Women Abandon Conservatives

[Canadian Blue]

3. Notwithstanding particular policies that may be unharmful, the Conservatives policies and the ideology behind them are ... negative on a net basis. Support for such a party cannot be explained except through some combination of the factors I've listed.

4. I still don't know what your question was.

Name the policies which are harmful and why you believe them to be so, and then let conservatives debate you on them. Just to see which of the four camps they falled into. How are they harmful, so far what major harm has been done to the country. I haven't seen any harm done yet, and I work for the federal government. The sky isn't falling. Personally this forum should be about debate, not name calling and childish behavior which mirrors are current politicians which is the reason why many Canadian's don't even bother with politics anymore.

4. On thoughtless individuals, don't you remember your comments saying all conservatives are "thoughtless". I said I voted conservative, yet I think I am perfectly capable of having my own thoughts on issues. I'll paste this a few more times so you can read.

4. On thoughtless individuals, don't you remember your comments saying all conservatives are "thoughtless". I said I voted conservative, yet I think I am perfectly capable of having my own thoughts on issues.

4. On thoughtless individuals, don't you remember your comments saying all conservatives are "thoughtless". I said I voted conservative, yet I think I am perfectly capable of having my own thoughts on issues.

[gerryhatrick]

Why would women drop away from the Conservatives like they have?

And will Mackays ignorant sexist insult to Stronach lose them even more women votes?

[betsy]

Calm down, Gerry. Take a deep breath.....

[SamStranger]

Its so Ironic that the NDP used this poll against the Conservatives on Mike Duffy Live saying "it shows how out of touch the Conservatives are with women"... now, the Tories have 28% in this poll and the NDP has 11%....

11%...

How dare the NDP say Tories are out of touch with women when they only have 11%!!!

Fools.

[watching&waiting]

Gerry you need to get a grip and quit being so petty in these things. Many people have given you very good arguments to what you say, and I am trying to stay out of it, as I promised to not attack you for a month just to show the people it was not just me that makes you go off in rages. The idea of debate is to argue the poin ts that the other side made not just shout and screeam thay are thoughtless or idiots.

I know some where in you is the ability to debate issues, without the bad behaviour. You just need to find it and maybe then people will take you more seriously. As I said earlier, what makes you sure that if the women who leave the CPC camp, are ever going to go to the Liberal camp. Is there any proof? To me if women left the CPC it probably would be to go to the green party, more then any other. The reason would be that for them to be unsatisfied with the CPC, they would proably be over issues that the green party is now pushing and making them better known. Just what about the Liberals would any of these women find attractive? Right now it looks more like the liberals are more concerned about painting their own as tainted and not worthy, of the leadership race. Along with all this are scandels every week about something or other. Do you really think women would find that attractive. Also even after a leader is picked, it will take a very long time to unite the party as right now it is fractured so badly, that I have to wonder if it can ever be put together ever again.

I will stop here and let you answer these things, and as i said I am not trying to bait you or pick on you. All I am asking is that you answer my questions and the many others that have been asked of you.

[Argus]

You have things more than a little off, which makes me wonder about what else you have off. Where do you get that Emerson turned down a deal in 2005? Also, Canada will not be paying any kind of export tax unless the price of lumber drops below a given limit. And if they do pay it it will go to CANADA, not to the US, and all provinces have signed on to the agreement.

The story that Emerson turned down the deal in 2005 appeared in the April 28th, 2006, issue of the Vancouver Sun. It's in the A section. I have the hard copy in front of me but unfortunately no link.

As far as the export tax goes, the price of lumber has already dropped to the point that the 15% tax has now kicked in. That's why the softwood lumber industry is unhappy. You can read more about how Emerson and Harper betrayed the industry here:

http://thetyee.ca/News/2006/10/13/Softwood/

That's an opinion piece on a leftist/environmental site. Like most such opinions it's based more on emotion than common sense. We had to make a deal with the US. There simply was no alternative. So what if NAFTA panels sided with us. WTO panels sided with them. We would have had litigation for at least another ten to twenty years, by which time they'd have moved the yardsticks and be coming back over something else again. They've been coming at us with various taxes and fines for two decades now and there is zero likelihood of things getting any better in the future. Those people arguing against the deal are like wide-eyed nafes who believe that the whole world will be fair if you just smile enough. Life doesn't work that way.

[Argus]

Why would women drop away from the Conservatives like they have?

And will Mackays ignorant sexist insult to Stronach lose them even more women votes?

Do you have posters of Belinda all over your walls?

[Figleaf]

3. Notwithstanding particular policies that may be unharmful, the Conservatives policies and the ideology behind them are ... negative on a net basis. Support for such a party cannot be explained except through some combination of the factors I've listed.

4. I still don't know what your question was.

Name the policies which are harmful and why you believe them to be so, and then let conservatives debate you on them. Just to see which of the four camps they falled into. How are they harmful, so far what major harm has been done to the country. I haven't seen any harm done yet, and I work for the federal government. The sky isn't falling. Personally this forum should be about debate, not name calling and childish behavior which mirrors are current politicians which is the reason why many Canadian's don't even bother with politics anymore.

4. On thoughtless individuals, don't you remember your comments saying all conservatives are "thoughtless". I said I voted conservative, yet I think I am perfectly capable of having my own thoughts on issues. I'll paste this a few more times so you can read.

4. On thoughtless individuals, don't you remember your comments saying all conservatives are "thoughtless". I said I voted conservative, yet I think I am perfectly capable of having my own thoughts on issues.

4. On thoughtless individuals, don't you remember your comments saying all conservatives are "thoughtless". I said I voted conservative, yet I think I am perfectly capable of having my own thoughts on issues.

PART 1

I gave three reasons that could explain why someone might support a party whose existing and expected policies are unwise, impracticsl or harmful: ignorance, stupidity, or perceived self -interest. I added thoughtlessness to capture a less intense manifestation of stupidity or ignorance. I have no desire to diagnose the choice of each Conservative voter who seeks to challenge my opinion.

Obviously many Con. supporters here are incensed by my statement, which surprises me somewhat, since most of them are astoundingly immoderate in their criticisms of others who disagree with them. (This tendency toward double-standards on the rightwing is ONE of the reasons I think it is ill-advised to give them political power.)

Now, consider my point again -- how to explain the choice of people who support ill-advised political options? Could it be because they're brilliantly insightful, clear-thinking, and broad-minded? That's not a satisfactory explanation for poor choices, is it? To explain something negative, one will perforce have to turn to unflattering attributes.

Now obviously you don't believe you made a bad choice. But I do, so what other explantion for bad choices are available from my perspective? When you think about the choices of people you disagree with, what explanations do you come up with?

PART 2

Next, to deal with the question of whether Conservative philosophy and policies are [i[actually[/i] wrong, I can give you my reasons and you will like them or not. You can give me your reasons and I'll ke them or not. If one of us convinces the other, then the one who becomes convinced will have to recognize that his prior opinion was incorrect, and that the explanation for that mistake will have to have been one or more of the reasons I gave that started this discussion. For example, my opposition to the three strikes law was based on ignorance of its contents.

(Though I'm still not thrilled with it.)

PART 3

What are my reasons for thinking the Conservatives are wrong or should be expected to be frequently wrong? I've alread given some and I can only give you a few more examples for now:

-Harper supports U.S. foreign policy which is inimical to international security.

-Conservative economic philosophy is unlikely to lead them improve/redress market failures.

-Conservative traditionalism is likely to steer them against beneficial social reforms.

[Argus]

PART 3

What are my reasons for thinking the Conservatives are wrong or should be expected to be frequently wrong? I've alread given some and I can only give you a few more examples for now:

-Harper supports U.S. foreign policy which is inimical to international security.

US foreign policy can basically be reduced to: the desire for stability. That is really what they want, stability so that trade and resource extraction can continue without being interfered with. This benefits everyone in the West. The Lefties can snivel about oil wars all the way, but let them start shivering in the dark because there isn't any oil and I bet they change their minds reaaaall fast.

If you look at French foreign policy, by contrast, it's all about money for their companies. They will support any kind of brutal dictator if it means they can get oil and military contracts. They supported the Serbs during the Yugoslavian mess. They supported Hussein. They support Sudan. They have troops in various African countries helping prop up dictators friendly to them. The Germans are little better. The Chinese and Russians infinitely worse (they both support Sudan too - genocide be damned).

-Conservative economic philosophy is unlikely to lead them improve/redress market failures.

There is terrible poverty in England and In France, and terrible violence, crime, social upheavel and injustice.

Twenty or thirty years of socialist government does not seem to have done anything to change that.

-Conservative traditionalism is likely to steer them against beneficial social reforms.

Beneficial to whom? There is a lot of question about just how beneficial many left wing social reforms are to society as a whole.

[Drea]

hi dear Andrea.I miss u too very much.I am studing architecting in Tehran university now .the capital of Iran.so I am not at home and I can use computer just at the university.plz tell me whw\en u are online that I can find a time and chat u

Just got this instant message from my friend in Iran.

a FEMALE!

an EDUCATED female!

in IRAN!

becoming an ARCHITECT!

wimim ar sew stoopid and unedukated eh argus!?

Good for her!

Planning to migrate to the west, I suppose?

Yes,

we are hoping to have her here by 2010. Her parents don't want her to live in a theocracy. They want her to live in a free society.

[Figleaf]

US foreign policy can basically be reduced to: the desire for stability.

There's at least a couple of problems with that.

First, many US actions (e.g. illegally attacking Iraq, claiming exceptional status, undermining the UN) are counterproductive to stability.

Second, seeking 'stability' will automatically imply conflict with parties to whom the status quo is not acceptable, some of who have quite valid reasons for that stance (e.g. the poor in Latin America, or the Palestinians).

-Conservative economic philosophy is unlikely to lead them improve/redress market failures.

There is terrible poverty in England and In France, and terrible violence, crime, social upheavel and injustice.

Twenty or thirty years of socialist government does not seem to have done anything to change that.

So? I don't concede that you're correct, but what's that got to do with my point?

-Conservative traditionalism is likely to steer them against beneficial social reforms.

Beneficial to whom?

Beneficial to everyone, or beneficial to those dis-served by existing traditions, obviously.

[Canadian Blue]

Figleaf, once again people on the right side on the spectrum can debate your points, absolute truths are rarely absolute. I'll admit that alot of right wingers on this site do give a knee jerk reaction, but so do left wingers as well. It contributes nothing to debate here, and looks more like a preschool playground. You can't say that center left policies are absolute, no offense but your treating those liberal policies as religion, something I did myself in the past.

Now, consider my point again -- how to explain the choice of people who support ill-advised political options? Could it be because they're brilliantly insightful, clear-thinking, and broad-minded? That's not a satisfactory explanation for poor choices, is it? To explain something negative, one will perforce have to turn to unflattering attributes.

Now obviously you don't believe you made a bad choice. But I do, so what other explantion for bad choices are available from my perspective? When you think about the choices of people you disagree with, what explanations do you come up with?

Usually with politics I say they made a free choice and have the self awareness to be able to decide who would best serve their country. Your thinking is bordering on authoritarian, they voted this way thus they must be in one of these camps which is inferior to the reasons I voted for my guy.

Let me ask you this, if 100% of Canadian's were to vote Liberal, and 100% of American's were to vote democrat, would that be a great day for society or a terrible day for society?

[Figleaf]

Usually with politics I say they made a free choice and have the self awareness to be able to decide who would best serve their country.

If they are making a wrong choice, in you opinion, and someone who agrees with your opini0n asks you why they make that choice, what do you say?

Your thinking is bordering on authoritarian,

Not at all. I'm not proposing to deny their politucal rights. I'm just saying they're dead wrong and saying how I think they must have come to that point.

... they voted this way thus they must be in one of these camps which is inferior to the reasons I voted for my guy.

If I didn't think my reasoning is better than theirs, shouldn't I agree with them?

Let me ask you this, if 100% of Canadian's were to vote Liberal, and 100% of American's were to vote democrat, would that be a great day for society or a terrible day for society?

Neither the Liberals nor the Democrats are guaranteed to be right all the time. I prefer to retain some political opposition (even wrong-headed) to prevent complacency or arrogance from taking root.

[Canadian Blue]

If they are making a wrong choice, in you opinion, and someone who agrees with your opini0n asks you why they make that choice, what do you say?

I try to explain it, but its not as simple as putting it into four camps. For example how would you respond to somebody who said they felt they had to vote conservative in order for the age of consent to be higher. That was one of the reasons I voted conservative, and you even said that you were unaware of some of the conservatives policies regarding justice, so how can you say they made the wrong choice.

QUOTE

... they voted this way thus they must be in one of these camps which is inferior to the reasons I voted for my guy.

If I didn't think my reasoning is better than theirs, shouldn't I agree with them?

No, you simply be mature and realize that they have their own reasons for voting that way. Allright you have your way of thinking which is pretty well 100% Liberal, and believe thats the best way to run the country. Conservatives have their way of thinking, and have their reasons why they think their system is the best way of running the country. Same with any other political ideology. However you seem to believe that all left wing voters are the only ones who seem to have great thinking power. Thats elitism. Do you see where I'm getting at, and elitism rarely ever results in anything positive happening in society. Everybody has differences in politics which is why western society is so great. You can believe the other policies are inferior of course, however in your case you are saying the people who vote right of center of inferior to those who vote on the left. Do you see what I'm getting at, your saying nearly 1/3 of Canadian's are inferior Canadian's based on one of the four camps you listed. Imagine if people were to buy into that line of thinking, especially irrational people. If all people believed conservatives only voted for self-interest, stupidity, and arrogance, then irrational people would get to thinking maybe those conservatives should be put in their place.

Your thinking in terms of absolute truths, truth is rarely absolute.

By the way have you figured out which camp I'm in of the four you listed, I'm planning on voting New Democrat provincially and Conservative federally so its a bit of a paradox???

[Figleaf]

If they are making a wrong choice, in you opinion, and someone who agrees with your opini0n asks you why they make that choice, what do you say?

I try to explain it, but its not as simple as putting it into four camps.

I believe, and challenge you to refute, that any explanation would fall within one of the four categories.

That was one of the reasons I voted conservative, and you even said that you were unaware of some of the conservatives policies regarding justice, so how can you say they made the wrong choice.

Because even occasional non-troublesome policies don't overcome the general wrongness of the whole package. If I wanted to be completely blunt, I could say it's 'stupid' to vote a wrongheaded party into power just because they have one or two ideas that you like.

If I didn't think my reasoning is better than theirs, shouldn't I agree with them?

No, you simply be mature and realize that they have their own reasons for voting that way.

I fail to see what maturity has to do with it. And I don't think your answering my point. They have their 'reasons', sure. But if their 'reasons' aren't sound there's no basis for me to defer to that reasoning.

Allright you have your way of thinking which is pretty well 100% Liberal,

You've got the wrong impression. Sure, I think the Liberals are less likely to be as wrong as the Conservatives, but they can be awfully bloody wrong too.

However you seem to believe that all left wing voters are the only ones who seem to have great thinking power.

No, no, no. The left can be profoundly wrong as well. If

you ask me who is more wrong, the Conservatives or the Marxist-Leninist party, I'd say the latter.

You can believe the other policies are inferior of course, however in your case you are saying the people who vote right of center of inferior to those who vote on the left.

I did not say that. 1. Particularly I did not categorize the people but rather their choices. 2. I did not laud the left.

... your saying nearly 1/3 of Canadian's are inferior Canadian's based on one of the four camps you listed.

I'm saying that whatever the number, they have made wrong choices and the wrongness of those choices falls within one of the categories given.

Imagine if people were to buy into that line of thinking, especially irrational people.

I can't see how people can avoid buying into this line of thinking, if they think about it.

If all people believed conservatives only voted for self-interest, stupidity, and arrogance,

IGnorance.

...then irrational people would get to thinking maybe those conservatives should be put in their place.

I don't know what you mean by that. The place for wrongheaded decisionmakers is out of power.

Your thinking in terms of absolute truths, ...

Absolutely not.

[Canadian Blue]

Allright then, how about this why don't you admit that the four camps can the go for the entire electorate, as the vast majority is ignorant of whats goes on in politics.

Finally, list the policies that you think are wrong headed, and since I voted conservative, I'll tell you why I believed that those policies would help the country. After that, put me in one of the four camps you listed, if you fail to put me in one of those camps then it proves that theory is flawed.

As for the Liberals, how many wrongheaded decisions did they make over the past forty years. I'll list a few:

-Take away civil liberties during the October Crisis

-Disband the once proud Canadian Airborne Regiment due to the actions of a few individuals

-Use public money to reward their friends who contributed to their campaign

-Alienate Western Canada, and during their tenure Quebec was a few thousand votes away from becoming a country

-Oppose Proportional Representation

-Take away the "Notwithstanding Clause" thus taking away the power of the legislative branch and putting it in the hands of 9 unelected judges all chosen by the PM

-Waste one billion dollars on a gun registry that hasn't worked

-Bring in a 300 billion dollar debt, which was later made larger by Brian Mulroney

-NEP, which resulted in the destruction of Alberta's economy

I am more then aware of the damage done by Tories as well. However I am bringing this up to show you how wrongheaded the Liberals have been as well.

I remember talking to a Liberal once, and when I brought up the sponsorship program his response was this, "Whats wrong with it, thats good business!". Same with another liberal supporter that smoked weed nonstop, and another one voting liberal because thats how his parents vote. Would it then be fair for myself to say all liberals are either drug addicts, corrupt, ignorant, and thoughtless.

[Figleaf]

Allright then, how about this why don't you admit that the four camps can the go for the entire electorate,...

Some choices are good ones some are not. I see no reason to lump them together.

Finally, list the policies that you think are wrong headed, and since I voted conservative, I'll tell you why I believed that those policies would help the country.

I've already mentioned several ways I think the Conservatives get or have gotten it wrong. Deal with more of those if you like. But I've also said I'm not interested in diagnosing the choices of every Conservative on the board.

After that, put me in one of the four camps you listed, if you fail to put me in one of those camps then it proves that theory is flawed.

I don't need to do that exercise ... just answer two questions: 1. Why did you vote Conservative? 2. What, if any, hesitations did you have in voting Conservative?

... I am bringing this up to show you how wrongheaded the Liberals have been as well.

I don't necessarily agree with the items on you list, but I'll certainly agree the Liberals have been wrong from time to time (less frequently and less wrong than the Tories, however).

But look, it doesn't seem like were getting anywhere here -- would it help you if I changed my terminology to say that supporting the Conservatives can be explained by some combination of:

-lack of relevant knowledge or information;

-use of a faulty analytical method;

-knowing it's wrong but doing it for an ulterior purpose; and/or

-negligence?

Is that better?

[Canadian Blue]

Allright I'll tell you why I voted for the tories.

1. Raising the age of consent to 16

2. Keeping the notwithstanding clause a part of the constitution

3. Respecting areas of provincial jurisdiction

4. Bringing forward the Accountability Act, and capping party donations

5. Eliminating the wasteful and useless gun registry

6. Supporting our Canadian military by introducing more money to help troops do the job

7. Support of senate reform

8. Bringing a western voice to government, thus healing the rift between government and the west

9. Supporting the three strikes rule for violent offenders

10. Arming the CBSA, who have an extremely dangerous job

11. Apologizing for the Chinese head tax

12. Eliminating spending which does not serve any benefit to the country

As for you, you were completely ignorant about the policy of firearms regarding the CBSA, and the three strikes rule. So you should consider taking a less hypocritical approach towards issues. You can't call people ignorant for voting for policies which even you don't know about.

I can just as easily put liberals in a few categories as well:

1. Dope smokers and drug addicts

2. Corrupt businessman who seek contract in order to get political favors

3. Ignorant people

But then again, I'm not that stupid. As well you failed to diagnose me, since your the master of political psychology here, why don't you tell me what camp I fall in so I can learn how to get reeducated. Seriously, I've never met a person with such a flawed logic towards politics in general.

I'd like to know how any person can get this arrogant. No offense Figleaf, but you are the most arrogant left winger I think their has ever been on this board, since I was on here before. Here's the thing about arrogance and pride, it does nothing to make you better as an individual, open your mind a little bit. Get out of your tiny box, and realize the world is more complex then you think it is.

[gerryhatrick]

Gerry you need to get a grip and quit being so petty in these things. Many people have given you very good arguments to what you say, and I am trying to stay out of it, as I promised to not attack you for a month just to show the people it was not just me that makes you go off in rages.

In what way am I being petty or do I need to get a grip or have I gone off in a "rage"? Go ahead and attack me, nobody cares what you promised and nobody cares what you think you are showing people. In the end you will claim something anyway.

Just like you claim Mackay meant that the opposition should ask Stronach about his dog. Your credibility is a little...hurting after that one!

[Figleaf]

Allright I'll tell you why I voted for the tories.

You we're supposed to answer two questions. This is only one.

1. Raising the age of consent...

W / E.

As for you, you were completely ignorant about the policy of firearms regarding the CBSA, ...

Yes. And I'm still waiting for someone to refer me to some

useful infornation about why it should be needed.

and the three strikes rule.

I had a mistaken impression about it.

So you should consider taking a less hypocritical approach towards issues.

Hypocritical? How so?

You can't call people ignorant for voting for policies which even you don't know about.

Sure I can. I was ignorant of those policies, they can be ignorant of others.

I can just as easily put liberals in a few categories as well:...

If you think it was easy for me, you are mistaken. I pondered long and hard to achieve my excellent analysis.

1. Dope smokers ....

Again, W/E.

But then again, I'm not that stupid

Oh? How stupid are you?

As well you failed to diagnose me, ... why don't you tell me what camp I fall in ...

It appears you are not reading my posts with a sufficient level of care to make this exchange useful.

I'd like to know how any person can get this arrogant.

Kindly refrain from personal attacks.

No offense Figleaf, but you are the most arrogant left winger

1. I'm not left wing.

2. Just because you can't comprehend my points doesn't make me arrogant.

... [blah blah blah]... realize the world is more complex then you think it is.

You mean 'than', not 'then'.

[Canadian Blue]

Buddy, its not an excellent analysis. Really what credentials do you have to back that up. You have a bit of a high impression of yourself. What experience has given you that idea.

As for the CBSA, I guess we can wait till a bunch of border guards get killed manning their posts since thats what it usually takes to get the Liberals to address an issue. The union representing the CBSA has repeatedly said they need firearms so they are not forced to flee their posts.

What makes you arrogant is more or less you believe your superior to your fellow Canadian's, due to the fact your a left wing Liberal. You can't come to grips with the idea that people might have different political values than you, so you believe they are either stupid, ignorant, or thoughtless.

With responses such as W/E, which I can take a guess means whatever, you don't want to respond because you see the hypocrisy in your own arguments. The only people that say whatever, are people that have been proven wrong.

How Stupid Am I, well I joined the miliary right out of high school instead of doing post secondary so you can read into that anyway you want.

What life experiences do you have, let me ask you this do you have any experience in politics?

As for whether or not I questioned whether voting for the conservatives would be a mistake. Of course, I was afraid that cuts would be to deep, deficits if taxes were cut too much. But so far neither has really come into effect.

WHAT MAKES YOU ARROGANT IS YOUR SIMPLISTIC VIEW OF THE WORLD, AND BELIEVING YOU ARE A SUPERIOR HUMAN BASED ON IGNORANCE AND PRIDE. AS WELL I'VE BEEN TRYING TO POINT OUT THAT JUST BECAUSE YOUR A LEFT WINGER DOESN'T MAKE ALL OF THOSE ON THE RIGHT INFERIOR OR IGNORANT. IN ORDER FOR A CIVIL SOCIETY TO REMAIN CIVIL IS FOR ALL SIDES TO BELIEVE EACH IS AN EQUAL IN REGARDS TO THOUGHT, EXPRESSION, AND SPEECH.

WHAT CREDENTIALS AND EXPERIENCE DO YOU HAVE THAT MAKES YOUR EXCELLENT ASSESSMENT CORRECT?

WHAT CREDENTIALS AND EXPERIENCE DO YOU HAVE THAT MAKES YOUR EXCELLENT ASSESSMENT CORRECT?

WHAT CREDENTIALS AND EXPERIENCE DO YOU HAVE THAT MAKES YOUR EXCELLENT ASSESSMENT CORRECT?

May I reference you to this post by the moderator.

http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums//index....mp;#entry145907

Despite trying to have a civilized debate you continue on about this whole idea that all conservative voters are ignorant, and self interested. Which is probably not true.

[Rovik]

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!

The only party that seemed to want to bring in PR is the NDP. The other parties are against it.

[jdobbin]

The only party that seemed to what to bring in PR is the NDP. The other parties are against it.

If the NDP is in support of it, they should demand that Manitoba and Saskatchewan do it to demonstate how good it is.

[Figleaf]

Buddy, its not an excellent analysis.

It pains me slightly that you cannot perceive the merits of my views.

Really what credentials do you have to back that up.

I can scarcely fax you my diplomas, now can I? Neither am I inclined to.

You have a bit of a high impression of yourself.

What you're doing there is called 'projecting'.

As for the CBSA, I guess we can wait till a bunch of border guards get killed ...

Suggestion: Rather than petulant ranting, it might be more productive to simply provide the info I asked for.

The union representing the CBSA has repeatedly said they need firearms so they are not forced to flee their posts.

It's usually considered wise to seek confirmation before accepting the representations of such a special interest.

What makes you arrogant ...

Again, I urge you to refrain from personal attacks.

... you believe your superior to your fellow Canadian's,...

Your abilities in creating fiction certainly exceed your abilities in grammar.

... due to the fact your a left wing Liberal.

"You're", not "your".

Now, since I've already told you that I'm neither Liberal nor left wing, I wonder what you'd have me conclude from the above statement about your comprehension or intelligence.

You can't come to grips with the idea that people might have different political values than you,...

You err, I'm afraid. Not only have I come to grips with it, I've drawn lessons and conclusions from it.

... so you believe they are either stupid, ignorant, or thoughtless.

When they are wrong, I have views about how. In our discussion I've asked you to propose alternative possibilities, but you've offered none.

With responses such as W/E, ..., you don't want to respond because you see the hypocrisy in your own arguments.

It's rather that I can't see the relevance of yours.

How Stupid Am I, well I joined the miliary right out of high school instead of doing post secondary so you can read into that anyway you want.

I don't read that any special way at all.

What life experiences do you have, let me ask you this do you have any experience in politics?

I've never held public office, if that's what you mean. Why do you ask?

WHAT MAKES YOU ARROGANT IS YOUR SIMPLISTIC VIEW OF THE WORLD, AND BELIEVING YOU ARE A SUPERIOR HUMAN ...

Personal attacks ,projecting, and shouting now too. Surely you don't expect me to indulge you in such behavior?

Despite trying to have a civilized debate you continue on about this whole idea that all conservative voters are ignorant, and self interested.

Our debate could have remained civilized, but your inability to tolerate my inability to agree with you has led you to commit several breaches of polite discourse. For example, just there you have blatantly mischaracterized my carefully stated position.

[Canadian Blue]

I don't really like any of the major parties, I vote for conservative simply because they are better then the rest. If the Reform party was around and had stuck to its original principles I would have supported them. However with PR, people are free to vote on who they think has the best platform, not based on which of the two lesser evils they prefer. Thats been happening in our elections, as well as down in the United States as well. The positive with PR, is usually their will never be a majority government, a party has to compromise in order to get into a majority position. This is the best way to run a government as the majority of the population is represented unlike the current sitaution.

Have you ever done volunteer work with any political body Figleaf?

It pains me slightly that you cannot perceive the merits of my views.

Well, since you can't provide any substance to your claims then I don't really see how it can be an excellent analysis. Excellent analysis usually brings about something of substance. I doubt your going to be able to show it in your next post since it doesn't exist. If you can't show personal experiences, or anything concrete to add to it, then the theory is as flawed as the author.

I can scarcely fax you my diplomas, now can I? Neither am I inclined to.

You don't have to fax them, simply name your credentials without giving out your identity. If you have this huge wealth of knowledge then we should know. I'm not a political scientist, and I'm not afraid to say it.

Suggestion: Rather than petulant ranting, it might be more productive to simply provide the info I asked for.

You were shown proof of the CBSA fleeing their posts. You simply chose to ignore it.

Again, I urge you to refrain from personal attacks.

I think saying that about 1 out of 3 people are ignorant, stupid, and thoughtless, because you don't like the way they voted is a bit more deranged then calling you arrogant.

Your abilities in creating fiction certainly exceed your abilities in grammar.

My abilities in grammar are fine, despite the odd mistake. If you can't come up with anything valid to debate then stop going on about grammar. It's like getting into a debate with Chretien about unity, and then simply debating his ability to correctly speak the english langauge. As well I can admit that I'm a mad typer, and will often have to go back and correct typing mistakes.

Now, since I've already told you that I'm neither Liberal nor left wing, I wonder what you'd have me conclude from the above statement about your comprehension or intelligence.

Lets see, top marks in BMQ for academics. Top marks in Social Studies throughout Junior High and High School, MLA for a day. I don't know what else you wanna go on about. Your not a liberal or left wing, yet you came up with this psychological analysis of why all conservatives vote. Interesting indeed.

I'm still waiting for you to put me in one of the camps you listed and give your reasons behind it, in order to prove your theory.