Progressive Tory Posted March 2, 2009 Report Posted March 2, 2009 Why would someone interested in PR, vote for the LPC who advocate against PR? Because the CPC are NUTS. Quote "For all our modesty and self-deprecation, we’re a people who dream great dreams. And then roll up our sleeves and turn them into realities." - Michael Ignatieff "I would not want the Prime Minister to think that he could simply fail in the House of Commons as a route to another General Election. That's not the way our system works." Stephen Harper.
madmax Posted March 2, 2009 Report Posted March 2, 2009 Because the CPC are NUTS. That is no reason to vote for the LPC. That is a reason not to vote for the CPC. Neither party supports PR. And NUTS are plentiful in politics. MIXED NUTS are quite popular on Parliment Hill. Quote
ToadBrother Posted March 2, 2009 Report Posted March 2, 2009 Regardless, electoral reform isn't the be all and end all. I agree. It's not about whether some fringe party with 10% of the vote can get a handful of seats or not. To my mind the really failure has occurred inside the House, and I fail to see how modifying the way MPs get there is going to solve the problem of MPs of all parties basically being treated as voting machines by the leadership of their parties. The current caucus system needs to be massively loosened up. MPs need to grow a backbone. Quote
Argus Posted March 3, 2009 Report Posted March 3, 2009 If he is, he's not doing a very good at it, because he's sure making the Liberals look good. But then so is Harper. He sounds like an overenthusiastic boy without the slightest political awareness of what's been going on in any of the parties over the past five years who reads the papers only for the comics. If the likes of him and you represent the Liberal party i want nothing to do with it. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted March 3, 2009 Report Posted March 3, 2009 Oh, but look on the bright side. We get to feed them and their families for the rest of their natural lives. Won't make gangs go away though, unless they're hungry or would like a free university education.My conservative perspective. You don't HAVE a conservative perspective. Most of these people are already on welfare, as are their familes. Personally, I'd make them work for their food while in prison, and pay for every benefit they get above basic food and shelter. The cost of keeping them in prison, in any event, is less to society than the cost of the damages they create on the streets. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted March 3, 2009 Report Posted March 3, 2009 That's interesting, because in my riding, the Councillors and Mayor are all Open Conservatives and Liberals. There isn't a single NDP or Green or person who declares themselves independant of parties. Infact, my guess is most municipaliteis are Liberal and Conservative. I think you are making it up, when you say "the vast majority of councils are lefty dominated". I find that hard to believe. In fact, I'm pretty sure you're lying. What municipality do you hale from. I'll look them up. The fact that you don't know or don't care about Hurricane Hazel shows how disconnected you are from Municipal Politics and politicians. Right, she's the mayor of a "city" which almost no one even knows is a city because there's no THERE there. It's nothing but a suburb of Toronto, and carries about as much importance as a suburb. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted March 3, 2009 Report Posted March 3, 2009 Because the CPC are NUTS. PT learned this when she became infatuated with Iggy, and started posting his picture on the wall like a schoolgirl with a crush. The CPC oppose Iggy. Therefore, they're nuts. Igggy is fab, y'know! he's so hot! Don't you just get all mushy inside whenever he waggles his big thick eyebrows! Swwoooooonnn. I love him soooo muccchhh! That basically constitutes PT's extensive logic and political acumen on the subject of federal politics. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
madmax Posted March 3, 2009 Report Posted March 3, 2009 (edited) I find that hard to believe. In fact, I'm pretty sure you're lying. What municipality do you hale from. I'll look them up. Unfortuneately, there is little satisfaction for me provide this information. You will discount facts as easily as you discount the 6th largest city below. What's in it for me..... Right, she's the mayor of a "city" which almost no one even knows is a city because there's no THERE there. It's nothing but a suburb of Toronto, and carries about as much importance as a suburb. No wonder people don't like Civil Servants like you. Edited March 3, 2009 by madmax Quote
Oleg Bach Posted March 3, 2009 Report Posted March 3, 2009 If liberal is the new conservative and the neo-conservatives are the new facists - then I would vote liberal - but....If you take the mayor of Toronto who is supposedly a leftist liberal environmentalist...who now hands out 150 traffic tickets to bike riders going the wrong way on a quiet residential street - it makes you wonder if some liberals and NDPers are simply hypocrites and total materalist..which does not make for a good and kind civil society. It's hard to tell who is who 'You will know them by the fruit they bear" - And Layton along with Miller and McGinty are ambitious opportunist who love money a little to much ----show me a real liberal and I will vote for them - show me a real conservative and I will vote for them also - so far both are rare. Quote
Progressive Tory Posted March 3, 2009 Report Posted March 3, 2009 The Liberals don't support Electoral Reform of any kind. Its not part of their platform.The Federal NDP supports Electoral Reform in a PR system. The Federal NDP supports Electoral Reform in the abolishing of the Senate. The Conservatives support Electoral Reform in an Elected Senate. (Erm, just ignore December for my benefit) That's not entirely true. Liberals have agreed that electoral reform is necessary, but that full scale Proportional Representation is not attainable. The Green Party are the strongest supporters of PR and Conservatives want smaller government... hmmm...Wait.... more government? Not sure anymore, but you're right, they definitely want an elected senate ... oops... no lobbyists with gov't jobs? ...oops. Can't remember what they used to want. Quote "For all our modesty and self-deprecation, we’re a people who dream great dreams. And then roll up our sleeves and turn them into realities." - Michael Ignatieff "I would not want the Prime Minister to think that he could simply fail in the House of Commons as a route to another General Election. That's not the way our system works." Stephen Harper.
madmax Posted March 3, 2009 Report Posted March 3, 2009 That's not entirely true. Liberals have agreed that electoral reform is necessary, but that full scale Proportional Representation is not attainable. Well that clears it up entirely.The LIBERALS DO NOT SUPPORT PR. You have told someone in this thread looking for PR to vote Liberal. You have proven why this person should NOT vote Liberal if they want PR. Because voting Liberal will never get this person PR. The Green Party are the strongest supporters of PR Erm, no. The Federal NDP are the strongest supporters of PR. Have ran many a campaign on PR, and couldn't leverage PR as one of Paul Martins concessions to the NDP. PR is a NO GO ZONE to the Liberals. The GP support what ever measure would find them holding some kind of power. Because they can't win a minority of votes required to win a seat, it is problematic for them under any circumstances. Much has to do with weak campaigns, candidates, platform. But they want a voice, and if PR will give them one then they will take it. Just like they would sell their soul to have Elizabeth May tossed a Patronage Appointment for a Senate Seat. THis blurring the line for the rest of your argument, regarding the CPC hypocracy. The Federal NDP would obviously be the largest benefactors of PR and this would have been a consistent fact since the establishment of the CCF. The NDP has maintained its abolition of the Senate since its CCF days. So what is the Liberal Electoral Reform again???? What is it they want to reform? You know, Reform if necessary, but not necessarily reform? Please show me the LPC way of saying "Status Quo" for change Quote
Progressive Tory Posted March 3, 2009 Report Posted March 3, 2009 He sounds like an overenthusiastic boy without the slightest political awareness of what's been going on in any of the parties over the past five years who reads the papers only for the comics.If the likes of him and you represent the Liberal party i want nothing to do with it. But broadbase statements like the Liberals appoint only gays to the court system so they can advance their homosexual agenda, is clear political debate? Michael Ignatieff is a 'slow learner'? Somehow I never thought Harvard, Oxford or Cambridge would hire slow learners to teach, but who knew? Jack Layton wants Punjab to be our official language.... very clever stuff. Most of us are here because we have a passion for politics. Sometimes we rant, and sometimes we react. KingIggy has approached the subject in the same fashion that many do. Its sparks controversy and encourages debate. Otherwise, it would just be boring and I doubt anyone would stick around. Now while we're on the subject: Stephen Harper is a yellow bellied sapsucker who would only agree to equal marriage if George Bush would have him and who thinks that Stockwell Day is the brains of the Conservative Party because he shares an IQ with Sarah Palin and that it's OK to lie if you're name is Stephen and steal money if you are a Conservative and only steal from taxpayers and won't go anywhere or do anything unless there's a good photo-op and he can get his face somewhere and says there won't be a deficit or there will be a deficit and there won't be an appointed senate or there will be an appointed senate unless it is on a wednesday because he hates wednesdays and could be capable of anything on a wednesday even suggesting that bad food in Peru caused the Parliamentary crisis and not his inability to govern and wearing a hunting vest in Mexico makes a fashion statement and his helmet head hairdo is worth every penny of the four hundred bucks taxpayers shell out to make him look like he wears a helmet on his head while looking at Canadian flags and without the stars and stripes like he designed cannot really be Canadian flags so damn that Coalition for propping up fake Canadian flags at their back and damn that Layton and Duceppe for stealing his coalition idea and damn those Canadians for not liking him and damn the economic crisis that his masters in economics did not allow him to see coming ... whew. I'm out of breath. Quote "For all our modesty and self-deprecation, we’re a people who dream great dreams. And then roll up our sleeves and turn them into realities." - Michael Ignatieff "I would not want the Prime Minister to think that he could simply fail in the House of Commons as a route to another General Election. That's not the way our system works." Stephen Harper.
Progressive Tory Posted March 3, 2009 Report Posted March 3, 2009 If liberal is the new conservative and the neo-conservatives are the new facists - then I would vote liberal - The problem is that everyone wants to assign political labels. I've never really considered myself left or rightwing, but that's no longer acceptable. You need to wear the T-Shirt. I simply support the person or party I think best represents my views, which would never be neo-conservative or socialist. Ignatieff is in the middle and while I don't agree with everything he says or does, there is an appropriate balance. The only other one who comes close is Pat Martin. There are a few Conservatves I like, but not enough to make them an option for me. Quote "For all our modesty and self-deprecation, we’re a people who dream great dreams. And then roll up our sleeves and turn them into realities." - Michael Ignatieff "I would not want the Prime Minister to think that he could simply fail in the House of Commons as a route to another General Election. That's not the way our system works." Stephen Harper.
Argus Posted March 3, 2009 Report Posted March 3, 2009 I'm out of breath. No doubt. Apparently so out of breath the flow of oxygen to your brain was cut off. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
jdobbin Posted March 3, 2009 Report Posted March 3, 2009 The Federal NDP are the strongest supporters of PR. But the provincial NDP want nothing to do with it. At least in Manitoba. Quote
Oleg Bach Posted March 3, 2009 Report Posted March 3, 2009 No doubt. Apparently so out of breath the flow of oxygen to your brain was cut off. Blue blood means no oxygen - and aristocrats don't need air...nor do they need brains - we function out of devine inspiration.....damn it - I'm runing out of C0 2 ...........................I have to go now and recycle my face in a paper bag......actually that was quite the rant the last writer spewed forth...crafty and arty .. Quote
ToadBrother Posted March 3, 2009 Report Posted March 3, 2009 The problem is that everyone wants to assign political labels. I've never really considered myself left or rightwing, but that's no longer acceptable. You need to wear the T-Shirt. I simply support the person or party I think best represents my views, which would never be neo-conservative or socialist. Ignatieff is in the middle and while I don't agree with everything he says or does, there is an appropriate balance. The only other one who comes close is Pat Martin. There are a few Conservatves I like, but not enough to make them an option for me. I think the problem is that you tend to find people who are extremely partisan, and these are precisely the kind of black-and-white thinkers who demand that you fit in the little mental niche they've got for you. That's why Mr. Canada went around calling me a socialist because I support a secular government. Under normal conditions I'd vote Conservative, but I won't do it while my current MP is running. He's a dyed-in-the-wool social conservative who makes no secret of his views. Now I know lots of folks will say "Harper's governing from the middle", and they're right, whether because he's trying disparately to form a majority or whether it's because he's been given little choice by the Opposition and the centrist MPs in his own caucus, he has, by and large sat in the middle. But I still have to consider who it is I'm sending to Ottawa, regardless of how the leadership stands. Beyond that, the latest Tory policy convention didn't do a lot to convince me that a fair segment of the party is all that middle-ground. I have no idea who I'll vote for next time around. I'm hoping I won't have to decide for many months to come, and it is looking like, for the most part, Parliament has managed to keep itself together, if for no other reason than only suicidal lunatics want an election in this kind of an economic climate. Quote
madmax Posted March 3, 2009 Report Posted March 3, 2009 But the provincial NDP want nothing to do with it. At least in Manitoba. No surprise there. The Ontario NDP supports PR. But as this is a federal thread, the Federal NDP has been a strong advocate of PR. And if you are voting Federally and your focus is to obtain a PR system, you have only one choice with members in parliment and a handful of choices from parties who have never elected a person. Quote
Alta4ever Posted March 3, 2009 Report Posted March 3, 2009 I think the problem is that you tend to find people who are extremely partisan, and these are precisely the kind of black-and-white thinkers who demand that you fit in the little mental niche they've got for you. That's why Mr. Canada went around calling me a socialist because I support a secular government. actually the problem is in the name PT chose for herself, you have labelled yourself into the "partisan" by using the "progessive tory" you have chosen. Quote "What about the legitimacy of the democratic process, yeah, what about it?" Jack Layton and his coup against the people of Canada “The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, ‘I’m from the government and I’m here to help.’” President Ronald Reagan
ToadBrother Posted March 3, 2009 Report Posted March 3, 2009 (edited) actually the problem is in the name PT chose for herself, you have labelled yourself into the "partisan" by using the "progessive tory" you have chosen. At any rate, I don't consider myself partisan. I'll vote for the best mixture of candidate/party I think can represent my interests. If the Conservatives had a candidate in my riding who wasn't a religious nut, then they might very well get my vote, but as it is, I'm simply not comfortable with somebody who makes delightful statements like "allowing gay marriage is a violation of my religious freedoms", which he did when the Liberals pushed it through. Edited March 3, 2009 by ToadBrother Quote
Progressive Tory Posted March 3, 2009 Report Posted March 3, 2009 I think the problem is that you tend to find people who are extremely partisan, and these are precisely the kind of black-and-white thinkers who demand that you fit in the little mental niche they've got for you. That's why Mr. Canada went around calling me a socialist because I support a secular government. Beyond that, the latest Tory policy convention didn't do a lot to convince me that a fair segment of the party is all that middle-ground. You're lucky you were only called a socialist. I was called a Godless socialist who waves a stick at Jesus. I don't remember being that drunk. My local guy, Peter Milliken was Ok. He's pretty smart and did do a lot for the community. Unfortunately, I never really cared for Chretien or Paul Martin. We happened to have a pretty good NDP candidate, so I decided to give them a chance when the PC Party folded. Harper might want you to think he's middle, but he's not, and putting Mike Harris throwbacks in his cabinet was a stupid move. They'd have to change about 90% of their caucus before I'd go back to voting conservative, and even then .... I don't know. They've ruined the brand. I also hope we don't have an election anytime soon but don't know how long Harper can keep up as a lame duck PM, with no money or support. He seems to be spending more time trying to convince conservatives that he hasn't gone mad, so has little energy left for the rest of us. Quote "For all our modesty and self-deprecation, we’re a people who dream great dreams. And then roll up our sleeves and turn them into realities." - Michael Ignatieff "I would not want the Prime Minister to think that he could simply fail in the House of Commons as a route to another General Election. That's not the way our system works." Stephen Harper.
capricorn Posted March 3, 2009 Report Posted March 3, 2009 PT learned this when she became infatuated with Iggy, and started posting his picture on the wall like a schoolgirl with a crush. You may have missed the part where PT divulged that Iggy looks like her father and, she and her idol share the same birthday. Sheesh, there goes another Liberal whose politics are dictated by emotion. Quote "We always want the best man to win an election. Unfortunately, he never runs." Will Rogers
Alta4ever Posted March 3, 2009 Report Posted March 3, 2009 Harper might want you to think he's middle, but he's not, and putting Mike Harris throwbacks in his cabinet was a stupid move. They'd have to change about 90% of their caucus before I'd go back to voting conservative, and even then .... I don't know. They've ruined the brand.I also hope we don't have an election anytime soon but don't know how long Harper can keep up as a lame duck PM, with no money or support. He seems to be spending more time trying to convince conservatives that he hasn't gone mad, so has little energy left for the rest of us. What brand? The CPC was a new party in 2003, of which most of the sitting MP's where in western Canada. You just seem a little upset because their is no room for you a "liberal" in the conservative party of Canada. I hope you never vote conservative again because you are liberal and the conservative party that I vote for is not the red tory liberal thing of the 80's. As for Support and money, last I checked the CPC out performed all of the other parties put together in fundraising. Harpers core support is at the same level as chretiens and he won to elections with it. Face it the liberal's and the conservatives are on equal footing when it comes to popular support. Quote "What about the legitimacy of the democratic process, yeah, what about it?" Jack Layton and his coup against the people of Canada “The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, ‘I’m from the government and I’m here to help.’” President Ronald Reagan
Realist Posted March 3, 2009 Report Posted March 3, 2009 A plague on all their houses! I lean left, way left, and I'd hoped that the Liberals, in particular Michael Ignatieff, would be an alternative to Harper and the Conservatives. But under Ignatieff, I can't tell the difference any more.There is no daylight between Harper and Ignatieff. Their only vision of Canada is "Me! Me! Pick me!". Ignatieff supported every aspect of Harper's budget. The rest of his silliness about demanding accountability was, just that, silliness. Just as I don't believe a word Harper says, I don't believe Ignatieff or the Liberals. As scary as it is, I really don't care anymore. Let's just get a majority and "f**k" the country, so everybody can get a dose of reality. Ignatieff supported the budget out of political necessity. Where his actual policy would fall if he was scrape out a minority win is unclear. Quote
Oleg Bach Posted March 3, 2009 Report Posted March 3, 2009 You should not support something out of political neccesity - you should support it out of public neccessity. Your won personal ambitions politically should come second to that of serving the people - so where are our public servants - where is the prime minister (first and formost servant - head servant of OUR house? I can see why everyone with a logical and civilized mind is frustrated - you send a rep to Ottawa - and he does not do his job - this is not democracy this is fraud and usery. Quote
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.