Jump to content

Strategic Voting - It needs to be done


marcus

Recommended Posts

..Majority is only a bad thing if there is an evil government with hidden agenda who will abuse its majority to legislate morality or cover up scandals and corruptions....

Does this include PM Chretien's AdScam scandal ? I seem to recall something called the Gomery Commission, but I could be wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 534
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

We need a stable good government. A majority is good if it is a good government. Chretien's majority worked well for Canada to eliminate the deficit eventually and make an economic sound Canada. Mulroney majority was good for Canada too to pass Free Trade. Majority is only a bad thing if there is an evil government with hidden agenda who will abuse its majority to legislate morality or cover up scandals and corruptions and especially when they have contemptible values and divisive based on race and religion. Those are not values either Trudeau or Mulcair believe in.

All I can say is fisheries. It may well be there is a political party out there somewhere that can manage fisheries without managing them into near oblivion but not the Liberals or Conservatives. I wouldn't trust them to manage a fish fry on their own. We need honest accountable and above all else transparent government in Canada. Stability should be based on trust not power.

Divisiveness has always been a strong aspect of Ottawa's fisheries management in Canada no matter who was in power.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The methodology sounds a little sketchy to be tbh. Unless the organization has commissioned or researched updated riding-level polls, I'd take the info with a grain of salt. I find their numbers hard to believe.

I would recommend looking at all of the sites and then applying your own knowledge of the situation on the ground.

I know that at least a couple of the sites have a false sense of what is going on in my riding as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The methodology sounds a little sketchy to be tbh. Unless the organization has commissioned or researched updated riding-level polls, I'd take the info with a grain of salt. I find their numbers hard to believe.

a cursory look at the code shows the use of an API to CBC/Eric Grenier's Poll Tracker... the seat projection counts at anyonebutharper pretty much match those at Poll Tracker (as below)... although it hasn't been updated since the 9th:

.

Edited by Charles Anthony
[img=http://i.imgur.com/qpZLbhs.jpg] deleted superfluous image
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In my riding I have to vote strategically to avoid another Harper majority. I will do it for the team even I really don't think Trudeau is tough enough for the job. I just want honesty and transparency.

What do you mean 'tough' enough? He seems to have come from third place to quite possibly first - despite everything Harper could throw at him, and being more or less dismissed by almost everyone early on. Mulcair, in possibly first place near the beginning, is now third. Harper is fighting hard with every trick in the book, and he doesn't seem to be gaining any ground ... that seems pretty "tough" to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What do you mean 'tough' enough? He seems to have come from third place to quite possibly first - despite everything Harper could throw at him, and being more or less dismissed by almost everyone early on. Mulcair, in possibly first place near the beginning, is now third. Harper is fighting hard with every trick in the book, and he doesn't seem to be gaining any ground ... that seems pretty "tough" to me.

Well stated comments!!.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good luck with that. They all promise transparency but none ever deliver.

That's because there are too many hypocrites. Harper rode into Ottawa on promises of openness and transparency. He clearly has not delivered but people will vote for him anyways.

The people who are cutting those thousand dollar cheques need to have the integrity to face down their local party and tell them that those cheques won't be there until the transparency returns.

Until that happens, we should expect more of the same.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's because there are too many hypocrites. Harper rode into Ottawa on promises of openness and transparency. He clearly has not delivered but people will vote for him anyways.

The people who are cutting those thousand dollar cheques need to have the integrity to face down their local party and tell them that those cheques won't be there until the transparency returns.

Until that happens, we should expect more of the same.

No. They all promise to be transparent when they are running and they might actually mean it, but when they gain power, they realize how inconvenient it really is and control becomes more important. It is usually one of the first campaign promises to be abandoned. Harper didn't invent the psychology, he is just a prime example of it. So don't expect a huge change no matter who wins.

Remember, the Liberals lost power primarily because of Adscam.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No. They all promise to be transparent when they are running and they might actually mean it, but when they gain power, they realize how inconvenient it really is and control becomes more important. It is usually one of the first campaign promises to be abandoned. Harper didn't invent the psychology, he is just a prime example of it. So don't expect a huge change no matter who wins.

During his interview with Mansbridge, Trudeau said he was committed to transparency and openness in government. He said his father had started the trend to more control and secrecy and it seemed fitting that he (Justin) should be the one to reverse that. Hope he means it, but ultimately I agree with you - regardless of intention when campaigning, politicians realize they can't actually keep all those promises, whether due to unforseen circumstances or simply personal or political advantage.
Link to comment
Share on other sites


Conservatives vote Liberal

"I've known Stephen Harper for over 30 years, beginning when we were both Progressive Conservatives in Calgary. Back then Stephen had strong opinions and strong ethical standards. But after a decade of division and disregard for Parliament and the judiciary, I no longer recognise the man I knew. And in his government I don't see the values of accountability, integrity and respect he once espoused. That's why I'm personally working hard to elect prudent, compassionate Liberal candidates in Ottawa and the 905-belt. I want to end Canadians' disillusionment with what government can be."

Eric LeGresley, Former Conservative supporter

Edited by dialamah
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No. They all promise to be transparent when they are running and they might actually mean it, but when they gain power, they realize how inconvenient it really is and control becomes more important. It is usually one of the first campaign promises to be abandoned. Harper didn't invent the psychology, he is just a prime example of it. So don't expect a huge change no matter who wins.

Remember, the Liberals lost power primarily because of Adscam.

It's not just the people running, it's the people supporting them. Adscam was a betrayal but as you said, the Liberals lost power because of it.

The Conservatives have cheated on every election (and actually obstructed the investigation in the robocalls scandal) but their base hasn't changed at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Their "base" doesn't have any place to go. Don't confuse people voting for Harper with people that like Harper.

The base, or at least the card-carrying members of the base, have had no lack of opportunities to get rid of Harper. There are leadership reviews which could have unseated him. Even his own caucus could have thrown him out, no need for Chong's legislation (it's been done even in Canada). The fact is that there is a sizable chunk of the base that, for far too long, worshiped the ground the man walked on. They had bought into the Cult of Harper, much as Harper's opponents outside the party had, to the point where you would have thought from the way everyone talked about him that he was some sort Machiavelli reborn; an unassailable political genius.

Well, the base allowed him to try for a fourth term, even as it was clear two years ago that the Tories had trouble. Other leaders had had the good sense to leave, to at least give the governing party a chance at another term. But oh no, not in Harper's Party, where apparently he calls ALL the shots, and you'd just best do what you're told.

The base allowed an autocratic system of party management to creep in, much as a gutless caucus allowed the same man to turn an entire government into a one man show.

So for the base to whine and snivel about how they had no choice, that they had to follow the man, just rings false. The party could have got rid of him, the caucus could have got rid of him, but they abrogated all responsibility for their political fortunes, and now that they're messiah is turning out to be more an anchor that will either deliver the party defeat on the 19th, or when Parliament is recalled.

I have no pity for the base. They are reaping what they sowed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So for the base to whine and snivel...

Who's whining and sniveling? You are aware that most people don't give a damn about politics outside of election time, are you not? Aside from this board and others like it, how many people do you know that are "card carrying (anythings)"?? I'm certainly not and no one I know is. After the 20th and the various "whining and sniveling" from every side of the spectrum about who won or didn't, the Canadian public will go back to sleep and forget politics for the most part.

In a way I'm glad there's only one less-left-leaning party in this country or we'd be faced with the vote splitting issue we had for years. I'd like to see a few more more-left-leaning parties show up in the mainstream so the vote on that end would be divided even more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In a way I'm glad there's only one less-left-leaning party in this country or we'd be faced with the vote splitting issue we had for years. I'd like to see a few more more-left-leaning parties show up in the mainstream so the vote on that end would be divided even more.

The way I read this, you would like a way to have perpetual Tory rule.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,713
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    nyralucas
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • Jeary earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Venandi went up a rank
      Apprentice
    • Gaétan earned a badge
      Very Popular
    • Dictatords earned a badge
      First Post
    • babetteteets earned a badge
      One Year In
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...