ccen Posted January 20, 2011 Author Report Posted January 20, 2011 (edited) Someone said a long time ago that a party that wants to keep our best programs like health and education and our strong social programs needs to be created and our economy must be a free market economy so our party would balance social progress on that front with free market economics therefore like the Progressive Conservative party and therefore used their time tested strategy. Remember if it was used in 1867 to 2003 then it could work now and I see nothing wrong with saying to people in certain regions that we want to be the successor to that party and try to seek the nomination of people who are committed to that ideology. My friend in the party even talked about the fact that Newfoundland and Labrador and Nova Scotia were good places to start since they have tons of people who believe in Red Toryism and red toryism does exist and people on other sites have said it is just liberalism painted with a few brushes of conservatism which is false since it is used in Great Britain and our party and its ideology would use what is used in certain parts of Europe. Therefore Eastern Canada is a place where our party would most likely be successful the same goes with Quebec and replacing the liberal vote in Western Canada. I think with these conditions applied our party would take votes from Liberals and Conservatives and give way to a new type of politics in Canada. Check out http://www.centristparty.piczo.com Edited January 20, 2011 by ccen Quote
PIK Posted January 20, 2011 Report Posted January 20, 2011 CC I can't seem to get that to work. Quote Toronto, like a roach motel in the middle of a pretty living room.
ccen Posted January 20, 2011 Author Report Posted January 20, 2011 CC I can't seem to get that to work. The website works now. Quote
Jack Weber Posted January 20, 2011 Report Posted January 20, 2011 Hopefully the Centrist party gets created for Atlantic Canadians and Quebeckers who want to vote for something more pragmatic and more fiscally responsible. Knowing how the Conservatives have governed over the last 5 years that is a welcomed alternative. I'm no fan of Captain Sweatervest,however,if I'm being totally objective I would say that Mr.Harper has governed more closely to the Centre than I would have imagined.It's fairly obvious that this is because he,and his merry band of Reformers,have been kept in check through minority parliaments.I think things would be quite different,and alot worse,if he had a majority... The Refor...errr....Conservative Party HAD to move to the Centre to become more electable because that's where the votes are.That's the place the Liberals are also trying to stake out and even the NDP is is fighting for votes in the same general area... How would your party differentiate itself from all the other slightly right,or slightly left,of centre choices out there? Quote The beatings will continue until morale improves!!!
Shwa Posted January 21, 2011 Report Posted January 21, 2011 (edited) How would your party differentiate itself from all the other slightly right,or slightly left,of centre choices out there? Ooooo, I'd like to answer that! It would be centre-centre, or dead centre. Their logo would be a bullseye. Some guys discussed this over a game of darts at the pub. Trouble is... If the party is based in Newfoundland, as appears to be the case from the website, and you are facing north, the party is most definitely on the left. But, magically, if you face south, it is on the right. I think they owe us an explanation about this. Edited January 21, 2011 by Shwa Quote
eyeball Posted January 21, 2011 Report Posted January 21, 2011 I could care less what hands a party uses to pat it's head or rub it's tummy with. What I want to know is would this new party govern in a manner that was quasi-transparent or semi-opaque? Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
ccen Posted January 21, 2011 Author Report Posted January 21, 2011 I could care less what hands a party uses to pat it's head or rub it's tummy with. What I want to know is would this new party govern in a manner that was quasi-transparent or semi-opaque? Well in answering the question about how the party would have to govern is centre to centre-right since that area is currently unoccupied and the current Conservative party is more closer to the Canadian Alliance ideologically than the old red tory Progressive Conservative party which we would try to govern much closer to. Therefore we would be centrist, liberal conservative, one nation conservative, traditionalist conservative, neoliberal, and be for reducing the size of government. I think that is what most Canadians would want in a party. Quote
ccen Posted January 21, 2011 Author Report Posted January 21, 2011 I could care less what hands a party uses to pat it's head or rub it's tummy with. What I want to know is would this new party govern in a manner that was quasi-transparent or semi-opaque? Well if you mean in secrecy would you like the answer if I said for a change in North America we would be a conservative party in this continent that actually governs with complete transparency and openness and accountability and even start a website to basically show all our ideas and run the most transparent government in Canadian history and actually mean what we say and not hide behind closed doors. Canadians deserve better and we would be the party of 18 to 24 and 25 to 39. We would be so popular in fact the other parties would need to worry. Quote
eyeball Posted January 21, 2011 Report Posted January 21, 2011 Well if you mean in secrecy would you like the answer if I said for a change in North America we would be a conservative party in this continent that actually governs with complete transparency and openness and accountability and even start a website to basically show all our ideas and run the most transparent government in Canadian history and actually mean what we say and not hide behind closed doors. Canadians deserve better and we would be the party of 18 to 24 and 25 to 39. We would be so popular in fact the other parties would need to worry. I did mean in secrecy. I work with cameras and GPS data loggers recording what I do. Technicians service the 'black-box', validators and auditors scan the data, my performance is scored, and my accuracy rating adjusted, often on a weekly basis and reports of my activities are generated and distributed to bureaucrats who's job is to protect the public's interest. So transparency eh...just how deeply are you proposing to open yourself up to scrutiny? By the way I'm not a criminal, I'm just a fisherman. Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
ccen Posted January 21, 2011 Author Report Posted January 21, 2011 (edited) Anyways for those of you who are interested in viewing the party and seeing the first page of the party which has the join to become a member for free and be one of the 250 electors to help the party get registered then the site is: http://www.centristparty.piczo.com Also, you may contact me by seeing the email address at the bottom of the first page. Thank you. Edited January 21, 2011 by ccen Quote
Wild Bill Posted January 21, 2011 Report Posted January 21, 2011 Well in answering the question about how the party would have to govern is centre to centre-right since that area is currently unoccupied and the current Conservative party is more closer to the Canadian Alliance ideologically than the old red tory Progressive Conservative party which we would try to govern much closer to. Therefore we would be centrist, liberal conservative, one nation conservative, traditionalist conservative, neoliberal, and be for reducing the size of government. I think that is what most Canadians would want in a party. You say this yet again, that the CPC is closer to the old Alliance party, yet you give zip all in specifics to back it up! Could you name some Alliance party planks that are actually being PRACTICED by the present CPC? I've been watching since the merger and I've yet to see ANY trace of Reform/Alliance in the CPC. Actions speak louder than words and the CPC doesn't look any different from Mulroney's party to me. If I'm wrong and you're right, how about some specifics? Instead of just cheerleading. Quote "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."
ccen Posted January 21, 2011 Author Report Posted January 21, 2011 You say this yet again, that the CPC is closer to the old Alliance party, yet you give zip all in specifics to back it up! Could you name some Alliance party planks that are actually being PRACTICED by the present CPC? I've been watching since the merger and I've yet to see ANY trace of Reform/Alliance in the CPC. Actions speak louder than words and the CPC doesn't look any different from Mulroney's party to me. If I'm wrong and you're right, how about some specifics? Instead of just cheerleading. In terms of the support for Israel unilaterally the Conservatives are closer to the Alliance part of the party which cannot be denied. In terms of law and order they are closer to the Alliance side, the PC side favoured a balanced law and order approach which meant money going into rehabilitation programs and an approach where you do not engage too much into mandatory minimums. For health and education I agree the party is pretty much the same as the old PC party and we favour that too. On foreign policy we favour the balanced approach and making sure diplomacy and peace comes before engaging in war and the Conservatives seem to be in that direction probably since they are just in a minority government but traditionally the PC party wanted a balanced law and order and balanced foreign policy approach. In terms of security we favour protecting our North, our borders and our coasts not just to copy the CPC agenda but because it is the right thing to do. The PC party supported getting rid of the long gun registry and we in the Centrist Party want the same thing even though some Alliance and Reform members at one time supported it. The Alliance supported gay marriage being banned and the same with parts of abortion, in the PC party they supported making sure gay marriage was not banned and the same goes with abortion. We in the Centrist Party support the PC party direction. In terms of democracy we support parliamentary democracy over a republic and we want a party that is committed to middle grounds and compromise and we want to even bring in a proportional representation system and even reform the Senate. Those are the differences between the PC party and the Alliance party. They wanted to be the blue tory side and the red tory side was the PC party and this new Conservative party is on the blue tory side and we want to bring back the red tory side which wanted health and education a major priority with support programs for the disadvantaged and tax cuts to stimulate growth and support in key areas in the manufacturing sector. Therefore we think a red tory/blue liberal party is wanted. Quote
M.Dancer Posted January 21, 2011 Report Posted January 21, 2011 In terms of the support for Israel unilaterally the Conservatives .... Your party brain trust is lacking. ..Canada called for the resumption of Mideast peace talks and publicly condemned the expansion of Jewish settlements on Tuesday, an issue which once more chilled relations between Israel and the United Stateshttp://www.nationalpost.com/news/story.html?id=2690127 Quote RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us
ccen Posted January 21, 2011 Author Report Posted January 21, 2011 Your party brain trust is lacking.States http://www.nationalpost.com/news/story.html?id=2690127 Well we support a two state solution and we won't just support one nation over another. I think the balanced approach must take hold in this country and the US approach is a failure. Quote
ccen Posted January 21, 2011 Author Report Posted January 21, 2011 Your party brain trust is lacking.States http://www.nationalpost.com/news/story.html?id=2690127 I think what everyone wants is a two state solution and have you seen the ten percenters the Conservatives launched in other ridings saying that they will always stand with Israel and the other parties don't support Israel at all. They were trying to win Jewish voters. I think that approach is too negative and we would say all nations are equal and try to help build relations with all nations. Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted January 21, 2011 Report Posted January 21, 2011 Well we support a two state solution and we won't just support one nation over another. I think the balanced approach must take hold in this country and the US approach is a failure. That's all well and good, but doesn't mean anything until you are ready to put some money into it. If the US approach is a failure, the Canadian approach has been non-existent. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Wild Bill Posted January 21, 2011 Report Posted January 21, 2011 In terms of the support for Israel unilaterally the Conservatives are closer to the Alliance part of the party which cannot be denied. In terms of law and order they are closer to the Alliance side, the PC side favoured a balanced law and order approach which meant money going into rehabilitation programs and an approach where you do not engage too much into mandatory minimums. For health and education I agree the party is pretty much the same as the old PC party and we favour that too. On foreign policy we favour the balanced approach and making sure diplomacy and peace comes before engaging in war and the Conservatives seem to be in that direction probably since they are just in a minority government but traditionally the PC party wanted a balanced law and order and balanced foreign policy approach. In terms of security we favour protecting our North, our borders and our coasts not just to copy the CPC agenda but because it is the right thing to do. The PC party supported getting rid of the long gun registry and we in the Centrist Party want the same thing even though some Alliance and Reform members at one time supported it. The Alliance supported gay marriage being banned and the same with parts of abortion, in the PC party they supported making sure gay marriage was not banned and the same goes with abortion. We in the Centrist Party support the PC party direction. In terms of democracy we support parliamentary democracy over a republic and we want a party that is committed to middle grounds and compromise and we want to even bring in a proportional representation system and even reform the Senate. Those are the differences between the PC party and the Alliance party. They wanted to be the blue tory side and the red tory side was the PC party and this new Conservative party is on the blue tory side and we want to bring back the red tory side which wanted health and education a major priority with support programs for the disadvantaged and tax cuts to stimulate growth and support in key areas in the manufacturing sector. Therefore we think a red tory/blue liberal party is wanted. Obviously, you don't know the difference between a party's stance on a particular issue and an actual policy plank. The Reform/Alliance party had a formal, written party platform, concerning things like right to recall, that party policy would come from grassroots workshops and be binding on the leadership, that MPs would be expected to vote according to the majority wishes of their constituents and NOT according to their own conscience or according to the party's stance. The Alliance never had anything one way or the other about gay marriage or abortion in their party platform. They did this deliberately! Later, they mostly voted against a Liberal Bill because at the time most of them were representing ridings where that was the popular will. None of them were MPs for Toronto urban ridings so that was not surprising. You seem to spit a lot of stuff off the top of your head. This will make drumming up support more of a challenge. If you're going to make comparisons it might be more effective if you research them a bit, instead of relying on stereotypes. Quote "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."
ccen Posted January 21, 2011 Author Report Posted January 21, 2011 Obviously, you don't know the difference between a party's stance on a particular issue and an actual policy plank. The Reform/Alliance party had a formal, written party platform, concerning things like right to recall, that party policy would come from grassroots workshops and be binding on the leadership, that MPs would be expected to vote according to the majority wishes of their constituents and NOT according to their own conscience or according to the party's stance. The Alliance never had anything one way or the other about gay marriage or abortion in their party platform. They did this deliberately! Later, they mostly voted against a Liberal Bill because at the time most of them were representing ridings where that was the popular will. None of them were MPs for Toronto urban ridings so that was not surprising. You seem to spit a lot of stuff off the top of your head. This will make drumming up support more of a challenge. If you're going to make comparisons it might be more effective if you research them a bit, instead of relying on stereotypes. I try not to be stereotypical but what is wrong with a party that favours keeping things which work well and not keeping the things that don't work well for Canadians. The truth is I am trying to let you know about what I saw in the 2000 election from Joe Clark and making the party comparison from the PCs at that time which they even favoured action on poverty, reducing the debt, opening more free trade with other countries, they actually wanted an approach to tackle violent crime but not as hard as the Conservatives are pushing, they wanted democracy as the main plank of the party and wanted to focus on maintaining health and education as a strong priority. Therefore, you understand when I brought up the comparisons between the Alliance party and the PC party I don't mean to put them down I genuinely do remember some of the planks of the two parties but ya you may be right that some of the extreme elements of the Alliance party were gotten rid of in favour of more moderate planks for the party. I think that is good but what is wrong with getting good policies from the two major parties to make an even better party better but work and build a stronger Canada in the mean time. Quote
Saipan Posted January 21, 2011 Report Posted January 21, 2011 What I want to know is would this new party govern in a manner that was quasi-transparent or semi-opaque? They would probably inform Al-Quida of every move. Just so they won't discriminate. Quote
Moonlight Graham Posted January 22, 2011 Report Posted January 22, 2011 (edited) Anyways for those of you who are interested in viewing the party and seeing the first page of the party which has the join to become a member for free and be one of the 250 electors to help the party get registered then the site is: http://www.centristparty.piczo.com Also, you may contact me by seeing the email address at the bottom of the first page. Thank you. Your party logo colour is purple. You just lost my vote. Also, there's spelling and grammar mistakes all over your homepage. I need a party that can write better than me can. Edited January 22, 2011 by Moonlight Graham Quote "All generalizations are false, including this one." - Mark Twain Partisanship is a disease of the intellect.
Scotty Posted January 22, 2011 Report Posted January 22, 2011 I could care less what hands a party uses to pat it's head or rub it's tummy with. What I want to know is would this new party govern in a manner that was quasi-transparent or semi-opaque? What's the point of asking this question? The Liberals said they would. The Conservatives also said they would. Once they got into power, other priorities asserted themselves. Quote It is an inverted moral calculus that tries to persuade the world to demonize one state that tries its civilized best to abide in a difficult time and place, and rides merrily by the examples and practices of dozens of states and leaderships that drop into brutality every day without a twinge of regret or a whisper of condemnation. - Rex Murphy
Saipan Posted January 22, 2011 Report Posted January 22, 2011 In terms of the support for Israel unilaterally the Conservatives are closer to the Alliance part of the party which cannot be denied. More FREEDOM for citizewn and less for criminals also. And getting rid of the $2 Billion duck gun registration that is nothing but drain on the economy and police time. And indeed the REFORM party (real conservatives) are the same people that split because of Mulroney bungling. I.e. the MAJORITY. Now back as one party once more. Quote
ccen Posted January 31, 2011 Author Report Posted January 31, 2011 More FREEDOM for citizewn and less for criminals also. And getting rid of the $2 Billion duck gun registration that is nothing but drain on the economy and police time. And indeed the REFORM party (real conservatives) are the same people that split because of Mulroney bungling. I.e. the MAJORITY. Now back as one party once more. Well our party wants to be strong on law and order and support mandatory minimums while providing rehabilitation programs and make sure that education programs are provided to ensure youth and troubled people don't enter the world of crime. We all need to make sure that all loopholes are filled. Also, as a party we are close to it getting formed. I feel that the only problem is finding a leader but of the 250 electors needed I would say that we are on our way. Quote
ccen Posted January 31, 2011 Author Report Posted January 31, 2011 One other thing I talked about yesterday on other forums is it is inevitable by the nature of how the Conservatives act a new party could form between the Liberals and Conservatives simply because of hatred that the Conservatives will cause and even by alienating their own people in the party who expected the Conservatives would be different. In fact, the Conservatives could make a lot of supporters go to the Green Party or a party like ours. I have heard that the United Party is something people could go to and our party being a successor to the old Progressive Conservative party is something that would get favour in the Atlantic provinces. There is nothing wrong with wanting a party that simply wants to compromise the best issues of the two major parties into a new party. Some party people have even thought about bringing in some fluently bi-lingual, charismatic and people who are inspiring. That is what we need for leadership in the country and I feel it is what we could get if our party was created. Quote
Wild Bill Posted January 31, 2011 Report Posted January 31, 2011 One other thing I talked about yesterday on other forums is it is inevitable by the nature of how the Conservatives act a new party could form between the Liberals and Conservatives simply because of hatred that the Conservatives will cause and even by alienating their own people in the party who expected the Conservatives would be different. In fact, the Conservatives could make a lot of supporters go to the Green Party or a party like ours. I have heard that the United Party is something people could go to and our party being a successor to the old Progressive Conservative party is something that would get favour in the Atlantic provinces. There is nothing wrong with wanting a party that simply wants to compromise the best issues of the two major parties into a new party. Some party people have even thought about bringing in some fluently bi-lingual, charismatic and people who are inspiring. That is what we need for leadership in the country and I feel it is what we could get if our party was created. If you're trying to build on the old Progressive Conservative Party, is there anything that might attract the old Reform demographic? It was MILLIONS of votes, you know! I wouldn't think you would want to just blow them off. Or expect them to suddenly become Progressive Conservatives. Quote "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."
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.