cybercoma Posted February 25, 2011 Report Share Posted February 25, 2011 (edited) In regards to the NDP I simply can't find any logical reason to support them on a federal level since they have no chance to implement anything I believe in because they will never be the Government...First, let me admit that I didn't actually read your entire post, so I apologize if I'm taking this out of context. I just wanted to say, if they stand for what you believe in, then you ought to vote for them because it shows at the polls that one more voter believes in what they stand for. Unfortunately, many Canadians rationalize themselves out of standing behind the party they believe in because the first-past-the-post system is broken. Say what you want about the Bloc Québecois, but if les Québecois used the same rationale, they would never be where they are today. Edited February 25, 2011 by cybercoma Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWiz Posted February 25, 2011 Report Share Posted February 25, 2011 I get what you're saying. Yes, a centrist party is vulnerable from both sides. I just quibble with the term "splitting the left" because it implies to me that there are two left-wing parties that are relatively similar in policy but are dividing the left-wing vote between them. This is different from having a centrist option and a distinct leftist option (especially when the latter is more likely to win your riding, as is the case in my riding). As your post suggests, one could just as easily say that the Conservatives (or the Liberals!) are "splitting the right". Or that the two parties are "splitting the federalist vote" in QC. If the left-wing party were not there, it is possible that the centrist party would get more votes (and be popularly regarded as the 'left' party as is the case with the US Democrats) but it might also likely mean that our politics would just shift further to the right, without a party on the left to advocate and influence for change. Fair enough... Although if you look at the Liberal website the "middle" is more to the left than the right in many aspects, social, environment, health, child care, native rights, etc.... I just don't agree that the NDP's advertising or campaigning targets the Liberals more than the Cons. The main campaign they were running recently had to do with attacking Stephen Harper for taxes on home heating. I'll post the ads next election... Frankly I haven't heard Layton EVER criticise the CONS without a "shot" at the Liberals included in ANY interview I've watched... Re: Home heating that's there in spades on the Liberal website PLUS, even better, the Liberals had a heating and insulation upgrade (renovations) grant for homeowners that the CONS cancelled... If the Liberals get elected those VERY POPULAR and important programs that spured jobs and helped the economy would return... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWiz Posted February 25, 2011 Report Share Posted February 25, 2011 First, let me admit that I didn't actually read your entire post, so I apologize if I'm taking this out of context. I just wanted to say, if they stand for what you believe in, then you ought to vote for them because it shows at the polls that one more voter believes in what they stand for. Unfortunately, many Canadians rationalize themselves out of standing behind the party they believe in because the first-past-the-post system is broken. Say what you want about the Bloc Québecois, but if les Québecois used the same rationale, they would never be where they are today. You're getting further behind in your reading there's more to read now... Enjoy... (It covers and answers your comments) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
William Ashley Posted February 25, 2011 Report Share Posted February 25, 2011 (edited) The United States threatened to move it's entire automotive related commerce to Mexico, negating the Auto Pact, if NAFTA was reopened or cancelled... - The implementation in 1965 of the Auto Pact, which established free trade in automobiles between Canada and the United States, served to promote the already strong economic ties between the two countries. The historic signing in 1989 of the U.S.-Canada Free Trade Agreement (FTA), which established tariff-free trade on a multi-sectoral basis, set the stage for an enormous increase in the amount of bilateral commerce between Canada and the United States. In 1994, the fundamental principles of trade liberalization established by the FTA were further expanded, both in terms of scope and coverage, under the North American Free Trade Agreement, which added Mexico to the regime. These trade agreements have helped fuel unparalleled economic growth, with bilateral trade between Canada and the United States nearly tripling during the past twelve years. - http://www.buyusa.gov/harrisburg/can_ustrade.html Aren't you glad he made that decision NOT to reopen NAFTA even if it was heavily slanted in the US's favour? Doesn't the center have BOTH a left and a right side component to it? It does... Therefore wouldn't the party in the center of politics be vulnerable from BOTH the left and the right in a multi party system like Canada's? A centrist party is thus vulnerable... Since the Right of center in Canada has only one party (since the Reform and PCs merged) it can draw from the center (the Liberals) easier than the far left (the NDP)... Since the Left of center in Canada has only one National Party (the NDP) it also draws from the center (the Liberals) easier than the far right (the CONS)... Note: The Bloc, also on the left, draws primarily from the Liberals as well in Quebec... Add to all that the FACT that the NDP knows it's unlikely to gain votes from the Right it TARGETS the Liberals to gain support through it's advertising etc., even when the Liberals are NOT the Government... They are american companies anyway. There is always work, it is just what people do. My qualm is that Brian Mulrooney the last Conservative Prime minister drove up debt sold off Canada's crown corporations and entered into the arrangement in the first place. NAFTA trade isn't good for Canada. 90% of the stuff is crap. there is a difference between trading without tarriffs and allowing another country to take your resources without paying. A simple trade agreement is not the same as saying how you can trade internally. Americans are untrustworthy, liars, and cheats. Much like Canada's own governmnt these bastards lack any sense of human decency - dealing with scum is contrary to reasonable judgement. They deserve to hang, every last scoundrel who theives from the good people by coruption, extortion and violence. They should all die. The earth would be better with out them, they are pestilence. Edited February 25, 2011 by William Ashley Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evening Star Posted February 25, 2011 Report Share Posted February 25, 2011 (edited) Fair enough... Although if you look at the Liberal website the "middle" is more to the left than the right in many aspects, social, environment, health, child care, native rights, etc.... The LPC has been quite neoliberal ('right-wing') on the economy for about 20 years now, although they seem to shifting surprisingly to the left now, at least in rhetoric. And Ignatieff's views on foreign policy are generally known to be rather in line with American neoconservatism (though he rejects the label), to the point of strongly publicly supporting the Bush administration at the time of the invasion of Iraq and defending the use of torture in maintaining US hegemony and 'counterterrorism'. Again, now that he's actually in party politics, who knows what he'll do? Edit: So, according to Wiki, he would not apply the label of "torture" to the practices he endorses but you can judge whether it fits: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Ignatieff#The_Lesser_Evil_approach Edited February 25, 2011 by Evening Star Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Weber Posted February 25, 2011 Report Share Posted February 25, 2011 I was never a "Chretien Liberal" so I was certainly objective about the Chretien years and to some extent I agree... Then again I look at the overall balance sheet of achievements vs failures and the Chretien/Martin era was overall pretty good for Canada in that it turned the ship around economically during some extremely turbulent seas including the potential breakup of Canada itself... Considering the Chretien Government followed a Government that "sold out" Canada to US interests via Free Trade/NAFTA; being able to bring Canada into balanced budgets, surplus trade and even paying down Canada's principal debt, PLUS establishing a "rainy day fund" for future needs was no small achievement... Since I have never moved from my position as a centrist (somewhat right fiscally, meaning prudent and wise spending and NOT tax cuts) (slightly left socially meaning support for those in real need but not runnung any facets of free enterprise beyond that) whether the Liberal Party wobbles a little left or right really doesn't have much affect on whether the Liberals are closest to MY views... For someone like me, and perhaps I'm more unique than I think I am, things like the Sponsorship Scandal where no one elected was directly involved and where in fact what happened was detrimental to the Governments efforts to keeping the country together to me is nothing but background noise involving a sum of money that every Government wastes every year in some form or another... I don't like it, and I say so loudly, but it's not going to make me vote one way or another... One very important aspect I consider when looking at the party portion of the overall picture is historical values and after the performance of the Governments of Diefenbaker and Moroney I have long a go determined that the CONS (by any name) are not something I could ever support federally... In regards to the NDP I simply can't find any logical reason to support them on a federal level since they have no chance to implement anything I believe in because they will never be the Government... Quite frankly taking credit for something implemented in parliament by either of the two parties who have been in Government I find rather irksome because it wasn't the NDP that passed said policy and have no right to take any credit for anything passed while chiding the party that actually implemented the policy with the next breath... In that Layton is the worst leader the NDP have ever had... A complete politico who would sell his own mother to gain an extra meaningless seat in parliament to make himself look good... However should I ever find a local candidate running in my riding in the likes of an Ed Broadbend or even a Gary Doer if running against a less than stellar Liberal I would assess the possibility of casting my vote for them but only if I could be assured that they would vote in parliament based on princple and not party ideology as both Broadbend and Doer did on a number of occasions... BUT only if the NDP party had a good and pragmatic leader... I've always found it quite interesting, especially under Layton, that the NDP spend about 70% of their TIME and money deriding another opposition party (the Liberals) rather than the Government (the CONS)... I wonder why that is?!?! Whizzer.. The problem is that the lIberal Party is rotting from the inside out... It has not had to really compete in the arena of fresh ideas since Trudeau was it's leader...Let's face it,a slobbering neanderthal could have run against Kim Campbell (who was wearing the stench of Mulroney) and would have had a 50/50 shot of winning that election without saying a word... The phony majorities of the mid-'90's and into the early part of this deacde gave the party a false sense of security in that they were THE ruling party in this country.It was false because it was only getting majorities because of the split on the right.The Lib's basically won a few seats in Atlantic Canada,a few in Quebec,dominated Ontario,and everyne else could pick up the rest...The candidates basically had to show up, villify the Reform/CCRAP party,and,sit back and tally up the votes... That worked fine as long as the Right was split... It's not now,and because it had such a long period of time were it got almost a free ride,it's almost like a rudderless ship that can't seem to find a suitable port.iT's like it simply exists to be in power instead of providing an actual alternative to the Conservatives.In fact,it almost seems like it complains about the Con's,but it would most likeley do almost the same as the Con's...Just with a smile.... Clearly that's not good enough,and I don't think it's going to change with Iggy,because he's essentially a right of centre politician... Agreed about Layton...I find him to be in love with his own mind.I get the feeling he one of these people who thinks he's the smartest guy in the room and he really wants you to know about it.I suppose it's hard to dispute the NDP's electoral success,after all,they are at thehighest seat count since the Broadbent era.The problem for the Dips is that it's not as cohesive between the urban/rural split that it used to be.Under Layton,the party has increasingly become and urban/tree hugger/leftist fringe type of party.If it was me leading that party,I would get back to Tommy Douglas style Prairie Social Democracy.That works because there is inherent practicality to it... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evening Star Posted February 25, 2011 Report Share Posted February 25, 2011 But what would you actually change from their current actions? They are primarily focusing on bread-and-butter economic issues at the moment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWiz Posted February 25, 2011 Report Share Posted February 25, 2011 Whizzer.. The problem is that the lIberal Party is rotting from the inside out... It has not had to really compete in the arena of fresh ideas since Trudeau was it's leader...Let's face it,a slobbering neanderthal could have run against Kim Campbell (who was wearing the stench of Mulroney) and would have had a 50/50 shot of winning that election without saying a word... The phony majorities of the mid-'90's and into the early part of this deacde gave the party a false sense of security in that they were THE ruling party in this country.It was false because it was only getting majorities because of the split on the right.The Lib's basically won a few seats in Atlantic Canada,a few in Quebec,dominated Ontario,and everyne else could pick up the rest...The candidates basically had to show up, villify the Reform/CCRAP party,and,sit back and tally up the votes... That worked fine as long as the Right was split... It's not now,and because it had such a long period of time were it got almost a free ride,it's almost like a rudderless ship that can't seem to find a suitable port.iT's like it simply exists to be in power instead of providing an actual alternative to the Conservatives.In fact,it almost seems like it complains about the Con's,but it would most likeley do almost the same as the Con's...Just with a smile.... Clearly that's not good enough,and I don't think it's going to change with Iggy,because he's essentially a right of centre politician... Agreed about Layton...I find him to be in love with his own mind.I get the feeling he one of these people who thinks he's the smartest guy in the room and he really wants you to know about it.I suppose it's hard to dispute the NDP's electoral success,after all,they are at thehighest seat count since the Broadbent era.The problem for the Dips is that it's not as cohesive between the urban/rural split that it used to be.Under Layton,the party has increasingly become and urban/tree hugger/leftist fringe type of party. If it was me leading that party,I would get back to Tommy Douglas style Prairie Social Democracy. That works because there is inherent practicality to it... Well, having now heard and seen Ignatieff speak live on a few occasions my impressions of him have improved, which is a good thing since what I see of him on the boob tube doesn't work for me too well... My view of Ignatieff is that he's esentially NOT a "typical" politician, his ideas and assessments are fairly good, but since he's not all that politically astute he listens too much to the "advisors" mostly left over from the Chretien/Martin era... Being in the middle I really can't see anything better to either the right or the left soooo - that's where I'm at and it is what it is... In my riding it doesn't matter anyway since the vote will split exactly as before, except maybe a few more votes for the useless CON Joy Smith... If it was me leading the Liberals Canada would become GREAT (utopia even), but I'm not and it won't... One never knows once a writ is dropped, just maybe Ignatieff will "shine" and USE all the arrows the CONS have given him to use against them and the Grits will come out ahead... One can hope, eh... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Weber Posted February 25, 2011 Report Share Posted February 25, 2011 (edited) Well, having now heard and seen Ignatieff speak live on a few occasions my impressions of him have improved, which is a good thing since what I see of him on the boob tube doesn't work for me too well... My view of Ignatieff is that he's esentially NOT a "typical" politician, his ideas and assessments are fairly good, but since he's not all that politically astute he listens too much to the "advisors" mostly left over from the Chretien/Martin era... Being in the middle I really can't see anything better to either the right or the left soooo - that's where I'm at and it is what it is... In my riding it doesn't matter anyway since the vote will split exactly as before, except maybe a few more votes for the useless CON Joy Smith... If it was me leading the Liberals Canada would become GREAT (utopia even), but I'm not and it won't... One never knows once a writ is dropped, just maybe Ignatieff will "shine" and USE all the arrows the CONS have given him to use against them and the Grits will come out ahead... One can hope, eh... I'm not impressed at all with Ignatieff... In fact,I'm quite underwhelmed and disappointed at how easily he's been made to look sophomoric... I suspect he's going to give the Liberals the same result as Dion,except he's had all this hype behind him... I think he's a kind of "caretaker" leader that is an emodiment of the clueless nature of the party right now... It has to come to grips with the fact that it has'nt really stood for anything since Pierre Trudeau led the party... Until then,and it brings something to the table to compete in the public arena of ideas,spinning its wheels in opposition is the best it can hope for... Edited February 25, 2011 by Jack Weber Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWiz Posted February 25, 2011 Report Share Posted February 25, 2011 I'm not impressed at all with Ignatieff... In fact,I'm quite underwhelmed and disappointed at how easily he's been made to look sophomoric... I suspect he's going to give the Liberals the same result as Dion,except he's had all this hype behind him... I think he's a kind of "caretaker" leader that is an emodiment of the clueless nature of the party right now... It has to come to grips with the fact that it has'nt really stood for anything since Pierre Trudeau led the party... Until then,and it brings something to the table to compete in the public arena of ideas,spinning its wheels in opposition is the best it can hope for... Hmmm, doesn't seem to leave us with much choice, does it? Let's analyze this... 1. Harper and the CONservatives... "Conservative" in name only - big and free spending Government as evidenced by record deficits of approx. 67 BILLION DOLLARS, the waste of the Liberal's "rainy day fund", no accountability as to where the record deficit was spent for the benefit of the general public, the largest untendered purchase of Military equipment in Canadian history with the F-35, 1 Billion spent for 1 weekend on G8/G20, Corporate Tax Cuts, 2% GST cut resulting in said record deficit, "nanny state" interference with Canada's Banks which weathered the recession without needing a bailout by sound Liberal implemented policies, tax payer money spent on advertising for their own benefit, and on, and on, you get the idea... International - Canada is no longer seen as an "honest broker" because of unfettered support for Israel, destroying Canada's long standing ADVANTAGE in trade with China, destroying Canada's favourable position on the environment (reneging on Kyoto accord etc.), Harper position re: UN leaving Canada without it's say on the security counsel, and on, and on, you get the idea... Canada-US relationship - Like Diefenbaker and Mulroney before him willing without question to sell/give Canadian sovereignty and independence over to the US and others effectively making Canada a "sub" state to foreign interests... In Parliament - Prorogued Government twice rather than face opposition, a bevy of bad Ministers that have gone afoul in their duties as evidenced by the likes of Bev Oda, total disregard for the workings of parliament, stacking the still unelected senate with conservatives contrary to campaign promises, and on, and on, you get the idea... I gotta stop for a bit before continuing and I'll have to make "my opinions" into it's own thread because I didn't think it'd be this big a list for each party... OR maybe you'd like to take over and start the Liberals and NDP for me (Seperate thread?)... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wild Bill Posted February 25, 2011 Report Share Posted February 25, 2011 Hmmm, doesn't seem to leave us with much choice, does it? Let's analyze this... 1. Harper and the CONservatives... "Conservative" in name only - big and free spending Government as evidenced by record deficits of approx. 67 BILLION DOLLARS, the waste of the Liberal's "rainy day fund", no accountability as to where the record deficit was spent for the benefit of the general public, the largest untendered purchase of Military equipment in Canadian history with the F-35, 1 Billion spent for 1 weekend on G8/G20, Corporate Tax Cuts, 2% GST cut resulting in said record deficit, "nanny state" interference with Canada's Banks which weathered the recession without needing a bailout by sound Liberal implemented policies, tax payer money spent on advertising for their own benefit, and on, and on, you get the idea... International - Canada is no longer seen as an "honest broker" because of unfettered support for Israel, destroying Canada's long standing ADVANTAGE in trade with China, destroying Canada's favourable position on the environment (reneging on Kyoto accord etc.), Harper position re: UN leaving Canada without it's say on the security counsel, and on, and on, you get the idea... Canada-US relationship - Like Diefenbaker and Mulroney before him willing without question to sell/give Canadian sovereignty and independence over to the US and others effectively making Canada a "sub" state to foreign interests... In Parliament - Prorogued Government twice rather than face opposition, a bevy of bad Ministers that have gone afoul in their duties as evidenced by the likes of Bev Oda, total disregard for the workings of parliament, stacking the still unelected senate with conservatives contrary to campaign promises, and on, and on, you get the idea... I gotta stop for a bit before continuing and I'll have to make "my opinions" into it's own thread because I didn't think it'd be this big a list for each party... OR maybe you'd like to take over and start the Liberals and NDP for me (Seperate thread?)... Your points are all fair comment. So what? Any salesman quickly learns that it's not enough to knock your competitors. The customer also needs to hear more positive reasons to switch to YOUR product or service! Otherwise, he tends to stay with "the devil he knows". Right now, polls consistently show that the majority of Canadians put Ignatieff LAST as who they think would make the best Prime Minister. I saw one poll where he came after "None of the Above"! So that's one reason unavailable to a Liberal salesperson. Also, like it or not, AdScam is just not old enough to have been forgotten. It stiil detracts a fair number of voters, especially in Quebec. So if your strategy is just to knock Harper and his Tories, guess what? You're gonna lose! The Liberals desperately need a more charismatic leader to help people to forget all the past sins. They have to seize the flag as far as being the party of new ideas, while making Harper's bunch look stale and old-fashioned. It's amazing the Liberals haven't been able to do much of this already, considering Harper's public personality makes an accountant look like Alice Cooper! To me, it seems the real problem with today's Liberal Party is that nobody with REAL power and REAL resources behind him or her WANTS the job! All the "big knobs" (techie term for high-placed 'suits') have known since Paul Martin's demise that it was going to take a few terms before their party would have another shot at power. None of them were interested in being the leader of an opposition party. IMO, the NEXT election should start to show a more interesting fight! Enough time would have passed and the Tories would have been the incumbent party long enough to start to look boring. (Actually, they look rather boring right now but Ignatieff looks so boring you'd have to poke him to make sure he's alive!) I expect some REAL Liberal candidates to emerge and fight for the party leadership! It should make for a fun show! However,this next election is gonna be a "snore-fest"! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWiz Posted February 25, 2011 Report Share Posted February 25, 2011 Your points are all fair comment. So what? Any salesman quickly learns that it's not enough to knock your competitors. The customer also needs to hear more positive reasons to switch to YOUR product or service! Otherwise, he tends to stay with "the devil he knows". Right now, polls consistently show that the majority of Canadians put Ignatieff LAST as who they think would make the best Prime Minister. I saw one poll where he came after "None of the Above"! So that's one reason unavailable to a Liberal salesperson. Also, like it or not, AdScam is just not old enough to have been forgotten. It stiil detracts a fair number of voters, especially in Quebec. So if your strategy is just to knock Harper and his Tories, guess what? You're gonna lose! The Liberals desperately need a more charismatic leader to help people to forget all the past sins. They have to seize the flag as far as being the party of new ideas, while making Harper's bunch look stale and old-fashioned. It's amazing the Liberals haven't been able to do much of this already, considering Harper's public personality makes an accountant look like Alice Cooper! To me, it seems the real problem with today's Liberal Party is that nobody with REAL power and REAL resources behind him or her WANTS the job! All the "big knobs" (techie term for high-placed 'suits') have known since Paul Martin's demise that it was going to take a few terms before their party would have another shot at power. None of them were interested in being the leader of an opposition party. IMO, the NEXT election should start to show a more interesting fight! Enough time would have passed and the Tories would have been the incumbent party long enough to start to look boring. (Actually, they look rather boring right now but Ignatieff looks so boring you'd have to poke him to make sure he's alive!) I expect some REAL Liberal candidates to emerge and fight for the party leadership! It should make for a fun show! However,this next election is gonna be a "snore-fest"! Good post... A LOT of things change once a writ is dropped and people start paying attention... The next election may depend on things like the fee crossing the border and the price of gas at election time... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbg Posted February 25, 2011 Report Share Posted February 25, 2011 It's amazing the Liberals haven't been able to do much of this already, considering Harper's public personality makes an accountant look like Alice Cooper!Even with his piano and vocal performances? Sure beat Paul Martin on the air guitar. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWiz Posted February 25, 2011 Report Share Posted February 25, 2011 Even with his piano and vocal performances? Sure beat Paul Martin on the air guitar. Suggesting he quit his day job? I agree, but he sucks at BOTH... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
(Phone).thumb.jpg.165c8315c6251d31b87efa29fe65361b.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.