Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community

Go Back   Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community > Main Forums > The Off Topic Forum
Register Forum Rules FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 10-16-2012, 12:40 AM   #21
Daradon
Has lived the dream!
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Where I lay my head is home...
Exp:
Default

I doubt he's thinking federal politics. At least not immediately. He's been under a lot of pressure lately.

EDIT: Political pressure that is.

Last edited by Daradon; 10-16-2012 at 12:52 AM.
Daradon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2012, 06:37 AM   #22
Slava
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Calgary, Alberta
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GP_Matt View Post
Are you trying to say that you are running for leadership of the Liberals?
I'd buy a membership to vote for you.
That would be awesome, but no, I'll be sitting this one out. I might buy a membership if it looks interesting or something, but most likely I'll watch it on TV!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rathji View Post
I would buy 17.

After all, the left wing party is always about voter fraud to win elections, right?
If you would get off your wallet and buy about 117,000 I'm in.
Slava is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Slava For This Useful Post:
Old 10-16-2012, 07:50 AM   #23
GP_Matt
First Line Centre
 
GP_Matt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Edmonton
Exp:
Default

Is it wrong to buy a membership in a party you don't support so that you can vote for their leader?
I have done it before during a PC campaign at a time when the PC candidate was guaranteed his seat, and I suspect a lot of NDP and Liberal voters did the same to elect Allison Redford.

Federally though the race is a lot closer so it feels wrong to vote in their leadership election.
GP_Matt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2012, 08:32 AM   #24
bizaro86
Franchise Player
 
bizaro86's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GP_Matt View Post
Is it wrong to buy a membership in a party you don't support so that you can vote for their leader?
I have done it before during a PC campaign at a time when the PC candidate was guaranteed his seat, and I suspect a lot of NDP and Liberal voters did the same to elect Allison Redford.

Federally though the race is a lot closer so it feels wrong to vote in their leadership election.
Well, that's the system. I'm pretty unlikely to vote Liberal, but I'd buy a membership to vote Slava for Liberal leadership if we get a CP "Draft Slava" jihad going.
bizaro86 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2012, 08:40 AM   #25
mykalberta
Franchise Player
 
mykalberta's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Calgary
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by chemgear View Post
Or he finally realized the amount of debt that Ontario has run up. Quite a bit worse than California now.
Worse than Cali? Is Ontario in danger of defaulting or not being able to pay their employees because that is the position Cali was in.
__________________
MYK - Supports Arizona to democtratically pass laws for the state of Arizona
Rudy was the only hope in 08
2011 Election: Cons 40% - Nanos 38% Ekos 34%
mykalberta is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2012, 08:43 AM   #26
mykalberta
Franchise Player
 
mykalberta's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Calgary
Exp:
Default

They also just lost 1/2 byelections which would have given them majority. It could be that he saw the writing on the wall and its better to go out on your own terms then be thrown out.

I can see him running for the Fed Libs as an MP, not as Leader though.
__________________
MYK - Supports Arizona to democtratically pass laws for the state of Arizona
Rudy was the only hope in 08
2011 Election: Cons 40% - Nanos 38% Ekos 34%
mykalberta is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2012, 08:51 AM   #27
chemgear
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mykalberta View Post
Worse than Cali? Is Ontario in danger of defaulting or not being able to pay their employees because that is the position Cali was in.
I'm sure it's not an apples to apples comparison, but there are numbers like this:

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/blogs/canad...210518512.html

I haven't been following the Ontario stuff much, anybody know if have they acted on the Drummond report yet?
chemgear is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to chemgear For This Useful Post:
Old 10-16-2012, 12:50 PM   #28
Jacks
Franchise Player
 
Jacks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Exp:
Default

I don't have a problem with proroguing in general, every government does it, this is crazy though. I wonder if we'll see protests (not bloody likely).

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/...rticle4615458/
Quote:
Mr. Hudak complained in his letter that Mr. McGuinty had not followed the rules that require a government to announce an approximate date for reconvening the legislature before a session is prorogued.“Once again, your government and a senior minister are at odds with the rules of the legislature, which is most regrettable and embarrassing,” wrote Mr. Hudak.
Mr. McGuinty said Monday he will stay on until the Liberals elect a new leader, adding the timing of the recall of the legislature would have to wait until then.
“I want my successor to make that decision,” he said.

Seriously? They aren't bringing back the Legislature until they pick a new leader? How long is that going to take?


This seems like a suicide move, they are getting taken down guaranteed if they don't change this.
Jacks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2012, 01:41 PM   #29
GP_Matt
First Line Centre
 
GP_Matt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Edmonton
Exp:
Default

Looking at the last 3 years and comparing Alberta to Ontario I have found the following for number of days sat in the legislature.

2012
On - 73
Ab - 28

2011
On - 57
Ab - 47

2010
On - 93
Ab - 50

It would appear that voters don't care how often the politicians sit in the legislature. Alberta seems to sit about 25 days in the spring and 25 in the fall. So as long as they find a leader by the end of March they should be fine to prorogue until then.
GP_Matt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2012, 02:33 PM   #30
Jacks
Franchise Player
 
Jacks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GP_Matt View Post
So as long as they find a leader by the end of March they should be fine to prorogue until then.
Seriously?
Jacks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2012, 03:06 PM   #31
GP_Matt
First Line Centre
 
GP_Matt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Edmonton
Exp:
Default

I don't agree with it, but seems to be how things work in the legislature.They rarely sit.
Alberta did the same thing, they didn't sit in 2011 after Ed announced his retirement and waited until Redford won in the fall. She initially cancelled the fall sitting and then agreed to sit for a few days. The Spring 2012 sitting was shortened for the election and after the election they only sat for a few days. Now the fall sitting is just getting started for 5 or 6 hard weeks of 5 hour sittings 4 days a week before taking a 6 week break for Christmas.
GP_Matt is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:12 PM.

Calgary Flames
2024-25




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright Calgarypuck 2021 | See Our Privacy Policy