madmax

Certainly, reading the posts here, it shows that Harper has stalled and these policies aren't growing on people. It plays good to his base and western Canada, but doesn't grow on the larger, far more populous regions of the country. With the Liberals so weak, (they are getting Turner numbers) you would think the Conservatives would be on the verge of a Mulroney Landslide. They need some good economic policy, a move on Environment, and move away from their tactics of behaving like they are still the opposition and not the government. You would soon learn, that while Rae is a tactician, a great public speaker, he also has little courage or conviction. While this would fit well with the Liberal Mould, and Rae has virtually always been a Liberal , I don't believe he could bring victory to the Liberals. He certainly might fight the Cons, and he still plays well publicly, although he shouldn't, but he did a great job of hiding his failures of leadership on the party he led. So perhaps Rae is a great politician, if that is how we view them, but Nothing he did has held any water. The fact that after 15 years in power and Martin failing miserably as a leader, that the Liberals would have no one to choose other then a parachute intellectual elitist who spent most of his life in the US and supporting Harper on the Iraq War. Or Rae, a Failed NDP premier born with a silver spoon in his mouth, or Dion, another intellectual, who is not strategically competent is beyond me. But none of these potential leaders, NONE could offer Ontario anymore hope then, what the Conservatives are offering and that isn't saying alot. So really, what you say about the Libs not having the balls to make Rae their leader may not be an incorrect assessement. It could well be true. But the most telling line, is that the Liberals don't have any balls.

And the dope smoking corporate businessmen who build 35 to 40 skyscrapers a year and make a fortune. The have more then one plant growing

Even when it rains?

I also thought they were in a rush to get names out. It's not like the candidates are running for the Communist, BQ, Rhino, NPD, or Green Party. I would think any of those party names might put a Candidates job in Jeapardy, but Liberal? A circus requires clowns and the Liberals appear to be recruiting.

Mintority? Mint Into Tori Ity Hmm...

WHAT A LOAD OF BUNK!!! Beside, the only thing more SPINLESS then a Liberal Hiding in Fear while in Opposition, is a political coward who crosses the floor on DAY 1. He BETRAYED those who elected him. HE DID NOT CAMPAIGN SAYING.... I am a business man, not a politician....................YADDA YADDA YADDA...... He campaigned like any other LIBERAL of the day in 2006, SLAMMING the CONSERVATIVES and their Agenda. I'm going to be Stephen Harper's worst enemy," he warned. "We're going to stir the pot and you better believe we are going to make a heck of a lot of noise." What you are referring to is his blubbering excuses to express the turncoat nature of his actions. And even worse, how it goes against the REFORMIST vision that made up the Core of the Conservatives. Pretty much from that moment forward, we knew that these Conservatives were going to behave like Mulroney Conservatives. Power and Priveledge before Ethics and Honour. He is indeed a politician. Now if the Liberals could find a spine.......

This has got to be the most absurd....no wait, it's politics...ok this has got to be another one of the most absurd things to go on within the Liberal Party http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/stor..._liberal_080402

I didn't see this one previously posted, I apologise if someone did and I missed it. http://www.thestar.com/News/Canada/article/407824 Bad News for the Liberals, Worse News for Dion. Conservative/NDP stable Green Vote eating at Liberals.

Flaherty is a blowhard and a two time leadership loser. He was a poor finance minister and he has been heavily critised, by Conservatives too, for his lack of judgement. However, his attacks were not so much taken as against Mcguinty as they were taken as Anti Ontario. McGuinty is a dweeb, but a dweeb that just won a 2nd Majority, and strengthened it considerably. So, looking at Mr. Guyser, who is an open voter, and quite frankly has limited options, having read his past posts over the last year, votes either Liberal or Conservative. Therefore, Flaherty is turning off Centrist/financial services voters. So where does one go if DION (also portrayed as a dweeb) is not your first pick? These are the votes that Mr. Harper needs to get, and he ain't gonna get them with the likes of Flaherty spouting off like a little spoiled brat, and as Federal Finance minister, sits idly by as Ontario Bleeds. And there is more to come, it just hasn't caught up to the rest of the sectors. McGuinty was in denial that there was a manufacturing crises for 3 years, he let them bleed, and now he and Pupetello are running around like Chicken Little. I got no use for these two clowns who know nothing about working for a living, but as of recent, they can claim to be doing something, no matter how little or insignificant, and look like defenders of the Province, while the Feds and Flaherty look like Fat Cats looking to the West with eyes wide open and East with Blinders. Look at Flaherty's comments over the past year, not much to like. Look at Flaherty's Budget, and they are nothing to write home about. Not alot happening and bordering on deficit. Yikes!!! The Conservatives just barely broke back into Ontario, and they are not going anywhere with that kind of talk. Heading into an election, with comments like Foolish Flaherty will make John Tory look like a home run hitter, instead of a 3 time loser. Something about Ontario Conservatives. They never miss an opportunity to shoot themselves in the foot. John Torys just came out of an ELection barely holding onto his base, and has just attacked civil servants in the mold of Mike Harris. Good Luck John, you nose for exploiting a political opportunity is consistently plugged . No wonder this guy has no seat in the house. He reminds me of Joe Clark, but without the ability to win. If he wanted to comment on Civil Servants and be accurate. He could mention that the wages for private sector middle class Ontarians are stagnate or falling, while those in the Civil Service continue to go up. Civil Servants best beware that this cannot sustain itself, and in time they may be looking at huge paycuts just like the private sector. But Tory isn't that smart, because people with silver spoons often miss what is happening on the ground. Tories Rambling Rant, combined with Flaherties (ironically very opposing views between each other), have done nothing to promote the Conservative Party as a viable option in Ontario. If they keep this up, Ontario could remain a Liberal Stronghold, at a time when the Provincial Liberals haven't a clue what to do, and the Federal Liberals are afraid of their own shadow. So Guyser...... Where does a Progressive, Moderate, Business Oriented, Service Sector voter put down their marker, say one who did vote for John Tory last time around, or previously supported Flaherty or Harper? Do you just plug your nose, vote Conservative and put up with the ignorant yahoos that think Ontario should be sunk under the great lakes?

So has China and Mexico lost more jobs to technology, what is your point? Technological innovation also creates jobs. That is why Bell Canada offers Tech support from India. Presidents Choice Financial Quotes are done in India for both Home and Auto Insurance. Etc.... We could replace our entire financial industry offshore because of these great technological leaps. I find it amusing that the same arguments still go round in circles just the sector changes. Any COOPERs out there? I have a barrel I need fixed Sir John A Mac Donald, recognised Canada as a resoure rich country that had been exploited for years by the French and the British and various trading companies. He had great foresight with his National Policy. Something Liberals of the Day had great disdain for. Today, Liberals and Conservatives Share the views of those 19th Century LIberals regarding Trade. Trade will always be an issue with any country, and the balance will sway back and forth. Looking at South America where for Decades and Centuries policies were driven by Right Wing and resource based trade agreements, many of these countries sold themselves out and the people did not benefit. Econonic Collapse for many countries. Now we see, remaining puppet regimes of the US, or Extremists Left wing Challenges to the Global Economy and resource exploitation. Luckily Canada has never suffered from such huge swings in government policies. But are resources are in demand by the US and I don't believe we are getting as much for our natural resources as we should be demanding. However, other more knowledgeable people may know more about this one way or another. NAFTA doesn't allow the free movement of Labour, only goods and resources. One thing with the SPP is that they are working on allowing Mexicans to cross the borders freely to come to supply the US and Canada with cheaper labour. Too many people look at trade deals as if they can't be touched or that they are perfect. They are not, they are trade deals plain and simple, and they need to grow with the times and the concerns of the players/countries. One problem with NAFTA is how easily the US can thumb its nose at us, ignore rulings, and we have no enforcement or political leverage to make the US comply. Some have argued that by threatening reciporacal penalties in resource sectors the US can't ignore, were the tools that used to be used to get the US onboard in other areas. These were never pleasant situations and FTA was to elliviate these situations. Today, and since the inception of the FTA it was quite clear that the US main goal was to secure petrolium resources. Something they were always looking for. Just some thoughts.....

UM ? UH ? HMMM? ? The Liberals are USELESS?

Why did you leave Honda? Was it that bad of a job? Or just better opportunities in the West?

The Price of the Car is dictated by the market. Not the cost to produce. You can produce a vehicle and sell it at a profit or a loss, but the sale of the vehicle is driven by demand. No matter how much non value added salaried staff burden the overall cost in operations, they are not taking huge paycuts, nor is this a consideration when the operations choose to relocate. IF plants relocate, suppliers follow...it is just a fact, and their are many reasons behind choosing a location, and politics/money play a significant role in the decision. Vehicles made in other juridictions often sell their automotive goods for as much or more then the automotive goods made here. Vehicles have been made here for decades upon decades, however, even now we see Toyota hesitating, because of other market conditions which dwarf the labour costs of the Salaried and Contract Employees. Also Any savings that go into obtaining better prices from tier one suppliers are not passed on to the consumer, but go into the coffers of the Manufacturer. Dealers are not making alot of money from selling the car above their wholesale price, regardless of manufacturer and production origin. The way Auto Dealerships make their money today is in the financial upselling of various warranty packages/tire protections/ etc. The only time dealers are given opportunities to make money off the vehicles, is when the manufacturer is overloaded with a model and needs to move it, and their is a pecking order for this. What I am saying to you, August 1991 is that when the time comes when people are not able to pay $20,000 to $70,000 for an automobile, could you possibly see prices drop. But this is unlikely, nor would it be good for dealers or manufacturers regardless of origin. However, with the move to hybrids, the cars will be in demand and prices will rise as long as people are willing to pay for it. Balancing this out will be technological advancements that lower the costs to produce these cars. Unfortuneately, not everything works as good as an electronics model, which has held true (IMHO) since edison. Such as a computer, where in months to a years time you can buy a new computer with more power and cheaper then the one you currently purchased. There are more factors involved in Automotive Manufacturing and more reasons, that you won't receive a price advantage because of a change in the wages of an employees. Next Posting..... Quality, Marketing, and the changing consumer

Or stop anything else for that matter. Obviously, more worried about the party then the policy. Friendship and Politics can be separate.

Ok... This group of Liberals ARE pathetic. The CPC went to great lengths to portray Dion as weak. Had they waited, they wouldn't have had to spend all that money on advertising

If you are suggesting to reduce the Liberals to the SEVEN (7) voting members who made the effort to vote on their own amendment then I am in agreement. If only 7 can be bothered to vote, then that is all they need elected. If their purpose is to prop up the conservatives and vote for conservative agendas and not vote for their own agenda, then clearly, you may as well elect a Conservative. If you really want to put forth amendments with conviction, then you should elect an MP from a party that is not a member of the Liberal Party, because, obviously, under Stephen Dion, their is no committment to anything they profess to support. I think that it is only political junkies who care. I believe dyed in the wool Liberal Supporters are happy with this strategy because it keeps them alive, and their hopes alive that they can wait this out and reform the government. But as an opposition party, this group of Liberals appear pathetic.

Shouldn't I get TWO votes if I want to vote for the NeoRhinos?

Good information This is an excellent direct response to scribletts initial posting.

For a Long Time Unions have supported Conservative and Liberal Parties. There was an attempt from the 60s till roughly the 80s to support the NDP. I know of many NDP candidates who have ran in campaigns never to have seen a Union Dollar. I know of many Liberal Candidates with long lists of union donations. I am aware of Conservative Candidates receiving Union donations and having Union and former union Activist Campaign managers. Ah, the stereo types..... Really, corporations don't vote and shouldn't be allowed to adverstise or support any political campaign. They should just be concerned about doing business. Not getting involved in politics. .... I believe it was the National Party back in the 1990s that first brought forth the idea of banning union and corporate donations and replacing them with a $ per vote system. Man were they crazy..... never won a seat......yet....look at us federally. I believe the Manitoba NDP government banned union and corporate donations..... Man, that is just crazy

Curb union, corporate donations, NDP leader says Tory reliance on big money detrimental to families: Mason "We don't get as much from unions as people think," he said. "We'd be happy to give up our $50,000... if the Conservatives give up the $2 million they (receive) from corporations. Lisa Young, a political science professor at the University of Calgary, sees the NDP proposal as a positive development. Alberta stands out from most Canadian jurisdictions in its "Wild West" treatment of political finances, she said. The current situation in Alberta has helped create a longstanding tradition of "lopsided elections... that is very difficult to overcome," Young said.

The end For taking the bait, you did a great job.

2006 New Democratic Party Jack Layton 17.48% 2004 New Democratic Jack Layton 15.8% 2000 New Democrats Alexa McDonough 8.51% 1997 New Democrats Alexa McDonough 11.05% 1993 New Democratic Audrey McLaughlin 6.88% In the last 15 years, the NDP has been trending upwards in popular vote. This is still a very very very very long way from forming the official opposition. In fact, if I look further, It would be reasonable to assume that the NDP and its CCF roots have always been in the 6% to 20% range since their creation, but lets look to see if it's fact. 1988 New Democratic Party Ed Broadbent 20.38% 1984 New Democratic Party Ed Broadbent 18.81% 1980 New Democratic Party Ed Broadbent 19.77% 1979 New Democratic Party Ed Broadbent 17.88% 1974 New Democratic Party David Lewis 15.44% 1972 New Democratic Party David Lewis 17.83% 1968 New Democratic Party Tommy Douglas 16.96% 1965 New Democrats Party Tommy Douglas 17.91% 1963 New Democrats Tommy Douglas 13.24% 1962 New Democrats (CCF) Tommy Douglas 13.57% 1958 Co-operative Commonwealth M.J. Coldwell 9.51% 1957 Co-operative Commonwealth M.J. Coldwell 10.71% 1953 Co-operative Commonwealth M.J. Coldwell 11.28% 1949 Co-operative Commonwealth M.J. Coldwell 13.42% 1945 Co-operative Commonwealth M.J. Coldwell 15.55% 1940 Co-operative Commonwealth J. S. Woodsworth 8.42% 1935 Co-operative Commonwealth J.S. Woodsworth 9.31% Based on this, I don't think that anything has changed dramatically since the inception of the CCF. Party hacks tend to think that the general public really gives a rats ass about what goes in parliment. Nobody cares, nor should they be remotely concerned with the petty squabbles, political antics and false outrage. People have better things to do with their time. But when it comes time to vote, you can be assured, regardless of other parties that have come and gone during the life of the CCF/NDP that the NDP will continue to receive votes within the % percentages above and that the leadership will continue to bring in as many votes as possible. No different then any other party. What I find more interesting is the lack of movement of the Conservatives and Liberals and the NDP in the polls. Very stagnat. BUT!!! Here is what I think will happen in the NEXT election. It may not be a stalemate with a return to virtually the same number of seats. I think ONE party, and it could be any single party contesting the election, is going to get momentum, and have a significant change in their seat count and voter percentage. We could still have a minority government or a runaway majority. (PS, I have no scientific fact or data to back up this claim, It is only my opinion of how I think the electorate may behave this time around) If the electorate is tuned out, like they are now, then we may not see change. But, if someone can get the publics attention.... Your thoughts?

Trolling is against the rules and since I have been here I have seen some pretty big misleading whoppers for thread titles. (Sometimes that's the fun being here). I am not a fan of big brother, but every now and then the moderator needs to step in to keep order. We don't have trolls here :angry: We have ninja assassins Ah, Christmas is coming (can i say that?) Regardless, is the monthly deficit a cause for alarm ? A: NO Was this title offensive? A: imho NO Of course if I am wrong in the latter answer, I could be wrong in the former answer.

I have to wonder about the bold talk, tough love, and macho talk that comes from some forum members, and then to think that someone went running to mommy when he didn't like the thread title. I'm tellin, I'm telling on you Jdobbin. You are a bad boy :angry: Ok, so what's the big deal. One monthly deficit? Good article, and if the past is any measure, our federal finances will continue to diminish with Flaherty. But it hasn't happened yet. But really, I think with the way this thread title was initially portrayed. I would have had a petition ready to ban jdobbin

The Irony of Fortier speaking out regarding anything is amusing to say the least. Hiding in the security of the Senate. Perhaps he should commission a poll asking if he should step down. Fortier is one of the 2 mistakes Harper made within days of taking power. Emerson is the other. Fortier needs to shut up and hide, or people are going to question what the bagman is doing with our money.