Women Abandon Conservatives

[watching&waiting]

Lets see now I have done a poll and it was very scientific. I took earth worms and asked them how they vote and then put them on a line where to the left was liberal and the right was conservative. The majority of earth worms moved awy to the left. So that must mean that the Liberal get more support of earth worms then Conservatives. This is just about as useful as this present poll.

It really doe s not make any sense and it will not make any difference because when it comes to election time, the issues of the day will be what will divide the voters, and we all know just how fluid that can be. There is not going to be an election any time soon and if and when there is, I have full confidence that women as a whole will take a look at the issues and make their own choices, regardless of what their husbands or fathers have told them. Just the very fact that this poll is even being brought up by Liberals at this point in time shows you just how sad the liberals are. Any women who would follow with her vote because of anything said about this pole, is not then the thinking and wise representative of her gender. When the time comes look at all things and then make a clear and thoughtful vote for the party who has your values in their actions if they were governing or by thei party position if they have never goeverned.

I am more then a little appalled by the way both sides have looked at women during this thread. Personally it has come to how many points do I take away for each for their positions, not that this would gain any points. I apologise to any women, who has been made to feel less because of the views here.

[Higgly]

And you think women who vote Conservative do that? The only two young women I now who vote the way they do because "daddy" did, both vote Liberal. Another frankly admits she doesn't follow politics and finds it boring, and votes Liberal because her husband does. Most of the other younger women don't bother to vote, though they tend to be dismissive of the Conservative Party.

The women I know who do vote Conservative tend to be considerably tougher and less emotional than the others, with a personality which says "cut the bullshit" and a look to match.

Too late Argus. You are toast. Attention needs be paid. Arthur Miller.

[Argus]

The women I know who do vote Conservative tend to be considerably tougher and less emotional than the others, with a personality which says "cut the bullshit" and a look to match.

Have you ever been around a woman older than 30?

You keep mentioning young women. Very few young people have any interest in politics whatsoever. It's a youth thang, not a woman thang.

Most of the people I know are in their twenties, and the topic was "women". If you want my opinion of young men, well, you won't have to search far. I've mentioned it before.

But yes, I do know women who are older, but I'm trying to not base my opinons on people who are self-selected. One tends to associate more with people who are more like you, so yes, clearly, more of the women I know who are older tend to to have the kind of cynical, intelligent, good humoured attitude I respect - and so they do tend to be more conservative in many ways. On the other hand, they still tend to be less interested generally in politics than men, and have less time for the news, or internet, or newsmagazines.

Conservative women tougher? So? Does one need to be "tough" to vote on an issue? Does it make me "tough" that I agree with Harper regarding crime and punishment in this country?

What I mean by tougher, is one who can look at something like poverty and not immediately feel sorrow and vote to give more money to the poor. What I mean is someone who considers why people are poor, who considers what giving them money has done in the past and is likely to do now, and who doesn't feel unrestrained sympathy, but instead suggests maybe a lot of them are poor due to their own stupidity. And maybe they should do something about it instead of just sticking out their hand.

[Argus]

Too late Argus. You are toast.

As ever Higgly, the value of your contributions to the topic under discussion are matched only by the depth of your insight.

[Argus]

I am more then a little appalled by the way both sides have looked at women during this thread. Personally it has come to how many points do I take away for each for their positions, not that this would gain any points. I apologise to any women, who has been made to feel less because of the views here.

You know, the women I know and respect and admire would look at that and laugh at you.

The very idea that some posts on a political forum would make them feel less would fill them with mirth.

[Drea]

I agree with pretty much everything in your last post.

But I am a liberal. Not a leftwinger.

I don't believe in throwing money at everything and sticking my head in the sand. This however, does not make me a conservative. Economically conservative perhaps, but socially liberal.

I believe in tougher sentences for criminals, less welfare, no govt money for special interest groups. I also beleive in affordable healthcare for all.

Conservatives tend to make the mistake of lumping liberals and leftwingers in the same group.

[Higgly]

Hee hee.

[Argus]

Poorer?

Lonelier?

I am neither poor nor lonely.

God for you, but statistically speaking the comment is valid.

Like in the 50's and 60's. Yes exactly! There was no equality then. My mother would attest to that. The ONLY option she had to leave her father's home was to find a man to marry her.

Well, my mother had six brothers, and once kicked down her sister's door (which landed on her sister), in a rage. She started working when she was sixteen and except for a decade long span of paradise in Europe with my father when cheap local help would do everything for pennies a day, worked all her life. She worked on parliament hill for fifteen years, and described MPs of all stripes as the phoniest and most dishonest people she'd ever met.

Honey, I ain't no victim.

I am a very strong, independent liberal thinking educated woman.

And would you cry and go on tv and demand an apology if an ex-boyfriend referred to you as a dog?

The He-Man Woman-Hates Club is looking for a president. You should run.

First, I'm not a he-man. Never claimed to be. Never was a macho, jock type. I'm more of a reading, writing talking kind of guy. Football always bored me.

Second, I am the only straight man I know who has more female friends than male friends. My office at work gets so many visits from women who just want to chat and say hi that my boss has suggested putting in more visitors chairs. I still get email from women I haven't seen in years. I've been told by more than one woman that if only I wasn't a man I'd be a perfect best friend. I love women, both chatting and flirting with them, but my respect for them is such that I feel completely free being honest about their general traits and attitudes. I don't sugar coat things because the women I respect wouldn't take offense at honest talk.

Certainly none of them would give a damn that an ex called them a dog.

[Argus]

I agree with pretty much everything in your last post.

But I am a liberal. Not a leftwinger.

I don't believe in throwing money at everything and sticking my head in the sand. This however, does not make me a conservative. Economically conservative perhaps, but socially liberal.

I believe in tougher sentences for criminals, less welfare, no govt money for special interest groups. I also beleive in affordable healthcare for all.

And I believe in all of that, too. But I also believe in self-reliance, and that people should take responsibility for their own actions. I believe in paying our way, and in helping yourself before asking others to help. I believe in honesty, integrity, and judging everyone, individual or group, by the same set of high standards.

Conservatives tend to make the mistake of lumping liberals and leftwingers in the same group.

In Canada, Liberals pretty much are left-wingers by world standards.

[Drea]

In Canada, Liberals pretty much are left-wingers by world standards.

Only from a rightwing view. The NDPers and other leftwingers would disagree with you.

The word "liberal" in the USA means extreme leftwinger. The rightwing in Canada has taken this and ran with it.

Liberals in Canada are the centrist party. Actually they are a tad to the right of centre.

If we were on an acutal line it would look like this:

Leftwing NDP, Marijuana Party and Green supporters -- Liberals -- Tories -- Rightwing Alliance type conservatives -- Christian Heritage Party.

Liberals and Tories have much more in common than they realize

I gotta go take my son to Cadets... would like to continue this later -- Argus it seems like you and I are making some headway! And we might even be on the same page after all!

[Rovik]

Sorry *double post*

Delete.

[Rovik]

Yes, but it's a relatively new trend, and overall, men still tend to be more educated. Also, most of the women I know are graduates from liberal arts courses: psychology, sociology, history, English, and know little and want to know less about economics, finance and science.

If you go back multiple generations, this may be true, but women are quickly catching up. Are you implying that ALL graduates from liberal arts courses don't want to know about economics, finance and science? Or only women? Or only the women you know?

<shrug> My experience is the opposite. The younger women I know tend to focus on what they think should be done, and don't like to be distracted by the complexities, costs and side effects of proposals. That would certainly tend to make them more likely to vote Liberal or NDP.

Funny, I feel that Conservatives (even Conservative women) tend to focus on what they think should be done, and don't like to be distracted by the complexities, costs and side effects of proposals.

Yes, that sort of sentiment is common. But ask her what exactly should be done, and look at the blank expression on her face.

"We should reduce greenhouse gases!"

"Okay. How?"

Cue blank look. Then something like "They should make a law banning it!"

You know exactly what this woman will say though you don't even know her?!?! Man, you are insulting her intelligence. I don't know exactly what she would say, but I know this....she is very savvy in politics and wouldn't answer in the way you assume she would.

[Higgly]

Quite possibly. Young men are pretty stupid.

Oh man. It just keeps getting better and better.

B-I-G-O-T. What's that spell?

[Rovik]

Sentimentality does not equal open-mindedness. Quite the opposite. It tends to obscure truth, dismiss logic and bypass intelligence in favour of emotion.

I disagree...sentimentality and empathy are components of open-mindedness. For example, look at what happened in the mid '90s. The Liberals cut spending and this meant less money for programs such as healthcare. The healthcare systems in the provinces suffered for it and healthcare today in many instances is at critical levels. Here in Newfoundland, horror stories on the open line shows are common...sick patients lying in cots in corridors because beds were previously cut to save money...people waiting days to see doctors because the area couldn't afford to keep a doctor and so on and so on. The Liberals at the time cut payments so that they could pay down the debt but they didn't consider the human consequences.

You don't like border-line poverty, eh? So what should we do? Let me guess here. Increase taxes on people who have more money and give it to poorer people? As for consequences, oh who cares, right? Yes, you're correct some men don't get less sentimental. That's why we have the NDP, for dreamers who never grew up.

Raising taxes for upper incomers doesn't need to be the way to do this. Cut subsidies and tax breaks to companies. In addition, have a tiered tax program, so companies making oodles of profits get taxed higher than companies breaking even or with lower profits.

For example, in today's daily paper, IOCC is demanding continued tax breaks and low cost power or else. There are huge amounts of money at both the provincial and federal levels going to companies like these and a portion of this money should be directed to social programs instead.

Link to that story. Do or die for IOC

[Argus]

In Canada, Liberals pretty much are left-wingers by world standards.

Only from a rightwing view. The NDPers and other leftwingers would disagree with you.

The word "liberal" in the USA means extreme leftwinger. The rightwing in Canada has taken this and ran with it.

Liberals in Canada are the centrist party. Actually they are a tad to the right of centre.

If we were on an acutal line it would look like this:

Leftwing NDP, Marijuana Party and Green supporters -- Liberals -- Tories -- Rightwing Alliance type conservatives -- Christian Heritage Party.

The fact is that Canada's Conservatives are considerably to the left of American Republicans, and even most Democrats. Canada's Liberals would be considered to the left of the Democrats in the US. Most would be dismissed as radicals. As for the likes of Maude Barlow and Svend Robinson - they'd be hard pressed to get elected as dog catchers (which is an entirely sensible attitude, imho).

If I was in the US I would be considered a liberal, and probably a radical liberal at that. My dislike, bordering on contempt, of the religious right and their social conservative policies and programs, my agnosticism, my support for public health care and social programs would, at best, put me on the far left of the Democratic Party. Mind you, I do not much like large portions of the American "Left" either. I am not a fan of affirmative action and quotas, nor do I have much sympathy for the self righteousness of limosine liberals like Ted Turner and his gal pal Jane Fonda.

[Drea]

The fact is that Canada's Conservatives are considerably to the left of American Republicans, and even most Democrats. Canada's Liberals would be considered to the left of the Democrats in the US. Most would be dismissed as radicals. As for the likes of Maude Barlow and Svend Robinson - they'd be hard pressed to get elected as dog catchers (which is an entirely sensible attitude, imho).

If I was in the US I would be considered a liberal, and probably a radical liberal at that. My dislike, bordering on contempt, of the religious right and their social conservative policies and programs, my agnosticism, my support for public health care and social programs would, at best, put me on the far left of the Democratic Party. Mind you, I do not much like large portions of the American "Left" either. I am not a fan of affirmative action and quotas, nor do I have much sympathy for the self righteousness of limosine liberals like Ted Turner and his gal pal Jane Fonda.

So we are in complete agreement regarding political policy. We just call ourselves different "names". You call yourself a conservative, while I call myself a liberal. I believe I am socially liberal (as you are) and economically conservative (as you are). So, two basically (politically, not socially) like-minded voters battle it out for supremacy -- we are battling for the same thing. It ain't the current crop of social Conservatives. The old PCs would get my vote if they were around today. Today's conservatives, for the most part, have aligned themselves with the US Republicans and by proxy, the religious right.

I have no choice but to vote Liberal in today's political climate.

With regard to women, we are not in agreement.

Earlier you stated that there "must be a reason why women didn't have the vote". The only reason is that for the past few thousand years we have lived in a patriarcal society.

Earlier you stated that you like women "chatting and flirting with them". "Chatting and flirting" is most definetly not the same as "respecting". You may like women, sure, but you have no respect for them as equal fellow human beings. You may have a great respect for your mother, but only in the sense of her motherhood, not her as a person.

[Canadian Blue]

I'm somewhat socially conservative as I am against abortion, racial qoutas, and support some traditional conservative values [with the exception of gay marriage and adoption which I support]. However at the same time I prefer economic liberalism and don't mind more government intervention in a mixed economy if it means helping the disadvantaged and middle class. I would be supportive of a pro-life democrat if I was down in the states.

Try to find a Canadian political party that stands for that.

Personally, PR would fix alot of the divisions in Canada right now, then no goverment would get 100% of the power, from 60% of the seats and 40% of the votes. If PR was in place more political choices, and governments would have to compromise in order to have a government. It works alot better the having the minority rule the country.

PS: Wasn't it Jean Chretien who promised to bring in PR in 1984!

[Ricki Bobbi]

Today's conservatives, for the most part, have aligned themselves with the US Republicans and by proxy, the religious right.

Let's actually take a look at how much the Conservative Party of Canada 'aligns' itself with US Republicans.

US Republicans generally favour capital punishment. The CPC doesn't and has made no mention of legislating on the matter.

US Republicans are generally pro-life. The CPC is split on the issue and has made no mention of legislation on the matter.

US Republicans are strongly in the NRA life. The CPC got rid of the wasteful gun registry *but* they have still kept the ban on automatic rifles and the need to acquire a Firearm Acquisitions Certificate before buying a gun. Both of those would make them a target of the NRA.

Harper could only win a nomination at any level as a Republican in a handful of blue states (i.e. Democratic leaning) with the policies he ran on and the way in which he has been running the government.

It is convenient for the LPC to say the CPC is aligning itself with the religious right but it really isn't even close to the truth.

[Drea]

The Canadian Conservatives are more likely to support US actions. They supported Isreal unabashedly -- called the response "measured". Conservatives are emotional. They need an "enemy" and are unable to look at issues from more than one point of view (theirs) -- just like the Republicans.

"God Bless Canada" -- Harper is like the kid in school who copies the bully... he's not really a bully but he thinks he'd like to be. He thinks the bully is way cool. If you asked him though -- he'd deny it.

[Ricki Bobbi]

The Canadian Conservatives are more likely to support US actions.

So that means they have *aligned themselves* with the Republicans? I for one think it is a sign of maturity and class we haven't seen Conservative MPs stomping on dolls of the U.S. Presidents or senior Conservative staffers calling their counterparts in the White House a**holes.

They supported Isreal unabashedly -- called the response "measured".

And the Liberals howled in protest when Prime Minister Harper rightly pointed out that most of the Liberal leadership contenders are anti-Israel. Nothing wrong with picking a side. Look at Mr. Dithers. Trying to play both sides is what lead to his failed Prime Ministership.

Conservatives are emotional.

Do you have any evidence of Conservatives actually responding more emotionally than Liberals? This is clearly the weakest part of your response given the emotional behaviour of all parties and their supporters in many cases. Clearly can't be supported.

They need an "enemy" and are unable to look at issues from more than one point of view (theirs) -- just like the Republicans.

As opposed to the Liberals openness to all sides on SSM, the middle East, Afghanistan... The Liberals hold their positions just as staunchly as the Conservatives. At least they did under Chretien. Dithers, well there is a reason he got the nickname.

"God Bless Canada" -- Harper is like the kid in school who copies the bully... he's not really a bully but he thinks he'd like to be. He thinks the bully is way cool. If you asked him though -- he'd deny it.

The Canadian Charter of Rights guarantees Freedom of Religion. Glad to see only Conservativs are unable to look at issues from more than one point of view. btw I have never, ever heard GW Bush say God Bless Canada.

[Drea]

Honey, Bush doesn't even know where Canada IS, let alone bless it.

What I meant (sighhhhh) is that GW Bush is known for saying "God Bless America" at the end of his speeches.

Mr. Harper now says "God Bless Canada". If that aint copyin' I don't know what is.

[admclark]

You want a list of people who crossed the floor?

How many political parties did Stephen Harper belong to?

Liberals, Progressive Conservatives, Reform, Alliance and now the Conservatives.

Can't the man make up his mind?

When was he a member of the Liberal party? Check your facts!

[Ricki Bobbi]

Honey, Bush doesn't even know where Canada IS, let alone bless it.

What I meant (sighhhhh) is that GW Bush is known for saying "God Bless America" at the end of his speeches.

Mr. Harper now says "God Bless Canada". If that aint copyin' I don't know what is.

If I woulda called you Honey it would a been sexist ... but that's the double-standard of the left. (Besides I wouldn't make such a presumption without seeing a photo first.)

As for the second part. To quote Homer Simpson "In case you dont' get it I was being sarcastic." But thanks for falling for it.

[jdobbin]

When was he a member of the Liberal party? Check your facts!

"He first became involved in politics in high school, serving as a member of the school's Young Liberals Club."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Harper

It is any biography of Harper you can find. Please check your facts.

He switches parties regularly.

[Ricki Bobbi]

It is any biography of Harper you can find. Please check your facts.

He switches parties regularly.

He switched from the Liberals to the PCs in high school.

He switched from the PCs to the Reform in the 80s.

Hmm, something he has done twice in 30 years and that is regular behaviour?

All the others were moves to a new party at the end of the old. Not a switch. Please quit being so dishonest.