NDP Make Big Move in Latest EKOS Poll

[Smallc]

No to mention reforming the senate. Hasn't Harper appointed the most senators on record?

It's constitutionally required. Reform is at the moment politically impossible.

[Keepitsimple]

I believe there was something in their original platforms about open and transparent government. Where did that all go I wonder...

You'll have to be a bit more precise. If you are referring to the Accountability Act, they fulfilled their platform - perhaps not as much as what some would like to see - but more accountability than preceded them. And it's there to build on for the next government - whomever that might be.

[Argus]

Trashing C-377 helps union members from having their private info being made public. Non union corporations hate that!

When I first heard of the bill I was opposed to it. I was, at that time, a shop steward for my union. But when I read it I decided that it was justified. I've seen a lot of money wasted in the time I was in the union. Way too many conferences held in other cities, where too many union activists got to attend with all expenses paid. Way too many options for activists to get time off work to participate in this or that union activity and be reimbursed by the union. And that's even without those who abuse the rules, and there are plenty of them. We had a big fight in our local because of the claims certain people were putting in for reimbursement. For example, our vice president found lots of necessary duties, even if he had to create meetings himself, around the dinner hour so he could buy himself a wrap and then get reimbursed $30 for dinner (the union pays the same amount as the public servants get regardless of what they buy). His travel to and from union activities also seemed peculiarly circular in that his car seemed to take a lot more miles to get somewhere than it should have. Then there were stunts like renting an airplane to fly a "Stephen Harper hates me" sign around the capital, and donations of union money to numerous causes which union members themselves were never asked to approve Those decisions got made up high, by those elected by those who were themselves mostly not elected but appointed.

I doubt your self proclaimed economic success is independent of taxes/social services/infrastructure.

Think what you like. Aside from my initial education I got nothing. My source of income is 98% foreign now.

Edited May 16, 2015 by Argus

[Argus]

You'll have to be a bit more precise. If you are referring to the Accountability Act, they fulfilled their platform - perhaps not as much as what some would like to see - but more accountability than preceded them. And it's there to build on for the next government - whomever that might be.

No, I give this one a miss. This government is incredibly secretive about every conceivable type of information. I kind of sympathized when they were a minority. Every report, every bit of information was being analyzed and scanned and requested for no purpose other than to look for something to make them look bad. But it never changed when they got their majority.

[On Guard for Thee]

It's constitutionally required. Reform is at the moment politically impossible.

He did promise reform by saying he would appoint only elected people to the senate. Then went on to make a stack of what were blatantly patronage appointments.

[WWWTT]

When I first heard of the bill I was opposed to it. I was, at that time, a shop steward for my union. But when I read it I decided that it was justified. I've seen a lot of money wasted in the time I was in the union. Way too many conferences held in other cities, where too many union activists got to attend with all expenses paid. Way too many options for activists to get time off work to participate in this or that union activity and be reimbursed by the union. And that's even without those who abuse the rules, and there are plenty of them. We had a big fight in our local because of the claims certain people were putting in for reimbursement. For example, our vice president found lots of necessary duties, even if he had to create meetings himself, around the dinner hour so he could buy himself a wrap and then get reimbursed $30 for dinner (the union pays the same amount as the public servants get regardless of what they buy). His travel to and from union activities also seemed peculiarly circular in that his car seemed to take a lot more miles to get somewhere than it should have. Then there were stunts like renting an airplane to fly a "Stephen Harper hates me" sign around the capital, and donations of union money to numerous causes which union members themselves were never asked to approve Those decisions got made up high, by those elected by those who were themselves mostly not elected but appointed.

Think what you like. Aside from my initial education I got nothing. My source of income is 98% foreign now.

Oh the vagueness is relentlessly never ending.

The contradictions always obvious.

Whatever buddy.

Kiss your conservatives goodbye because their days are numbered.

And after their gone, the economy is going to strengthen through a more focused trend on our infrastructure and self worth.

WWWTT

[Smallc]

He did promise reform by saying he would appoint only elected people to the senate. Then went on to make a stack of what were blatantly patronage appointments.

He was forced to make the appointments, so he did what everyone but Paul Martin has ever done.

[Keepitsimple]

No, I give this one a miss. This government is incredibly secretive about every conceivable type of information. I kind of sympathized when they were a minority. Every report, every bit of information was being analyzed and scanned and requested for no purpose other than to look for something to make them look bad. But it never changed when they got their majority.

I don't disagree....but I consider that to be a part of their paranoia against the press....not against their electoral promises. Upon winning a majority, I think their whole gang should have taken a more humble approach to governing. Heck - their outreach under Jason Kenney was more inclusive than any government ever - e.g. - the Liberals and taking the open-door approach to immigration - only to take their votes for granted - and eventually lose their support. If the Conservatives are lucky enough to win another majority - or even a minority, Harper will resign at some point and I would be flabbergasted if Kenney doesn't win the next leadership contest. I think you'll see less paranoia and more humility under his leadership.

[littleguy1]

I think people are fed up with what conservatives are doing right across the country. With Trudeau being rather vague and smug, who else do people have to turn to. Look, right leaning politics has become so corrupt and arrogant that people are looking at another alternative and maybe trying the far left is what they will do. After all, where are the improvements in our country that Harper and his bunch have promised since they were a minority. Middle class people are really suffering and despite what some polls have said, millionaires are not part of the middle class.

I wish some if these people would give their heads a shake if they really think they are part of the middle class. What do you call the 80% of Canadians making less than 80 grand a year? How about the 45% making less than 30 grand. I really don't think people that are doing well realize how many are struggling

Retirement savings being used up, wages falling, benefits disappearing and costs still rising. It is quite difficult for many of us to afford the high cost of housing and still make every day requirements getting met. I would like to see half if these individuals try to live on the pitence others make.

[cybercoma]

I don't disagree....but I consider that to be a part of their paranoia against the press....

Think about that for a minute. You support a government that's overly secretive and afraid of the press.

Is that not a red flag for you? A government that's not accountable to the press? Or does your partisan bias run so deep that this would only raise red flags when it was an NDP government?

Edited May 16, 2015 by cybercoma

[On Guard for Thee]

He was forced to make the appointments, so he did what everyone but Paul Martin has ever done.

And in doing so in the way in which he did, he reneged on his word.

[Smallc]

And in doing so in the way in which he did, he reneged on his word.

For sure. He's a partisan hypocrite.

[WWWTT]

He was forced to make the appointments, so he did what everyone but Paul Martin has ever done.

So just forget about the promises he made.

Maybe you are ok with Harper breaking his word?

WWWTT

[WWWTT]

The NDP know who they want to take money from and they know who they want to give it to, the problem with the NDP is that they never know how to generate money - and that should be the only real issue here. If the economy is good, or at least stable then everything else falls into place. We need foreign money to sustain ourselves and and our social structure, and the NDP has never been able to to secure that.

Alberta is patting themselves on the back for tossing out the conservatives - great, lets see them in a years time when we can gauge their buyers remorse. What they did there is the definition of "throwing out the baby with the bathwater".

Ever heard of taking from the rich and giving it to the poor?

Well the conservative/liberal plan is to take from the middle class and give it to the corporate welfare cheats!

What about the corporate grants and welfare scammers that the conservatives are helping? Why are the only things they are creating are Caymen/Barbados bank accounts?

WWWTT

[Hal 9000]

Ever heard of taking from the rich and giving it to the poor?

Well the conservative/liberal plan is to take from the middle class and give it to the corporate welfare cheats!

What about the corporate grants and welfare scammers that the conservatives are helping? Why are the only things they are creating are Caymen/Barbados bank accounts?

WWWTT

You really think thats a sustainable business plan? WoW! Oh yea, self worth (I think you said) will carry the economy! WOW, can you really vote?

[WWWTT]

You really think thats a sustainable business plan? WoW! Oh yea, self worth (I think you said) will carry the economy! WOW, can you really vote?

Seams to be working in China and India. What's your examples?

Oh ya that's right, all your examples are falling behind and reconsidering the importance of the middle class.

Why don't you join Shady and start changing the channels?

WWWTT

[Argus]

Seams to be working in China and India. What's your examples?

Both countries are shitholes of poverty, misery and increasingly tyranical government.

[jacee]

There is no policy or act of government which has helped me in any way, shape or form to improve my economic well-being.

Really? You don't use health care? You won't collect CPP? OAS? You never attended (subsidized) postsecondary?

You don't drive on the roads or use any public infrastructure?

I did it myself through persistence and hard work.

You did it in the policy environment of Canada. Wouldn't have been so easy anywhere else. You might not have 'made it' anywhere else. You don't know.

And I'm not ASKING for help from government.

Nonetheless, it's there if you need it ... and you do use it too. We all do.

On the other hand, you should hardly expect me to welcome a government whose every policy statement since it was created has been hostile to me and my well-being.

...

Like increasing taxes on those more successful than you are? You know it's really not my fault if you're a failure.

Ya the 1% are really whining these days.

I feel your pain. :/

Not.

* 1%

¡

¡

¡

¡

¡

¡

¡

¡

¡

********* The rest of us.

.

Edited May 17, 2015 by jacee

[WWWTT]

Both countries are shitholes of poverty, misery and increasingly tyranical government.

You perfectly described Harper and his vision of Canada!

WWWTT

[Keepitsimple]

Think about that for a minute. You support a government that's overly secretive and afraid of the press.

Is that not a red flag for you? A government that's not accountable to the press? Or does your partisan bias run so deep that this would only raise red flags when it was an NDP government?

Cyber - when a poster admits that they'll have to be lucky to win the next election.....whey they suggest their leader might step down.....when they say they need more humility......and when they on numerous occasions stated that if the Liberals were led by Marc Garneau they would strongly consider voting for them......and when that same poster raises a topic touting the rise of the NDP and how the Conservatives are no longer safe from losing votes to them - somehow you feel they have a deeply held partisan bias? I think you might want to look in the mirror Cyber and confront your deeply held anti-Harper bias.

[-1=e^ipi]

A de facto two party system has been the plan for over 20 years.......I've no doubt this will result in two differing parties, both with a then solid ~40% base, vying for the ~20% undecided middle. In turn, we'll have two parties, slightly left of center and slightly right of center, but with differing key principles that will force the undecided to choose, well further marginalizing the fringes of each party.........

Except the NDP want to bring in proportional representation. So such a 2 party system will not last very long.

Efforts to lift up groups that have been marginalized or even brutalized in the past make sense to most people

Except your version of 'lift up groups' involves institutionalized sexism and racism, and creating scapegoats out of demographic groups that had nothing to do with the problems they are associated (except via some bizarre concept of morality comparable to original sin).

Edited May 24, 2015 by -1=e^ipi

[-1=e^ipi]

I predict that unless another Islamist attack occurs (like we saw last year on parliament hill), the NDP will win.

[cybercoma]

I predict that unless another Islamist attack occurs (like we saw last year on parliament hill), the NDP will win.

Seems pretty unlikely still, unless the upswing continues. I'm still saying a Conservative minority on the assumption that Harper will eventually enter the consortium debates. If Harper doesn't enter the consortium debates, then I'm calling an NDP minority government.

[jacee]

The first NDP tv ad is about to air.

The Cons & Libs have been running campaign ads for a year.

soaring-in-polls-ndp-tv-ad-features-thomas-mulcair

Last week, a CROP poll of federal voting intentions in Quebec showed that Mulcair has his party where Jack Layton took it in the Orange Wave of the 2011 federal election. Layton scored 42.9% of the popular vote in 2011. Last week, Mulcairs NDP was at 42% in Quebec.

A national poll from EKOS released Friday had Mulcairs NDP at 29.6% compared to 28.1% for Stephen Harpers Conservatives and 26.1% for Justin Trudeaus Liberals.

I'm thinking Canadians are ready for a real change, and see Mulcair as more viable than the other two.

.

Edited May 24, 2015 by jacee

[Derek 2.0]

Except the NDP want to bring in proportional representation. So such a 2 party system will not last very long.

And that position will change once they've received their first Federal majority mandate.............