|
2008 Official Federal Election Voting Poll (Who you voted for!) (pg. 11)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| smuncky |
| quote: | Originally posted by fayraree
keep ur commie russian views to urself :rolleyes:
where's mccarthy when u need him? |
don't make me cut you with my sickle, comrad. |
|
|
| zoogla |
| quote: | Originally posted by jsibilin
,, |
this concerns me as a Canadian |
|
|
| DigiNut |
| quote: | Originally posted by Cosmic Fur
Voting only for the two major parties because only they have the chance at winning defeats both the purpose of democracy and the electoral process. |
Actually, strategy voting is a fundamental tenet of democracy and the electoral process. See Gibbard–Satterthwaite Theorem.
| quote: | Originally posted by Intangible
I am tired of these guys getting my money to sit and drink coffee, debate for hours and come up with no action plan. |
Yeeeeah... Harper's Conservatives have been very busy with their minority government. I mean, that's awfully cynical, even for you, even for me. It's a little sad that most of their support has had to come from the BQ, and I can't say I agree with all of the acts they've passed or worked on, but to say they sit around drinking coffee and not coming up with any plan is, well, wrong. Even the Chretien/Martin Liberals didn't do that - they were coming up with elaborate scams to waste even more taxpayer money, but they still weren't sitting around sipping lattes.
And seriously, if you people want to complain about wasted taxpayer money, there are way more expensive boondoggles to harp on. Come on.
These comments are so ridiculous. If the Liberals had somehow squeaked out a minority, nobody would be complaining that the election was a waste. So is every election a waste unless the distribution of power changes? And if not, then why does the interval matter, and shouldn't it also matter that the Conservatives took more seats and very nearly did win a majority? |
|
|
| MarkT |
^^^
Harper has been able to govern just fine...so I'd agree that they've been plenty busy. That's part of why this election was a farce. Parliament was NOT dysfunctional, as the CPC was effectively able to pass whatever it wanted.
Winning more seats is NOT a valid excuse for the election call. For one, it's in hindsight. Second, Harper himself said that the goal/purpose was to obtain a majority...so the election could be deemed a failure.
I'm pleased that the Liberals didn't squeak out a minority. I think this will be the wake up call and will likely trigger a leadership change, hopefully with Igantieff who was my first pick anyway. I still support Dion and still prefer him to Harper, but a very weak Liberal minority would have been pointless and unproductive, IMHO, other than to have Harper gone.
We won't rehash breaking the fixed election dates (which his supporters magically interpret to only apply to majority gov'ts, as if a minority gov't can't call a self-serving election, lol...one just did!)
Just because there are bigger wastes of money, it doesn't make THIS waste of money any more accpetable.
This election was pointless, unnecessary and completely self-serving for the CPC as it does not benefit Canadians as a whole AT ALL, IMHO. |
|
|
| DigiNut |
| quote: | Originally posted by MarkT
Winning more seats is NOT a valid excuse for the election call. For one, it's in hindsight. Second, Harper himself said that the goal/purpose was to obtain a majority...so the election could be deemed a failure. |
These two points contradict each other. They wanted to win a majority, they didn't, but they came pretty close and obviously had no way of knowing whether or not they'd succeed. You can't say it was a waste based on hindsight alone - democracy doesn't work on guarantees.
Besides, I would argue that winning more seats is in fact a valid excuse. 124 seats to 143 is nothing to sneeze at, and the Tories have had to rely far too much on the Bloc for support. They probably still will, to an extent, but just because they don't have a majority doesn't mean the additional seats won't make it easier for them to govern.
As for the election date issue, yeah, that's sort of BS, but it really has no bearing on whether or not the election was "wasteful". |
|
|
| exstasie |
Here's what the CPC need to do.
1. Get Quebec to hate the CPC and Liberals. (Not that hard to do)
2. Call an election. (Same as above)
3. Get the block to win 60+ Seats with 50%+ of the popular vote.
4. Bloc will have referendum and separate.
5. CPC will now have a majority in the House.
Seems simple enough to me! It's a win-win for everyone.
|
|
|
| malek |
| quote: | Originally posted by exstasie
Here's what the CPC need to do.
1. Get Quebec to hate the CPC and Liberals. (Not that hard to do)
2. Call an election. (Same as above)
3. Get the block to win 60+ Seats with 50%+ of the popular vote.
4. Bloc will have referendum and separate.
5. CPC will now have a majority in the House.
Seems simple enough to me! It's a win-win for everyone.
|
Bloc can't call a referendum :p
Its the PQ at the provincial level.
But I do agree, we'de be better off as good neighbours than annoying roomates. |
|
|
| zoogla |
| quote: | Originally posted by smuncky
don't make me cut you with my sickle, comrad. |
 |
|
|
| MarkT |
| quote: | Originally posted by DigiNut
These two points contradict each other. They wanted to win a majority, they didn't, but they came pretty close and obviously had no way of knowing whether or not they'd succeed. You can't say it was a waste based on hindsight alone - democracy doesn't work on guarantees.
Besides, I would argue that winning more seats is in fact a valid excuse. 124 seats to 143 is nothing to sneeze at, and the Tories have had to rely far too much on the Bloc for support. They probably still will, to an extent, but just because they don't have a majority doesn't mean the additional seats won't make it easier for them to govern.
As for the election date issue, yeah, that's sort of BS, but it really has no bearing on whether or not the election was "wasteful". |
How do they contradict each other? An election is not a 'roll of the dice'. The likelihood of a majority was always small, regardless of when you look at the polls. Given that Harper was already able to govern as if he had a majority (ALL legislation they wanted to pass was passed), gaining seats is all but meaningless.
The CPC, just like before, still needs the support of at least one of the Liberals, NDP or Bloc, to have a majority. Also, just like before, all three of those parties would have to band together to defeat the CPC as any two together is still below 50% of the seats.
People can pretend that this is a "stronger minority", but that's looking at the numbers alone, without taking into account the reality of the situation. Sure, they have more seats...but...it doesn't change anything in reality, except perhaps in a 'free vote' situation.
So how was this election not "wasteful"? How do Canadians benefit (since the cost of the election is essentially ours)? |
|
|
| exstasie |
| quote: | Originally posted by malek
Bloc can't call a referendum :p
Its the PQ at the provincial level.
But I do agree, we'de be better off as good neighbours than annoying roomates. |
Damn it lol
Well, how about this.
We should kick the Montreal Canadiens out of the NHL and see what happens :eek:
|
|
|
| dEsidEL |
| quote: | Originally posted by exstasie
Here's what the CPC need to do.
1. Get Quebec to hate the CPC and Liberals. (Not that hard to do)
2. Call an election. (Same as above)
3. Get the block to win 60+ Seats with 50%+ of the popular vote.
4. Bloc will have referendum and separate.
5. CPC will now have a majority in the House.
Seems simple enough to me! It's a win-win for everyone.
|
i've always wondered whether people would vote for a Bloc candidate who ran in a western province
|
|
|
|
|
