PoliticalCitizen Posted September 18, 2008 Author Report Posted September 18, 2008 Why in the world would you base a vote for anyone on one single issue?? That just boggles my mind. If the issue is important to you and you see the other parties just using it as a card in their campaign - you will vote. Quote You are what you do.
PoliticalCitizen Posted September 18, 2008 Author Report Posted September 18, 2008 Raving idiots scare me.... Are you trying to insult me, Dancer? Quote You are what you do.
nbguyca Posted September 18, 2008 Report Posted September 18, 2008 If the issue is important to you and you see the other parties just using it as a card in their campaign - you will vote. This could have the best environmental policy in the world but if they haven't got a clue about anything else, what good are they? If you vote based on one issue and one issue only. you are voting irresponsibly. Unfortunately, many people vote like this. Quote
PoliticalCitizen Posted September 18, 2008 Author Report Posted September 18, 2008 This could have the best environmental policy in the world but if they haven't got a clue about anything else, what good are they? If you vote based on one issue and one issue only. you are voting irresponsibly. Unfortunately, many people vote like this. Not true. It is quite obvious that they would get a couple of seats at most, which is exactly what's needed to keep this one issue alive. They're far from the position where a viable shadow government can be formed... The other side of the coin is parties that try to cover everything - Liberals and Democrats - are very much alike and are both likely to forget or ignore the issues they used in to get votes in the election. Quote You are what you do.
nbguyca Posted September 18, 2008 Report Posted September 18, 2008 Not true.It is quite obvious that they would get a couple of seats at most, which is exactly what's needed to keep this one issue alive. They're far from the position where a viable shadow government can be formed... The other side of the coin is parties that try to cover everything - Liberals and Democrats - are very much alike and are both likely to forget or ignore the issues they used in to get votes in the election. I guess we are going to have to disagree. I have watched governments win and lose based on one issue voting. The winner then had no clue what to do. A responsible voter needs to weigh all the issues and decide who would best represent them best as an MP. Quote
M.Dancer Posted September 18, 2008 Report Posted September 18, 2008 Are you trying to insult me, Dancer? Why? You suggested that people hate things that they are afraid of and I continued.... Do you consider yourself a raving idiot? Quote RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us
PoliticalCitizen Posted September 18, 2008 Author Report Posted September 18, 2008 Why? You suggested that people hate things that they are afraid of and I continued....Do you consider yourself a raving idiot? So you're trying to insult me again... Is that the best argument you can come up with in a discussion? Quote You are what you do.
M.Dancer Posted September 18, 2008 Report Posted September 18, 2008 So you're trying to insult me again...Is that the best argument you can come up with in a discussion? I wasn't aware your comment to me was part of a discussion. Why do you feel you are being insulted? Are you that self centred....? Quote RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us
PoliticalCitizen Posted September 18, 2008 Author Report Posted September 18, 2008 I wasn't aware your comment to me was part of a discussion. Why do you feel you are being insulted? Are you that self centred....? People usually don't hate something or someone unless they are afraid of it, don't understand it, or know it is more powerful than them. Hate is a feeling of the powerless... As a civilized and educated person living in a free country you should have no reason to hate anyone... especially people who are expressing their freedom of thought and speech... unless you are afraid that what they may uncover will rip the fabric of the world as you know it... Quote You are what you do.
kengs333 Posted September 18, 2008 Report Posted September 18, 2008 So you're trying to insult me again...Is that the best argument you can come up with in a discussion? That his MO. Somehow, for 9000+ posts, he's been able to carry on that way unimpeded. Makes one wonder... Quote
Charles Anthony Posted September 18, 2008 Report Posted September 18, 2008 Everybody, Stop with the baiting and the personal attacks. Take this as a global warning. If this childishness continues, posting privileges will be suspended. Quote We do not have time for a meeting of the flat earth society. << Où sont mes amis ? Ils sont ici, ils sont ici... >>
marksman Posted September 19, 2008 Report Posted September 19, 2008 Only one?Green Party And these are the ones that have come to light so far. As long as the Greens don't receive any votes, no one cares who their candidates are. But if they rise in the polls, they'll come under more scrutiny. For the moment, the Greens are getting a free ride because in general, people vote for them thinking that they're "voting for the environment". I don't understand. You're saying that the Greens are a fringe party and your 2nd piece of proof is that they kicked out a candidate that might've said inappropriate things. That sounds like the actions of a mainstream party not a fringe party. If saying inappropriate things is your definition of fringe then there's an agricultural minister that meets your criteria. To partially agree with you though I've got no doubts that if you questioned every candidate from every party and they actually answered honestly you'd find a lot more fringe people in every party. Quote
PoliticalCitizen Posted September 19, 2008 Author Report Posted September 19, 2008 I don't understand. You're saying that the Greens are a fringe party and your 2nd piece of proof is that they kicked out a candidate that might've said inappropriate things. That sounds like the actions of a mainstream party not a fringe party.If saying inappropriate things is your definition of fringe then there's an agricultural minister that meets your criteria. To partially agree with you though I've got no doubts that if you questioned every candidate from every party and they actually answered honestly you'd find a lot more fringe people in every party. With this election the Greens have a good chance of getting a few seats in the Parliament. Can you guys remind me how many seats are necessary to have the "party" status? Quote You are what you do.
Oleg Bach Posted September 19, 2008 Report Posted September 19, 2008 Never liked Jack Layton much - but as time passed he actually looks like a leader of some sort - to bad that the conservatives sent off all the manufacturing jobs to China in a bid for more selfish enrichment. This sending away of blue collared employment has destroyed the NDP ...seeing there are no more factories - hence no blue collar - hence no NDP - Layton had better relize that the party is dead and run as an independent - He might just win - The Jack Party! He could ruin, I mean run the nation and we could live in co-op housing and all get mail order brides - real hot young ones....you know - the kind that wash the floor and get you beer! Quote
capricorn Posted September 19, 2008 Report Posted September 19, 2008 With this election the Greens have a good chance of getting a few seats in the Parliament. Personally, I don't see it happening this time around. One look at their policy platform is enough to turn potential Green voters away. Can you guys remind me how many seats are necessary to have the "party" status? 12. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Official_party_status Quote "We always want the best man to win an election. Unfortunately, he never runs." Will Rogers
M.Dancer Posted September 19, 2008 Report Posted September 19, 2008 (edited) With this election the Greens have a good chance of getting a few seats in the Parliament.Can you guys remind me how many seats are necessary to have the "party" status? As they wander between 6 and 9% their chances are few and far between. They wil be extremely lucky if they come in 3rd in any riding... Edited September 19, 2008 by M.Dancer Quote RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us
Bryan Posted September 20, 2008 Report Posted September 20, 2008 With this election the Greens have a good chance of getting a few seats in the Parliament. What ridings do you see them being able to win? Every riding by riding poll I've seen has their regional support in the same range as their national support. Quote
PoliticalCitizen Posted September 20, 2008 Author Report Posted September 20, 2008 What ridings do you see them being able to win? Every riding by riding poll I've seen has their regional support in the same range as their national support. Well I guess May has no chance against MacKay... Guelph has a good chance to get at least one riding and there was a riding in BC where Greens led the race and narrowly lost. Quote You are what you do.
Moonbox Posted September 20, 2008 Report Posted September 20, 2008 Well I guess May has no chance against MacKay...Guelph has a good chance to get at least one riding and there was a riding in BC where Greens led the race and narrowly lost. I live in Guelph and they have no chance of being elected here. There is a strong little core of voters who will vote Green around the University and in our old downtown but Guelph has quickly become a suburb of Toronto/Mississauga and it will probably be a Liberal again. It could go blue but the local conservative candidate is not impressing anyone. Quote "A man is no more entitled to an opinion for which he cannot account than he does for a pint of beer for which he cannot pay" - Anonymous
WIP Posted September 20, 2008 Report Posted September 20, 2008 To all major parties the "Environment" is just a card that they play during the election to quickly forget and dismiss right after they get in the office. No kidding! But Stephan Dion went so far out on a limb, proposing a green plan with a carbon tax, that I actually considered that maybe he had the strength of conviction. But what do I find in the news today: Green Shift: Are Liberals downplaying eco plan? WINNIPEG–Liberal Leader Stéphane Dion yesterday appeared to back away from his Green Shift plan featuring a controversial carbon tax by insisting it is not a major part of his election platform. And here I was actually planning on voting for a Liberal for the first time in over 20 years! The Liberals have been promoting their Green Shift Plan all summer, but rather than fall on his sword, Dion would rather try to scale it down and cling to the extremely faint hope of winning the election, and sacrifice whatever semblance of pride he has left! Since I have no reason to vote Conservative or N.D.P. either, I'm going to check the box for the Green Party candidate. The FPTP system makes it next to impossible for new parties to gain a foothold; but these aren't normal times! The Liberals may implode by taking away just about every reason to vote for them, and the NDP should have gone the way of the dinosaur years ago! There's no likely way to stop a Harper majority government it seems, but there is an opportunity to establish a new party with new ideas to shake up the system. Quote Anybody who believers exponential growth can go on forever in a finite world is either a madman or an economist. -- Kenneth Boulding, 1973
WIP Posted September 20, 2008 Report Posted September 20, 2008 We are all witnessing the results of the FPTP system (2006): Bloq Quebequois: Popular Vote = 10.48% (All of it in Quebec, of course); Seats = 51 Green Party: Popular Vote = 4.48% (All over Canada); Seats = 0 So whomever interests are represented by the results they are obviously NOT the interests of the majority of voters... But I'm not trying to change the system in this thread - just raise awareness of the Green alternative. We had a chance to get a proportional system in Ontario's last election, but most of the people I talked to didn't understand the proposal and were dissuaded by the propaganda from the Big Three, who want to keep the status quo and keep new parties from getting a foothold. Quote Anybody who believers exponential growth can go on forever in a finite world is either a madman or an economist. -- Kenneth Boulding, 1973
Wild Bill Posted September 20, 2008 Report Posted September 20, 2008 (edited) We had a chance to get a proportional system in Ontario's last election, but most of the people I talked to didn't understand the proposal and were dissuaded by the propaganda from the Big Three, who want to keep the status quo and keep new parties from getting a foothold. I understood it perfectly. I didn't like it! It all hinged on the idea of politicians making the list of alternative MPP's instead of voters. Every one I know who voted against the idea did so for this very reason. Yet every single time I hear someone like yourself refer to that vote I NEVER hear that point mentioned! It's always "Oh, folks just didn't get enough time to understand it!" or "Well, bad people spread evil propaganda that scared people away from it!" Never what perhaps was the TRUTH - there were things about the proposal that folks DIDN'T LIKE! The idea of a more proportional system is a totally separate and distinct issue from the specific proposal that was offered to Ontario voters on that ballot. It was a dumb and unpopular approach to your goal of PRR. Get over it! Stop whining and come up with a better one! Edited September 20, 2008 by Wild Bill Quote "A government which robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul." -- George Bernard Shaw "There is no point in being difficult when, with a little extra effort, you can be completely impossible."
PoliticalCitizen Posted September 20, 2008 Author Report Posted September 20, 2008 No kidding! But Stephan Dion went so far out on a limb, proposing a green plan with a carbon tax, that I actually considered that maybe he had the strength of conviction. But what do I find in the news today:Green Shift: Are Liberals downplaying eco plan? WINNIPEG–Liberal Leader Stéphane Dion yesterday appeared to back away from his Green Shift plan featuring a controversial carbon tax by insisting it is not a major part of his election platform. And here I was actually planning on voting for a Liberal for the first time in over 20 years! The Liberals have been promoting their Green Shift Plan all summer, but rather than fall on his sword, Dion would rather try to scale it down and cling to the extremely faint hope of winning the election, and sacrifice whatever semblance of pride he has left! Since I have no reason to vote Conservative or N.D.P. either, I'm going to check the box for the Green Party candidate. The FPTP system makes it next to impossible for new parties to gain a foothold; but these aren't normal times! The Liberals may implode by taking away just about every reason to vote for them, and the NDP should have gone the way of the dinosaur years ago! There's no likely way to stop a Harper majority government it seems, but there is an opportunity to establish a new party with new ideas to shake up the system. Great! Every vote counts If not to get your Green MP into the office than at least to prove to Canadians that the FPTP system is choking true democracy by denying fair representation of people's will in the Parliament. My reasons to go Green were similar: it's same shit, different party for the big three. As for BQ - they are a living insult to Federalism in general... and a parasite as they get funded by all "have" provinces while working against them... Quote You are what you do.
marksman Posted September 20, 2008 Report Posted September 20, 2008 I understood it perfectly. I didn't like it! It all hinged on the idea of politicians making the list of alternative MPP's instead of voters. I don't understand that criticism. Politicians make the list of candidates in each riding so what's the difference between the list of candidates in the ridings and the list of candidates used to make the seat totals proportional to the vote totals? Quote
Bryan Posted September 20, 2008 Report Posted September 20, 2008 Well I guess May has no chance against MacKay...Guelph has a good chance to get at least one riding and there was a riding in BC where Greens led the race and narrowly lost. Greens got less than 2% in Central Nova last time. Do you really think just May being there will get her that seat? I highly doubt it, especially since she's running against the Deputy Prime Minister. Guelph? 4th place. In all of BC, the Greens never finished better than 4th place last election. In some ridings they finished fifth behind independent or Christian Heritage candidates. They never broke the 10% support barrier, and even got less than 2% in many ridings. Perhaps you were thinking of a provincial election? I know the Greens came in second in Owen Sound in 2007. Quote
.thumb.jpg.9a49e1b2f22a6d34a345152c50044aa9.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.