Quote:
Originally Posted by Dion
Then they complain to anyone who will listen about how a promise was broken which I find ridiculous. You got what you voted for so suck it up and wait till the next election. I know a nurse who said a memo was sent to all union members to vote for Redford as they feared what Smith was going to do.
|
Well that's kind of my point though. If a party came and said "we're going to do this and it will negatively impact all financial advisors" I would vote against them. If another party said they wouldn't do that, I would vote for them instead. Obviously if they went back I would be angry though...why shouldn't I be? Voters might be apathetic, but to think they'll ignore an obvious threat to their own livelihood is just naive.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dion
You mean all the fear mongering that got the PC's the win? I didn't buy the garbage that Redford was selling. Smith made some mistakes during the election but I give her credit for admitting to such and making the effort to move away from the extreme policies the WR had. I have a great deal of respect for people who are willing to admit the mistakes they made.
When was the last time Redford apologised for anything other than making excuses or passing the buck? It's never her fault and she can't be trusted.
|
This is actually quite interesting to me. At what point do the policy changes and eliminations make them 'just another party'? Obviously I'm talking about the idiot candidates spouting off, but about actual policies. If the Wildrose jettisoned their private health approach (purely as an example), resource revenue cheques and conscience rights are they still different enough to represent any sort of change?