Stephen Harper, the Only Winner in Election 2011

[cybercoma]

Political Right: 39.62%

Political Left: 60.38%

I think he's speaking on behalf of the political left that did not want Conservative right-wing policies.

[RNG]

The NDP only got 18% of the vote? I think you better check your numbers again.

I as someone else did previously, assumed that those who didn't vote were not NDP supporters either. Then they work.

[cybercoma]

I as someone else did previously, assumed that those who didn't vote were not NDP supporters either. Then they work.

Those who didn't vote did not support a different party. They didn't support anything and are not applicable.

Edited May 6, 2011 by cybercoma

[RNG]

Political Right: 39.62%

Political Left: 60.38%

I think he's speaking on behalf of the political left that did not want Conservative right-wing policies.

I'd sure like to see where those numbers came from.

[Evening Star]

Yeah, I voted NDP but I have a real problem with trying to divide a multi-party system into two camps that way. Of course, we could try it: If the Liberals and NDP really are similar left-wing parties, it should be easy for them to unite under the banner of the party that has greater representation in the House now. Any bets on how many Liberals are going to go for this...?

I'm totally open to electoral reform, on the other hand.

[cybercoma]

I'm not saying it's a good way of dividing things. I just think that's where the poster above was coming from.

[Topaz]

Harper's been listening to that rhetoric for five straight elections now, and his support keeps increasing.

Well, I'm only repeating what people told me at the local coffee shop. They said they are all the same(crooks) and they were tired of the elections and to stop them for, at least, four years they gave their vote to Harper.

[Topaz]

Yeah, I voted NDP but I have a real problem with trying to divide a multi-party system into two camps that way. Of course, we could try it: If the Liberals and NDP really are similar left-wing parties, it should be easy for them to unite under the banner of the party that has greater representation in the House now. Any bets on how many Liberals are going to go for this...?

I'm totally open to electoral reform, on the other hand.

The Liberals won't go for it any more than the NDP would have or will. I believe Caandians should keep three parties at all times or we will end up like the USA with not much choice.

[cybercoma]

I think we have a political atmosphere that looks a lot like the religious one.

You have those that believe in God and they're an all or nothing sort of group. Here you have the Conservatives and their supporters, who are die-hard, nothing is going to sway me, I have "faith" in my party sort of people.

On the other side of the spectrum you have your agnostics and atheists. Atheists can be your die-hard, there is absolutely not a God type of people and those could be related to the NDP. They're going to support that part no matter what. You then have people that are agnostic, which relates to the Liberal Party being somewhere in the middle, but any given supporter could bleed to the NDP or Conservatives given enough of a push.

The problem is the division. While you have a group that are absolutely devote in their beliefs, the Conservative, the others define themselves a little differently and are moving about their spectrum. We've had this debate in the religious threads where atheists may not absolutely believe there is no God, but feel that it is very highly improbable, while still considering themselves atheists. Agnostics would claim that those people are not really atheists at all, but agnostics like them. At the end of the day, it comes down to whether you believe there is absolutely equal probability of there being a God or not. So while those that don't believe in God are spreading themselvs between camps based on probabilities, those that do have parked themselves squarely in the camp of absolutes.

Most Conservative supporters park themseles in their blue camp without deviation. They have the utmost faith in the party, regardless of the disastrous decisions made, even if they have non-partisan implications. This is part of the reason cutting the vote subsidy is so disastrous for the other parties. The Conservative base is more firmly supportive of their party, like a brand, like belief in God. The other parties are more flexible and their base is harder to pin down with the exception of the absolute far left. However, even then, many would rather resort to anarchism than take part in the electoral process. There's simply too much of a range on the left for them to park themselves into a single camp and I just don't see that sort of variation on the right.

I stand to be corrected, however.

[RNG]

I think we have a political atmosphere that looks a lot like the religious one.

You have those that believe in God and they're an all or nothing sort of group. Here you have the Conservatives and their supporters, who are die-hard, nothing is going to sway me, I have "faith" in my party sort of people.

On the other side of the spectrum you have your agnostics and atheists. Atheists can be your die-hard, there is absolutely not a God type of people and those could be related to the NDP. They're going to support that part no matter what. You then have people that are agnostic, which relates to the Liberal Party being somewhere in the middle, but any given supporter could bleed to the NDP or Conservatives given enough of a push.

The problem is the division. While you have a group that are absolutely devote in their beliefs, the Conservative, the others define themselves a little differently and are moving about their spectrum. We've had this debate in the religious threads where atheists may not absolutely believe there is no God, but feel that it is very highly improbable, while still considering themselves atheists. Agnostics would claim that those people are not really atheists at all, but agnostics like them. At the end of the day, it comes down to whether you believe there is absolutely equal probability of there being a God or not. So while those that don't believe in God are spreading themselvs between camps based on probabilities, those that do have parked themselves squarely in the camp of absolutes.

Most Conservative supporters park themseles in their blue camp without deviation. They have the utmost faith in the party, regardless of the disastrous decisions made, even if they have non-partisan implications. This is part of the reason cutting the vote subsidy is so disastrous for the other parties. The Conservative base is more firmly supportive of their party, like a brand, like belief in God. The other parties are more flexible and their base is harder to pin down with the exception of the absolute far left. However, even then, many would rather resort to anarchism than take part in the electoral process. There's simply too much of a range on the left for them to park themselves into a single camp and I just don't see that sort of variation on the right.

I stand to be corrected, however.

I don't know. There seem to be quite a few die-hard fanatic NDP supporters in the world.

[Battletoads]

And a majority that will be, at long last, be able to do something positive.

For the upper class and corporate elite, the middle class be damned.

[RNG]

For the upper class and corporate elite, the middle class be damned.

I don't think so. I'm probably what you would call lower middle class, and still think I'll have more green in my jeans and less government in my wallet with a Conservative government.

[Sandy MacNab]

Again I say, what about the 82% who didn't vote for Layton?

And the 81% who (wisely) didn't vote Liberal?

[RNG]

And the 81% who (wisely) didn't vote Liberal?

Yup. But my point is that the fanatics all are trying to use junk math to prove their points. The fact is Harper got 167 seats. That's it. He won, the others lost. Deal with it because that's the way it is. In four years, try again. And again, the electorate will speak. That's our system. You want it changed, do something about it and bitching on one of these here interwebz thingys isn't going to do dick. Contact your MP, write letters, start a petition. Whatever.

[Sandy MacNab]

Yup. But my point is that the fanatics all are trying to use junk math to prove their points. The fact is Harper got 167 seats. That's it. He won, the others lost. Deal with it because that's the way it is. In four years, try again. And again, the electorate will speak. That's our system. You want it changed, do something about it and bitching on one of these here interwebz thingys isn't going to do dick. Contact your MP, write letters, start a petition. Whatever.

The Liberals would rather feel sorry for themselves, bitch and whine.

[Guest Derek L]

For the upper class and corporate elite, the middle class be damned.

How many jobs do the “middle or lower class” create on their own? Have you ever worked for a “poor person”? Did you borrow the money for your car/house from a “poor person”?

[Bonam]

I think we have a political atmosphere that looks a lot like the religious one.

You have those that believe in God and they're an all or nothing sort of group. Here you have the Conservatives and their supporters, who are die-hard, nothing is going to sway me, I have "faith" in my party sort of people.

On the other side of the spectrum you have your agnostics and atheists. Atheists can be your die-hard, there is absolutely not a God type of people and those could be related to the NDP. They're going to support that part no matter what. You then have people that are agnostic, which relates to the Liberal Party being somewhere in the middle, but any given supporter could bleed to the NDP or Conservatives given enough of a push.

The problem is the division. While you have a group that are absolutely devote in their beliefs, the Conservative, the others define themselves a little differently and are moving about their spectrum. We've had this debate in the religious threads where atheists may not absolutely believe there is no God, but feel that it is very highly improbable, while still considering themselves atheists. Agnostics would claim that those people are not really atheists at all, but agnostics like them. At the end of the day, it comes down to whether you believe there is absolutely equal probability of there being a God or not. So while those that don't believe in God are spreading themselvs between camps based on probabilities, those that do have parked themselves squarely in the camp of absolutes.

Most Conservative supporters park themseles in their blue camp without deviation. They have the utmost faith in the party, regardless of the disastrous decisions made, even if they have non-partisan implications. This is part of the reason cutting the vote subsidy is so disastrous for the other parties. The Conservative base is more firmly supportive of their party, like a brand, like belief in God. The other parties are more flexible and their base is harder to pin down with the exception of the absolute far left. However, even then, many would rather resort to anarchism than take part in the electoral process. There's simply too much of a range on the left for them to park themselves into a single camp and I just don't see that sort of variation on the right.

I stand to be corrected, however.

Not really a good analogy. For one, liberals have die hard supporters just like the other two parties. In fact, the liberal brand probably had the greatest number of devoted supporters of any party until recent years. Secondly, the analogy implicitly tries to link conservatism with religiosity and atheism with leftism. This may be your intent, but you should know there are plenty of atheists/agnostics on all parts of the political spectrum. In particular, a large number of what one would consider the "far right" such as Libertarians tend to be atheists.

Anyway there's no need for this kind of analogy at all. It can be explained directly with words without resorting to complex simile. All you needed to say was that parties have their devoted supporters, and that currently the NDP and the conservatives have more of these, and that other voters who are less devoted can be persuaded to vote for different parties based on issues.

[Bonam]

How many jobs do the “middle or lower class” create on their own? Have you ever worked for a “poor person”? Did you borrow the money for your car/house from a “poor person”?

The poor don't create many jobs, but a great many small businesses are run by middle class people.

[Sandy MacNab]

The poor don't create many jobs, but a great many small businesses are run by middle class people.

Each sole-proprietor has created at least one job. My clients are almost all sole-proprietors, some create a number of jobs, and all pay income taxes. Some are in the upper middle class, most are just working stiffs, contributing and staying off government hand-outs.

[Guest Derek L]

The poor don't create many jobs, but a great many small businesses are run by middle class people.

Where do you think the small business owners get their start-up from?

[Guest Derek L]

Each sole-proprietor has created at least one job. My clients are almost all sole-proprietors, some create a number of jobs, and all pay income taxes. Some are in the upper middle class, most are just working stiffs, contributing and staying off government hand-outs.

As I asked Bonam, where do you think your clients got the money to become self employed?

[Bonam]

Where do you think the small business owners get their start-up from?

Well the answer you are looking for is that they get it from venture capitalists, angel investors, and banks. And that's certainly sometimes true, but far from always. Not all small businesses require a large initial investment, in fact, many do not. For those that do require an initial investment, people sometimes save up and use their own funds. Additionally, modern techniques like "crowdfunding" are available, where many of the investors are other middle class people.

[cybercoma]

Not really a good analogy. For one, liberals have die hard supporters just like the other two parties. In fact, the liberal brand probably had the greatest number of devoted supporters of any party until recent years. Secondly, the analogy implicitly tries to link conservatism with religiosity and atheism with leftism. This may be your intent, but you should know there are plenty of atheists/agnostics on all parts of the political spectrum. In particular, a large number of what one would consider the "far right" such as Libertarians tend to be atheists.

Anyway there's no need for this kind of analogy at all. It can be explained directly with words without resorting to complex simile. All you needed to say was that parties have their devoted supporters, and that currently the NDP and the conservatives have more of these, and that other voters who are less devoted can be persuaded to vote for different parties based on issues.

Fair enough. Bad analogy.

[Guest Derek L]

Well the answer you are looking for is that they get it from venture capitalists, angel investors, and banks. And that's certainly sometimes true, but far from always. Not all small businesses require a large initial investment, in fact, many do not. For those that do require an initial investment, people sometimes save up and use their own funds. Additionally, modern techniques like "crowdfunding" are available, where many of the investors are other middle class people.

Sure, not always but I doubt those with a small initial start-up create many, well paying jobs. Don't get wrong, I have the utmost respect for those that try and give it a go on their own.

None the less, the Tories economic policies will help create a business friendly environment for all, not just the “fat cats & upper class”….

[Bonam]

Sure, not always but I doubt those with a small initial start-up create many, well paying jobs. Don't get wrong, I have the utmost respect for those that try and give it a go on their own.

None the less, the Tories economic policies will help create a business friendly environment for all, not just the “fat cats & upper class”….

Oh, don't get me wrong, I tend to support the conservatives' economic policies. I voted for em and all. I just think it's somewhat of a misconception to assume that the vast majority of jobs originate with the upper class.