2011 Canadian Election Thread

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by zamler

Planning ahead?

Exactly.

The Conservatives were preparing for an election that they were counting on having.... yet they keep trying to blame the opposition for bringing it.

[Stranger]

Originally Posted by zamler

Tough crowd, although his stash looks a bit like a turd.

Nice!

[zamler]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

Exactly.

The Conservatives were preparing for an election that they were counting on having.... yet they keep trying to blame the opposition for bringing it.

Planning does mean you are the one that is going to trigger an election, but nice try you thought you'd scored there huh. Harper and co. knew full well that an election was likely for many reasons, and unless the Conservatives decided to bend over backwards for the opposition, it was inevitable.

Either way, if people think the Conservatives are responsible for triggering an unwanted election, they can decide with their vote.

[Stranger]

Originally Posted by zamler

Tough crowd, although his stash looks a bit like a turd.

Layton must be talking about those gangsters and their "Bling" bustin' caps in the hood....

[Frequitude]

Originally Posted by Azure

Very true.

But the sad part is that the NDP could become the official opposition if they would move further to the center. Why Jack thinks that the Canadian people will support his socialist wet dream year after year, when in fact they have shown that they won't is beyond me.

As crazy as it sounds, a Conservative-NDP coalition would be pretty intriguing, so long as Layton stayed way the eff away from the cheque book. Sort of Conservative-led government, NDP social policy input. Although I guess if that's my thing, I'd probably prefer a Conservative-Liberal coalition.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by zamler

Planning does mean you are the one that is going to trigger an election, but nice try you thought you'd scored there huh. Harper and co. knew full well that an election was likely for many reasons, and unless the Conservatives decided to bend over backwards for the opposition, it was inevitable.

Either way, if people think the Conservatives are responsible for triggering an unwanted election, they can decide with their vote.

I don't want to try to put a square peg into a round hole here, but you seem like a CPC supporter, so let me ask you: since the voters definitely didn't want this unnecessary election do you think that there are steps that the Harper government could've taken to avoid it?

[Resolute 14]

^Abandon their principles and give billions of dollars in bribes to support socialist and separatist pet projects.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

^Abandon their principles and give billions of dollars in bribes to support socialist and separatist pet projects.

Oh, no sorry I meant before the last few budgets and their election platform.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Slava

I don't want to try to put a square peg into a round hole here, but you seem like a CPC supporter, so let me ask you: since the voters definitely didn't want this unnecessary election do you think that there are steps that the Harper government could've taken to avoid it?

I don't believe there was unless he completely sold out.

Remember that he did put things into the budget at the NDP request.

But unless he was willing to bump the corporate tax rates and bend on his other key budget and principle points there was no way that there wasn't going to be an election.

As much as people want to blame the Conservatives, the Liberals and NDP for god only knows why, were gunning for an election.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Slava

Oh, no sorry I meant before the last few budgets and their election platform.

I don't see it, all sides poisoned parliment, and my gut tells me that Ignatieff was under incredible pressure to roll the dice.

[WilsonFourTwo]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

As much as people want to blame the Conservatives, the Liberals and NDP for god only knows why, were gunning for an election.

I'm annoyed with all the "Canadians didn't want an election" talk. To be honest, I did. A number of family members did. Several of my friends did. I would guess that (at least) a third of people I know wanted an election. I would wager there's at least one person who specifically wanted an election for every person who specifically didn't.

As for who triggered it......I could give two ####s. It actually angers me that an election is reported/treated as an inconvenience.

We gave 8 BILLION DOLLARS to a couple of car companies without a single discussion in Parliament, but suddenly spending $300 Million on an election is WASTEFUL? Get a freakin' grip people.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

I don't see it, all sides poisoned parliment, and my gut tells me that Ignatieff was under incredible pressure to roll the dice.

I agree with this. I think that the CPC wanted an election because they figure they can get a majority, and the opposition was waiting for an issue that they figured they could make a stand and campaign on.

I just get tired of hearing how the opposition foisted this unwanted, unnecessary election upon the poor electorate. In reality everyone of these parties cares about gaining power and for one reason or another wanted this campaign.

(I might give a pass to Layton here, just because the poor guy probably would've liked another few months to recover from his surgery and such)

[SeoulFire]

Originally Posted by burn_this_city

I'd love to see Quebec form their own country, own currency, borders, military, repay any debt to Canada, and deal with their own issues. Wash our hands of their ever growing tin cup.

I don't think that quite fits their definition of independence - Quebec is the kid who wants to move out and have Mom and Dad pay the rent.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by SeoulFire

I don't think that quite fits their definition of independence - Quebec is the kid who wants to move out and have Mom and Dad pay the rent.

My understanding is that the BQ wants complete independence. Is there something that you can provide where it says that they are expecting anything short of that?

In the meantime they're planning on fighting for everything they can get for Quebec, which makes it very difficult to campaign against for the federalists. If a similar party existed in the west it would almost certainly gain a majority of the seats here.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by Slava

My understanding is that the BQ wants complete independence. Is there something that you can provide where it says that they are expecting anything short of that?

In the meantime they're planning on fighting for everything they can get for Quebec, which makes it very difficult to campaign against for the federalists. If a similar party existed in the west it would almost certainly gain a majority of the seats here.

Yes they want complete independance but they also want the rest of canada to help pay for it...at least if the plan is similar to the 1995 seperation idea.

just as one example and the one I remember the most at the time...

On October 27, Bloc Québécois leader Lucien Bouchard's office sent a press release to all military bases in Quebec, calling for creation of a Quebec military and the beginning of a new defence staff in the event of Quebec's independence. Bouchard declared that Quebec would take possession of Canadian air force jet fighters based in the province

There was rampant speculation at the time that the seperatists had sent some of their members in to infiltrate the military in the case the vote went their way so they could immediately take control of all military possesions in the province.

the other HUGE thing at the time was Parizeau's promise to those who supported the secession that they would also retin their Canadian citizenship as well as being Quebecois...meaning that they could still vote federally. There was talk that they wanted to use the canadian dollar, still get health care payments etc etc. It was a boondoggle to say the least.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by transplant99

Yes they want complete independance but they also want the rest of canada to help pay for it...at least if the plan is similar to the 1995 seperation idea.

just as one example and the one I remember the most at the time...



There was rampant speculation at the time that the seperatists had sent some of their members in to infiltrate the military in the case the vote went their way so they could immediately take control of all military possesions in the province.

the other HUGE thing at the time was Parizeau's promise to those who supported the secession that they would also retin their Canadian citizenship as well as being Quebecois...meaning that they could still vote federally. There was talk that they wanted to use the canadian dollar, still get health care payments etc etc. It was a boondoggle to say the least.

They also wanted to use shared passports, that Quebecors that worked for the federal government wouldn't lose their jobs.

they would be able to remain in treaties that were signed in Canada by default.

[Slava]

^ ya, I forgot about those demands. I guess I just thought it was straight independence that they were after (which I would still try to prevent from happening).

[TylerSVT]

One thing that gets me about Harper is his idea that tax breaks to the rich and corporations leads to higher jobs and benefits to citizens... i'm sort of on the fence on that one. While i agree that in theory it should work, i imagine the trickle down affect is much less than reported.

I would be more inclined to tax the rich and the corporations and decrease the growing divide of middle and upper class in Canada. But it's hard to argue with the CPC's ability to provide a strong economy in the world right now.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by TylerSVT

One thing that gets me about Harper is his idea that tax breaks to the rich and corporations leads to higher jobs and benefits to citizens... i'm sort of on the fence on that one. While i agree that in theory it should work, i imagine the trickle down affect is much less than reported.

I would be more inclined to tax the rich and the corporations and decrease the growing divide of middle and upper class in Canada. But it's hard to argue with the CPC's ability to provide a strong economy in the world right now.

I don't know, I'm hardly rich and not poor, I'm probably in the upper percentage of wage earnings if you look at stats and I pay a ludicris amount of taxes. I would be fine with closing some tax loopholes.

I don't know what the taxation rates are for lower incomes anymore, and its a tough balancing act.

I don't think its a smart move attacking the major employers in this country, especially the ones that have options to invest in other areas of the world.

I would think we would want to encourage investment by these organizations.

I also don't think that your going to miraculously transform the poor to middle class by knocking a couple of percentage points off of their tax, your going to transform the poor with education, social aid when needed and better job selection.

[Bertuzzied]

Originally Posted by Ark2

Attack ads work. That's why they are used. Period.

Except for Kim Campbell. ouch!