How many Green votes?

William Ashley · October 22, 2008

The MP represents the riding collectively and by extension, you. They are not your personal mouth piece. Do you really think because you vote for someone and they get elected they will table your suggestion as a Private members bill? They will look at it if the bill concerns their riding but really....how naive. Doesn't anyone now what MPs do for their ridings?
They will listen to you though if you feel you are being unfairly treated by revenue canada, or that you would like government help for a local inititive....

OK so how do they represent me again?

You are saying they are somehow representative but havn't stated a single thing they do to represent me.

As for being unfairly treated by revenue canada I did and you know what came out of it, nothing that I can see. Revenue canada wont even provide an audit for someone who is incapable of doing their own taxes.

Revenue Canada's advice, do it anyway, if there are errors it doesnt matter.

I think you are totally wrong, MPs are suppose to be a voice for the people of their riding, not their own agenda. That is the whole point of parliamentary democracy, and as a fact it started not with 1 person but 2 or more being representatives of their riding. You clearly do not know what representation means.

At one point we had and we should still have the right to redress the monarch. The early parliaments were a way of sending people to represent their communities of the commons. To express the concerns of those who would find it difficult to travel to the court.

Edited October 22, 2008 by William Ashley

capricorn · October 22, 2008

In post # 80, I said:

Green party advocates in Canada were too lazy to work within an established national party to raise the profile of their environmental concerns and policies. They could have picked the Liberals or the NDP who would have been welcoming of a group of individuals dedicated to putting forward good environmental policies. But no. They had to go and form their own little Canadian version of the Green Party concentrated on one single issue. They totally ignored the fact that there is strength in numbers which they have had working within an established party. If the Greens are so convinced that their environment cause is meritorious and they have the answers to Canada's environment problems, there were other conduits already available to them to really make a difference.
The Green Party is destined to remain a fringe/protest party in Canada.

Lo and behold, David Suzuki agrees with me and went so far as to suggest there should not be a Green Party in Canada.

Canada’s foremost environmentalist says there’s no need for the country’s political landscape to include the Green Party.
David Suzuki on Tuesday via teleconference told a gathering of Lakehead University students that as long as there’s a Green Party the environment will be tossed around like a hot potato with no real action being completed.

"There shouldn’t be a Green Party," he said, matter-of-factly and unexpectedly.

An outspoken supporter of outgoing Liberal Leader Stephane Dion’s much maligned Green Shift carbon tax proposal, Suzuki suggested having a party solely focused on sustainability and the environment will not make the impact most supporters are hoping for.

Suzuki praised Green Party Leader Elizabeth May for getting into the national television debates during the recent election campaign, but suggested her platform is one better served if adopted by more mainstream parties.

"I really think we’ve got to drive the green agenda so it becomes everyone’s agenda," Suzuki said to an Agora audience of about 150.

"But until they understand that, yes, this has got to be the way we all act, it’s going to continue to be a political football."

http://www.tbsource.com/localnews/index.asp?cid=112586

The one time Suzuki and I agree on something, and I got to say it before he did. Man, I can just feel my credibility soaring in leaps and bounds. :lol:

Alta4ever · October 22, 2008

OK so how do they represent me again?
You are saying they are somehow representative but havn't stated a single thing they do to represent me.

As for being unfairly treated by revenue canada I did and you know what came out of it, nothing that I can see. Revenue canada wont even provide an audit for someone who is incapable of doing their own taxes.

Revenue Canada's advice, do it anyway, if there are errors it doesnt matter.

I think you are totally wrong, MPs are suppose to be a voice for the people of their riding, not their own agenda. That is the whole point of parliamentary democracy, and as a fact it started not with 1 person but 2 or more being representatives of their riding. You clearly do not know what representation means.

At one point we had and we should still have the right to redress the monarch. The early parliaments were a way of sending people to represent their communities of the commons. To express the concerns of those who would find it difficult to travel to the court.

Look at this way you are trying to elect who you think would best represent your constituency, but you were out voted, the person that is elected MP is still to represent your consituency, which includes you. They have no idea who you voted for and will listen to your arguement, and most will take it into consideration.

BUt you like a minority of others don't understand this or how it works.

BTW we are a constitutional monarchy, this means the people have the power to enact law. this was set out in the Magna Carta. It is the basis of our law and political system. We are not a straight monarchy, the crown does not have absolute power. In fact now it has no power, it is nothing more than a traditional symbol.

Alta4ever · October 22, 2008

Are you trying to prove my point.
Just some points

1. Canada is a minority government by the conservatives, the first past the post system for the most part insures a minority representation in the commons, and insures no representation in the senate. The GG and Queen are mostly executive and are more directive and active than propositional.

2. Canada is a monarchy so your comments about countries with monarchies is also off on that.

I am hardly whining it is you who is in denile and either really stupid or a lier. Even you can learn so don't give up hope. Nothing personal just stating facts.

A liar, care to prove that? Is that how you deal with someone who contradicts your position?

You are whining, it is you who wants to impose your minority's beliefs on the majority of others.

M.Dancer · October 22, 2008

I think you are totally wrong, MPs are suppose to be a voice for the people of their riding, not their own agenda. That is the whole point of parliamentary democracy, and as a fact it started not with 1 person but 2 or more being representatives of their riding. You clearly do not know what representation means.

Apparently quite a bit more than you. Show me where ot says anywhere that an MP has to follow the wishes of a crack pot. You seem to assume that if one crack pot wants something from their MP, then that must be the voice of the people....not quite.

As for being unfairly treated by revenue canada I did and you know what came out of it, nothing that I can see. Revenue canada wont even provide an audit for someone who is incapable of doing their own taxes.
Revenue Canada's advice, do it anyway, if there are errors it doesnt matter

Somehow I am not surprised you are incapable of doing your taxes. And I see no reason why Rev Can should do your accounting for you. I also notice you didn't quote your MP.....if I was your MP I would have sent you to H+R Block....

kengs333 · October 23, 2008

You are whining, it is you who wants to impose your minority's beliefs on the majority of others.

Unlike the Conservatives, who only got 37.7% of the vote... :rolleyes:

kengs333 · October 23, 2008

In post # 80, I said:
Lo and behold, David Suzuki agrees with me and went so far as to suggest there should not be a Green Party in Canada.

http://www.tbsource.com/localnews/index.asp?cid=112586

The one time Suzuki and I agree on something, and I got to say it before he did. Man, I can just feel my credibility soaring in leaps and bounds.

An odd claim considering that it was the Green Party that forced the other parties to take the environment seriously.

kengs333 · October 23, 2008

Represented how, if i I ask my MP to say something in parliament and they say no, or I propose a private members bill and they say they dont have time to address it in parliament how is this representation.. what if I have concerns about specific practices of government and they are in power so they dont want to spoil their own government, how is this representation?

M.Dancer always says that, though; and I'm sure that he does so oblivious to its stupidity because he has a Conservative MP. I'd sure love to see the day when his riding goes NDP and what he has to say about his "representation".

kengs333 · October 23, 2008

I see your point but the BQ only runs candidates in Qc plus they are a populist party. The Greens are more of a fringe party and run candidates in all 308 ridings. The BQ have a concentrated base of support and have developed that. The Greens do not and have not. Not really fair to compare those two.

LOL... So the Greens are a "fringe" party because they actually manage to run candidates across the country as opposed to just one province? I guess that makes the Cons a fringe party too, then?

kengs333 · October 23, 2008

I heard no outcry to change it when the Liberals were winning elections. Only now that your guy/gal didn't get in. The person with the most votes wins, what's fairer than that?

The issue has been around for quite awhile.

Alta4ever · October 23, 2008

Unlike the Conservatives, who only got 37.7% of the vote...

Out of all the parties conservatives got more of the vote than any one other party.

Have I once complained about this, although it really was not different then the last 4 liberal government which only one of them had more than 40% election night. Even in those results you would have never caught me whining about the need for proportional representation as presented by you sore losers. :rolleyes:

Keep in mind that all of you may be on the left but none of you agree, so when you look at it the liberals only got 26.23, NDP who got 18.19, the bloc at 9.98 and then the greens at 6.80.

So lets look at this the way you seem to 73.77% of Canadians did not vote for the liberals, 81.81% of Canadians did not vote for the NDP, 90.02% of Canadians did not vote for the Bloc, and well you should see the trend 93.2% of Canadians did vote for the greens. So what does this say to you? I'll tell you what this says to me a bigger majority of Canadians didn't want a liberal, ndp, or green government then CPC. So our democracy worked, I still would have said it worked had the result been different and another party got in.

Mr.Canada · October 23, 2008

LOL... So the Greens are a "fringe" party because they actually manage to run candidates across the country as opposed to just one province? I guess that makes the Cons a fringe party too, then?

I believe it's a rule of these not to shorten proper names as you have done.

Not at all. The Green Party needs to concentrate on ridings that are winnable. Much like the Social Credit and NDP parties used to do when they started. Like it or not they have zero credibility until they win a seat, they need to concentrate on that. Winning ONE seat.

Edited October 23, 2008 by Mr.Canada

M.Dancer · October 23, 2008

M.Dancer always says that, though; and I'm sure that he does so oblivious to its stupidity because he has a Conservative MP. I'd sure love to see the day when his riding goes NDP and what he has to say about his "representation".

Your string of being wrong is unbroken. My MP is Carolyn Bennett. My riding is as likely to go NDP as a Calgary riding go Green.

M.Dancer · October 23, 2008

An odd claim considering that it was the Green Party that forced the other parties to take the environment seriously.

It was the greens that got the Liberals to go to Kyoto? What about the Mulroney Era?

Revisonist history must be a (greenhouse ) gas....

Mr.Canada · October 23, 2008

Your string of being wrong is unbroken. My MP is Carolyn Bennett. My riding is as likely to go NDP as a Calgary riding go Green.

I'd say ST. Pauls is probably the safest Liberal riding in the country. It voted in, what? One Conservatove MP in the last 50 years or something like that?

Plus she delivered most of the people who vote for her now so yeah, she's pretty safe...lol.

EDIT - Alright I just check the wiki. 4 in the last 50 years and 1 in the last 28 years. If Peter Kent can't bring her down, nobody can. She's there for as long as she wants to run there.

Edited October 23, 2008 by Mr.Canada

M.Dancer · October 23, 2008

I'd say ST. Pauls is probably the safest Liberal riding in the country. It voted in, what? One Conservatove MP in the last 50 years or something like that?
Plus she delivered most of the people who vote for her now so yeah, she's pretty safe...lol.

EDIT - Alright I just check the wiki. 4 in the last 50 years and 1 in the last 28 years.

It went conservative during the Harris years with Isabel Basset. It won't do that again for awhile as Michael Bryant is a long time resident, has a grass roots organization, his child goes to school here with my son....

But we did have Babs Mcdougall for awhile..I voted for her once on the strength of her visiting me at my door asking for my support. There were two issues that were important, Free Trade and her plunging neckline. I was willing to support both.

I'm a sucker for Free Trade and plunging necklines.

William Ashley · October 23, 2008

Look at this way you are trying to elect who you think would best represent your constituency, but you were out voted, the person that is elected MP is still to represent your consituency, which includes you. They have no idea who you voted for and will listen to your arguement, and most will take it into consideration.
BUt you like a minority of others don't understand this or how it works.

BTW we are a constitutional monarchy, this means the people have the power to enact law. this was set out in the Magna Carta. It is the basis of our law and political system. We are not a straight monarchy, the crown does not have absolute power. In fact now it has no power, it is nothing more than a traditional symbol.

My experience is much different, and this is why I KNOW partisan politics that neglect any person who they are to represent is counter representation for the riding and the people in general.

Members of Parties actively serve some roles, that is receiving and discussing issues, but they often end up being filterers, rather than transmitters of information. They arnt representative they are judicial or at best diplomatic, that is what the courts should be doing not the representatives.

The point of the legislature or what it is suppose to be is to provide an outlet for the people to express their concerns and demands, to insure that their tax dollars and the laws that exist are sufficient to regulate society properly and insure that people do not become agitated - that is that they are brought to a state of war against the state, or breach of peace, riot, rebellion or what have you.

The courts are there to resolve breaches, and to mitigate potential breaches - eg. criminal, or civil courts - there are others such as martial courts to mediate ongoing wars or to extend the judicature beyond the bounds of the civil courts when there is no other civil jurisdiction that can viably adjudicate the state.

People have warped the legislature and it is highly unfortunate that Canada is not a free democracy, or that it even attempts to provide a democracy based on popular support ongoing so much is lost by silencing the minorities right to voice concern in open assembly.

You clearly have never read the magna carta--- the magna carta was an example of how in an akward situation state practices can be altered under threat, not be held up due to duress, but still be used at law illegally for political practices

eg. carta was forced on john, john rescinded it stating he was under duress (which is counter legal practice to enforce a contract entered under duress -also the pope was his headman at the time), then it was NOT law for some time, then after some time the magna carta was used to insure the barons right to question as had existed prior. If anything was instrumental in the british constitutionary documents it was the bill of rights, not the magna - the magna existed in practice in common law, it was just that William the Conqueror was really efficient at gaining authority over his fellow vasals.

There are probably lots of other things you don't realize but a big one is that all this stuff about the magna being really epic at the time is just a result vasalage, and illegal or questinable acts, that is used to deny divine right of monarchs which is also somewhat a fabrication of the period, however it is a little more complex than that.

None the less you appear uneducated to me in your manner of speach then using really weak rhetoric to create the appearance I dont have knoweldge, Ive actually studied the middle ages in university.

It isnt the basis of the legal system. You clearly havnt a clue, it does represent the martial and political though, not so much the legal system, as the magna was an illegal contract since John was a vasal at the time and his leige rescinded it, so too did John, who never ceased to have soviergn power, that is the right to break treaty since he was the highest court and could rescind any agreement.

Edited October 23, 2008 by William Ashley

Alta4ever · October 23, 2008

Members of Parties actively serve some roles, that is receiving and discussing issues, but they often end up being filterers, rather than transmitters of information. They arnt representative they are judicial or at best diplomatic, that is what the courts should be doing not the representatives.

I have seen suggestiona I have made to my MP make it to the floor of the House of Commons. Heck even the provincial politician that made MLA in my riding I didn't vote or supported has taken questions that I have and got answers from cabinet ministers. I just don't see what the problem is the system is working very well.

Mr.Canada · October 23, 2008

It went conservative during the Harris years with Isabel Basset. It won't do that again for awhile as Michael Bryant is a long time resident, has a grass roots organization, his child goes to school here with my son....
But we did have Babs Mcdougall for awhile..I voted for her once on the strength of her visiting me at my door asking for my support. There were two issues that were important, Free Trade and her plunging neckline. I was willing to support both.

I'm a sucker for Free Trade and plunging necklines.

I was speaking for federal but yeah if you take provincial into account, you're correct.

"I'm a sucker for Free Trade and plunging necklines." Way to hold onto your integrity there M.Dancer lol.

kengs333 · October 23, 2008

Out of all the parties conservatives got more of the vote than any one other party.
Have I once complained about this, although it really was not different then the last 4 liberal government which only one of them had more than 40% election night. Even in those results you would have never caught me whining about the need for proportional representation as presented by you sore losers.

Please, if you consider wanting all Canadians to be represented in Parlaiment "whining" then there's no discussion.

I ask you one thing, though: was the Reform Party "whining" when they wanted "democratic reform"? Didn't think so...

kengs333 · October 23, 2008

I believe it's a rule of these not to shorten proper names as you have done.

I doubt it, but if it is I apologize for always heartlessly referring to the New Democratic Party as the NDP... :rolleyes:

kengs333 · October 23, 2008

I have seen suggestiona I have made to my MP make it to the floor of the House of Commons. Heck even the provincial politician that made MLA in my riding I didn't vote or supported has taken questions that I have and got answers from cabinet ministers. I just don't see what the problem is the system is working very well.

Good, then I shall tomorrow ask my Conservative MP to champion my wish for a Carbon Tax once Parlaiment resumes...

William Ashley · October 23, 2008

-

Edited October 23, 2008 by William Ashley

Mr.Canada · October 23, 2008

William Ashley, Why do you post these epic tales? Very few people will take the time to read it. You should keep your points short if you want a true response.

Imho, of course you are free to post as you like. I'm just trying to help.

Alta4ever · October 23, 2008

Please, if you consider wanting all Canadians to be represented in Parlaiment "whining" then there's no discussion.
I ask you one thing, though: was the Reform Party "whining" when they wanted "democratic reform"? Didn't think so...

Actually they were because they never would have been able to form government to do it. They were whining in hopes some other party would do it for them. They were never going to form government and they new it. There were those in the reform party that want exactly what you do, and they are wrong for it.