracting surgeries out. Is this just an instance where some form of government control has been gained over a complete industry, and there is an "if you cant have it, I can't" type of mentality? That seems to be the argument I keep hearing equal people deserve equal care. Sure, that sounds great, but what about other industries? What sets someones right to choose what brand of milk they drink apart from choosing what kind of healthcare they will recieve? There are probably many Canadians willing and open to two competing systems, but no party has come out and stated it will do so. Provinces like Quebec and BC are already pushing the limits of the Canada Health Act and are being fined -- all it will take is a government which will ease the rules in order to have a sustainable public system competing with private clinics. Would the Conservatives continue to fine the government of Charest and Campbell like the Liberals have done for failing to meet the requirements of the CHA? I haven't heard a very clear answer from Harper on this, and Martin has already shown what he believes through his use of the private clinic.

I agree with what Sparhawk said, there really can be no half-measures in this debate over marijuana/other drugs. With that being said, you have the three parties positions: the Liberals support decriminalization, the Tories support enforcing current laws tougher, and the NDP I suspect favours completely legalizing it. I personally feel that the only way to stop the organized crime aspect is to make the industry transparent and legal -- but then it is highly likely the US would up the border searches even more on everyone. I don't think anyone really has a problem with someone having some fun on their own property with drugs, but once it gets into public areas, that is where the trouble starts. Perhaps some sort of legalization which would allow for private use, but if shown in public easily enforcable fines would be in order?

Martin has turned into (or perhaps always was) a complete buffoon, and Harper doesn't exactly ring of nationalism. Layton is a non-player, so he isn't even worth mentioning.

The main point about the immigrants is that they vote for the party which was in power when they came to this country. They view it as a sort of "thank you" to the Liberals. That is why things like Gomery have much less of an impact in the centres like Vancouver and Toronto. I personally know many newcomers to Canada and they fit well in the mold of being fiscally conservative and socially moderate, yet they largely vote for the Liberals. I think there is less of an effect of the immigrant vote in BC, as people tend to follow their ideology more there, but in Toronto the Liberals have painted themselves with the Canadian flag permanently on them, so when immigrants go to do that "duty of a citizen", that pops up in their mind. I'm not bitching about immigration here, I'm just saying that the Liberals have painted themselves as Canada to the newcomers.

I don't really think most Canadians want the government to spend their money instead of them, but no party has really stood up and said "there will be no government involvement where there is already a competitive industry" (e.g. the media). IMO, unless a party stands up and offers to drastically change the way things are done, like reopening the constitution, we will be stuck in this quagmire for a while. What will happen when the PQ probably wins the next Quebec election? Boisclair has indicated a referendum will follow. I doubt Martin could campaign for Canada, and Harper couldn't either. Unless someone stands up and says they will honestly do that (open up the constitution), I don't think there will be any large changes. Just look at all the different ways people view government across this country: BC wants to help the disadvantaged, Alberta wants very little government, Ontario wants some government to helpout the people less "well off", and I guess Quebec wants a lot of govt. The Maritimes nicely fit Ontario's "helping" hand.

I would like to see Volpe lose his seat, that guy is a real hothead. He goes off on random tangents swiping at the Conservatives, while he has no idea of any good policies . Another person I would like to see lose their seat is Jack Layton . Some of his ideas are completely insane, and hopefully voters in the Danforth area will see that. He didn't win by too much last election, so it is a possibility if the Liberals pool enough resources into his riding... but now they seem more interested in an alliance with him.

That, however, might alienate many of the party's other supporters. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Look at the numbers, if Harper goes for the centre-right socially moderate Liberals and sheds the rural socons, he could get a large net gain of seats. It all lies in where the party's priority lies, and at this time, it seems content to try to fuddle halfway between socon and socially liberal.

Well, I'll offer up a view of things from the 905 even though I plan to vote CPC: -It isnt so much about supporting Liberal ideas as it is rejecting the Conservatives -All people heard about Gomery was "scandal, corruption, etc" over and over again; we know this is bad, we know it was the Liberal party, but no big-name faces could be attached to it, so it got repetitive and ignored -There is still the percieved view of the CPC as an Alberta-based consortium, which combines both some social and fiscal conservative aspects -People here are fiscal conservative, but not socially conservative -- this means get Harper and the CPC to shutup about gay marriage, shutup about abortion, shutup about every social issue and leave everything in regards to the "family" or "religion" at the status quo -People don't really think Harper is scary, we just view him as a different kind of conservative -- a guy from smalltown Alberta who doesn't know how things work here -Finally, in the 416 code (downtown Toronto), there are masses of first-generation immigrants. Almost all of them vote for the government in power, which is the Liberals. They feel sort of a loyalty to them for allowing them to come to the country.

I don't know about the Liberals losing seats in BC, as people in the GVRD are experiencing record-low unemployment, record building starts, the fastest economic growth in Canada, and finally money being spent there by the Feds. For certain, the CPC won't lose seats in the Valley and the Interior, but I suspect there will be some changing of seats on the mid-island and the Surrey area. Harper doesn't really resound there as a person who cares about BC (because of the BC against the East attitude), and that Harper is trying to cater to Ontario (which he effectively is).

"Harper come talk about gay marriage... Then forget to present the candidate that was with him"--What are we cave men? I can almost read your post through all those spelling and grammar errors, but I suggest you fix it in case sombody else can't read your post. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Just for your info, I presume Bakunin is French-Canadian. We all don't speak English as our first language, so I would tone down the insults. Bakunin, I also noticed Vernee (CPC Quebec Head) ran away, and Harper didn't know the names of his candidates he was supporting. It was fairly embarassing, especially considering that those Quebec City ridings are ones that they could potentially win. The campaign started off well with a nice speech by Harper, but it's taken a bad turn now. Hopefully these bumps are going to be ironed out by the campaign team by January, and they can get the gay issue and others like it out of the way.

We will end up with a majority or near majority because Canadians are more disgusted with minority gov'ts than they are with either the Liberals or the Conservatives. The polls will be neck and neck until voting day when we will all get a big surprise when the undecideds have to make a decision. Right now, I would bet on a Conservative gov't but Harper could screw up the campaign badly. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I have a feeling Harper will do quite well after just watching all of the leader's talks. For once, he didn't focus on Gomery, he seemed friendly with his caucus, and of course there were well-positioned minorities behind him. He impressed me for the very first time (something hard for him to do). Martin went right on the attack in his speech, whipping out the "evil neoconservative" card. I was surprised how Layton was so small of a factor after the defeat of the govt -- perhaps a sign that the NDP won't really do that much better?

Well.. I guess we can all throw this EKOS poll out the window with a new poll coming in: http://www.ipsos-na.com/news/pressrelease.cfm?id=2876 This was released today, the 26th, with a larger sample size, so I would assume it to be more accurate.

I have to agree with you here on the BC numbers. I don't know how these companies can believe their own data -- there is a safe amount of votes in BC for the Tories (in the Interior/Bible Belt) where they will never dip below a certain number of seats or votes (short of an adscam of their own happening). In the last election, the CPC got 36% in BC, while the Liberals had 29%. The NDP is obviously picking up support from the left-side of the Liberals, so I don't really see how one can put the Tories at 21% in BC. That would mean they lost nearly half their voters since the last election there. On the Ontario numbers, it seems the CPC is still climbing there, albeit slowly. I think they should be able to break into the Brampton-Mississauga area with their increase in the upcoming election.

I saw that on the news earlier, and I think we can all expect much less voter turnout. With that in mind, you have to ask yourself: which party has the most dedicated supporters? There is a large possibility Liberal voters who are thinking twice about voting for them may simply stay at home.. allowing one of the Opposition parties to win the riding which would have otherwise gone Liberal.

There are similar tests to this one all over, but this one uses a bit different classifying words (like capitalist, conservative). I was: Social Libertarian 27.3% Economical Libertarian 52.3% Edited: I was in the middle of the line, between Libertarian and Capitalist

You'd have to be 19 to be naive enough to believe a Liberal promise at this point. Apollo19, do you really believe you're going to see any of this money the Liberals are promising? No, from what I know I wouldn't trust the promises made, but at this point I am looking mainly towards what each party envisions Canada being in the future. This platform lays out Martin's view: a globalised, technology-dependent, research country. It may not happen with the dithering and inaction, but it is a view of what Martin wants nonetheless. Since the CPC hasn't released their full platform yet, I can't make a decision yet, but I suspect it will go along the same lines as last election (which I do agree with) -- lower taxes, a stronger military, balanced budgets, a place for Canada in the international community "again", and keeping social laws the same (abortion, etc). You point out a good problem for people my age about the Liberals: we don't KNOW a Canada that has been better; we have seen no higher points in our lives. We don't know how the country was under Mulroney, or before him. All we know of Canada is what we grew up with under Chretien, so that may be a problem in the future with young people not caring about politics because we don't know of anything else. Maybe thats why it's important to put a new party in power (CPC) so we end the One-Party state that we've known.

I think this "budget" puts the Liberals in a position to get the young voters (like me), as they put quite a bit of money into things like loans and scholarships. Of particular interest is the money the put aside to "help Canadian students to study in a foreign country in order for a globalised workfore". I think that Martin's view of what he wants Canada to be like in the world is a free trader, a R&D center, and a place of generally high-educated people. The whole "globalised future workforce" clearly fits in with the FTAA idea. Overall, I think that if the Conservatives offer similar tax cuts, but fail to put the money into post-secondary education for students, they won't make gains among socially-liberal young people.

I would look for the government to be defeated on the December 8th fiscal update. That way, none of the opposition parties has to take the first step, and short of it being a "budget" Harper can support, the Tories would probably vote against it. That could all change, of course, if Martin adjourned parliament early for Christmas.

I just watched Global National and it was their main story. They didn't play much on the angle of the "poor Canadian boy being held by Americans", they did an interview with a soldier who was injured by Khadr and it was very much supportive of the US laying charges against him.

Actually, what it shows is that the electorate is becoming more fluid. Everytime the votes swing back to the Liberals, more of these people, who are centre-right supporters, consider the Conservatives a possibility. I would throw all bets off on polls until the election is officially underway and official policies comeout. I have a feeling that within the by the end of the campaign, there could be some large surprises coming out of it. What we know is that the CPC has around 25% of a solid base, and the NDP has around 15%. We don't know what the Liberals base is because they are always shifting so much , so we could all be very surprised with the next election.