madmax

Deficits. Typical Mulroney Conservative.

The Hurons, Petuns (tobbacco) et al exist. They suffered greatly from European Contact with smallpox etc. 1842 is an interesting year. Lots happened on this side and that side of the US border. Apparently the US government did this with the Hurons that moved to Ohio. The reduction of the Hurons occurred two fold And via war with their Iroquois and English enemies.

7% in any riding will not win you a seat. All the GP had to do to win a single seat after 25 years trying, is get close to 35% of the vote. A minority vote is all it takes to win a seat. The Communist Party, even when BANNED as a political party managed to win seats. Independents have managed to win seats. While I recognize that seat distribution is often unfair, the failure to win a single seat in a Nationally run Campaign is purely a reflection of the party. The Progressive Conservative Party was reduced to 2 seats in 1993, yet had 2,186,422 votes. Not a fair distribution by any means. Yet even they could send two MPs to work in a Smart Car. (Back then we said Corvette) While you criticise that the BQ received only 10% of the vote. Let it be known that in 1993 they received 1,846,000 votes while only running 75 Candidates. Today. The BQ ran only 75 Candidates and received 1,379,000 votes. Which averages to 18,386 votes per candidate. The GP ran 303 Candidates and received 940,000 thus 3,100 votes per candidate. To disregard the strength of the BQ is folley. Then to compare the GP numbers in Quebec, the % of votes cast is that much lower then the 3,100 votes. The Block is a Quebec, Separatist party and it is called a BLOCK to do just that. BLOCK. If you want to look at this evenly. How many votes did the GP receive in Quebec with Their 72 Candidates. What the GP has a habit of doing, is stating how many votes they received across Canada, then compare them to the number of votes other parties received in a Province such as Sask or Quebec or Alberta. Such as the GP had 900,000 votes across Canada but got no seats in Sask while the CPC won the Majority of Seats with a few hundred thousand votes. The GP fails to mention the quantity of votes they received in these Provinces. Such as this GP result in 2008 That said, all parties, national parties, registered parties, know and run candidates under the current election law. So while the BQ received alot of seats. Lets look at the other parties in Quebec BQ 1,379,000 = 18,386 The LPC 859,000 = 11,608 The CPC 784,000 = 10,400 The NDP 441,000 = 6041 The GP 126,000 = 1750 votes per candidate (this isn't worth a seat to me under any circumstances.) One can argue that they are the most popular party in Quebec.

I like Orillia The Mariposa Party is fun...

NO NO NO NO NO..... Wait...... I...... concur.... with........Guyser . I.......concur....with.........M.Dancer That wasn't difficult was it.......

Your from Caledonia.... mainstream eh? 4% is not mainstream. It is less then the Non Mainstream Candidate Gary McHale received, and he will get his deposit and expenses back. The first two Candidates are mainstream, the 3rd belongs to a mainstream party who finished ahead of the independent. The GP came nowwhere near mainstream in a rural farming community, with alot of small towns and villages. It also never connected with the serious problem in Caledonia. It finished last, and significantly behind the independent. 45,604 people in your riding did not vote Green. 2041 did. You may be vocal on the internet, but the silent majority in your riding is the 96% not in support of the Green Party.

Hey I ain't going anywhere... mad

Money has been flowing out of Ontario since Confederation. The pet programs were to help poor Provinces like Alberta develop their oil fields. Transfer payments flowed to Alberta,. Ontario has never been a have not Province, and the transfer, the Equalization funds flow out not in, even during the year when Ontario qualified, the system was changed and Ontario agreed. You can dispute whether that was money wasted or not. It is past history.

THought you would enjoy it. The GP has corporate sponsors as do many parties. They are still restricted in what can be donated/given to the party. This is a political forum for general political discussion. All views are treated with respect. Even party hacks and diehards are fun to banter with, and these forums are well moderated. Enjoy your time here.

ROTFLMAO

It depends upon what you are attacking. Harper blew Quebec, and fumbled the ball, allowing Duceppe to get a touch down. Harper may have ignored Layton, he attacked the strength of the Party in BC and edged Jack Laytons NDP come EDAY. They picked up early, the NDP momentum and wasted no time, ignoring the Liberals. It all depends on where you live who gets attention where. The other problem with attack Jack Layton is that you can only go after perceived weaknesses. Jack was on attack on Harpers Strength, which was Leadership. A battle of Leadership only highlighted Jack over Dion whenever Harper attacked, thus strengthening the NDP when the CPC no longer could afford the NDP to threaten their goal for Majority. In the end, Harper probably got the most help from the Liberal Premier, who choose to attack Layton on Softwood Lumber deal. Thus Layton and the NDP practically swept the Rural Northern Ontario Forestry sectors, while losing some ground to the CPC in BC. Softwood lumber ref.

BUMP I see by the choices.. People have given this alot more thought then I anticipated.

Wow, now theres a hard hitting point. $2million for environmental initiatives. You are onto something. BTW, I could have used the $300 million spent on this election for a new garage door opener. You know, if you see any xtra cash laying around.

Yes it is a thorough analysis. The GP is an old party that never had an interest in running a full field of Candidates until there was government funds provided. The argument cannot be made about ANY party. These Parties came 5 to 10 years after the Green Party established its existance. The Reform Party ran a full slate of Candidates when there wasn't federal funding. The Alliance Party ran a full slate of Candidates when there wasn't federal funding. The National Party tried to run a full slate of Candidates but is the Party responsible for the platform to provide federal funding to parties. The Social Credit ran full slates of Candidates, got seats, and higher percentage of voter turnout then the GPs have ever had. The Social Credit were not allowed into the 1979 TV Leaders Debate although they are the ones attributed to bringing down the Conservative Government. The Green Party cares more about money and about political pandering then the environment. The Green Party is a political party with the word GREEN in its name. It uses the environment as a marketing tool. If the Green Party cared about the environment? Why run a Pro Nuclear Candidates? Why Run Pro Coal Candidates? Why doesn't the environment come first and not political opportunism? Paper Candidates do not care about the environment. Infact often they sit at home during the campaign. Many GP candidates don't make it to debates, and they still get votes. Some never bother to engage the public. When environmental issues come to the front, I have seen , Liberal, Conservative and NDP reps take action. Sometimes officially, while in office, sometimes in fighting poor choice developments. While I have no doubt that you think the GPs care about the environment more then money, I do not believe that to be the case. Infact the marketing tool of the GP is to give people their own money as a bribe. To give large corporations like Bell, Telus, CIBC, Rogers, Shaw, Shell, etc HUGE tax breaks, larger then what CPC might offer in order create a system of REVENUE off a Carbon Addiction. Often the GP are as good as any political party with regards to misleading statements. I recall one GP candidate comparing their Green Shift to SWEDEN (a socialist country). Suggesting that Sweden implemented a Carbon Tax based on the Green Shift. (yes I know the LPC stole this unpopular Plank) However, Swedens Corporate Tax rate is 60% not 21.12 like Canadas and Swedens gas tax was implemented in the same manner as Canadas Excise Tax. So BS baffles brains. You can believe in GP fantasy. That is your right and you get to vote to support your position and party. However, I must admit, you will not find to many takers on the GP platform. One has to wonder how the GP with its base in BC never managed a 2nd place finish? How the GPs only managed 5 2nd place finishes in all of Canada. How the EMAY deal proved to be such a failure for two parties. And on top of that with the LPC not running a Candidate the GP Leader failed to get as many votes as the Previous NDP candidate who nearly toppled Peter Mackay. Clearly those 10,000 LPC votes will not be gifted to Elizabeth May next time around. The free media ride is over from all accounts. And from all the Winners and Losers columns regarding the Federal Election. The only party that gets put in both categories is the CPC. The LPC and GP are viewed as the Losers. The NDP and BQ as winners, in varying degrees of success. If the GP doesn't care about money, then Elizabeth May owes Dion a cheque for $1.95 for every vote he allowed her by not running a Liberal, short of the 600 normally get The GP does care about money. Immediately after the ELection Elizabeth May was asking for more handouts. Maybe you missed this... SHOW US THE MONEY .. The Greens by aiding the Liberals down the path to oblivion have managed to do more damage to the environment (politcally) then the Exxon Valdez did to the west coast.

All Auto Manufacturers have driven down the same path. Here are two cars I owned in the 80s. 1980 Toyota Corolla 4 cylinder (M4) Manual 33 43 mpg 1980 Toyota Corolla 4 cylinder (M5) Manual 31 43 mpg Vs a 2008 2008 Toyota Corolla 4 cylinder 1.8 liter R (M5) Manual 28 37 MPG 2008 Toyota Corolla 4 cylinder 1.8 liter R (L4) Auto 26 35 MPG Do you see what I see??? In the late 80s until 2001 I drove two Dodge TC3, (Omni and a Charger style) Excellent gas milelage. Compare these figures, and remember those 1980 cars sold for dirt cheap back then, to the overpriced underpowered and not really that great comparatively smart car. And we will determine that there are alot of people with too much money. The auto industry will cater to its market. The market in the 80s and 90s was well tuned for high milelage low cost vehicles. Today a high milelage car is too expensive for the average consumer. Could this be market gouging... much like market gouging on the gas guzzling trucks of Toyota, Honda, GM, ??? OF course. What happened in the 80s is that all the cars and trucks sat on the lots unable to move because of high gas prices, and interest rates. The auto industry changed in short order, and provide affordable low cost vehicles with high gas milelage. Don't expect the industry to ever sell vehicles for less then people are willing to pay for them. As for providing incentives to the automanufacturers. Perhaps you live in the dark. THe Ontario Provincial GOvernment has been providing a slush fund of money in the form of technology grants which was to be spent on having Ontario operations provide the new emmisions friendly vehicles. However, the companies have chosen to use this money to relocate operations instead. Tax dollars at work. The Federal COnservatives have an adhoc system, where they drop money in ridings they think they can win and call it an industrial policy. Essentially the real conservative policy is to allow operations to leave the country and build vehicles elsewhere. In order to help facilitate that arrangement, they offer tax cuts for profitable ventures leaving the region as a parting gift. If the operations has operated at a previous loss, or pays no taxes because of tax write offs from past years, then the corporate tax cut does nothing. It is not a reinvestment or transition to Environmentally Friendly technology within the Canadian Industry. Those companies are being lured to other countries where they can meet lower environmental, safety and quality standards, as well as lots of fiscal graft for the relocation. Our government believes that this is great for Canada. It is a policy supported by both the Liberal and Conservatives, so there shouldn't be to much controversy over this policy. Why this thread title has fixated upon the auto industry surprises me, but only from the standpoint that most people do not realize that the Auto Industry is in far better shape then most of the industry in Ontario which have been closing their doors at a record pace under Liberal and Conservative governments. Ontario needs another tax..... Go ahead make my day.

You have quite a track record for not voting.

I CANNOT AND WILL NOT ACCEPT AGREEING TO SOMEONE FROM THE INSURANCE BUSINESS!!!! IF YOU KEEP THIS UP < MY FRUSTRATIONS WILL PEAK. I actually have to agree with my evil nemesis vs MAD (Handle) Micheal. There is alot that is wrong with the Street Racing Legislation. Having seen a man in a car pulled over and charged with street racing, while making a right hand turn, while pulling up beside a motorcycle that was going straight. He was actually lane splitting, and often it is the other way around, where the Car is going straight and the Motorcycle or Bicycle comes up to the right of the vehicle, stops and then makes the turn. This time it was in reverse, and depending on which city you are in, the practice is either frowned upon or accepted and ignored. I don't believe this person should have had their car impounded. I don't believe the old guy really knew what he did wrong. Perhap it was just a way to get the 66 year old guy off the road. I believe people are fooled by the title of the legislation and its enforcement. This is why so many of the charges are being dropped or lost in court or moved to the proper charge. I haven't followed the issue for a few months now, I am hoping that the Enforcement of the law has taken a more realistic and practical approach. As for Mad Micheal. If I am charged with .... in your hypothetical..... going 50km over the speed limit, lose my car, licence and pay all the impound fees, and get to court in 6 months, only to find that I am NOT guilty, then there is a serious problem with this violation of my rights and the highway traffic act. I have been a participant when an officer accidentally charged the wrong person in the parking lot after a chase through the streets. Pointing to the offender, the Officer was not biting. Multiple witnesses, a fast car, a wreckless driver, was not enough to convince the hyped up officer that he actually has the wrong person, when he asked for a younger mans ID. It went to court, and all was rectified, except that the offender never did end up getting charged. Had this event happened today, some poor sap standing in the wrong place at the wrong time, with the wrong car, would have probably lost his Car, his Job, his money, his licence and been in a heap of trouble for years, vs 6 months of feeling guilty for nothing. Luckily his record was never affected, he never lost his car, or his job or had to pay huge fines and towing fees. The officer made an honest, yet judgemental mistake. He wanted to get the bad guy and he made a guess, even though he was following the violater for 3 blocks, he got picked the wrong car in the parking lot. I have sat in a parking lot with 5 motorcycles, only to see an OPP cruiser come off the highway drive into the local Hortons and accuse the said riders of speeding on the highway. It didn't take very long for the officer to realize he made an error in his judgement, had the wrong people, as many witnesses and cold engines would as well as the Hortons security would back up. These guys are trying to do their job. Sometimes, not often, considering I am using two examples from 29 years of driving, they make mistakes. The Conviction rate of the Street Racing Legislation is troubling to say the least. If you gottem, you gottem. Prove it in court. Then take the toys/licence away. Not visa versa. Trial then Punishment.... What do insurance guys know. GO AWAY, your evil

With his bib... And a smoking jacket. What a loser of a candidate and MP. ..a useful idiot.

Joes Winning Biggest Contribution Dion Winning in the Comeback This isn't over yet.......

You are correct.

Blame McGuinty if you like ..... BUT ONLY MIKE HARRIS IS TO BLAME FOR THIS SHAM!!! He built the licence plate renewal into the sale. The Liberals fought this crap and lost in court. Infact this is such a sweatheart deal that no one can touch the ETR. Thanks HARR (ASS) the jerk. SORRY IT TOOK 10 YEARS TO GET SCREWED!!! CALL JOHN TORY IF YOU CAN FIND HIS SEAT. IT IS IN HIS CAR!!! Ok, Sorry about this crap Wild Bill. There are lots of errant bills, false plates, and ETR incompetence. The Era that you first described, when you went to return the transponder was the worst. Unfortuneately, you are toast.

Can't agree with you more erm less... no matter IT IS STILL A TIE AT 2 EACH !!! Look at these guys go!!!

And the race is on..... 1 for DION 1 for Clark

OK this is for fun.... FUN I thought this would be a battle of two similar yet completely different politicians. Judge their ultimate achievements.

No Early Exit for Dion. He is sticking around until the Liberals select a new leader. http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2008/10/20/...nt.html?ref=rss And then there is this quote from Dion Now that is scary. Not only did he show what kind of opposition leader he was. He showed us his strategy. Surrender in Central Nova. A platform of Confusion. An inability to connect with voters. Unable to listen to party advisers. In Effect a Liberal in the mold of Harper. Just as wrong headed, and head strong on policy vs pragmatism. Dion was not as nasty and insincere. But less savy, a poorer strategist who ignored a team of strategists, vs Harper with a Team of Strategists reigning him in enough to allow the Liberals to fall on their own sword. No Mr. Dion you would not have won, never in your lifetime under any circumstances. WHich is why you are leaving. THat too shows how little effect you had and could have had as a Prime Minister. Unable to cope with the pressures of power.