|
Federal Election Looms: Who would you vote for? (pg. 5)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| ChemEnhanced |
| quote: | Originally posted by Jayx1
Good! Im glad some of those who dont want to vote for anyone actually take the time to make that political statement. It's just as much a service to the country as voting for someone. Staying home achieves nothing. |
It was an easy choice for last election....it may be a little harder this election to decline to vote. |
|
|
| patpicos |
i like the idea of a runoff. having 4 hands in the pot and a minority gov. just increases the spinning and nothing gets done.
A funny thing i see with elections is that we pick and fight over the little things when there are more pressing issues. For example, these topics are always hot potatoes:
- abortion
- aboriginals
- same sex marriages
Do we really need to haggle on this at every election...there are more pressing issues as making the country thrive economically and improve our various systems (transportation, health, etc etc) |
|
|
| Sentinal |
| quote: | Originally posted by devnull
i like the idea of a runoff. having 4 hands in the pot and a minority gov. just increases the spinning and nothing gets done.
A funny thing i see with elections is that we pick and fight over the little things when there are more pressing issues. For example, these topics are always hot potatoes:
- abortion
- aboriginals
- same sex marriages
Do we really need to haggle on this at every election...there are more pressing issues as making the country thrive economically and improve our various systems (transportation, health, etc etc) |
Women will still have the right to choose, homosexuals will continue to enjoy the freedoms they have. These issues are dead. It is merely the fear of a Conservative majority that keeps pressing these very dead issues to the forfront, while I agree with you more important social programs require immediate attention. |
|
|
| Sentinal |
The Conservative member for my riding Bob Decart won by literally 1500 votes, one of the closest votes in the country. So once again, every vote counts. I remember being at the victory party here in Mississauga and it was the most pins and needles situation I have ever witnessed in relation to politics. I was so happy to see him finally win after running in liberal soaked Mississauga for 3 elections. The liberal candidate, Omar Algabrara, doesn't even live in Mississauga so I wonder how he can possibly, honestly know, understand and convey the issues and concerns of his constituants.
/end rant. |
|
|
| mute79 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Jayx1
You dont think a run off election would serve us well? Its not a 2 party system due to the fact that there had already been an opportunity to elect ANY party that chooses to run in the first election.
So on one hand you bemoan that a third of the votes gets to rule and then say that 50% + 1 doesnt work because its American?
Coalitions would result in nothing but back room peddling and political fighting and NOTHING would get done. Talking about serving the establishment! |
run off elections are detrimental to the democratic process, since citizens are being hoarded into camps by the system, instead of representing their political interests.. your responses are overly emotionally charged to consider these issues pragmatically. it is impossible for a two-party system to represent interests of the masses
look at yourself, you said once that you were a fiscal conservative but a social liberal (or something along those lines). there is no party atm that represents these values, and here is an opportunity for you to start your own.. with a multi-party system you would be able to support the coalition and ensure that your core party values are implemented..
coalition governments need to become the norm, not the exception |
|
|
| DigiNut |
| quote: | Originally posted by MarkT
do you actually think there would be some utopia of noble cooperation that set aside partisan interests for the good of all Canadians? |
In fact, the original Harper CPC minority government operated for a time under a loose coalition with the BQ, since the Liberals were being obstructionists on every count, and the NDP didn't have enough seats to make a difference (not that they would ever agree with the Conservatives anyway).
This coalition sort of worked because the BQ are sort of conservative in spite of the incredibly divisive separatist issue. I remember thinking how truly bizarre a coalition it was at the time, but they voted together on a lot of issues.
Even that coalition didn't exactly turn out great in the long term. It helped in the short term to solve a temporary problem, that being the vacuum of leadership in the Liberal party at the time. Ironically, what Mute proposes is effectively that vacuum, the way the Liberal party was in 2006, aimless, leaderless, fragmented, but applying to the entire government and not just the opposition. Such an entity is incapable of governing effectively because every issue has to be debated to death and watered down to oblivion.
Coalitions of 3 or more divergent philosophies represent the extreme bureaucratic side of democracy. "Fairness" to the point of never accomplishing anything even remotely controversial. |
|
|
| DigiNut |
| quote: | Originally posted by mute79
you said once that you were a fiscal conservative but a social liberal (or something along those lines). there is no party atm that represents these values, and here is an opportunity for you to start your own.. |
Actually, there is, the Freedom Party of Canada. Guess how many seats they got. The fact that you don't know this information is proof of why the your system doesn't work. Voters are either terrified or simply ignorant of independents and minority parties, and other politicians don't trust them. |
|
|
| infinity HiGH |
| quote: | Originally posted by ChemEnhanced
and that is exactly what I did...I declined to vote. I agree that spoiling a vote does nothing....declining to vote tells the parties they all suck :D |
how does that work? I assumed that on the ballot there would be a "none of the above" option but alas there wasn't one :( |
|
|
| ChemEnhanced |
| quote: | Originally posted by infinity HiGH
how does that work? I assumed that on the ballot there would be a "none of the above" option but alas there wasn't one :( |
When you get your ballet you inform the polling station person that you are declining to vote and they mark down a declined vote. |
|
|
| Skipper |
| quote: | Originally posted by Jayx1
What it did was help create the massive deficit we now have by having Harper spend money like a drunken liberal. |
Initially I was irked about the level of spending to combat the economic downturn in Canada but the more I read and hear from a variety of market sources and economists, the more I think it was the right thing to do.
Canada's economy is in such better shape than most other developed nations in the world. We are sitting very pretty. It's not all because of Harper's spending package but it's a part.
I would continue to vote conservative. I like Ignatieff only marginally more than I liked Dion. |
|
|
| Yohan |
| quote: | Originally posted by Skipper
I would continue to vote conservative. I like Ignatieff only marginally more than I liked Dion. |
Jay gave a decent rebuttal about Mark's Harper criticisms.
Nothing really stood out for me that would turn me off from voting Cons to Libs. Plus, I'm not sold on how Libs want to turn Iggy into new Trudeau and try to win votes on their leader's charisma, and not much of a platform |
|
|
| ChemEnhanced |
| quote: | Originally posted by Yohan
Jay gave a decent rebuttal about Mark's Harper criticisms.
Nothing really stood out for me that would turn me off from voting Cons to Libs. Plus, I'm not sold on how Libs want to turn Iggy into new Trudeau and try to win votes on their leader's charisma, and not much of a platform |
but a conservative attack/scare campaign with no platform seems so much better |
|
|
|
|
