socialist Posted July 1, 2012 Report Share Posted July 1, 2012 Quebec is irrelevant not because it did not vote for the CPC, Quebec is irrelevant because the CPC proved that it is possible to form a government without Quebec, and much easier. Yes, but that is an irrelevant fact because the Conservatives formed a majority government with very few seats from Quebec, up to this point in time Canada has had 9 provinces and Quebec, with Quebec trying to force more concessions from the government in order to gain independence but at the same time benefit from being part of Canada. I might be mistaken but to me it seems that Quebec wants to be equal to the federal government rather than being equal to the provincial governments, that is why they are irrelevant. your reply shows how little you know about quebec. quebec had carried canada for many years in the past. if it werent for quebec who knows if canada would have survived this long. look at the brave students in quebec protesting against unreasonable tuition hikes. quebec students were the only students in canada with enough balls to fight the unfair system. i joined the protests for 7 straight nights. these people are fighting for all canadian students not just quebec students. so yeah we owe a lot to the great distinct province of quebec. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Signals.Cpl Posted July 1, 2012 Report Share Posted July 1, 2012 your reply shows how little you know about quebec. quebec had carried canada for many years in the past. if it werent for quebec who knows if canada would have survived this long. look at the brave students in quebec protesting against unreasonable tuition hikes. quebec students were the only students in canada with enough balls to fight the unfair system. i joined the protests for 7 straight nights. these people are fighting for all canadian students not just quebec students. so yeah we owe a lot to the great distinct province of quebec. How has Quebec carried Canada for many years? And Quebec students are the only once who can afford to go and protest, most students I went to school with were too busy working to pay for their tuition instead of terrorize a city in order to get their demands met after throwing a little tantrum. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
socialist Posted July 1, 2012 Report Share Posted July 1, 2012 How has Quebec carried Canada for many years? And Quebec students are the only once who can afford to go and protest, most students I went to school with were too busy working to pay for their tuition instead of terrorize a city in order to get their demands met after throwing a little tantrum. you're making stuff up again. they didn't terorize any cities. most of the public supported the brave protestors except cpc supporters. get your head out of the sand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Signals.Cpl Posted July 1, 2012 Report Share Posted July 1, 2012 you're making stuff up again. they didn't terorize any cities. most of the public supported the brave protestors except cpc supporters. get your head out of the sand. Bursting in to schools and scaring students who want to be in school or can't afford to throw childish tantrums in the street. Throwing molotov cocktails, smoke bombs in the subway, damage to public property. Need I go on? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
socialist Posted July 1, 2012 Report Share Posted July 1, 2012 Bursting in to schools and scaring students who want to be in school or can't afford to throw childish tantrums in the street. Throwing molotov cocktails, smoke bombs in the subway, damage to public property. Need I go on? where's the proof? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Signals.Cpl Posted July 1, 2012 Report Share Posted July 1, 2012 where's the proof? http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2012/05/18/quebec-student-protest-molotov_n_1529072.html http://www.torontosun.com/2012/05/19/montreal-protest-turns-violent-after-molotov-cocktail-tossed http://ca.news.yahoo.com/big-protest-march-responds-quebec-legislative-crackdown-014740864.html http://www.lfpress.com/news/canada/2012/05/19/19777906.html#/news/canada/2012/05/19/pf-19777746.html http://oncampus.macleans.ca/education/2012/05/30/quebec’s-new-ruling-class/#more-40282 http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/story/2012/05/18/montreal-orotest0.html http://ca.news.yahoo.com/protest-gangs-storm-montreal-university-classes-force-students-145628549.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
socialist Posted July 1, 2012 Report Share Posted July 1, 2012 http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2012/05/18/quebec-student-protest-molotov_n_1529072.html http://www.torontosun.com/2012/05/19/montreal-protest-turns-violent-after-molotov-cocktail-tossed http://ca.news.yahoo.com/big-protest-march-responds-quebec-legislative-crackdown-014740864.html http://www.lfpress.com/news/canada/2012/05/19/19777906.html#/news/canada/2012/05/19/pf-19777746.html http://oncampus.macleans.ca/education/2012/05/30/quebec’s-new-ruling-class/#more-40282 http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/story/2012/05/18/montreal-orotest0.html http://ca.news.yahoo.com/protest-gangs-storm-montreal-university-classes-force-students-145628549.html those were isolated incidents and i dont think they were the student protestors. those were people trying to make the protestors look bad and their tactics fooled people like you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Signals.Cpl Posted July 1, 2012 Report Share Posted July 1, 2012 those were isolated incidents and i dont think they were the student protestors. those were people trying to make the protestors look bad and their tactics fooled people like you. Yeah sure... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
socialist Posted July 1, 2012 Report Share Posted July 1, 2012 Yeah sure... i was in the protests. you were on your couch watching and reading one sided news reports. i was in the trenches. i know more about you than this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Signals.Cpl Posted July 1, 2012 Report Share Posted July 1, 2012 i was in the protests. you were on your couch watching and reading one sided news reports. i was in the trenches. i know more about you than this. You know more about me? Are you stalking me? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
socialist Posted July 1, 2012 Report Share Posted July 1, 2012 You know more about me? Are you stalking me? no i just assumed and often my assumptions are correct. you're insignificant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Signals.Cpl Posted July 1, 2012 Report Share Posted July 1, 2012 no i just assumed and often my assumptions are correct. you're insignificant. You know what they say about assumptions right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter F Posted July 1, 2012 Report Share Posted July 1, 2012 Quebec is irrelevant not because it did not vote for the CPC, Quebec is irrelevant because the CPC proved that it is possible to form a government without Quebec, and much easier. Yes, but that is an irrelevant fact because the Conservatives formed a majority government with very few seats from Quebec, up to this point in time Canada has had 9 provinces and Quebec, with Quebec trying to force more concessions from the government in order to gain independence but at the same time benefit from being part of Canada. I might be mistaken but to me it seems that Quebec wants to be equal to the federal government rather than being equal to the provincial governments, that is why they are irrelevant. Oh for goodness sake...Look if you guys have no interest in pandering to Quebec or seeking any support from Quebec thats fine. Do so - or more accurately - don't do so. But lets save the crap about it being Quebecs fault. Take responsibility for your position. Its very simple: you have no need to get Quebec on board the party program. Quebec is not needed. Quebec is irrelevant to the party. Therefore YOU choose to ignore Quebecs interests. ....then blame Quebec for your decisions? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocky Road Posted July 1, 2012 Report Share Posted July 1, 2012 "Quebec-bashing" is not the point. Moonbox has some issues with Quebec, sure...frankly, that's a fairly mainstream position. If anything, he's stated, if not optimism, at least an openness to an optimistic position, albeit tentatively, about the NDP and Quebec. Not the most partisan take I've ever seen, to be sure. And not overly "regional," either, unless TROC is a "region." If anything, this appears to be less of an issue as time passes. I'm personally not a Harper fan--to put it mildly--but I don't think that, here in the Maritimes, he's viewed through such a starkly regional lens. As far as Maritimers dislike him (for those that do), I really think Alberta has exactly zero to do with it. I hope Quebec chooses federalism and moderation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Signals.Cpl Posted July 1, 2012 Report Share Posted July 1, 2012 Oh for goodness sake...Look if you guys have no interest in pandering to Quebec or seeking any support from Quebec thats fine. Do so - or more accurately - don't do so. But lets save the crap about it being Quebecs fault. Take responsibility for your position. Its very simple: you have no need to get Quebec on board the party program. Quebec is not needed. Quebec is irrelevant to the party. Therefore YOU choose to ignore Quebecs interests. ....then blame Quebec for your decisions? So you are saying that Quebec has no fault whatsoever in making itself irrelevant? When Quebec demands special treatment and benefits that are not afforded to the other provinces they pit themselves against the rest of Canada and when a government has a majority without needing Quebec then the usual blackmail and threats don't really work. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dre Posted July 1, 2012 Report Share Posted July 1, 2012 Obviously Harper is going to better represent in the Canadian interests since he is the only among the two that understands that their needs to be a robust private economy that can generate the tax revenue to pay for government services that the urban latte swillers demand. :lol: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted July 1, 2012 Report Share Posted July 1, 2012 Oh for goodness sake...Look if you guys have no interest in pandering to Quebec or seeking any support from Quebec thats fine. Do so - or more accurately - don't do so. But lets save the crap about it being Quebecs fault. Take responsibility for your position. Its very simple: you have no need to get Quebec on board the party program. Quebec is not needed. Quebec is irrelevant to the party. Therefore YOU choose to ignore Quebecs interests. ....then blame Quebec for your decisions? This is what the CPC does. It pits the regions against each other, then blames it on the other parties or the regions themselves. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Signals.Cpl Posted July 1, 2012 Report Share Posted July 1, 2012 This is what the CPC does. It pits the regions against each other, then blames it on the other parties or the regions themselves. Really? So its all the CPC's fault? There has been a division between Quebec and TROC well before this government took office and there would be a division after this government leaves office. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted July 1, 2012 Report Share Posted July 1, 2012 Really? So its all the CPC's fault? There has been a division between Quebec and TROC well before this government took office and there would be a division after this government leaves office.Yeah. Don't bother working towards a better Canada or anything. I know that's not really part of the CPC's mandate. That much is evident. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Signals.Cpl Posted July 1, 2012 Report Share Posted July 1, 2012 Yeah. Don't bother working towards a better Canada or anything. I know that's not really part of the CPC's mandate. That much is evident. So you think the NDP will have better luck with closing the gap between Quebec and TROC? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dre Posted July 1, 2012 Report Share Posted July 1, 2012 So you think the NDP will have better luck with closing the gap between Quebec and TROC? I think youre overestimating the gap to start with. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Signals.Cpl Posted July 1, 2012 Report Share Posted July 1, 2012 I think youre overestimating the gap to start with. I doubt that, there is a gap and it's already pretty large and that is due to Quebec but a portion of the blame goes to the federal parties of the last few decades who have been trying to buy the Quebec vote no matter how harmful it is to the country. If Quebec realizes that the party that forms government does not need them then it might change their point of view, as long as the CPC treats Quebec just like any other province then everything is alright. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted July 2, 2012 Report Share Posted July 2, 2012 I think youre overestimating the gap to start with. It's also largely misplaced. The gap is really between Quebec and the monkey-house aka Parliament Hill - a gap that just about every region in this misbegotten country can relate to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter F Posted July 2, 2012 Report Share Posted July 2, 2012 So you are saying that Quebec has no fault whatsoever in making itself irrelevant? ... That is correct. No fault whatsoever. Citizens of Quebec get one vote each. Voters in Quebec are as relevant as any body else in this country. So the 'irrelevant' argument is mere sour grapes cause they vote for someone you dont approve of. Under your 'irrelevant' argument all other voters are also irrelevant. There is absolutely no rational argument to say some voters are relevant and some are not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wild Bill Posted July 2, 2012 Report Share Posted July 2, 2012 That is correct. No fault whatsoever. Citizens of Quebec get one vote each. Voters in Quebec are as relevant as any body else in this country. So the 'irrelevant' argument is mere sour grapes cause they vote for someone you dont approve of. Under your 'irrelevant' argument all other voters are also irrelevant. There is absolutely no rational argument to say some voters are relevant and some are not. Earth to Peter! I need votes to get in power. One group will not give me any. Another will. There are enough of those that will to get me into office. The group that won't has unique demands that would upset the group that will, reducing the numbers I need to achieve my goal. So simple games theory says I should not pander to the group that offers me no support anyway. Now what's irrational about that? 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.