If an election were held tomorrow

[daniel]

Just curious.

[Hydraboss]

Hold nose. Place "X" on idiot conservative candidate box. Go home and drink beer until I forget what I've done.

[SSD]

For me, last time I voted for the liberal candidate since he was the most qualified and I agreed with him on most issues. I didn't like the leader much-Stephane Dion and really didn't like the other leaders either. So it was an issue of which candidate suited me the best. This time around the choice is clear for me. Ignatieff is a much stronger leader than Dion and falls in line with what I believe in, in terms of political ideology (centrist). I also see why he is currently the most popular political leader in Canada on the federal level.

Harper out, Ignatieff in. Now its a matter of whether it is going to be a minority or majority.

[cybercoma]

NDP. It's time the government paid attention to the average working Canadian.

[SSD]

NDP. It's time the government paid attention to the average working Canadian.

I like th NDP for their stance on certain social issues but can't relate to their fiscal stances. The Liberals represent a good balance of programs and not spending out of our means or taxing out of our means.

[Muddy]

For me, last time I voted for the liberal candidate since he was the most qualified and I agreed with him on most issues. I didn't like the leader much-Stephane Dion and really didn't like the other leaders either. So it was an issue of which candidate suited me the best. This time around the choice is clear for me. Ignatieff is a much stronger leader than Dion and falls in line with what I believe in, in terms of political ideology (centrist). I also see why he is currently the most popular political leader in Canada on the federal level.

Harper out, Ignatieff in. Now its a matter of whether it is going to be a minority or majority.

Although I am not overly fond of Harper ,I fail to know what Iggy stands for. What policy or ideals has Iggy articulated that you find in common with you? Centerist could mean a lot of things.

[SSD]

Although I am not overly fond of Harper ,I fail to know what Iggy stands for. What policy or ideals has Iggy articulated that you find in common with you? Centerist could mean a lot of things.

Torture, etc....hehe.

But seriously, I like that he has expressed support for the oilsands (or at least using it while we can), for the high speed rail on the Windsor-Quebec Corridor, Quebec as a nation, a cap-and-trade system, increased funding for University research (which will create the new economy that will take over the current dying one), his perceived stance on the human rights commission, etc.

Edited April 20, 2009 by SSD

[Muddy]

Torture, etc.

So you and and Iggy are into torture? Do other Liberals believe in torture too?

[SSD]

So you and and Iggy are into torture? Do other Liberals believe in torture too?

I added hehehe. I pressed submit accidentally early. But Iggy doesn't support torture...at least as a politician.

[cybercoma]

I like th NDP for their stance on certain social issues but can't relate to their fiscal stances.

It costs money to fix problems.

I actually usually support the Conservative party, but I figure it's time to give the NDP a shot. Their platform is supposed to be focused on the working demographic, so I'd like to see what they can do.

[Wild Bill]

NDP. It's time the government paid attention to the average working Canadian.

Shouldn't we first expect the NDP to pay attention to the "average working Canadian"?

[cybercoma]

Yeah, I'm completely full of crap. Don't listen to me in this thread.

[tango]

I see good things and not so good about each party. However, I think Harper is done. There is nothing more. If he runs again it'll be a cakewalk for Iggy I think.

[Borg]

NDP - promise the world - deliver it on the backs of the tax payers

Libs - a transplanted American - who only came back to Canada because he thought he could become famous off the backs of his silver spooned friends - a fake and a charlatan

Have to vote for Harper - not always the best choice, but one that at least stands up and does what he says

Borg

[Muddy]

NDP - promise the world - deliver it on the backs of the tax payers

Libs - a transplanted American - who only came back to Canada because he thought he could become famous off the backs of his silver spooned friends - a fake and a charlatan

Have to vote for Harper - not always the best choice, but one that at least stands up and does what he says

Borg

[/quote

I will also vote CPC but not because of Harper,who I once thought I knew. He is acting like a socialist but he still has some good MP`s around him.

As for IGgy, he can`t decide if he is left right or center and he or his supporters can tell me what he stands for other than he is for torture as an American Professor ,but apparently is against it as a Canadian politician. Will the real Iggy please stand up!

[Wild Bill]

I will also vote CPC but not because of Harper,who I once thought I knew. He is acting like a socialist but he still has some good MP`s around him.

So Iggy is rising in the polls because he's not Harper. It's a shame that once again Canadians are looking to vote someone out instead of being inspired to keep voting someone IN!

It seems to be part of our national culture. We rarely get to vote for someone 'cuz we truly like him! Those times that it's happened it's been for candidates who presented a clear, unambiguous alternative. Trudeau-mania, Mulroney's back to back HUGE majorities, Mike Harris' two terms...we may have been disappointed at the end of their terms but we enthusiastically supported them at the start!

Mostly we get choices that are puppets of the "suits", who believe that every candidate must wear brown shoes and keep to the "middle". Thus they please a marginally extra few to eke out minorities but for the most part turn off more than they turn on.

They don't seem to realize that most Canadians are not policy wonks! For the most part we don't understand major issues and even if we do we don't really care!

What the average Canadian truly wants is to have CONFIDENCE in a party leader! This is a function of leadership and image. Manning didn't really start to come on strong until he ditched the Ross Perot style flip-charts and economic diagrams "with the circles and arrows on the back of each one".

We like someone who seems to be a bit of a maverick. Probably because we don't respect the status quo, which again is often confused with "the middle". Young people got behind Trudeau because he said what he believed and didn't give a damn if it bothered the "establishment". Ontario gave Harris those two record majorities for the same reason. His opponents came across as "phony" and slick.

We thought we were finally getting someone different with Mulroney but after two terms we realized that he was the same as all the others, just much better at it! It was the disappointment that caused the rise of Reform, the splitting off of the BQ and the reduction of the Progressive Conservatives down to TWO seats!

We've chosen both Liberal and Tory leaders in this fashion, so it's not just ideology. It's the leaders, pure and simple. Yet somehow all our parties tend to avoid strong personalities for their leaders and keep offering us the same old "schmaltz"!

When Harper talks he could freeze a glass of water. Ignatief is NOT Trudeau!

As for Layton or even Elizabeth May, they are so locked into a "faith" rather than a reasoned philosophy that they limit their appeal to only "faith-based" voters. By faith I don't mean religious, just religious in their style of thinking. They first chose to believe what made them feel good and forever more only accept evidence that supports their views and ignore anything that might be a contradiction.

The way present trends are developing, Harper may lose the next election to Ignatief. I find it very hard to believe that Ignatief would get a majority. Except to some older women, he seems boring! He has the charisma of a Robert Stanfield! I keep waiting to see a clip on the news of him fumbling a football.

So he can pick up the seats in Eastern Canada that Harper loses but has little chance of gaining any more in the West.

A LOT of us Canadians are getting very desperate for an INSPIRING choice! Perhaps that's the real reason behind the continued drop in the number of people who actually bother to vote.

WE'RE BORED WITH THE LOT OF THEM!

[Molly]

I have to admit to a negative vote... who can rid me of Harper and the boys?

It doesn't hurt that the history of the Liberal party is fiscally fairly conservative, and socially responsive. Wishy-washy for my taste, and Ignatief remains an unknown quantity-- but the dishonest, mean-minded, religion soaked, say one thing and do another, embarrassing, anti-democratic nastiness has to end. Getting on to yellow-dog necessity.

I find myself deeply disagreeing with what the Conservatives say they will do, and then disagreeing even more vehemently with what they actually do.

[Wild Bill]

I find myself deeply disagreeing with what the Conservatives say they will do, and then disagreeing even more vehemently with what they actually do.

And there you have it! Mike Harris said what he'd do and did what he said. You may not always have agreed with him but he was never a "weasel". The same could be said for my other examples.

Harper has made the mistake of 'selling out' to stay in power. I understand that you have to have power in order to do anything but there is always a price to selling out your principles and sometimes that can be TOO high! You lose respect from everyone, regardless of their political stripe.

I truly believe that the new Conservative Party is being run by the old Progressive Conservative backroom boys. They seem to think it's 1985, like they are all Mulroney boys. Well, the proof's in the pudding. They're slipping fast and so far have shown no signs of recognizing their slump is even happening, let alone doing something intelligent about reversing it!

Harper should air out his back room, or maybe he himself should be changed.

Damn! I'd vote for a dog next time if he was any different that these choices!

Hell, I'd vote for a DEAD dog!

[Muddy]

Wild Bill, I think you said it all. When Harper took power his people started cutting the old Reformers from all influence in the new party,replacing them with former PC members. I know! I was in the thick of it.

[cybercoma]

NDP - promise the world - deliver it on the backs of the tax payers

That's how the government works, isn't it? They operate on money from the taxpayers, so anything they deliver is on the taxpayers' backs, right?

[tango]

So Iggy is rising in the polls because he's not Harper. It's a shame that once again Canadians are looking to vote someone out instead of being inspired to keep voting someone IN!

It seems to be part of our national culture. We rarely get to vote for someone 'cuz we truly like him! Those times that it's happened it's been for candidates who presented a clear, unambiguous alternative. Trudeau-mania, Mulroney's back to back HUGE majorities, Mike Harris' two terms...we may have been disappointed at the end of their terms but we enthusiastically supported them at the start!

Mostly we get choices that are puppets of the "suits", who believe that every candidate must wear brown shoes and keep to the "middle". Thus they please a marginally extra few to eke out minorities but for the most part turn off more than they turn on.

They don't seem to realize that most Canadians are not policy wonks! For the most part we don't understand major issues and even if we do we don't really care!

What the average Canadian truly wants is to have CONFIDENCE in a party leader! This is a function of leadership and image. Manning didn't really start to come on strong until he ditched the Ross Perot style flip-charts and economic diagrams "with the circles and arrows on the back of each one".

We like someone who seems to be a bit of a maverick. Probably because we don't respect the status quo, which again is often confused with "the middle". Young people got behind Trudeau because he said what he believed and didn't give a damn if it bothered the "establishment". Ontario gave Harris those two record majorities for the same reason. His opponents came across as "phony" and slick.

We thought we were finally getting someone different with Mulroney but after two terms we realized that he was the same as all the others, just much better at it! It was the disappointment that caused the rise of Reform, the splitting off of the BQ and the reduction of the Progressive Conservatives down to TWO seats!

We've chosen both Liberal and Tory leaders in this fashion, so it's not just ideology. It's the leaders, pure and simple. Yet somehow all our parties tend to avoid strong personalities for their leaders and keep offering us the same old "schmaltz"!

When Harper talks he could freeze a glass of water. Ignatief is NOT Trudeau!

As for Layton or even Elizabeth May, they are so locked into a "faith" rather than a reasoned philosophy that they limit their appeal to only "faith-based" voters. By faith I don't mean religious, just religious in their style of thinking. They first chose to believe what made them feel good and forever more only accept evidence that supports their views and ignore anything that might be a contradiction.

The way present trends are developing, Harper may lose the next election to Ignatief. I find it very hard to believe that Ignatief would get a majority. Except to some older women, he seems boring! He has the charisma of a Robert Stanfield! I keep waiting to see a clip on the news of him fumbling a football.

So he can pick up the seats in Eastern Canada that Harper loses but has little chance of gaining any more in the West.

A LOT of us Canadians are getting very desperate for an INSPIRING choice! Perhaps that's the real reason behind the continued drop in the number of people who actually bother to vote.

WE'RE BORED WITH THE LOT OF THEM!

I agree with Wild Bill!

[tango]

And there you have it! Mike Harris said what he'd do and did what he said. You may not always have agreed with him but he was never a "weasel". The same could be said for my other examples.

Except for Harris. Harris was definitely a weasel in his methods.

Eg In his reporting on academic performance of our students in an international context he reported selectively and incorrectly.

Countries ranked in order:

X

X

X

X

Ontario

When the actual result was this:

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

Ontario

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

So other than Harris the weasel, I agree.

[madmax]

NDP. It's time the government paid attention to the average working Canadian.

I would never have put you down as voting for the NDP in a million years!!!

[madmax]

Yeah, I'm completely full of crap. Don't listen to me in this thread.

Thats better

[daniel]

Wow, 51% Liberal, 37% Cons. Harper's in trouble if he is losing a poll in this discussion forum.

I wonder what the results at Freedomonion would be.