Federal Election Called for Oct 19, 2015

[darklord700]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

Should people pick a poorer candidate because of ideology? Sometimes picking who will serve your constituency best trumps voting ideologically.

This is the dilemma with our parliamentary system. I personally always go with the party leader because the difference one MP/MLA can make is close to nil.

[The Goon]

Originally Posted by Ducay

It really depends on the situation. If I had choice between CPC and Liberal and they both were friendly to Oil & Gas, then yes, I would pick the better candidate.

But if your choice is marginally better representation by Kehr (as an example), which would have a very small impact on your life, versus voting for the CPC, which could potentially have a much larger impact on your life though a stronger Albertan economy, then yes, you should vote for CPC.

I begrudgingly supported Anders for years because of party, not because he was the best representative of my riding.

My philosophy was the opposite. There were elections I wanted to vote CPC but refused to put a check next to Anders' name. I joined the party in early 2014 with the new riding for the sole purpose of picking Liepert instead of Anders.

Now that I think about it, that was the vote that mattered in Calgary Signal Hill, as it's going blue.

[troutman]

Calgary Mayor Naheed Nenshi takes on Tory agenda of fear: Steward

No one on the campaign trail has challenged Stephen Harper’s politically opportunistic scapegoating of Muslims as eloquently as Calgary’s mayor.

http://www.thestar.com/opinion/comme...r-steward.html

[IliketoPuck]

Originally Posted by _Q_

It's mind boggling how people can vote for the CPC because of the economy when it was the CPC that got us in to the mess we're in right now economically.

I'd love to see the actual numbers to support your statement, rather than empty rhetoric.

[Looch City]

Originally Posted by troutman

Calgary Mayor Naheed Nenshi takes on Tory agenda of fear: Steward

No one on the campaign trail has challenged Stephen Harper’s politically opportunistic scapegoating of Muslims as eloquently as Calgary’s mayor.

http://www.thestar.com/opinion/comme...r-steward.html

Quote from article:

“According to the prime minister, in every speech he makes, one of the greatest threats is jihadi terrorism. This is very specific, very deliberate language. It ties violent action to a religious group. Most of them are Canadian citizens,” he said.

This is what I've been saying, Harper is riding the fear train and no one is calling him out for it. I'd like to see what the CPC supporters on this forum think about it.

[Ironhorse]

I think our mayor needs to stay out of federal politics altogether.

[Looch City]

Originally Posted by Ironhorse

I think our mayor needs to stay out of federal politics altogether.

Yeah, because federal politics has basically zero impact on the city.

Are you serious?

[Ozy_Flame]

Originally Posted by Ironhorse

I think our mayor needs to stay out of federal politics altogether.

All it took was three posts to mention this again! Let's try for two next time.

[surferguy]

I think our Mayor needs to go onto Federal Politics

[CaptainCrunch]

For me, there's no chance that I'm going to change my vote from conservative.

My MP is very good.

I don't like Trudeau's platform, I think the deficit spending platform isn't prudent right now, the economy isn't sliding except on the commodities based side and jamming tons of money into Ontario infrastructure for example isn't going to help. I'd rather stay the course and keep that option on the side if things start sliding.

I also don't trust Trudeau as a Prime Minister, his work in parliment hasn't been great, he's a disaster in question period and he doesn't strike me as a guy that puts into work.

I would never ever vote NDP or for Mulciar, I think their platform is too secretive.

[calculoso]

Originally Posted by Iggy City

This is what I've been saying, Harper is riding the fear train and no one is calling him out for it. I'd like to see what the CPC supporters on this forum think about it.

I've been a CPC supporter in the past, am likely not a supporter in this election.

The Fear Train has no impact on me. It won't be a reason to vote for them and will not be a reason to vote against them. It is only one aspect of the whole package - who has the overall best to represent my thoughts and interests.

[darklord700]

I think that I am pretty such that I can confidently make my prediction that says that our beloved mayor won't vote for Harper in two weeks.

[crazy_eoj]

Originally Posted by troutman

Calgary Mayor Naheed Nenshi takes on Tory agenda of fear: Steward

No one on the campaign trail has challenged Stephen Harper’s politically opportunistic scapegoating of Muslims as eloquently as Calgary’s mayor.

http://www.thestar.com/opinion/comme...r-steward.html

I think the only appropriate response to an article from the Star is one from the Sun:

Trudeau's economic claims just not truthful

Liberal leader Justin Trudeau continued his bogus claims over the weekend, with a fresh round of TV ads, that Canada's middle class is losing ground economically, that jobs are disappearing and that earnings are frozen....

Trouble is, none of Trudeau's claims are true. Not even close, actually.
Median income for families in Canada increased to $76,550 in 2014 from $68,410 in 2010. That's an annual average increase of 2.8%, well above Canada's inflation rate of 1.8% during that period. Average weekly wages also grew 2.3% on average from 2010 to 2014.
The relative wealth of the middle class is also on the rise. The median net worth of the middle class -- total assets minus debts -- increased 45.2% from 2005 to 2012. That's ahead of the top 20% of wealthy Canadians whose net worth increased by 40.6% during that period, according to Statistics Canada. The number of jobs in Canada grew to 17.8 million in 2014 from 16.96 million in 2010. That's not a decrease, it's an increase of some 840,000 jobs. And most of the job creation has been full-time.

http://m.winnipegsun.com/2015/10/05/...ors_picks=true

[Hockeyguy15]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

For me, there's no chance that I'm going to change my vote from conservative.

My MP is very good.

I don't like Trudeau's platform, I think the deficit spending platform isn't prudent right now, the economy isn't sliding except on the commodities based side and jamming tons of money into Ontario infrastructure for example isn't going to help. I'd rather stay the course and keep that option on the side if things start sliding.

I also don't trust Trudeau as a Prime Minister, his work in parliment hasn't been great, he's a disaster in question period and he doesn't strike me as a guy that puts into work.

I would never ever vote NDP or for Mulciar, I think their platform is too secretive.

Correct me if I'm wrong but haven't the Conservatives have been running deficits already? What makes you think this will change?

[John Doe]

Originally Posted by crazy_eoj

I think the only appropriate response to an article from the Star is one from the Sun:

Trudeau's economic claims just not truthful



http://m.winnipegsun.com/2015/10/05/...ors_picks=true

So the only appropriate response is to change the subject? How conservative of you.

[troutman]

Originally Posted by crazy_eoj

I think the only appropriate response to an article from the Star is one from the Sun:

No. The appropriate response is to address the issues raised in the Star article. Not raise a separate issue about another party.

[EldrickOnIce]

Originally Posted by Hockeyguy15

Correct me if I'm wrong but haven't the Conservatives have been running deficits already? What makes you think this will change?

Keynesian economics suggests that during a recession (in the short run) the best way to kickstart economic growth is spending. If one accepts that, running deficits was necessary after the global economic crisis. The CPC did actually mostly follow their planned recession deficit projections/back to balanced budget plan, more or less.
The CPC now says the economy is back on track and growing - so no more recession deficits, and the economy is good. The LPC says the economy needs more government spending as stimulus to get it going. The NDP has no idea at all.
It mostly depends where you fall on the state of the economy (assuming you buy Keynesian economics), and speaking from an economy standpoint only...
If you think more government infrastructure spending, but running a deficit, is what the economy needs, Trudeau is your man. If you think the recession is over and the economy has rebounded, then Harper is. He also is if you are from Alberta and believe the CPC is friendliest to O&G. Mulcair is no one's choice for the economy.

[Looch City]

Originally Posted by crazy_eoj

I think the only appropriate response to an article from the Star is one from the Sun:

Trudeau's economic claims just not truthful



http://m.winnipegsun.com/2015/10/05/...ors_picks=true

Two can play that game...

6 charts show Stephen Harper has the worst economic record of any Prime Minister since World War II

http://www.pressprogress.ca/6_charts...e_world_war_ii

1. Stephen Harper has steered Canada's economy to its lowest levels of growth in 69 years
With an average annual real GDP growth rate of 1.6%, under Stephen Harper's tenure the Canadian economy grew by nearly half the rate it did for his predecessors in the decade before he took office. It was nearly three times worse than Canada's growth rate during the 1950s and 1960s.

Under Harper, real GDP grew "barely enough to keep up with population growth," says Stanford. "And by early 2015, real GDP actually began shrinking."

2. Harper has the worst job creation record of any Prime Minister since 1946
Harper's 1% annual average growth in employment is "significantly slower than the rate of population growth," Stanford says, adding it is "the slowest job creation of any Prime Ministers since World War II."

[plus 4 more points that're too long to include]

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Hockeyguy15

Correct me if I'm wrong but haven't the Conservatives have been running deficits already? What makes you think this will change?

Right now, because the Cons aren't running on a massive deficit spending platform.

If I'm going on platforms, then the Cons is more in line with my thinking.

Even though Mulcair has talked about running balanced budgets, when I look at his platform I don't see how its realistic at all, and it looks like vapour ware.

[zamler]

Originally Posted by Iggy City

http://www.pressprogress.ca/6_charts...e_world_war_ii

LOL, the article headlines.... pages and pages of them.