Topaz Posted July 10, 2011 Report Share Posted July 10, 2011 While out in Calgary, Harper's still in campaign mode and spoke to his Tories supporters over the present and the Libs being left behind. He also, said Canadians are behind the Tories now. IF that were true, he would have gotten a higher majority but the truth is 60 % of voters DIDN'T vote for the Tories. When a party gets so sure of themselves, like Harper and his gang are, that's when they get themselves in more trouble, as scams and schemes and this Fall will get more aggressive once the House comes back. Just like any party that has all the power, Harper is going to trip up and the Canadians will let him know. Just like the Liberals, what goes up, must come down and down the Harper era will fall. http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/Harper%2Bdeclares%2Blong%2BLiberal%2Bover%2Bduring%2BStampede%2Bspeech/5079289/story.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CPCFTW Posted July 10, 2011 Report Share Posted July 10, 2011 What a clever and insightful post. Another Chemical Topaz gem. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keepitsimple Posted July 10, 2011 Report Share Posted July 10, 2011 (edited) You're persistent Topaz, I'll give you that. Like a dog on a bone. Curiously though, which party would you prefer? The Liberals, who 80% of Canadians didn't vote for.....or the NDP, who 70% of Canadians didn't vote for? I know the answer - you just don't like the result so you'd like to change the entire voting system. In short, you're a sore loser. Our voting system has helped Canada build and maintain a stable, moderate political climate and as far as I'm concerned, the best damn country in the world. Be careful what you wish for. Edited July 10, 2011 by Keepitsimple Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted July 10, 2011 Report Share Posted July 10, 2011 It's not about the percentage of people who voted for the parties. It's about the number of seats they get, relative to the way Canadians vote. Having a clear majority in the House with over 10% less than half the votes, regardless of which party has power, is absolutely worth criticizing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted July 10, 2011 Report Share Posted July 10, 2011 Topaz's newsflash: Harper plays to his base while giving a speech to his supporters. I'm shocked I tells ya! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keepitsimple Posted July 10, 2011 Report Share Posted July 10, 2011 It's not about the percentage of people who voted for the parties. It's about the number of seats they get, relative to the way Canadians vote. Having a clear majority in the House with over 10% less than half the votes, regardless of which party has power, is absolutely worth criticizing. What exactly are you criticizing? Since 1962, only the 1984 election (Mulroney) achieved the bare 50% that you seem to be looking for. Pierre Trudeau came the closest in 1968 with 45%. All three Chretien majorities were around the 40% mark. Why is there now a "problem". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted July 10, 2011 Report Share Posted July 10, 2011 Why is there now a "problem". I think we all know why it's a problem now. Their selective outrage and/or concern is amusing. I'm sure it's just a coincidence that it comes at a time of Harper's majority. I don't remember the same outrage and concern during the Chretien/Martin majorities. Go figure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted July 10, 2011 Report Share Posted July 10, 2011 (edited) What exactly are you criticizing? Since 1962, only the 1984 election (Mulroney) achieved the bare 50% that you seem to be looking for. Pierre Trudeau came the closest in 1968 with 45%. All three Chretien majorities were around the 40% mark. Why is there now a "problem". There isn't now a problem. There has always been a problem. Our representatives are not very representational. Edited July 10, 2011 by cybercoma Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted July 10, 2011 Report Share Posted July 10, 2011 I think we all know why it's a problem now. Their selective outrage and/or concern is amusing. I'm sure it's just a coincidence that it comes at a time of Harper's majority. I don't remember the same outrage and concern during the Chretien/Martin majorities. Go figure. Maybe you're having a hard time remembering it because you didn't know me during Trudeau, Mulroney, Chretien, and Martin's majorities. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Posted July 10, 2011 Report Share Posted July 10, 2011 There isn't now a problem. There has always been a problem. Our representatives are not very representational. Alright fine, so you've got a grievance with the electoral system of Canada. Was that Topaz's argument, though? No, it was just a meaningless rant capped off with a worthless forecast of doom. He's indirectly criticizing the system for transparently partisan purposes. Just like any party that has all the power, Harper is going to trip up and the Canadians will let him know. Just like the Liberals, what goes up, must come down and down the Harper era will fall/ Seriously? You can't come up with something better than this? This is pure infantile partisanship. What a pointless thread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted July 10, 2011 Report Share Posted July 10, 2011 I'm not vouching for Topaz or the thread, but KIS keeps using the same argument that more people voted for the Conservatives than any other party. After I say that there's a problem with the system when only 39.5% of people vote for a party and it gets majority, he'll come back and say that Quebec screws up the numbers and start dropping regions until it looks like the Conservative have the vote of the majority of Canadians. In reality, only something like 25% of eligible voters actually submitted a ballot with a Conservative's name checked off, yet they have unimpeded control of federal policy for 4 years. I find that disagreeable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keepitsimple Posted July 10, 2011 Report Share Posted July 10, 2011 (edited) I'm not vouching for Topaz or the thread, but KIS keeps using the same argument that more people voted for the Conservatives than any other party. After I say that there's a problem with the system when only 39.5% of people vote for a party and it gets majority, he'll come back and say that Quebec screws up the numbers and start dropping regions until it looks like the Conservative have the vote of the majority of Canadians. In reality, only something like 25% of eligible voters actually submitted a ballot with a Conservative's name checked off, yet they have unimpeded control of federal policy for 4 years. I find that disagreeable. ....and you're entitled to that opinion......but since you've "always" had this problem - does this mean that you're not satisfied with the type of country Canada has evolved to since Confederation? Are you saying the electoral system is broken and this thread should be another "change the FPTP" thread? Canada is doing quite well thank you. Be careful what you wish for. Edited July 10, 2011 by Keepitsimple Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted July 10, 2011 Report Share Posted July 10, 2011 Less than 2/3 of the population showing up to vote is not what I would call doing well in a democracy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonam Posted July 11, 2011 Report Share Posted July 11, 2011 Less than 2/3 of the population showing up to vote is not what I would call doing well in a democracy. If anything, less people showing up to vote shows that a country is doing well. People not caring much about their government means their government isn't doing too much to screw them over and make them care. Regardless, how well a country is doing is best measured by other metrics, such as economic prosperity, health, education, crime, etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
August1991 Posted July 11, 2011 Report Share Posted July 11, 2011 (edited) We've got the rules we've got and people vote knowing that these are the rules. If you change the rules, there is no guarantee that you can simply extrapolate to the result you desire. A Liberal Democratic Party would not receive all the votes of the NDP and the Liberals anymore than people would continue to buy the same quantity of gasoline if the price went to $3/litre. When rules change, people change their behaviour. If anything, less people showing up to vote shows that a country is doing well. People not caring much about their government means their government isn't doing too much to screw them over and make them care. Regardless, how well a country is doing is best measured by other metrics, such as economic prosperity, health, education, crime, etc.I'd say that the willingness of people to pay taxes is a far better measure of the democratic legitimacy of a State. One of the problems in Greece right now is that too many avoid paying taxes.----- As to Harper's speech, I think that he said something significant :“Under our Conservative government, Canada is more united than it ever has been. My friends, I think something has changed. I believe the long Liberal era is genuinely, truly ending. As with disco balls and bell bottoms, Canadians have moved on,” he said to applause and laughter.“We are moving Canada in a Conservative direction, and Canadians are moving in that direction with us,” Harper told an audience that included more than two dozen Tory MPs. “Conservative values are Canadian values. Canadian values are Conservative values.” ... “If we are in, meanwhile, who’s out? The Liberals are out, the Bloc Quebecois is out . . . The politics of division are out,” he said. “Canadians have found through a costly 40-year experiment with liberalism that big government is not an instant answer to everything.” I think that Harper is right. Canada is a fundamentally conservative country. Edited July 11, 2011 by August1991 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Molly Posted July 11, 2011 Report Share Posted July 11, 2011 I'd say that the willingness of people to pay taxes is a far better measure of the democratic legitimacy of a State. ----- Canada is a fundamentally conservative country. On the first assertion, maybe so. On the second, aye, Canada is a conservative country, but not so much, I don't believe, a Conservative one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
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.