Here we go again...Tory attacks ads.

WWWTT · March 22, 2012

The leader isnt a figurehead. They get a fair bit of power over the parties.

This is fale!

The leader is ultimately the best figurehead for the party,or the members would have never elected them(an argument can be made however in the case of the liberals).

In the case for the NDP I believe the leader can have strong influence,but never dictate.

WWWTT

PIK · March 22, 2012

They no longer use ''interim'' but call him leader and I think everyone knows he wants it and will break his promise not to run, that proves to me rae is a slime ball as he has always been and it also shows the liberal have not changed either ,still the old boys running the club.

Newfoundlander · March 22, 2012

First off,Mulcair as of this day is NOT the leader,he is the frontrunner in the leadership race but not the leader!

Secondly Ed Broadbent is NOT in the leadership race,nor an MP.

These are two distinctions the NDP have from the liberals concerning this scenario.

This second fact is important because after the leader is chosen,Ed can easily step away.

I emphasize this by pointing out that Pat Martin has clearly bein asked whom he supports in the leadership race.And I distinctly heard him on the CTV program "Question Period" that he will not say because he wishes to remain nuetral(or something like that).

And as far as the conservatives attacking Turmel goes,absolutely agree that a counter attack would have bein in order!

But for some reason the conservatives did not do this.Was it because they have no money?Turmel has bein compared to Stephen Dion when she speaks English wouldn't this be enough to make the conservatives salivate at the opportunity to attack an opponent?

Maybe they considered this but realized the risk and decided to play it safe and just attack Rae?

WWWTT

Turmel was a ticking time bomb so there was no need to attack her.

WWWTT · March 22, 2012

Turmel was a ticking time bomb so there was no need to attack her.

Let the record show that the conservatives did not run attack adds against Turmel,how you interpret that is your opinion.

If Turmel was a ticking time bomb then the conservatives are showing an unusual high amount of discipline/restraint in not attacking her.

WWWTT

MACKER · March 22, 2012

Complete nonsense. I realize that you're not a big fan of free speech, but limiting the amount of time one gets to criticize people in power is exactly the opposite of what should be done. If I want to pay for an ad, criticizing the actions or policies of a particular government or party, I have, and should always have that right.

Move to the Soviet Union if you don't like it.

In Soviet Union we move to you.

I can see the liberal response

Harper is Bob Rae cubed.

Try criticizing Mr. Rae on something Harper didnt perform worse at as PM.

Edited March 22, 2012 by MACKER

WLDB · March 22, 2012

Turmel was a ticking time bomb so there was no need to attack her.

That and her general unpopularity.

cybercoma · March 22, 2012

Ok then if Canadas unemployment rate is %7.4,then how many Canadians are unemployed?

7.4% of the labour force.

It's a quantitative measurement. It's just not in the format that you want to see it in.

Take for instance this equation.

0.074(x) = 537188

I'm not sure if 537188 is the actual number, but that's the expression you're looking for. Nevertheless, where x = the labour force, 7.4% of x is still the exact same number expressed differently. It's still a quantitative measurement.

What you are looking for is an absolute value, rather than an expression. It has nothing to do with quantitative or not quantitative.

cybercoma · March 22, 2012

But for some reason the conservatives did not do this.Was it because they have no money?Turmel has bein compared to Stephen Dion when she speaks English wouldn't this be enough to make the conservatives salivate at the opportunity to attack an opponent?

Maybe they considered this but realized the risk and decided to play it safe and just attack Rae?

WWWTT

Why would they do that? Do you really think a political party is going to bash someone for speaking English poorly because they have a French accent? Nearly 1/5 Canadians is French. That would be one of the dumbest moves they could make. Even with Dion they attacked his positions on the environment to scare everyone into thinking he would bankrupt Canada. The economy is the most important thing for Canadians. It's even more important than the environment and healthcare. So you will consistently see the CPC attack other parties on their environmental and healthcare positions, using the economy to scare voters away from values that they might otherwise hold in those other spheres. The problem is people consistently rank the economy higher than the others, so when push comes to shove, they'll pick the economy right now. The Conservatives will have to change gears when the economy recovers either by a) lying and saying the economic recovery is not sustainable, or focusing on something new. I can't see them doing b and they already did a in the last election. When people firmly believe the economy is recovered they won't be able to resort to a. That's when the CPC support will collapse, imo. People will realize that the emperor is wearing no clothes.

Topaz · March 22, 2012

What I was told was the Tories think that the next election the NDP could lose seats and that would put the Liberals as the official opposition, so now they are going after Rae. There's two things wrong with their thinking though. One, we don't know for sure who will be the leader of the NDP and we don't know who the leader of the Liberals in the next election will be. Of course, by doing these ads, this only makes the Tories look bad and they should pay more attention to the state of the economy, like JOBS and adjust their anxiety meds.

Vendetta · March 22, 2012

For one thing, they can afford it.

Of course they can, after all the taxpayer pays for all of the positive campaign ads. Action plan ads run like mad whenever the Cons are in trouble.

Smallc · March 22, 2012

Governments always have advertising campaigns.

PIK · March 22, 2012

It seems to me the liberals are worried big time about the ads on rae, I wonder why? lol

Edited March 22, 2012 by PIK

WWWTT · March 22, 2012

7.4% of the labour force.

It's a quantitative measurement. It's just not in the format that you want to see it in.

Take for instance this equation.

0.074(x) = 537188

I'm not sure if 537188 is the actual number, but that's the expression you're looking for. Nevertheless, where x = the labour force, 7.4% of x is still the exact same number expressed differently. It's still a quantitative measurement.

What you are looking for is an absolute value, rather than an expression. It has nothing to do with quantitative or not quantitative.

False

7.4% unemployment does not give the numerical value of the unemployed in Canada or the quantity of unemployed in Canada.

7.4% is a quantity described herein as a ratio of the number of those in the work force that are currently not employed.

Keep in mind this argument stemed away from what Topaz was describing.I somewhat misread however I believe my argument has merit because I believe Topaz was describing the quantity of unemployed as opposed to the ratio of unemployed.

Topaz you can jump in anytime now to clarify your position

Thankyou

WWWTT

cybercoma · March 22, 2012

0.074x is an expression for a numerical value. I'm really not sure why that's so hard for you to admit.

Edited March 22, 2012 by cybercoma

WWWTT · March 22, 2012

Why would they do that? Do you really think a political party is going to bash someone for speaking English poorly because they have a French accent?

I guess you do not remember all the attack adds of the time that showed Dion speaking English poorly/inaudible.True the adds did not say that Dion speaks English poorly but the conservatives clearly went out of their way to find the most inaudible English speeches he made to advetise to everyone.

Aswell many conservatives picked up on this and drove the message home.

It is possible that the conservatives could not find enough material on Turmel to make the same approach,but I doubt that they did not try!

WWWTT

WWWTT · March 22, 2012

Of course they can, after all the taxpayer pays for all of the positive campaign ads. Action plan ads run like mad whenever the Cons are in trouble.

Good one!

WWWTT

WWWTT · March 22, 2012

0.074x is an expression for a numerical value. I'm really not sure why that's so hard for you to admit.

0.074 is a value used to calculate the actuall number of unemployed when multipled by the number in the job market.

It is not the numerical value or the sum of those that are unemployed.

You know what forget it ok your right you win lets move on

WWWTT

Vendetta · March 22, 2012

Governments always have advertising campaigns.

I don't believe that any Canadian government has EVER spent so much taxpayer money on self promotion, nor run such blatanty partisan advertising on the taxpayer dime. Also pumping up the output of ads everytime they are in trouble stinks of propaganda, paid for by the very people they are trying to hoodwink. I don't remember ever seeing a Liberal party logo paraded about on giant sized government cheques when they announced funding for community infrastructure projects.

cybercoma · March 22, 2012

0.074 is a value used to calculate the actuall number of unemployed when multipled by the number in the job market.

It is not the numerical value or the sum of those that are unemployed.

You know what forget it ok your right you win lets move on

WWWTT

0.074 is a value used to calculate the actual number of unemployed people.

0.074x, where x represents the labour force, is an expression of the actual number of unemployed people.

If someone says, "How many unemployed Canadians are there?"

You could answer with an absolute number, which is what you're looking for "(y) people are unemployed."

Or you can say "7.4% of the labour force is unemployed." That full expression "7.4% of the labour force" is the actual number of unemployed people without giving you an absolute value.

They're both quantitative expressions. That's all I'm saying. I noticed you two arguing about whether or not 7.4% was quantitative. It is.

g_bambino · March 22, 2012

I don't believe that any Canadian government has EVER spent so much taxpayer money on self promotion, nor run such blatanty partisan advertising on the taxpayer dime.

On what are you founding that belief (or lack thereof)? By my recollection, there are no more advertisements promoting government programmes now than there were before.

cybercoma · March 22, 2012

On what are you founding that belief (or lack thereof)? By my recollection, there are no more advertisements promoting government programmes now than there were before.

To be clear, those kinds of ads I support. It's the blatant campaigning, where they're broadcasting ads attacking other politicians that I can't get behind outside of the election campaigns.

Now $12,000,000 for an ad about the budget, that's just pushing it.

Edited March 22, 2012 by cybercoma

WLDB · March 22, 2012

Now $12,000,000 for an ad about the budget, that's just pushing it.

A total waste I'd say.

WLDB · March 22, 2012

This is fale!

The leader is ultimately the best figurehead for the party,or the members would have never elected them(an argument can be made however in the case of the liberals).

By figurehead I meant a person who serves no practical purpose and just looks good and smiles sort of thing. So in that I was correct!

WWWTT · March 22, 2012

They're both quantitative expressions. That's all I'm saying. I noticed you two arguing about whether or not 7.4% was quantitative. It is.

No the argument started from a comment #54 that Topaz made in regards to unemployment and it stemmed out into an argument over definition(which by the way I still do not agree with yours)or something like that and this is now a classic example of thread drift which I do not condone so somehow I must gracefully step away from this argument.

However this mathematical argument might be a good thread for the off topic issues,we can continue this there if you wish.

Aswell its almost convention time and I must prioritize my time and I should not be spending so much here!

WWWTT

Newfoundlander · March 22, 2012

To be clear, those kinds of ads I support. It's the blatant campaigning, where they're broadcasting ads attacking other politicians that I can't get behind outside of the election campaigns.

Now $12,000,000 for an ad about the budget, that's just pushing it.

Do you agree or disagree with the Liberals having Bob Rae billboards or the NDP having ads on the gun registry?