|
Liberals and Conservatives virtually tied in national poll (pg. 5)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| baystreetboi |
| quote: | Originally posted by MarkT
baystreetboi,
I don't expect a "follow the leader" mentality...I expect a political party to have a POSITION on an issue. That's a pretty basic request. When I'm voting for my MP, I'm also voting for a party. My MP can tell me how they feel, I'd like the party to do the same. Why is that so much to ask? I propose that Harper is being vague so that (god forbid) if he does win, that when he goes ahead and turns back the clock on Canada's progress, no one can call him a liar (since calling the Liberals liars is basically their campaign, they would look pretty bad). He brings on this "hidden agenda" label he has all by himself...
|
Not to beat the issue to death, but yet again, he HAS stated what the party's position will be. A Conservative government will NOT introduce legislation banning same sex marriage, will NOT introduce legislataion implementing the death penalty, etc etc.
He is simply recognizing the fact that ANY private member (Conservative or otherwise), has the right to introduce a private member's bill on these (or any of 1000s of other) subjects, and that such a bill should entitled to due process and a fair, free vote on its merits. If anything, I'd call that a step forward for democracy.
By forcing a party to take a stand on every issue, you're essentially forcing every candidate to become a square peg fitting into a round hole. There would never be any party that entirely fits one's beliefs, yet because of the stated policy, candidates would be expected to tow the party line. I think it's much better that a party simply outline its stance on the issues it feels are of most IMPORTANCE at the current time, and allow free votes on any other issues that arise that were never explicitely campaigned on. That way, you end up with far more flexibility in the system and you get to know the personal stance of your local candidate on various issues.
I think part of the problem comes down to people being too lazy to take the time to find out what their local candidate stands for. It's much easier to pick up a copy of the paper and read "Conservatives = anti-gay" and mark your ballot accordingly. Remember, despite the fact that the way our system works, many (most?) people seem to decide who to vote for based on the party as opposed to the local candidate. I suggest this is because of the "tow the party line" attitude of the past. In actual fact, when you are voting are are selecting your LOCAL representative, and I think having a system of far more free-votes on non-campaign platform issues will force people to take a closer look at their candidates and make for a far more enriching, democratic and representative experience in Ottawa. |
|
|
| starsearcher |
| quote: | Originally posted by Jayx1
The US will not close their borders to us. We are their biggest trading partners. We supply the most oil to them as well as other natural resources as well. They talk big but they wont do anything.
Gay marriage? Sure do whatever you want but do i want to see them making out in public? God no! But whatever, i can look the other way.
How can we trust politicians after Muroney? Same way we trusted Mcguinty and Chretien i guess... hope for the best. Its the best we can do. At least we already know that paul martin has lied. So we have 2 or 3 other choices left. |
We are much more dependant on US than US is dependent on us...give me a break...With all the we talk about them I'm surprised they are still taking it from us...I really want to see Canada do well without US support :thepirate
And what's the big deal with seing gay people kiss in public? For them seeing you kiss a girl is just as nasty, you don't want to look, just like you said look away...they have every human right to do whatever they want. The only reason you feel that way is cause you were brought up in a heterosexual society and it seems strange to you.
*EDIT*
This morning on the news I saw a new poll showing conservatives in the lead by a few %... |
|
|
| b4k-oz |
| quote: | Originally posted by MarkT
baystreetboi,
I don't expect a "follow the leader" mentality...I expect a political party to have a POSITION on an issue. That's a pretty basic request. When I'm voting for my MP, I'm also voting for a party. My MP can tell me how they feel, I'd like the party to do the same. Why is that so much to ask? I propose that Harper is being vague so that (god forbid) if he does win, that when he goes ahead and turns back the clock on Canada's progress, no one can call him a liar (since calling the Liberals liars is basically their campaign, they would look pretty bad). He brings on this "hidden agenda" label he has all by himself...
b4k-oz,
there's already nothing any more legal or illegal about gay displays of affection in public. Legislating stipulations on gay displays of affection would be struck down in a heartbeat as unconstitutional. If you're asking whether or not having gay marriage will somehow make it more widely socially acceptable...HA, no. The law conveys benefits and obligations...it doesn't expand small, closed minds of sheltered, intollerant people. That will only comes with time...
As for pot...100% legalization has never really been the issue, probably because pot cannot easily be controlled by the gov't in the same was tobacco can. It's about decriminalizing it so that we don't waste valuable resources policing, prosecuting, etc. what amounts to a relatively harmless activity (compared to hard drugs). No one is really getting killed over pot. No one is od'ing and dying on pot. No one's is really commiting violent crime to feed their pot habit. The challenge is how to allow for simple pot possession but not have trafficking get out of control and continue to find and close dangrous grow operations, etc. It's a bit complicated...if dealing pot is illegal, but simple possession is not...well...why can 10 people have a dime, but that dealer who had all ten would be busted? |
OMG :eyes: it's so refreshing to hear that others feel as I do about the hidden agenda of the Conservatives.
ok...about gay marriage and open display of affection in public:
I just wanted to point out that this will be the major argument against gay marriages. The fact of the matter is that there is a large majority of Canadians and multi-cultural immigrants that are closed minded individuals with driven beliefs about gay behavior and for some reason North America has this obsession of using the catch phrase "protecting our children and the future" that I believe the issue of gay marriage is being used solely to win votes by the conservatives. I think this issue was to target our huge Asian community in Ontario and BC. What do you think?
About the pot issue:
It definately is a complicated issue. I only pointed it out to see what kind of feedback I got from it since PM announced he will follow through with this.
imo decriminalization of pot is the right direction to reduce monies spent policing and prosecuting small/1st time offenders. But the real test will be how we deal with the everyday political reality of Canada's relations with the United States - you have the two biggest trading partners in the world - the American retaliatory measures would be enormous. Especially since American's believe Pot is likely financing heroin and ecstacy operations and other criminal enterprises. The key words here are "other criminal enterprises" This whole 9/11 thing is a real problem ...I foreshadow that U.S. will say crime kingpins are using their pot riches as venture capital for criminal enterprises -- such as running guns. This will lead to Canada becoming the terrorists....you see where this is leading to?
This election is a crucial one for Canada and I think we should also be concentrating on how to save Canada from the U.S.A. hands.
So baystreetboi and other Conservative Supporters, if you are so intent on voting Conservative, have you given any thought to the issue of Canada being sold out to U.S.A.? Doesn't that matter? Or is it all about the almighty dollars for all of you? |
|
|
| Jayx1 |
The spin machine has a done a great job at brainwashing LOL
All these Liberal Chicken Littles....
I cant wait for a conservative government so that we can look back after 5 years and see that the sky in fact, did not fall. |
|
|
| baystreetboi |
| quote: | Originally posted by b4k-oz
This election is a crucial one for Canada and I think we should also be concentrating on how to save Canada from the U.S.A. hands.
So baystreetboi and other Conservative Supporters, if you are so intent on voting Conservative, have you given any thought to the issue of Canada being sold out to U.S.A.? Doesn't that matter? Or is it all about the almighty dollars for all of you? |
"Selling out Canada to the USA".... sounds like something one Mr. Turner kept telling Mulroney that Free Trade / NAFTA would result in during the '88 election.
Let's look at the real numbers:
Avg Monthly Unemployment (pre / post FTA):
1976-1988: 9.1%
1988-2004: 8.7%
(Good... unemployment is down!)
Average annual current account value (pre / post NAFTA):
1976-1994: -$13.7 billion
1994-2004: +$6.1 billion
(Great! We're exporting a lot more than we're importing after NAFTA)
Capital Accounts:
...have been generally neutral to positive throughout Canadian history, but really kick into high gear around 1987-1988 (to between $20-30 billion / year). Oddly enough, as soon as the Liberals take power in 1993, this starts to drop off, and *gasp*... between 1999 and 2003, have averaged -$16.6 billion! I remind you, the capital account balance is the overall investment flowing from Canadian to the outside world, less foreign investment flowing in.
...So, if anyone has been "selling out Canada", it would be the Liberals which have fostered an environment in which Canadian capital assets are being sold off like a firesale over the past 5 years.
To summarize: Liberals claim Conservatives are "selling out Canada" in the late 80s. Fact is, economy is stronger, more people at work and exports increase. The only real "selling out" that occurs happens from 1999 to present.
So, when you cast your ballot this election, ask yourself who REALLY is selling out Canada? |
|
|
| b4k-oz |
| quote: | Originally posted by Jayx1
The spin machine has a done a great job at brainwashing LOL
All these Liberal Chicken Littles....
I cant wait for a conservative government so that we can look back after 5 years and see that the sky in fact, did not fall. |
Good almight you really are a piece of work aren't you?
Don't get involved in a debate unless you've really done some schooling and can make an educated statement rather than instigate with words. Seems you really get off on feeding fuel to fire.
FYI Mulroney was a Conservative and if you read my posts at the "Canadian Political Parties" thread, then you'd know that the issue of Canada being sold out is a real one. I guess you must have been a Harris supporter too.
Maybe it's just too complicated for your simple mind to understand that Mulroney sold off big chunks of Canada and Harris sold off the smaller parts to the U.S.A. Or maybe you just need a new prescription for your glasses. "Cuz you sound dumb when you make statements about brainwashing"
But then again...maybe you were an offspring of those that were brainwashed by Dr. Cameron for U.S.A. interest...you know the one I posted about which you didn't read---where 500 Canadians went through LSD/Brainwashing experiments and only 10 survived....Mulroney was the one that struck that deal before he became Prime Minister. He used the "National Security" argument in the house of commons to shut further talks and had CSIS bully everyone else to coverup for him. Or maybe your related to Craig Bromell? (that's Police union goon-boss Craig Bromell) Is he your hero?
OK maybe I'm going overboard, but don't post stupid offensive comments again. It just makes you look more stupid. |
|
|
| Jayx1 |
apparently ive stated my opinion over and over so if you want it then dig for it.
Otherwise ill stick to dry political humour for now... |
|
|
| starsearcher |
 |
|
|
| b4k-oz |
| quote: | Originally posted by baystreetboi
...
To summarize: Liberals claim Conservatives are "selling out Canada" in the late 80s. Fact is, economy is stronger, more people at work and exports increase. The only real "selling out" that occurs happens from 1999 to present.
So, when you cast your ballot this election, ask yourself who REALLY is selling out Canada? |
baystreetboi,
Do you really want to touch this with me? I don't think so.
You definately wouldn't hold water to me and my friends (I'll bet you wouldn't want someone like Alex Doulis to get involved)....if your in the bus...you should know who he.
FYI, I feel really strongly on the issue of Canada being sold out. I haven't heard any Liberals saying that Conservatives sold out Canada. Since it's my opinion--based on facts, maybe you should rethink that statement. I can take great offense to someone saying that I would sell out Canada. imo using misinformation and wishy washy stuff to convince yourself whatever about the conservatives is not an admirable trait. |
|
|
| baystreetboi |
| quote: | Originally posted by b4k-oz
baystreetboi,
Do you really want to touch this with me? I don't think so.
You definately wouldn't hold water to me and my friends (I'll bet you wouldn't want someone like Alex Doulis to get involved)....if your in the bus...you should know who he.
FYI, I feel really strongly on the issue of Canada being sold out. I haven't heard any Liberals saying that Conservatives sold out Canada. Since it's my opinion--based on facts, maybe you should rethink that statement. I can take great offense to someone saying that I would sell out Canada. imo using misinformation and wishy washy stuff to convince yourself whatever about the conservatives is not an admirable trait. |
I'm not on the bus, and I'm not even working on any of the campaigns as a matter of fact! Selling out Canada was your opinion based on facts. I submit that in '88, the Liberals said the same thing would happen, yet the facts I presented show otherwise. What facts do you have to provide that show a Conservative government will sell out Canada any more so than the wishy-washy statements provided by Turner in '88?
The facts I provided come straight from CANSIM, Statistics Canada's data website. I'd hardly call that misinformation / wishy washy. On the other hand all you have provided to this point are anecodtes and mistruths. From earlier in this thread:
-Conservatives want to bring back Capital Punishment (False)
Show me the facts... show me the evidence. Show me how Conservatives have or will sell out Canada. I've provided evidence to the contrary.
(Also, I never claimed that you would sell Canada out. I was refuting your claim that the Tories did. However, as a Conservative, I "take great offense to someone (you) saying that I would sell Canada out.") |
|
|
| b4k-oz |
| quote: | Originally posted by baystreetboi
...any more so than the wishy-washy statements provided by Turner in '88?
The facts I provided come straight from CANSIM, Statistics Canada's data website. I'd hardly call that misinformation / wishy washy. On the other hand all you have provided to this point are anecodtes and mistruths. From earlier in this thread:
-Conservatives want to bring back Capital Punishment (False)
Show me the facts... show me the evidence. Show me how Conservatives have or will sell out Canada. I've provided evidence to the contrary.
(Also, I never claimed that you would sell Canada out. I was refuting your claim that the Tories did. However, as a Conservative, I "take great offense to someone (you) saying that I would sell Canada out.") |
On selling out Canada....Why are you citing Turner from '88 to this election? You and I have discussed politics b4 and you've seen that I lean heavily on figures, dates, History and court outcomes rather than on statements or anecodtes. So why would you suggest that I do. That also sounds kind of offensive.
About Cap Punishment....Harper did bring this issue to the table ( it was televised) why would he do it if he did not have some predisposed intent. Politics is like boxing...each fighter always looks to see who foreshadows...and Harper's foreshadowing. imo you should ask yourself why was it necessary for him to table such s sensitive issue? I'm working on figuring out what outcome he's looking to get.
My evidence of Selling out Canada is very long and uses stats, legislative changes and tax cuts. It's not as cut and dry as you make it out to be...with only stats. Neways you and I will bore everyone in this thread (rebuttal is too long) and then some will proclaim it as lame. If you want i can pm you...but i have a feeling it won't make much difference...cuz your a true blue.
Truth be told I'm not a true red...I only want what's best for Canada's future and based on the last conservative(s)...I just can't see the Conservatives doing anything good. However, I see your point about you getting offended too. So I guess my friend we'll have to touch this later when things have cooled down. Right now...i'm going to have some lunch :toothless |
|
|
| ShadoWolf |
| quote: |
FYI Mulroney was a Conservative and if you read my posts at the "Canadian Political Parties" thread, then you'd know that the issue of Canada being sold out is a real one. I guess you must have been a Harris supporter too. |
Mulroney was a liberal in sheep's clothing. That's why the Reformers left the party. |
|
|
|
|
