cybercoma Posted January 23, 2006 Report Share Posted January 23, 2006 When I went to vote today, I noticed a candidate listed as PC Party as well as a candidate listed Conservative. For those voters who don't follow politics, I wonder if this will mislead them? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biblio Bibuli Posted January 23, 2006 Report Share Posted January 23, 2006 When I went to vote today, I noticed a candidate listed as PC Party as well as a candidate listed Conservative. For those voters who don't follow politics, I wonder if this will mislead them? I enjoy my hallucinogens as much as the next guy but I forgot to take one before I went to vote. http://www.streetdrugs.org/pcp.htm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
betsy Posted January 23, 2006 Report Share Posted January 23, 2006 When I went to vote today, I noticed a candidate listed as PC Party as well as a candidate listed Conservative. For those voters who don't follow politics, I wonder if this will mislead them? I just heard the same thing from one of my parents who went to vote, warning us that it was misleading. At first he thought it was Conservative...but luckily, he knew the name of our Conservative MP. We worry that this will split up the votes since it may confuse a lot of people....especially the elderlies. This parent is going to write to the MP complaining about this. Why didn't they specify the full name of the party? Was it done deliberately to confused people? I know I sound paranoid..... This is serious! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scribblet Posted January 23, 2006 Report Share Posted January 23, 2006 This is a party set up by Joe Hueglin and guess who - David Orchard.... as far as I'm concerned its a deliberate attempt to sabotage the CPC. Anyone not knowing who the CPC candidate is, could make a mistake - which is the intention of course. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canuck Monk Posted January 23, 2006 Report Share Posted January 23, 2006 Reminds me of the Jim Green/James Green scenario in Vancouver's civic election. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boru Posted January 23, 2006 Report Share Posted January 23, 2006 I doubt it was intention. Just idiocy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lost&outofcontrol Posted January 25, 2006 Report Share Posted January 25, 2006 The Progressive Canadian Party(PCP) is the true progressive conservative party(Joe Clark's & John A. Macdonald's) the current conservatives(Harper's) are the result of the merger between the Canadian alliance and the more right wing faction of Mulroney's conservatives. The proof is that their still is a few senators that refuse to become conservatives and remain PCs. So a case could be made that it's the current conservatives(Harper's) that of taken the name to confuse the voters. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scribblet Posted January 26, 2006 Report Share Posted January 26, 2006 I doubt it was intention. Just idiocy. From what I've read I believe it was deliberate - not to mention sour grapes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shoop Posted January 26, 2006 Report Share Posted January 26, 2006 Wow, who would have thought a Progressive Canadian zealot would have made it to the board? There are currently four PC member's of the Senate, two who were appointed by Paul Martin in March. (Why not take the easiest job for the money in the world to sit under the name of a dead party?) So that means there are *two* senators who were appointed by Mulroney who refuse to sit as members of the Conservative caucus. Quite a movement you have going there... The Progressive Canadian Party(PCP) is the true progressive conservative party(Joe Clark's & John A. Macdonald's) the current conservatives(Harper's) are the result of the merger between the Canadian alliance and the more right wing faction of Mulroney's conservatives. The proof is that their still is a few senators that refuse to become conservatives and remain PCs. So a case could be made that it's the current conservatives(Harper's) that of taken the name to confuse the voters. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lost&outofcontrol Posted January 26, 2006 Report Share Posted January 26, 2006 Wow, who would have thought a Progressive Canadian zealot would have made it to the board?There are currently four PC member's of the Senate, two who were appointed by Paul Martin in March. (Why not take the easiest job for the money in the world to sit under the name of a dead party?) So that means there are *two* senators who were appointed by Mulroney who refuse to sit as members of the Conservative caucus. Quite a movement you have going there... wow, didn't think people were that bad on this board, me thinks you need to look in the mirror to find the zealot. I'm not even a conservative voter nor am I a PCP voter; I was just stating facts. And yes, the PCP did choose to keep to name hoping for a few more votes. That I know as a fact. Didn't realy help them since their best showing was in Brome-Missisquoi with 4% of the vote. Heck , the Christian Heritage Party got twice as many votes nation wide. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
justcrowing Posted January 26, 2006 Report Share Posted January 26, 2006 I doubt it was intention. Just idiocy. From what I've read I believe it was deliberate - not to mention sour grapes. I noticed it on the ballot and was taken aback for a moment. However, knowing my candidate I knew where to place my vote. Why was it on the ballot to begin with? They never campaigned or even produced any policies. Orchard is nothing but an NDPer posing as a Conservative. Shame on him so agree scriblett tht this was deliberate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shoop Posted January 26, 2006 Report Share Posted January 26, 2006 Sorry, didn't want to come across too partisan. You attacked the Conservative Party of Canada somehow stating the pathetic Progressive Canadians was a viable alternative. I always wonder where they get the money for the deposit to run when it is a given they have no shot at winning ... anywhere. wow, didn't think people were that bad on this board, me thinks you need to look in the mirror to find the zealot. I'm not even a conservative voter nor am I a PCP voter; I was just stating facts. And yes, the PCP did choose to keep to name hoping for a few more votes. That I know as a fact.Didn't realy help them since their best showing was in Brome-Missisquoi with 4% of the vote. Heck , the Christian Heritage Party got twice as many votes nation wide. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lost&outofcontrol Posted January 26, 2006 Report Share Posted January 26, 2006 Yeah, sorry, I did sound like a douche earlier. I spoke to a rep from the PCP party before the election and he though they were going to get at least 1 representative elected in either Winnipeg south-center or Brome-Missisquoi. They barely received 0.1% of the national vote! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shoop Posted January 26, 2006 Report Share Posted January 26, 2006 They *almost* got 2.3% of the vote in Winnipeg South Centre and *close to* 4% of the vote in Brome-Miissisquoi. I hear you though. Rumours fly around a campaign and if there are races in a region you aren't familiar with you can believe them without any support for the rumour. Or any idea how ridiculous the rumour is. 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.