Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 998
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted

I agree. The idea that the NDP are some band of radical leftists doesn't hold much water.

Radical? That was never anything I said. What I implied and said was that the federal NDP is simply goofy!

If we needed a bridge the CPC would be concerned about the cost. The Liberals would be concerned about who's brother-in-law got the most contracts.

The NDP would want to ensure that the engineers were chosen not from a list of the most capable but rather from those engineers representing minority groups, who received their degrees from an affirmative action program.

"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."

Posted

Oh, I don't know! I've voted Liberal before and could see myself doing it again. Just not with Ignatieff and his present bunch!

There was a time when Liberals were Blue instead of left wing, you know!

It's important to understand that Canadian parties really don't have a fixed ideology. True, things have stayed pretty well on the right side with the Tories this past decade or so but they too have slipped a bit left towards the middle. Mulroney's party and that of Joe Clark was rather pink at times.

So if you hang around long enough everything changes! It's like the old joke about Vancouver weather - if you don't happen to like it then just wait a few minutes and it will change.

The Liberals and Conservatives are like a professional sports team. The players and coaching strategy changes drastically over the years but they always wear the same jerseys.

I guess what I'm really saying is that you can't keep judging a party by its words. It's actions can be widely at variance and that is the ONLY true measure!

I will state that I'm too old to ever likely to vote NDP before I die. Philosophically, I have never thought socialism to be a practical approach. Once again, it's the techie in me. I just don't see it working efficiently! What's more, the Canadian socialist party which is the NDP seems even more so. They talk about noble goals but rarely talk any practical way to achieve them, IMHO. They ignore reality and live on dreams. Worse yet, they've shown no signs of changing with the times. The NDP is NOT the party of Tony Blair! I'm talking federally, of course. Out west there are and have been practical NDP governments but they are nothing like their federal cousins.

So never say never, Nick! If the CPC were to revert to a Joe Clark approach at the same time as the Liberals choosing a leader more like Pearson and I would switch with no problem!

If you wanted to amend your premise to say that Wild Bill would always find leftwing parties to smell worse then I would agree with you.

Ignatieff is one of the more conservative Liberal leaders in the party's history. If the Liberals are too left wing now, they'll always be.

Posted

Ignatieff is one of the more conservative Liberal leaders in the party's history. If the Liberals are too left wing now, they'll always be.

Actually, I never said that the reason I could not switch to Ignatieff was that I found him to be too leftwing. I just don't find him to be much of anything!

He flip flops, he caves, he rants and roars only to duck a vote so that he won't force an election. He is gauche enough to screw his country out of a UN seat just for a cheap partisan attack on Harper's government.

I wouldn't switch to the Liberal party for any sense of left or right. To me, they and their leader simply seem incompetent.

However, if you wait a few minutes that can change! :P

"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."

Posted

Actually, I never said that the reason I could not switch to Ignatieff was that I found him to be too leftwing. I just don't find him to be much of anything!

He flip flops, he caves, he rants and roars only to duck a vote so that he won't force an election. He is gauche enough to screw his country out of a UN seat just for a cheap partisan attack on Harper's government.

I wouldn't switch to the Liberal party for any sense of left or right. To me, they and their leader simply seem incompetent.

However, if you wait a few minutes that can change! :P

I find that a leader who can be persuaded due to good information to be a good thing. I'd much rather have that than someone who can't move on anything due to being such a staunch ideologue.

Posted

I find that a leader who can be persuaded due to good information to be a good thing. I'd much rather have that than someone who can't move on anything due to being such a staunch ideologue.

Yah and if that were the case it would be one thing but it isn't, the guy doesn't stand for anything. Remember a year and half ago when he almost forced an election on EI, stood back and said he wouldn't if a deal could reached on EI? Than he spent the whole summer talking about it, but couldn't the deal done? Than the NDP got the deal he was looking for and he showed up in the house and voted against it because it wasn't him who got the Conservatives to come to an agreement on EI?

Yah the guy stands for NOTHING. It is that simple the EI case is when I knew this guy was the biggest snake we have seen in a long time.

Posted

I think most Canadians want a visionary leader. I think Canadians just want a plan to fix health care and education and pensions. That is enough for any government to fix. Just once a leader that says we need to do this should get elected.

Posted (edited)

You mean when the NDP didn't get anything they wanted, and voted with the government anyway?

Yah 1 Billion dollars to save working families from falling off the EI rolls wasn't enough to vote for it right?

The NDP and Bloc almost passed a bill 3 weeks which included the things they wanted and the things that the Liberals said they wanted 2 summers ago. Funny thing about that it failed seems 12 Liberals didn't show up, one of them was on the floor not 10 minutes before the vote bu disappeared when the vote came up. Who was that again? Oh yeah it was Ignatieff doing his flip flop shuffle. The Liberals were ready to force an election on EI then they vote against it, then when a vote comes to include everything Ignatieff was asking for a year ago he disappears.

Flip Flop Flip Flop Flip.

16 Months ago

http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/QPeriod/20090514/election_iggy_090514/

Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff sent his clearest signal yet that an election may be imminent if Prime Minister Stephen Harper and his minority government fail to reform Employment Insurance by the summer.

"My party wants to get Mr. Harper to make some constructive changes on EI before this summer," Ignatieff said late Thursday in a speech to a labour union.

"And I'm telling you straight and I'm telling you clear: I cannot continue to make Parliament work unless we get substantive EI reform before this Parliament rises in June."

Last month

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/ignatieff-changes-his-mind-on-ei-bill/article1732585/

Michael Ignatieff is reversing his support for a wide range of enhancements to Employment Insurance benefits, saying they are too expensive and are no longer required.

The Liberal Leader attempted to provoke a federal election around this time last year over some of the very reforms that are coming to a vote Wednesday in the House of Commons, but he now says he no longer supports them.

“This bill is not fiscally responsible,” he said of a Bloc Québécois private-member’s bill that comes to a vote Wednesday evening. The Liberals and the NDP had supported the bill at second reading and in committee, but Mr. Ignatieff said it will be a free vote for his MPs.

Flip Flop Flip Flop. The guy has no morals. Stands for nothing and has compass.

Edited by punked
Posted

Flip Flop Flip Flop. The guy has no morals. Stands for nothing and has compass.

I hate to defend him, but that isn't flip flopping. Times have changes from over a year ago.

Posted

I hate to defend him, but that isn't flip flopping. Times have changes from over a year ago.

Got it so why did he vote against the EI deal a year ago than? Oh yeah because Layton got the deal and the Liberal leader does not care about those on EI he just wanted a win.

Posted

Layton's explanation of his support for the govt's EI reform always seemed like one of his most sensible statements, actually:

http://www.midweekcanada.com/news_detail.php?nid=5054&cid=2

That said, I have to grudgingly agree that Ignatieff reversing his stand in the light of this year's budget isn't exactly a flip-flop either.

Pretending you against a budget then letting 30 of your party members no show up to vote is a flip flop in itself. "I AM SO AGAINST THIS BUDGET I WILL LET IT PASS!!!!" Yah flip flop flip flop.

Posted

Pretending you against a budget then letting 30 of your party members no show up to vote is a flip flop in itself. "I AM SO AGAINST THIS BUDGET I WILL LET IT PASS!!!!" Yah flip flop flip flop.

Read many conspiracy theories?

Posted

Read many conspiracy theories?

If you think that's crazy, he actually believes the NDP are capable of forming a Government!!!!!!

"They muddy the water, to make it seem deep." - Friedrich Nietzsche

Posted (edited)

If you think that's crazy, he actually believes the NDP are capable of forming a Government!!!!!!

I don't vote for a party because they can or can not form government I vote for a party which believes what I believe. That is why I am not a Liberal. I know Liberals are fine with not standing for anything as long as they vote for a winner, myself I would rather vote for a better Canada. Sorry we don't see eye to eye on that one, maybe someday you will vote based on who you think is best for Canada instead of who you think will win. Doubt it though.

Edited by punked
Posted (edited)

Oh gotcha 30 Liberal members missed the last budget vote because.....????

Oh yeah it was because their Leader told them to stay home or so he told the CBC. Maybe someday you will become an informed voter.

http://www.cbc.ca/money/story/2010/02/23/f-federal-budget-2010.html

As opposed to the NDP who has the luxury to vote against anything the Conservatives lay out. Oh, wait, until last fall when Ignatieff declared he wouldn't be supporting the CPC government, Jack Layton immediately declared that he was willing to work with Harper. Pretty much exactly what Ignatieff has been doing. So, really, all parties are the same. The NDP vote to keep themselves in power just as much as any other. So don't come here with your holier than thou attitude, it doesn't wash.

You only vote for parties that want to make a better Canada. Though that's, at it's heart, a good outlook, you can only really effect good when you're in power. The NDP will never achieve that. Furtehrmore, Liberals fully believe that the platform the party sets up will benefit Canada. The Liberal Party is a large party and it's policies shift because what's best for society shifts as well. I'd much rather have a party that recognizes new difficulties and challenges and are willing to change policy accordingly rather than a party based on stringent ideology that doesn't change.

Edited by nicky10013
Posted

As opposed to the NDP who has the luxury to vote against anything the Conservatives lay out. Oh, wait, until last fall when Ignatieff declared he wouldn't be supporting the CPC government, Jack Layton immediately declared that he was willing to work with Harper. Pretty much exactly what Ignatieff has been doing. So, really, all parties are the same. The NDP vote to keep themselves in power just as much as any other. So don't come here with your holier than thou attitude, it doesn't wash.

This has a lot of truth to it. Fringe parties have the benefit of voting the way their ideologies speak most of the time. The opposition parties and a party in power in a minority situation has to vote much more strategically based on what will or won't pass, what will or won't trigger an election etc. Some people would call this "selling out" for votes/power or whatever. But it's just called politics. Virtually all parties change their voting behaviour based on their political circumstances.

"All generalizations are false, including this one." - Mark Twain

Partisanship is a disease of the intellect.

Posted

This has a lot of truth to it. Fringe parties have the benefit of voting the way their ideologies speak most of the time. The opposition parties and a party in power in a minority situation has to vote much more strategically based on what will or won't pass, what will or won't trigger an election etc. Some people would call this "selling out" for votes/power or whatever. But it's just called politics. Virtually all parties change their voting behaviour based on their political circumstances.

I would'nt exactly call the NDP "fringe"...

I mean,they are'nt exactly the Natural Law party...

The beatings will continue until morale improves!!!

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.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,910
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    AlembicoEMR
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...