Federal Election Called for Oct 19, 2015

[fulham]

Originally Posted by Canuck-Hater

Non story IMO, I'm not concerned about stupid things people say as a teenager.

You can use the "I was a dumb kid" excuse when your actually significantly removed from those years...

She said those things 40 months ago, and there's pictures on FB of her at a anti Israel rally on campus standing next to a man holding a Hamas flag...

They have enough time to run a new candidate and hopefully one that has actually practiced liberal principles for more than 40 months.

[Iowa_Flames_Fan]

I don't think it matters who the Liberals run in Nose Hill, honestly. They aren't going to win that riding.

[Blaster86]

Originally Posted by fulham

You can use the "I was a dumb kid" excuse when your actually significantly removed from those years...

She said those things 40 months ago, and there's pictures on FB of her at a anti Israel rally on campus standing next to a man holding a Hamas flag...

They have enough time to run a new candidate and hopefully one that has actually practiced liberal principles for more than 40 months, I'd imagine that a liberal candidly in that area could win their seat.

I said and did stupid #### as a 18 / 19 year old. I had pretty much grown out of it by 21 / 22 and felt like an idiot for saying those things. There is usually a change in personality between end of high-school and middle of university.

[Kjesse]

Originally Posted by Blaster86

I said and did stupid #### as a 18 / 19 year old. I had pretty much grown out of it by 21 / 22 and felt like an idiot for saying those things. There is usually a change in personality between end of high-school and middle of university.

I take from your comment, this is a person you would consider voting for.

[Kjesse]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

Wow, the replies to that are really mean. There is a lot of hatred out there eh? I wish those people had to account for their statement.

Let's just presume they won't run for office either.

[Kjesse]

Originally Posted by MarchHare

How does this keep happening? Seemingly every party at every level of government has had an embarrassing incident with a candidate's previous social media history. Why does this not get vetted and scrubbed before the candidates enter the limelight?

Its actually quite shocking how these political parties do not have the motivation to do proper checks on their candidates. In terms of the person who stepped down today, she was a throw-away candidate in any event, but as we've seen in Alberta recently, even those can win office.

[starseed]

A YouTube clip of Mulcair praising Margaret Thatcher in 2001 is circulating. He was putting down the PQs left wing policies.

Margaret is one of the most hated persons of all time to unions. I wonder how their union supporters are feeling about this?

[White Out 403]

Originally Posted by starseed

A YouTube clip of Mulcair praising Margaret Thatcher in 2001 is circulating. He was putting down the PQs left wing policies.

Margaret is one of the most hated persons of all time to unions. I wonder how their union supporters are feeling about this?

It's caused me to come full circle. I am now supporting Harper and his war on science. Feels liberating to be on the side of evil. When do I get my decoder ring and official cape?

[carbonrod]

Originally Posted by Resurrection

It's caused me to come full circle. I am now supporting Harper and his war on science. Feels liberating to be on the side of evil. When do I get my decoder ring and official cape?

Are you confusing academia with science again?

[EldrickOnIce]

I emailed my local NDP candidate yesterday via his official party website page. Wanted clarification on certain issues, etc.
Apparently the NDP party somehow decided this gave them the right to subscribe me to spam from 'Tom Mulcair', without my permission. NDP = any other insidious worm?

[Dan02]

The Liberals are doing the same thing. Daily emails. Occasionally multiple times in one day.

[Makarov]

Originally Posted by carbonrod

Are you confusing academia with science again?

Can you elaborate? Has Harper discovered a new source of science other than scientists?

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by transplant99

Calgary Lib candidate has a bit of a checkered twitter history to say the least.



Says it was just because she was a teen and stupid....3 years ago....but shes all better now.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/cana...eets-1.3195193

Just another example that the Internet is the greatest destroyer of lives on the planet. Someday I'll run for office and you basterds will pull up some old off color hookers and blow murdering hobo's for sport post from here and I'll have to make some tearful speech that I'm withdrawing from the race, and checking into rehab and with the help of my family and god and blah I'll come out of this as a stronger less hobo killing inclined person.

[Regorium]

Originally Posted by Makarov

Can you elaborate? Has Harper discovered a new source of science other than scientists?

My understanding is that Harper re-allocated funding from basic science (ie. academia) to industry science (joint industry projects, industry R&D etc.).

Obviously post-docs and PhD students aren't happy, and everyone is framing it as a subsidy for corporations. The R&D credit for corporations has existed forever, it was just expanded under Harper.

[Blaster86]

Originally Posted by Delgar

I take from your comment, this is a person you would consider voting for.

If I was in that riding, and I heard her speak on a regular basis and knew who she was running against and knew where they all stood on a myriad of issues that are currently relevant this election cycle, I would not hold a comment made three years ago on twitter against them, no.

[Makarov]

Originally Posted by Regorium

My understanding is that Harper re-allocated funding from basic science (ie. academia) to industry science (joint industry projects, industry R&D etc.).

Obviously post-docs and PhD students aren't happy, and everyone is framing it as a subsidy for corporations. The R&D credit for corporations has existed forever, it was just expanded under Harper.

So, if I understand you correctly, the Harper government is basing policy decisions (such as how to regulate certain industries) on data from industry stakeholders themselves rather than from objective sources such as: science professionals working in the public service, the academy, and the long form census data, etc?

That is more horrifyingly absurd than I ever feared possible.

[Makarov]

Just stumbled across this scathing opinion piece in the New York Times that is particularly relevant to the current discussion:

Mr. Harper’s war against science has been even more damaging to the capacity of Canadians to know what their government is doing. The prime minister’s base of support is Alberta, a western province financially dependent on the oil industry, and he has been dedicated to protecting petrochemical companies from having their feelings hurt by any inconvenient research.

In 2012, he tried to defund government research centers in the High Arctic, and placed Canadian environmental scientists under gag orders. That year, National Research Council members were barred from discussing their work on snowfall with the media. Scientists for the governmental agency Environment Canada, under threat of losing their jobs, have been banned from discussing their research without political approval. Mentions of federal climate change research in the Canadian press have dropped 80 percent. The union that represents federal scientists and other professionals has, for the first time in its history, abandoned neutrality to campaign against Mr. Harper.

His active promotion of ignorance extends into the functions of government itself. Most shockingly, he ended the mandatory long-form census, a decision protested by nearly 500 organizations in Canada, including the Canadian Medical Association, the Canadian Chamber of Commerce and the Canadian Catholic Council of Bishops. In the age of information, he has stripped Canada of its capacity to gather information about itself. The Harper years have seen a subtle darkening of Canadian life.

[Regorium]

Originally Posted by Makarov

So, if I understand you correctly, the Harper government is basing policy decisions (such as how to regulate certain industries) on data from industry stakeholders themselves rather than from objective sources such as: science professionals working in the public service, the academy, and the long form census data, etc?

That is more horrifyingly absurd than I ever feared possible.

Wait how did you get that from what I wrote?

I mean with regards to developing new technologies, new processes, and new equipment. Joint industry projects do not create regulations or drive policy. They are purely for economic benefit.

However, you are partially correct in that some of the cuts affected areas that could drive policy. We have less data to make policy decisions, and the tradeoff is that we have better technologies to sell and use.

I don't particularly agree with the direction that Harper chose, but please don't mis-represent what he did. He did not unilaterally cut "science", he chose to invest the science money into ideas that have economic benefit, rather than basic research. That's all.

[Makarov]

Originally Posted by Regorium

Wait how did you get that from what I wrote?

I mean with regards to developing new technologies, new processes, and new equipment. Joint industry projects do not create regulations or drive policy. They are purely for economic benefit.

However, you are partially correct in that some of the cuts affected areas that could drive policy. We have less data to make policy decisions, and the tradeoff is that we have better technologies to sell and use.

I don't particularly agree with the direction that Harper chose, but please don't mis-represent what he did. He did not unilaterally cut "science", he chose to invest the science money into ideas that have economic benefit, rather than basic research. That's all.

Sorry, I misunderstood what you were suggesting.

I must admit that I wasn't very familiar with recent investments in university research. I just finished reading a rather disapproving review of the latest funding in Macleans (will link it when I am off my phone and in front of my computer.

Anyway, in my (admittedly shallow) understanding, it sounds like, at best, the Harper government has traded good, evidence-based public policy for subsidies for certain research universities (that pales in comparison to recent cuts to their actual funding) and certain industries (notably the energy industry).

Not sure that looks any better for Harper (maybe even worse).

[zamler]

Originally Posted by Canuck-Hater

Non story IMO, I'm not concerned about stupid things people say as a teenager.

Everyone says stupid things but her Tweets were downright vile. Speaks to her character I highly doubt it was just a dumb teenager phase.