Federal Election Called for Oct 19, 2015

[Incogneto]

Originally Posted by Tron_fdc

Ugh. Like I don't see enough of this drivel in my FB feed.

I really wish political parties wouldn't pander to the lowest common denominator with this sensationalist tactic. It's insulting to people with half a brain, and actually turns me off the party.

CPC appealing to their main voter base: the elderly. That's how I see this.

[OMG!WTF!]

Originally Posted by Thor

I guess that's why they used the inflammatory headline suggesting he said the "Jews are like the Taliban..."

He did say that. There is no uncertainty in saying, "Much like the Taliban....Heredim Jews blah blah ". There are obviously many more issues beyond women's rights that don't accurately compare. But I don't think that makes it an anti semetic issue though. He just ended the comparison with what is really a very minor similarity.

I dunno, are the Haredim promoters of religious/political violence?

Remember that guy who wouldn't sit next to the woman on the plane a few weeks ago? That kind of stupid modesty related weirdness.

[Tron_fdc]

Originally Posted by InCoGnEtO

CPC appealing to their main voter base: the elderly. That's how I see this.

That kind of got me thinking. Who are the target demographics for each party? Here is my tongue in cheek generalization (for the record I am still TOTALLY undecided who I'm voting for)

CPC: The elderly, the Christian right, the RW crowd of over 40yr old males (that would be me)
NDP: The elderly and the left wingers (I'm looking at you 18-28yr old students)
Libs: The more centrist, not quite LW but not RW either, somewhat undecided voter who doesn't like what they see in CPC or NDP (Me again)

I'm not sure any particular party can appeal to the masses in Canada; your message (platform) has to be targeted to a portion of the population that can get you elected. Kinda curious what people think that is.

[rubecube]

Does anyone know if Trudeau is banking on his plan to legalize marijuana, and the subsequent tax revenue from it, in order to balance the budget after the infrastructure spending? Because if not, he should absolutely be hammering on that point.

[2Stonedbirds]

With the massive revenue it would generate one would think so but since nothing has been said either way as to what would become of said revenue it's pretty tough to say.

May be playing possum on that one for a reason. Why, I couldn't say.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by 2Stonedbirds

With the massive revenue it would generate one would think so but since nothing has been said either way as to what would become of said revenue it's pretty tough to say.

May be playing possum on that one for a reason. Why, I couldn't say.

Yeah, that might be something to drop on the final week of campaign as it could be a game-changer. It's not going to win over any staunch Conservatives, but those who are fiscally-minded and see it as an avenue for balancing the budget might be tempted to switch their votes, and it could lure some NDP and Green voters into the fold as well.

I mean, it's not like people don't consider this, but if Trudeau says he plans to pay for his infrastructure promises with pot revenue and the savings on law enforcement on prison from removing drug penalties and actually presents something that shows this, I can't see how people wouldn't be on board.

[edslunch]

Pot is already contentious issue. Framing it as a tax grab isn't going to help

[FlamesAddiction]

It's disappointing that the Liberals are afraid to make marijuana legalization and revenues generated more of a key point in the campaign.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by edslunch

Pot is already contentious issue. Framing it as a tax grab isn't going to help

I think the tax grab and the potential for jobs and small businesses, and the decreased tax burden spent fighting pot is the most attractive part about legalization for most people who are in favour of it. Emphasising those benefits isn't going to drive anyone away who wasnt already set on not voting for the Liberals.

[Coach]

Originally Posted by rubecube

Does anyone know if Trudeau is banking on his plan to legalize marijuana, and the subsequent tax revenue from it, in order to balance the budget after the infrastructure spending? Because if not, he should absolutely be hammering on that point.

I think he may be a little wary of bringing that out as a full-blown election issue. A lot of people who are even for decriminalization aren't for all out legalization. It could still pull votes away from him.

Although it could shift a lot of NDP support his way as well.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by MattyC

I think he may be a little wary of bringing that out as a full-blown election issue. A lot of people who are even for decriminalization aren't for all out legalization. It could still pull votes away from him.

Although it could shift a lot of NDP support his way as well.

I don't know. I think there are a lot of people that just think "Oh who cares about dopey potheads." If you can frame it as economic opportunity that the Harper government is passing up, it might raise some eyebrows. It's also a renewable resource and an industry that isn't nearly as volatile as O&G.

[Coach]

Originally Posted by rubecube

I don't know. I think there are a lot of people that just think "Oh who cares about dopey potheads." If you can frame it as economic opportunity that the Harper government is passing up, it might raise some eyebrows. It's also a renewable resource and an industry that isn't nearly as volatile as O&G.

I whole-heartedly agree. However, we have seen that the economic benefits of legalization are largely overlooked/ignored by the people who are against it from a moral stand point. Those people tend to be conservative voters anyways, but not always.

But yeah I agree, it hasn't been brought up much, and I think that shows that there is legitimacy to the benefits. Otherwise, Harper would be trying to hammer the other two parties on it.

[polak]

He simply doesn't have the balls by the looks of it.

It's such a no-brainer. I can't believe that they aren't jumping all over it. I blame the baby boomers (once again). And they loved pot!

[Coach]

Originally Posted by edslunch

Pot is already contentious issue. Framing it as a tax grab isn't going to help

This is all based on assumptions about the people who would in general vote certain ways, but:

The people who tend to be against taxes in all shapes and forms I would think tend to be those who are against pot legalization as well (ie mostly conservative people). They are usually more wealthy people that don't want the potheads/entitleds/commie pinkos of the world getting a piece of their pie. This is kind of the one tax with a burden that would fall mostly on the liberal base, not the conservative base, so you think they would actually be for it if they were actually concerned with the economics and not the "OMG my kids!!" side of things.

[edslunch]

Originally Posted by rubecube

I think the tax grab and the potential for jobs and small businesses, and the decreased tax burden spent fighting pot is the most attractive part about legalization for most people who are in favour of it. Emphasising those benefits isn't going to drive anyone away who wasnt already set on not voting for the Liberals.

True but neither will it convince people who have misgivings about legalization. "Hey, never mind your concerns, we're going to make a boatload of money on this".

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by edslunch

True but neither will it convince people who have misgivings about legalization. "Hey, never mind your concerns, we're going to make a boatload of money on this".

Right, but you don't have to frame it as solely a tax grab, just that that is a huge benefit of it and actually give a break down of the projected numbers. Then you can emphasize how your also going to devote that money to drug prevention and treatment programs as well, particularly targeting people under 18, yadda, yadda.

[OMG!WTF!]

Originally Posted by rubecube

Does anyone know if Trudeau is banking on his plan to legalize marijuana, and the subsequent tax revenue from it, in order to balance the budget after the infrastructure spending? Because if not, he should absolutely be hammering on that point.

Zero dollars....

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/...ticle26531726/

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by OMG!WTF!

Zero dollars....

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/...ticle26531726/

I guess it's the prudent thing to do, but I still don't understand why they wouldn't release a projection of the revenue they could get from marijuana sales as an addendum.

[Blaster86]

Originally Posted by edslunch

Pot is already contentious issue. Framing it as a tax grab isn't going to help

Contentious for who? Isn't there a large majority pushing for decriminalization at the very least?

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by Blaster86

Contentious for who? Isn't there a large majority pushing for decriminalization at the very least?

I don't get the decriminalize crowd. We want the same number of people to be smoking pot but we don't want society to benefit from it?