Printable View
...and they're off.
The Government of Canada, a minority Conservative Party of Canada government, fell today on a motion of non-confidence brought forward by Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition, the Liberal Party of Canada. The New Democratic Party of Canada and the Bloc Quebecois both voted with the Liberals to bring down the government, 156-145.
We're probably going to the polls May 2 or May 9.
Canadian civics lessons for Amelicans will be held herein.
lol canadian politics.
Nothing like sticking a knife in your minority government and twisting it into a possible majority. They don't know how good they had it. How long has it been since a Conservative majority? Mulroney maybe, it could get interesting. Now if Ontario could learn that Dalton Mcguinty is not the answer.
I'm not sure which is worse, a two party system or continually electing minority governments. The US two party system is pretty much a joke, there's really very little difference between them. Minority gov'ts are also a joke as really nothing gets done and they keep calling for elections where at best they will be the largest minority...
I have such a hard time giving a shit.
Even though the US has a superficial majority rule system, we're running an incredibly powerful minority rule system. Cliffs on what creates Canada's minority rule problems?
cliffs are we have 4 parties in gov't
I've always liked how Canadians love laughing at American politics for being wonkers when they themselves enjoy all of those Steve Harpers and Rob Fords but at least there's goings on about some of them now.
Politics is politics the world over.
Nothing has really changed since the last Canadian Election thread. Rona Ambrose is still pretty hot.
http://www.flopturnriver.com/pokerfo...ad-163134.html
Yeah, but we spend a few million to elect crazies and it takes a month. You guys spend billions and take years to do it and get crazies anyway.Quote:
Originally Posted by a500lbgorilla
Yeah, Rona, eat that pie.
http://www.macleans.ca/photos/electi...onaAmbrose.jpg
And the ruling (until today) Conservative Party of Canada is actually a combination of the socially conservative Reform Party of Canada/Canadian Alliance and the remains of the once formidable Progressive Conservative Party of Canada, who united to defeat the Liberals beacuse they were splitting the conservative vote.Quote:
Originally Posted by jyms
Meanwhile, in Quebec, they made their own party 20-years ago just to represent the interests of Quebeckers at the Federal level. It's comprised of a wide range of voters on the political spectrum and just serves to make it nearly impossible to vote in a majority government.
It would be like having a California Party. But with more Celine Dion and poutine. And everyone is French. And they smoke a lot.
Touche, Canada man. We'll see how well you've resisted our crazy brand of politics a decade from now.Quote:
Originally Posted by BennyLaRue
I'm voting conservative
in a riding that couldn't possibly ever elect a conservative MP (ville-marie, i.e. downtown montreal)
but fuck it, right? go with your gut etc.
of interest to americans:
the likelihood of a conservative majority gov't depends largely on its performance in the province of quebec... however, the party stands to lose some of its seats in the province because of it's decision to, get this, NOT PAY FOR AN NHL HOCKEY ARENA IN QUEBEC CITY
THERE IS NO NHL FRANCHISE IN QUEBEC CITY
lololololololol
'yeah, fuck them conservatives, how dare they not fund our arena for a team that doesn't even exist yet, it's a perfectly reasonable use of taxpayer funds, etc etc'
lol canadian politics, the conservatives are gonna lose their fuckin majority over some bullshit propaganda from the bloq quebecois
Lost cause. You'd be better off vote swapping.Quote:
Originally Posted by Penneywize
I vote for the Queen.
and when i say the Queen, i don't mean Benny.
Thanks for the clarification. I am pretty fucking regal.
regal backwards is lager.
He is pretty lager, you are what you eat (drink)
Sometimes, I try to convince myself that I should try to give Stephen Harper a fair shake and not judge him based on the fact he looks like a child molester.....and then I flashback to that video of him playing with his rock band and have to try to convince myself he's not actually our representative on a world scale. I'm too ashamed to even post it in this thread.
Canada have elections? I hope those of French descent are barred from voting, otherwise our Queen might as well not bother owning your sorry arses. It's the French who are to blame for America being all independant and stuff, the last thing we want is an independant Canada.
So the guy/woman you vote in, this person becomes the Queen's slave, right?
i thought canada was communist, red flag and all
estimate the number of american citizens who have any meaningful idea of what goes on in canadian politics.
i'll set the preliminary line at 1%.
http://images4.wikia.nocookie.net/__.../Scottdick.png
Dont vote for scott, he's a dick
I am against vote swapping; no offense but I'm actively going to make multiple swap requests that I won't hold up my end on. It's undemocratic, and douchebags that want marginal parties elected and plan to do it via nefarious means can lick my testicles.Quote:
Originally Posted by BennyLaRue
The reason it will never work is that there is absolutely no way to verify whether a vote exchange took place. In the meantime I will take advantage of these idealistic fucks.
do you ever say anything that isn't pretentiousQuote:
Originally Posted by Lukie
he looks creepy and I feel like I shouldn't trust him because his eyes don't look human.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ravageur
But to be fair, I have the same feeling around gingers and I still hang around drew from time to time.
This conservative minority hasn't been so bad though I'm not sure I want to see a majority.
I'll take the under. Easy call.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lukie
How is what you're planning on doing any less nefarious? I'd suggest it's just as undemocratic and you'll be a liar to boot.Quote:
Originally Posted by Penneywize
It's the same here. We English haven't got a clue what's going on in Scottish politics, because the further North one goes, the less important the location. What's the least important American state? Alaska. What does that say about Canada as a nation? Unimportant.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lukie
As much as I fucking hate the Yanks (and like the Canadians, well, apart from the French speakers and Bryan Adams), their politics is at least important outside of their borders.
Canada could have a full blown revolution like in the Arab world, and only our lovely Queen would give a shit.
That seems really high.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lukie
In fairness though, there's an overflow of political news all over American TV that is watchable (Daily Show, Colbert Report, Bill Maher HBO show though he can be over the top at times) whereas you have to seek it out in Canada (does anyone watch the Rick Mercer show?). That and they don't get Canadian channels but we get theirs.
yeah cuz like, Jean Chretien was super awesome at making Canada look like a serious countryQuote:
Originally Posted by Ravageur
it's actions like mine that renders vote swapping ineffective, so, again, fuck them.Quote:
Originally Posted by BennyLaRue
fuck canada
So, in summation, you agree that you're being nefarious, undemocratic and are lying but it's ok because the other guys are fuckers?Quote:
Originally Posted by Penneywize
Me and some friends are billeting with your Mom during the Olympics. So, she will.Quote:
Originally Posted by Muzzard
Anyway, I'm over Rona Ambrose. Enter Dr. Ruby Dhalla, MP from the Toronto area.
http://j-rad.ca/wp-content/uploads/2...im-240x300.jpg
csbQuote:
Originally Posted by BennyLaRue
just doing my part to dilute the effectiveness of an unfair and dishonest election tactic. I disagree with 'nefarious' and 'undemocratic'; vote swapping is clearly undemocratic, and I am dissuading vote swapping. morally speaking, I'm on the correct side of things, imo.Quote:
Originally Posted by BennyLaRue
are you not getting this, Mr. LaRue?
Yes, I get that you've somehow rationalized this in your head. We'll stop there.Quote:
Originally Posted by Penneywize
So does anyone know which party they plan to support?
I am voting Liberal in my riding as it has a Liberal incumbent and I want to ensure that it stays Liberal. Like last time, I want to keep the Conservatives from a majority government and, possibly, help the Liberals form a minority.
I am thinking of ruining my ballot by writing in and checking off "none of the above"
There is little difference in the parties as far as true debate on real issues go. It just comes down to where each party wants to spend the money
While you think about not voting, as is your right, please try to think about what it would be like to not have the right to vote at all.
^ Thats a semi valid point but making a "none of the above" vote is a vote. In fact they should have it on the ballot officially. I think if I vote for one of the big 3, which none of them have my support, then that is truly a useless ballot.
Voting for someone simply because they are the lesser of 3 evils is still thowing it away imo. Its like telling whichever party you vote for that they got your vote b/c they are only slightly less shitty than the other 2 parties.
The party I would vote for have no encumbents in my area so I can either not show up or make my opinions known on the ballot.
I was going to start a poale, but let's be honest, we really don't need two Canadian Election threads.
For the non-Canadians here (looking for an un-biased opinion), who is the scariest looking Party Leader?
A)
http://ezralevant.com/IgnatieffMichael_LIB.jpg
B)
http://www.nndb.com/people/373/00011...n-harper-1.jpg
C)
http://www.dgc.ca/PHPUploads/Gilles%...pe%20photo.jpg
D)
http://media.thestar.topscms.com/ima...1d2c0f32d.jpeg
E)
http://www.mindofspaz.com/wp-content...ack-layton.jpg
b. Everyone else looks normal, Harper looks photoshopped. Also, he's Harper.
B looks like he would touch your children inappropriately the second you turned your back
Quote:
Originally Posted by kiwiMark
:!:Quote:
Originally Posted by d0zer
The Conservative campaign is "TAX CUTS" and "GOD HATES FAGS". How can anybody compete against that?
I might vote Green this time from abroad even though they'll still have 0 seats at the end, despite getting only 4% less of the popular vote than the BQ...
Gotta go with E, he looks like he has a Machiavellian plot to take over the world up his sleeve
Right now, I put May's chances of winning her seat at about 25%, if only because there will be enough vote splitting in that riding that she could sneak in with <35% of the vote. That's just about the only chance they have.Quote:
Originally Posted by eugmac
YouTube - Prime Minister Stephen Harper performs piano with 10-year old Youtube sensation Maria Aragon (1/2)
A disgusting attempt at trying to tell us that the Cons like or in any way care about culture.:puke: Remember they told us artists were spoiled rich people who get to dress up fancy for their gala balls who ordinary Canadians can't relate to, in justifying the arts cuts he made. I don't know any rich artists personally, and many poor ones.
Britian is discussing Alternative Vote ( YouTube - The Alternative Vote System Explained ) versus First Past The Post ( YouTube - The Problems with First Past the Post Voting Explained ) and I noticed that Canada has more than 2 major parties mostly on the left, so I was wondering if our neighbors up north were using FPTP or AV for elections. And if it's FPTP is there any interest in moving into a newer voting system?
It's FPTP and yes, it sucks and yes, there is some interest at both the provincial and federal level. In Ontario, we had a referendum on the issue in the last election but it didn't interest a majority of voters.
that tilted the shit outta me :xQuote:
Originally Posted by BennyLaRue
FPTP is great for broken two party systems like 'merica's
In American politics, party discipline is loose. You can be a "Democrat" and vote with the Republicans a lot of time, e.g. "Blue Dog" Democrats. In Canada, if the party leader supports bill X and you do not support bill X, you get kicked out of the party. The only party that has some "free votes" (i.e. no party discipline enforced, so the elected members can vote how they want) on some issues is the Conservative party, a relic from the merger with the Reform party.
In my opinion, the Liberal Party is ideologically at the center. They aren't afraid to cut cut cut when the budget deficit is hemorrhaging, like they did in the 90s. But they are also socially liberal.
The Conservative Party is at the center-right. Anybody who says they are to the right of that needs to think about this: how many "right wingers" support free healthcare? How many "right wingers" would pass a huge stimulus package?
Even though the NDP historically has not been able to form a majority government or even come close, their influence is there. They were the primary opponent to the proposed bank mergers years back. The Liberal Party often adopts some of their political ideas in order to siphon enough votes to beat the Conservatives.
Soo... cliffs on which party is least likely to ruin online poker for us, and also has a chance at actually winning seats?
I'd say conservatives, if only for the fact that they've been in power for several years now without much of a blip on the poker regulation front.Quote:
Originally Posted by KoRnholio
I could see Liberals / NDP wanting to tax the shit out of that, FWIW.
The conservative base is still too religious / puritan to go out of their way to do anything good for poker. Maybe they'll leave it alone, but harper has a hardon for american conservatives -- the same ones who snuck in the UIGEA. The worst the NDP/libs will do is regulate and tax it, which is pretty much an inevitability anyway.Quote:
Originally Posted by Penneywize
Nah, it's pretty clearly provincial domain considering that BC, Quebec and Ontario are all getting into the online gambling business. The federalies won't do anything.Quote:
Originally Posted by Penneywize
as sort of an aside, I never really got this accusation at all.Quote:
Originally Posted by d0zer
If you lived in the US, and you supported:
- public health care (with perhaps somewhat of a private / paid service element, as a matter of choice)
- non-intervention on social issues ("right to choose", gay marriage)
- gun control
- etc
leaving aside the fact that the conservatives clearly support fiscal responsibility / low corporate and personal taxes -- is it not fair to say that, given the above, you'd probably be considered as being further to the left than even the democratic party?
yet, oh yes, harper is a bush wannabe etc etc
We're talking about Canadian politics, not the bible belt.Quote:
Originally Posted by d0zer
yeah I think I'm voting NDP...
if this is a poor decisions someone please educate me in short detail
To basically highlight the shortcomings of the First-Past-the-Post voting system, people go nuts with strategic voting:
Amp Your Vote | Project Democracy / Projet Démocratie
The very fact that that site exists tells us our democracy is broken... But never mind, I'm all for preventing a Harper majority so if you're in a swing riding I full support attempting to block the Cons.
Harper has tried to reopen the gay marriage issue already, and who knows what he'll do with a majority -- mind you that motion was voted down by Conservative MPs as well. He has called Canada "a northern European welfare state, in the worst sense of the word."Quote:
Originally Posted by Penneywize
Mind you this is a speech he gave to a June 1997 Montreal meeting of the Council for National Policy, a right-wing U.S. think tank, so it's old, but a view into the mind of Stephen Harper nonetheless:
Full text of Stephen Harper's 1997 speech - CTV News
I don't really see anything wrong with this speechQuote:
Originally Posted by eugmac
comments like 'second-greatest country in the world' are obviously tongue in cheek
if anything it's kind of funny how CTV feels it's worthwhile to dig up this obscure speech 8 years after it happened, even funnier how you dig it up 6 years after it was posted to the site. do you have like a list of harper-bashing urls saved up or something? lol
The joke about the constitutional lawyer asking god if there would ever be an end to the Quebec/Canada issue is actually kind of funny imo
btw: Harper only ever said that he would favour a free-vote in parliament on the issue of gay marriage. given the dynamics of his own party (not all are opposed) and others, there isn't a snowball's chance in hell of anything ever happening on that front.
also: this vague threat of "oh but we don't know what he'd do if he had a majority" is a media construction with no substance to it whatsoever. oh, but he's a conservative, so with a majority, he might eat all our babies!
obvious irony: site that claims to want to end harper's 'contempt for democracy' (wat?) aims to use rather undemocratic measures i.e. not voting for the party you actually want in power, rather just voting 'against harper' as an ends to do soQuote:
Originally Posted by eugmac
I actually have less problem with this than I do vote-swapping, though.
Canada
Thoughts?
American standards for conservative are more extreme than canada's just like european standards swing the other direction. You can say "he's different because he's not the same" and be right, just like I can be right in saying he's more aligned with the american right than he is the european right. He can't very well oppose the canadian health care system given the massive public support for it that transcends party lines.Quote:
Originally Posted by Penneywize
He's pushed for increased military spending, warrantless e-surveillance (ala patriot act), weakening environmental regulations, corporate welfare to the oil industry, etc.
Is goot.Quote:
Originally Posted by eugmac
Owait what happened in 2008 again? Nah, that has nothing to do with it. Clearly Harper is at fault for the financial crisis contagion that affected virtually every country on the planet. Let's do a side-by-side comparison of budget deficits under PM's names, like they're each entirely responsible for them!Quote:
Originally Posted by eugmac
Oya, no let's raise taxes for corporations during a recession. It's the right thing to do, fuck you corporations!
Does it ever occur to you that such an argument can't be boiled down to a few statistics and percentages crammed into a silly comic strip?
Jesus I just realized that that idiotic strip went on for like 5 page lengths
soso much of it is debatable/twisted that it doesn't even warrant discussion
the climate change bit, something about Canadian media not reporting enough on it (our media is famously liberal?)
comparing G20 jailings to FLQ jailings lolwat? apples and grenades
goes on and on about budget deficits but really no mention of the stimulus packages that were debatably among the most successful in relaunching the economy out of all industrialized nations (compare our current unemployment rate to those in europe, or south of the border)
bleh, etc. honestly if you just eat shit like that up there really isn't much point in discussing this is there... either you can be convinced otherwise or you are beyond convincing.
I'm actually hoping for a coalition government.
What, like Liberal / NDP / Bloc? Yeah let's get the separatists in power. It'll end well.Quote:
Originally Posted by eugmac
Listen, if it happened that Bloc didn't need to be a part of it, then it wouldn't be such a bad thing. NDP and Libs have very similar agendas (one wonders how the electoral landscape would look if the left vote werent so evenly split) and would probably have a relatively secure coalition.
Anyway, won't happen because historically the gov general asks the party with the greatest popular vote to form a government. That should be the Conservatives, so we're probably looking at another conservative minority?
I'm not 100% sure who I am voting for. I know more about American politics, and if I was American I would vote Liberal. However, isn't Obama just as far right wing as the Conservatives are in Canada?
Right, but the Cons would be able to pass nothing if the coalition were large enough and then Parliament would pass a non-confidence motion as soon as they could and the Governor General would turn to a coalition if one was already organized, rather than call yet another election.Quote:
Originally Posted by Penneywize
Tide is turning in Quebec. This could (finally) get interesting:
NDP on track to win 60 seats, poll projects - The Globe and Mail
Style over substance.Quote:
Originally Posted by eugmac
For what he wants to do with the military, he needs it. Canada's military is a joke right now in terms of what it can do and how up-to-date its technology is. Not to mention the issue of arctic sovereignty:Quote:
Originally Posted by d0zer
Battle for the Arctic heats up - Canada - CBC News
Some view this as a necessary weapon to fight modern threats like terrorism. It isn't a cut-and-dry issue like whether killing kittens is good or bad.Quote:
warrantless e-surveillance (ala patriot act),
There is more than meets the eye for these sorts of actions. Cost-benefit considerations for one.Quote:
weakening environmental regulations, corporate welfare to the oil industry, etc.
NDP will def win some seats in MB (they are prob a lock in my area) and I'm sure SK leans towards the NDP federally. It would be quite a change in landscape with them in the opposition.
Yes.Quote:
Originally Posted by JL
What's the long term plan there? Go to war with russia? We'll need a whole lot more money. Our 'peacekeeping' has become a little murky in recent years and I'm not convinced that our military's new role is one that we should take.Quote:
Originally Posted by StillDeadMoney
I'm aware that some would rather have civil liberties curtailed for some sense of security, just like some would rather spend tons of money on jails to lock more people up for longer, despite falling crime rates. I am not one of those people.Quote:
Originally Posted by StillDeadMoney
Again I'm aware of the arguments for subsidizing big oil, but I just see it as completely unsustainable and believe that money could be put to better use elsewhere. There's more ways to stimulate the economy and create jobs than to just throw it at oil companies.Quote:
Originally Posted by StillDeadMoney
I think the long term plan is just to make sure that other countries don't grab away land that as of right now belongs to Canada. The concern is that people may try to do that because of natural resources that may be or are up there, along with it being easier to sail through the arctic now that it's warmer there.Quote:
Originally Posted by d0zer
Spending money doesn't necessarily stimulate the economy. Yes, if government spending goes up, so does GDP - that's because of the way GDP is defined. But Keynesian-style economics has been discredited for almost 40 years now. Despite this, bureaucrats, armchair economists and policy makers still take some of its tenets as gospel.Quote:
There's more ways to stimulate the economy and create jobs than to just throw it at oil companies.
Krugman would disagree.
Just handed in my ballot at the Canadian Embassy in Berlin.
Yea it's pretty annoying that NDP and Liberal seem to be cannibalizing each other's votes right now, esp with the gain in popularity of NPD. The only thing I like about the conservatives is keeping taxes low, other than that I'm not sure why I'd vote for them as a Quebecer, his policies obv favours other provinces moar.
Take this test
The Political Compass
Compare that to this:
http://www.politicalcompass.org/images/canada2011.png
Heh interesting when compared to the "test" I took on the CBC website, which basically puts the Liberals far more left and libertarian than in this diagram.Quote:
Originally Posted by BennyLaRue
By the way my results:
http://i.imgur.com/KCYJj.png
Seems like some arbitrary bullshit to me
Where does this put the US republicans hm? make a bigger graph?
EDIT wow what the fuck.
"Controlling inflation is more important that controlling unemployment"
"A genuine free market requires restrictions on the ability of predator multinationals to create monopolies."
"The freer the market, the freer the people."
Ever occur to anyone that some of these things can`t just be ranked according to agree/disagree
A long list of idiotic questions imo. This serves nothing.
for kicks, this is where I ended up:
http://www.politicalcompass.org/face...4.25&soc=-2.15
I like how you go on this frothing-at-the-mouth rant about how stupid the test is, but still feel compelled to not only finish it, but to post your results. :D
From the 2008 election:Quote:
Originally Posted by Penneywize
http://www.politicalcompass.org/imag...aries_2008.png
Bear in mind this is a test on the Internet. If you run your life based on tests on the Internet, you're an idiot, of course. But if it gets people understanding the basics behind what the parties stand for and where they are on the spectrum relative to things that they believe in, it's not a bad thing.