So this is why I'll be voting Conservative

[blueblood]

I believe I've seen him speak French on more than one occasion.

He can be premier of saskatchewan for as long as he wants. His operation is squeaky clean and his budgets are balanced. Plus his province has one of the lowest unemployment rates in the country.

[blueblood]

If I vote at all it'll be for the NDP, because of the grotesque mismanagement and destruction of our fisheries at the hands of Liberals and Conservatives.

The NDP are the only party that has talked about basing fisheries management on the coast rather than leaving it in Ottawa - 1500 miles from the nearest ocean.

At least you are voting for them based on what suits your needs.

[Keepitsimple]

If I vote at all it'll be for the NDP, because of the grotesque mismanagement and destruction of our fisheries at the hands of Liberals and Conservatives.

The NDP are the only party that has talked about basing fisheries management on the coast rather than leaving it in Ottawa - 1500 miles from the nearest ocean.

Good reason......I don't claim to know if it's accurate - but many people vote for local reasons. Thanks for sharing yours.

[Queenmandy85]

I'm undecided. I want a government that will switch our sources of energy from fossil fuels to nuclear. Nobody in the current government seems to have a clue about the long term effect increased levels of methane and carbon dioxide in the atmosphere will have on the planet. Switching to nuclear power will give an incredible boost the the economy, particularly in western Canada while preserving our oil reserves to when they are actually worth something. (ie. $10,000 a barrel after the rest of the world has run out of oil).

I am reluctant to vote for Harper or Mulcair because of their attack on the Senate. The best cure for the Senate is to have members appointed by the Crown. Leave the PM out of it. Anyone promoting an elected Senate clearly hasn't looked at the quality of people who have been elected in the past. Let the Crown appoint eminent people.

I am reluctant to vote for Trudeau because of his attempt to bring in changes to the voting system. We tried that in BC in 1952 and ended up with W.A.C.Bennett's Socialist Credit crooks.

I am left with Elizabeth May, but her party seems to have an irrational fear of nuclear power so what am I to do?

[Keepitsimple]

I don't want to see Harper step down after the election. I hate the idea that the Conservatives win, Harper quits, and our next PM is decided by the usually-ridiculous party leadership convention process instead of a general election. (and look how well that worked out for the Alberta Tories.)

Who, aside from Harper, do you see in the Conservative Party that you'd like to take over?

-k

I've always been a Jason Kenney fan - he speaks clearly and is smart enough to think on his feet....one of the few that Harper gives almost complete freedom to. When he talks - he talks in substance - and makes sense.

[ironstone]

Not quite. They were accused of inappropriate use of postage by a parliamentary committee stacked with their political adversaries - in other words a kangaroo court.

Contrast that to the vision of Dean Del Mastro, in leg irons and handcuffs, being led off to jail after being found guilty by a Canadian court with an independent judge - of election related fraud..

I could be wrong,but I can't recall ever seeing any Liberals in leg irons and handcuffs after the sponsorship scandal.Were any Liberals treated that way?

Quite the heinous crime wasn't it?Overspending with your own money?

[ironstone]

Do you hear all the complaints about the "rich"Conservatives outspending the Libs and the NDP?This once again shows that left wingers are not as generous as right wingers in my opinion.On the flip side,lefties are extremely generous with other people's money.In this election,the Conservatives will be under intense scrutiny from the media.

I'll be voting for Harper for most of the same reasons as Argus.Frankly,Mulcair and Trudeau scare the hell out of me.

[Icebound]

Reason One. Stability

Reason Two. Energy

Reason Three. Immigration

Reason Four. Quebec

We can select any number of these kind of issues, and there maybe differences between the parties.... Yes, they might spend money in somewhat different ways... yes priorities will be different.... but ultimately each will encounter situations, and respond with their most reasoned approach. Harper will not shut down the borders, and Mulcair will not throw them wide open. Nobody is going to close down the oil sands, and Trudeau will not disband the military.

There are only two issues of import in this election, sports-fans....

1. Democracy

2. Evisceration of Canadian institutions.

Necessity of Democracy is a given. Stability is a facade. Here are some "stable" governments: North Korea, China, Saddam Hussein, Iran, Assad, Stalin, Putin.

To have a country grow, you need an exchange of ideas, and you need new ideas. Stability is stagnation.

Our of our great failings is the inability to recognize that all great achievements are the result of cooperation... whether it is going to the moon, or building a city, or just building a car. You don't have great achievements if your philosophy is everyone for himself. You need cooperation from government and business, from capital and labour.

When we eviscerate our Canadian institutions, whether research, or statistics, or the mail system, or yes, the Communications infrastructures, we are destroying what makes this country great to live in, These institutions are what foster the necessary cooperation to make the country grow, rather than stagnate and turn it into another ho-hum rat race ... (make a buck, spend a buck (if you have it).

Pick whatever issues you like.... But without a strengthening of Democracy and a strengthening of Public institutions.... yes, including the Senate.... this country will crawl instead of soar.

...

[ReeferMadness]

I don't want to see Harper step down after the election. I hate the idea that the Conservatives win, Harper quits, and our next PM is decided by the usually-ridiculous party leadership convention process instead of a general election. (and look how well that worked out for the Alberta Tories.)

Who, aside from Harper, do you see in the Conservative Party that you'd like to take over?

-k

It seems like you don't understand our system of governance, which isn't surprising because the parties have undermined it to the point where it doesn't work.

You're not supposed to vote for a PM. The PM is supposed to be chosen by the people's representatives, one of which is your MP. Who is supposedly your representative to the government, not (as actually happens), a shill for the government back to you.

Oh, and the best part? The PM is supposed to be accountable to Parliament. I know that last one sounds hilarious, given what actually happens.

Our system has broken to the point where it is no longer recognizable. And Mr. Harper is responsible for more than his share of the damage.

[TimG]

Our system has broken to the point where it is no longer recognizable.

The fact that Harper could be gone in 3 months and Muclair taking over as PM shows that the system is working exactly as it should. The purpose of a democracy is to provide a peaceful means to get rid of old guard and bring in new blood. BTW - Harper is accountable to parliament - that is what confidence votes are for. It is also worth remembering that the extremely worthwhile reforms pushed by Michael Chong were rushed through the senate before the election call - something that would not have happened if Harper was the anti-democratic dictator that the left wants to make him out to be.

[ReeferMadness]

Reason One. Stability

The self serving promise by both Liberals and NDP to change the way we do elections in Canada is very concerning to me. Regardless of which party has been in power, and it's mostly been the Liberals, we've had a hundred and forty eight years of stable government, and it shows. I don't want pizza parliaments where there's an election every two years and where all the back room maneuvering gives tiny single-issue parties disproportionate power.I don't want unstable governments which are afraid to make difficult decisions, as in Greece, as in all of Europe, in fact.

Reason Two. Energy

I think cap and trade is moronic policy which increases the price of power, which damages the economy. Just look at what the Liberals have done to Ontario in doubling the cost of power here. It also increases the cost of heating and of gasoline. Think the Liberals or NDP will mention that even once? Nope! How much will this cap and trade scheme cost us? They'll tells us after they're in power. I also don'think it does a thing to help the environment. It just chases manufacturers to third world countries where there are no such schemes.

Reason Three. Immigration

The NDP and to a lesser extent, the Liberals, have promised to increase immigration and focus more on family reunification, which means we get millions more third world people coming here, none of whom are screened for education, job skills or language. That's idiotic! How is that supposed to help Canada?

Reason Four. Quebec

I've rather enjoyed this brief interlude where the government of Canada wasn't primarily concerned with pleasing Quebec. I don't really want to go back to that again, which a Mulcair or Trudeau government promises. Both, for example, have promised that all new Supreme Court appointees will have to come from the 2% of Canadians (mostly Francophone) who are fluently bilingual. Why? To pander to Quebec, of course, and the hell with how second or third rate the new judges are.

Stability - Dictatorships are very stable. If you think that stability is more important than representative governance, you and Stalin can agree on that point.

Your statements about pizza parliaments and Europe show a depth of ignorance that is quite typical. It's common for PR systems to create coalition governments. Most of the countries in Europe with PR systems have, on average, fewer changes of government than Canada. Coalitions are stable, except when paired with an undemocratic, FPTP voting system.

Energy - The high Canadian dollar, a direct result Harper's moronic focus on commodity-based economy (mainly energy), has already hollowed out the manufacturing sector. It will recover, regardless of the party that gains power, as the price of oil will not recover anytime soon.

Immigration - Wow, you're gutsy. Lots of people associate statements like yours with closet racists. Good on you for not being afraid to be associated with them.

Quebec - Zero credit can be given to Harper for the period of stability we've had where Quebec's separatist community has been subdued. Harper and Canada have both been lucky that this has occurred.

[ReeferMadness]

In Harper's speech he said we ALL play by the rules..... wow, it only took the Tories 10 years, Election Canada fines to know that???

Hahahahahahahaha!!!!

And they said Harper had no sense of humour.

[kimmy]

It seems like you don't understand our system of governance, which isn't surprising because the parties have undermined it to the point where it doesn't work.

You're not supposed to vote for a PM. The PM is supposed to be chosen by the people's representatives, one of which is your MP. Who is supposedly your representative to the government, not (as actually happens), a shill for the government back to you.

Oh, and the best part? The PM is supposed to be accountable to Parliament. I know that last one sounds hilarious, given what actually happens.

Our system has broken to the point where it is no longer recognizable. And Mr. Harper is responsible for more than his share of the damage.

What you're describing is so far from the reality of our system, it's almost like you're new here.

The reality is, people don't vote for 1 of 309 members of parliament, they vote for 1 of 3 parties.

People don't care at all which backbencher will sit in Parliament on behalf of their riding. People care a lot which party is in power, and especially who is the Prime Minister.

And if people vote for the Conservatives with the expectation that Harper will continue as PM, and he then proceeds to step down and hand the keys over to some doof who wins a clown-show leadership convention, people are going to be pissed.

-k

[ReeferMadness]

Do you hear all the complaints about the "rich"Conservatives outspending the Libs and the NDP?This once again shows that left wingers are not as generous as right wingers in my opinion.On the flip side,lefties are extremely generous with other people's money.In this election,the Conservatives will be under intense scrutiny from the media.

I'll be voting for Harper for most of the same reasons as Argus.Frankly,Mulcair and Trudeau scare the hell out of me.

What colour is the sky on your planet?

The Conservatives have more money because most of the wealthy support them. Because their policies primarily support the wealthy.

See how that works?

[ReeferMadness]

What you're describing is so far from the reality of our system, it's almost like you're new here.

The reality is, people don't vote for 1 of 309 members of parliament, they vote for 1 of 3 parties.

People don't care at all which backbencher will sit in Parliament on behalf of their riding. People care a lot which party is in power, and especially who is the Prime Minister.

And if people vote for the Conservatives with the expectation that Harper will continue as PM, and he then proceeds to step down and hand the keys over to some doof who wins a clown-show leadership convention, people are going to be pissed.

-k

I'm fully aware of the reality, hence the line about about parties undermining the system.

However, the other half of that reality is that the rules are still premised on the system as I described it. Which is why it's fundamentally broken.

The parties have gradually entrenched power into the PMO. And the population, partly due to apathy, and partly because their understanding of our political system is mainly based on what they glean from American television, has stood idly by and let it happen. And that's why you think you should have some direct say in who the PM is.

And if people are going to be pissed because a doofus they didn't vote for replaces the doofus they did vote for, that's good. Maybe they'll wake the hell up and demand a better system.

[Derek 2.0]

And if people vote for the Conservatives with the expectation that Harper will continue as PM, and he then proceeds to step down and hand the keys over to some doof who wins a clown-show leadership convention, people are going to be pissed.

-k

Some might, but for the most part, I don't think it would mater, when he wins his second majority this Fall, I doubt very much the Prime Minister (despite suggestions by pundits) will step down.......he'll only be 60 years young for the 2019 election, is in good health (lost a ton of weight over the last couple of months through diet and exercise) and still sees important work ahead.

With that, the only way Prime Minister Harper would step-down, would be if they lost or were reduced to an unstable minority, at which time, the CPC would very much so find a new leader. Likewise, the Prime Minister, if he developed a sudden serious health issue would step down, which as a country we would be better for.....as much as I loved Reagan, his health was in serious decline in the last years of his administration, so much so, in some ways, Bush was defacto President starting in ~1986-87......

With that though, its all moot, as Harper is a robot, more machine now than man, twisted and evil

[ReeferMadness]

The fact that Harper could be gone in 3 months and Muclair taking over as PM shows that the system is working exactly as it should. The purpose of a democracy is to provide a peaceful means to get rid of old guard and bring in new blood. BTW - Harper is accountable to parliament - that is what confidence votes are for. It is also worth remembering that the extremely worthwhile reforms pushed by Michael Chong were rushed through the senate before the election call - something that would not have happened if Harper was the anti-democratic dictator that the left wants to make him out to be.

Oh, gawd.

Really? I thought the purpose of democracy was to vest power in the people. And representative democracy (which in theory we have) would vest power in the people's representatives. Do you know who the people's representatives are? No, they're not the hangers on in the PMO who actually make all the important decisions.

Harper is accountable to parliament? If that's a joke, it's not funny.

[ReeferMadness]

And Kimmy, one more thing.

If you think we should be able to directly vote for the PM, I agree. But if we want a style of government where we directly have a leader, then we need a set of rules that limits the power of this leader. Because, at the moment, we have a system where the PM has all the power of a head of state with little of the checks and balances that you see in, for example, the American model.

[Smallc]

If you think we should be able to directly vote for the PM, I agree.

This form of government doesn't lend itself to that. We'd have to switch to something like a presidential system (the United States) or a semi presidential (France). It would be a massive undertaking that would fix things that aren't necessarily bad.

[TimG]

Really? I thought the purpose of democracy was to vest power in the people.

Yep. And the people exercise that power at each election. Your problem is you seem to think that a government can function based on "consensus". Sorry. That is not an option - there are simply too many POV for there to be any effective government by consensus. For better or for worse we need governments with the power to actually make decisions and then be judged based on the decisions they make. That is the system we have now and it works well.

Harper is accountable to parliament? If that's a joke, it's not funny.

Now you are just delusional. Confidence votes happen all of the time. You seem to think that "accountable" means Harper does what you want. Edited August 3, 2015 by TimG

[Freddy]

So at lest you understand the party you will vote for are crooks. Glad you made that clear.

I've avoided paying sale taxes on services at least once in my life. I'm sure you have too. I see you can't understand that you are also a crook for having done this, as its fraud.

I'm not surprised you lack the mental capacity to acknowledge this.

It's ok when you do it, or the people you support. But anyone who has diffrent opinions then you. They aren't allowed.

Its the same with avoiding to pay income taxes, I'm sure you have avoided paying it at least once in your life. You are a crook for doing it as it is also fraud. But it's ok for you to do it Isn't it?

I bet you the budget would be balenced with ease if everyone was paying taxes as they are supposed to.

Edited August 3, 2015 by Freddy

[On Guard for Thee]

I've avoided paying sale taxes on services at least once in my life. I'm sure you have too. I see you can't understand that you are also a crook for having done this, as its fraud.

I'm not surprised you lack the mental capacity to acknowledge this.

It's ok when you do it, or the people you support. But anyone who has diffrent opinions then you. They aren't allowed.

You are accusing e of breaking the law? Probably against forum rules. Speaking of mental capacity, why don't you find a forum that more suits yours?

Edited August 3, 2015 by On Guard for Thee

[Freddy]

You are accusing e of breaking the law? Probably against forum rules.

as everyone has broken the law at least once in his life I'm surprised you seek offence in this. I find it amusing you can't openly admit to it.

Speaking of mental capacity, why don't you find a forum that more suits yours?

Wouldn't you love that, you must be getting really frustrated & tired of getting destroyed in all your illogical opinions jamb packed with self serving double standards. Edited August 3, 2015 by Freddy

[On Guard for Thee]

as everyone has broken the law at least once in his life I'm surprised you seek offence in this.

Wouldn't you love that, you must be getting really frustrated of me destroying all your illogical opinions jamb packed with self serving double standards.

Wouldn't I love what? Once again you make no sense. Only thing frustrating is your blather. Only thing you destroyed is your presentation.

[Freddy]

Wouldn't I love what? Once again you make no sense. Only thing frustrating is your blather. Only thing you destroyed is your presentation.

Then you agree?

We are all crooks. Or are you holier then thou?

You have never been fraudulent once in your life with your taxes?

I'd be surprised if 1% of our population is clean on this one throughout his life time.

Edited August 3, 2015 by Freddy