Thoughts on Liberal leadership race?

[Table 5]

Originally Posted by Ford Prefect

Vote Green. Ever since I've started voting Green, which has been for about three elections now, I haven't even had to hold my nose while I cast my vote!

That's actually who I've voted for the last couple of times. It's definitely nice to vote for something I believe in for a change, and not some revenge or "lesser of two evils" strategy.

[Cheese]

Originally Posted by Table 5

Come on, with the way the economy is these days, a monkey could have run this province....and the way Ralph has handled things over his last term, it probably did. It's been pretty much cruise control for a while now.

I would also strongly advise a visit to Hogtown for anyone who sees Calgary or Alberta as a power broker. It simply pales in comparison. The money is here...and with that comes the power.

[Table 5]

mmm power

[peter12]

Originally Posted by Cheese

As much as I dislike Rae it is unfair to suggest it was him or his party that led Ontario into the pits. All of Canada was in a raging recession at that time and all provinces felt the heat.....including Calgary and Alberta. Many in Alberta went on work sharing and wage cutting excersizes...yet noone wants to bring those fun experiences up.

I think it's very clear that you have no idea what you are talking about.

[Ayrahb]

If Rae gets Ignatieff elected, I will be really ****ed. I can see a future election campaign where we will have to put up with the Republican-style "he is a flip-flop" campaign from the Conservatives and "he is an American" from NDP.

Oh, and by the way, Ignatieff is a flip-flop.

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by Cheese

That answer is very simple actually...simply look south and see the headlines the Conservatives make...that plays to a largely Secular Canadian not wanting to wallow in that same swamp. That and the fact that Liberals are...

• broad: showing or characterized by broad-mindedness; "a broad political stance"; "generous and broad sympathies"; "a liberal newspaper"; "tolerant of his opponent's opinions"
• having political or social views favoring reform and progress
• tolerant of change; not bound by authoritarianism, orthodoxy, or tradition
• a person who favors a political philosophy of progress and reform and the protection of civil liberties
• big: given or giving freely; "was a big tipper"; "bountiful compliments"; "a freehanded host"; "a handsome allowance"; "Saturday's child is loving and giving"; "a liberal backer of the arts"; "a munificent gift"; "her fond and openhanded grandfather"
• a person who favors an economic theory of laissez-faire and self-regulating markets
• free: not literal; "a loose interpretation of what she had been told"; "a free translation of the poem"
  
  
  

Just because you quote the definition of "Liberal" doesn't mean it is the Liberal Party of Canada.

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by Table 5

The gun registry simply isn't that high of a priority for many people. Sure if you're a farmer in Saskatchewan, it might be, but do you really think that's what drives Joe Sixpack to vote one way or another? I myself definitely wouldn't vote based on it.

It is not just the idea of the gun registry. It was the program it self. The actual malfeasence of public money. The same as the HRDC boondoggle.

[metallicat]

All I've got to say, is Belinda looks better as a blonde.

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by Cheese

not so....there were a number of Liberal seats in BC, Manitoba as well as the eastern provinces. I think Saskatchewan even voted a few Libs into power now and then.
As much as Alberta wants to paint the Liberals as the Evil force, I still see Canada as one of the best countries to live in this world...maybe the best...and that was WITH Liberals holding power for the vast majority of the last century. They do deserve some credit to go along with their helping of crow.

And that is why we have massive government mis-managment and grows. AND some of the highest taxes in the developed world, yet we don't get the same results as other developed nations with regards to social programs.

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by Table 5

Come on, with the way the economy is these days, a monkey could have run this province....and the way Ralph has handled things over his last term, it probably did. It's been pretty much cruise control for a while now.

True....a monkey could run the system right now. But Ralph had the balls to fix the spending problem we had back in the 90's. A monkey couldn't have done that.

[Cheese]

Originally Posted by peter12

I think it's very clear that you have no idea what you are talking about.

LOL...and you obviously bring intelligence?

[browna]

Dion and Ignitief on final ballot...Rae is toast.

[Table 5]

Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor

True....a monkey could run the system right now. But Ralph had the balls to fix the spending problem we had back in the 90's. A monkey couldn't have done that.

Oh I think Ralph did a bangup job then....but that was a decade ago, and I feel like the last few years have been totally wasted. While The PC's could have been using this economic opportunity to focus on other deficiencies, they really seemed to have lost their drive and imagination (giving out ralph bucks was a clear sign that the party really had no direction any more).

[Devils'Advocate]

(1) I didn't live in Ontario at the time of the Rae government, but I have knocked on doors for the NDP after Rae's term and there is still a lot of anger here. I think it is misplaced. Peterson had a huge debt, Rae won on the promise of new spending programs WHICH THE PEOPLE WANTED and when Mulroney and the Conservatives put our economy in the toilet, Rae couldn't please anybody. Spending too much for the people on the right of the spectrum, spending too low for the left of the spectrum and those in the middle were just ****ed off at every politician alive for what Mulroney and Crow were doing to the economy. Even though I believe the anger to misplaced, you cannot deny it is there, so I'm pleased to see that Rae is off the fourth ballot.
(2) Each candidate has a liability... there isn't a super amazing candidate that will take the world by storm. I think the Liberals should sit back for a year or two to build up their current leadership, distance themselves from past leadership and THEN pounce on the Conservatives.
(3) Personally, I think Belinda looks better with the black hair. But I realize to most in Alberta, she's the most reviled human being on the planet, only rivaled by Osama, so I didn't expect anyone else to say anything similar.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Cheese

That answer is very simple actually...simply look south and see the headlines the Conservatives make...that plays to a largely Secular Canadian not wanting to wallow in that same swamp. That and the fact that Liberals are...

• broad: showing or characterized by broad-mindedness; "a broad political stance"; "generous and broad sympathies"; "a liberal newspaper"; "tolerant of his opponent's opinions"
• having political or social views favoring reform and progress
• tolerant of change; not bound by authoritarianism, orthodoxy, or tradition
• a person who favors a political philosophy of progress and reform and the protection of civil liberties
• big: given or giving freely; "was a big tipper"; "bountiful compliments"; "a freehanded host"; "a handsome allowance"; "Saturday's child is loving and giving"; "a liberal backer of the arts"; "a munificent gift"; "her fond and openhanded grandfather"
• a person who favors an economic theory of laissez-faire and self-regulating markets
• free: not literal; "a loose interpretation of what she had been told"; "a free translation of the poem"
  
  
  

C'mon Cheese, there's a difference between what the Liberals say and what they stand for.

broad: showing or characterized by broad-mindedness; "a broad political stance"; "generous and broad sympathies"; "a liberal newspaper"; "tolerant of his opponent's opinions"
Hedy Fry and her comments about cross burning, the Liberals continual anti-American stance, thier refusal to listen to anything any other party says shows a certain narrow mindedness. Jean Chretien's quips about not understanding the west, and the inability for them to solve the democratic situation with any province thats not Ontario is a damning condemnation.

having political or social views favoring reform and progress
Nice and glowy, but the only political or social views that the Liberals adopt are the ones that will get them votes, then when they get into power they promptly forget about them and bury them completely. Under the Liberals there has been very little in the way of forward progress over thier last two or three governments, but there has been a rapid increase in tax rates and ######ed government spending on pet projects into thier electorial strong holds.

tolerant of change; not bound by authoritarianism, orthodoxy, or tradition
If anything the Liberals were far more authoritarisist as they proudly used house of common rules to cut off any kind of debate including the removal of opposition days. The continual use of whipped votes within thier own party to staunch any kind of debate.

a person who favors a political philosophy of progress and reform and the protection of civil liberties

I'm sure that the Canadians that were tortured in Syrian, Chinese and Saudi Arabian jails were greatful for the Liberals protection of thier civil liberties, including the female reporter that was locked up in Iran, except that she's dead.

big: given or giving freely; "was a big tipper"; "bountiful compliments"; "a freehanded host"; "a handsome allowance"; "Saturday's child is loving and giving"; "a liberal backer of the arts"; "a munificent gift"; "her fond and openhanded grandfather"

I'm not sure I get this, but the Liberals were certainly big tippers as they threw around our money like it was a manhole cover. They tipped huge on the gun registry, and the HRDC. Look at how much they tipped the recent convict investigator. They tipped thier friends hugely in Quebec, and spent money they didn't have. They are certainly open handed when nobody demands answers from them.

a person who favors an economic theory of laissez-faire and self-regulating markets
Are you sure your talking about the current Liberals, you should ask Bombardia(sp) about the definition of Laissez-faire. Or the companies that benefited from winning government bids that they had no right to win because they were generious in thier donations to the Liberals. How about the farmers victimized by the wheat board. Or the Liberals stance on a carbon tax which would exclude the automotive industry.

free: not literal; "a loose interpretation of what she had been told"; "a free translation of the poem"

I don't know, I felt less free under the Liberals, mostly on the financial side then anything else.

What I think the Liberal party (not liberal's, lets seperate that) really stand for.

• Getting into power no matter what the costs.
• Making sure that thier friends benefit from thier assent to power
• Burying promises then denying them
• tilting competition to benefit thier buddies.
• making more promises and then doing nothing about them
• Being wussies and doing nothing productive on the world stage.
• treating our countries soldiers like disposible assets to be killed due to a lack of proper care or concerns.
• Going to war internally with anyone who they don't agree with, and trying to cripple them through government polices.
• The old boy networks.
• Being accountable to nobody.
• taking as much money from the working Canadian's as possible
• **** poor social engineering
• being soft on crimes of all types and screwing over the victims of crime
• cronyism

Watching the current Liberal leadership convention, and following the liberals with great interest, it dosen't matter who wins the leadership convention, this party is still Paul Martin's and Jean Chretien's Liberals with a new face in charge.

Watching the speeches last night they are still use same smear and deny tactics that they used in the last election, as they put the focus externally instead of the sad state of affairs that thier party is. Undoubtedly there will probably be another spring election, and I really hope that it drives the Liberal party into a funding crisis and bankruptsy because real change won't come to this sad and distorted party until they completely change the direction of the party and get rid of the old guard that still runs the backroom politics.

[Thunderball]

Originally Posted by Cheese

That answer is very simple actually...simply look south and see the headlines the Conservatives make...that plays to a largely Secular Canadian not wanting to wallow in that same swamp. That and the fact that Liberals are...

• broad: showing or characterized by broad-mindedness; "a broad political stance"; "generous and broad sympathies"; "a liberal newspaper"; "tolerant of his opponent's opinions"
• having political or social views favoring reform and progress
• tolerant of change; not bound by authoritarianism, orthodoxy, or tradition
• a person who favors a political philosophy of progress and reform and the protection of civil liberties
• big: given or giving freely; "was a big tipper"; "bountiful compliments"; "a freehanded host"; "a handsome allowance"; "Saturday's child is loving and giving"; "a liberal backer of the arts"; "a munificent gift"; "her fond and openhanded grandfather"
• a person who favors an economic theory of laissez-faire and self-regulating markets
• free: not literal; "a loose interpretation of what she had been told"; "a free translation of the poem"
  
  
  

That's a definition of Classical Liberalism, not Canadian Liberal Party Policy. You'd find most of those find themselves more firmly entrenched with the Conservatives than the Liberals. Conservatives tend to believe that social change should come from somewhere other than the state. That's why they want a free vote and/or referendum on things like SSM. They don't think a bunch of elitist politicians should dictate the country. Now that's openness. They are also opposed to blowing money that isn't theirs. Conservatives believe that if things like sports, arts, etc. are so important, it should be easily taken care of by private interests, or by local plebiscite to allot a temporary tax specifically for it. Its very easy to be generous with someone else's money. The protection of civil liberties is subject to opinion, but one could say that Ted Morton's stance of "tolerance is a two-way street" and that those who are opposed to SSM should have the same rights as those who wish for SSM is far more egalitarian than saying this is it, don't like it, don't care about your beliefs. That's subject to a different debate.

Economic theories of laissez-faire and self-regulation are very firmly found on the right side of the political spectrum, with, yep... the Conservatives. Reform and progress, come on... those words can be sold in any number of ways to serve any number of purposes. The Nazis stood for reform and progress too. That's crap. To say the Liberals aren't bound by tradition is also crap. That party is so traditional in the way it views Canadian regions and in its own party operations its not even funny. In fact, they still rely on grossly undemocratic conventions for leadership and policy.

As for powerbases... everyone knows Toronto is #1... that's like arguing the sky isn't blue... and no one said otherwise. The argument is Calgary is an emerging #2 which EXCEEDS Toronto PER CAPITA. The problem lies with the fact that Toronto has a lot of sway (which is fair) but Calgary is largely ignored, despite the huge amounts of money it generates, which exceeds any city in Canada per capita, and is catching up with Toronto.

The comparisons between the Conservatives and Republicans are ones largely based out of ignorance. People incorrectly assume that the right wing in Canada must equal the right wing in the US. Not so. In the US, both the Liberals and Conservatives would be on extreme sides of the Democratic Party. The Liberals would be seen as too far to the left to many mainstream democrats, where the Conservatives would be more like Colorado Democrats... almost Republican, but clearly not. The US is a completely different political creature, and if its that ignorance that is leading people away from the Conservatives, then it really backs up the allegation that many Liberal voters in Ontario are ignorant. Even if the Canadian Alliance contained elements of the Christian right... that Christian right pales in size and scope of the American counterparts, and the majority of the ones in Canada don't seek to radically alter the country (unlike their US counterparts), but seek to "stop the bleeding" in their social opinion, rightly or wrongly, by establishing dialogue and by taking issues back to the people, where they hope they'll find support.

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by Table 5

Yep, whether people like it or not, the Conservatices are seen as the Republicans of Canada, and any comparison these days is not viewed in a positive light. I don't want Canada to go anywhere near that direction.

Personally, what drives me away from the Conservatives is not their policies on economics or money, its their stance on social and environmental issues. Harper's environmental "plan" released a few weeks ago pretty much sealed his fate for me in the next election. I've voted for them before in the past, but the last few elections I feel my beliefs growing more and more distant.

Ok...not saying you are going to vote for the Libs....but if you are....you would rather vote for a party that tells you what you want to here and not do anything or a party that is realistic about CO2 reduction?

[flambers]

Originally Posted by Table 5

The gun registry simply isn't that high of a priority for many people. Sure if you're a farmer in Saskatchewan, it might be, but do you really think that's what drives Joe Sixpack to vote one way or another? I myself definitely wouldn't vote based on it.

Its not about the Gun Registry its how our tax dollars are being spent. Remember this program has caused billions of dollars basically flushed down the toilet.

[transplant99]

in this thread i see props to a corrupt Liberal government who only inherited a mess from someone else even though they made things even worse all by their majority selves, and then a thought process that the current Conservative leader isn't swashbuckling enough to be re-elected.

Yup...sounds about what it has for the last 30 years in Canada. Its truly mind-boggling.

[Cheese]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

C'mon Cheese, there's a difference between what the Liberals say and what they stand for.

broad: showing or characterized by broad-mindedness; "a broad political stance"; "generous and broad sympathies"; "a liberal newspaper"; "tolerant of his opponent's opinions"
Hedy Fry and her comments about cross burning, the Liberals continual anti-American stance, thier refusal to listen to anything any other party says shows a certain narrow mindedness. Jean Chretien's quips about not understanding the west, and the inability for them to solve the democratic situation with any province thats not Ontario is a damning condemnation.

having political or social views favoring reform and progress
Nice and glowy, but the only political or social views that the Liberals adopt are the ones that will get them votes, then when they get into power they promptly forget about them and bury them completely. Under the Liberals there has been very little in the way of forward progress over thier last two or three governments, but there has been a rapid increase in tax rates and ######ed government spending on pet projects into thier electorial strong holds.

tolerant of change; not bound by authoritarianism, orthodoxy, or tradition
If anything the Liberals were far more authoritarisist as they proudly used house of common rules to cut off any kind of debate including the removal of opposition days. The continual use of whipped votes within thier own party to staunch any kind of debate.

a person who favors a political philosophy of progress and reform and the protection of civil liberties

I'm sure that the Canadians that were tortured in Syrian, Chinese and Saudi Arabian jails were greatful for the Liberals protection of thier civil liberties, including the female reporter that was locked up in Iran, except that she's dead.

big: given or giving freely; "was a big tipper"; "bountiful compliments"; "a freehanded host"; "a handsome allowance"; "Saturday's child is loving and giving"; "a liberal backer of the arts"; "a munificent gift"; "her fond and openhanded grandfather"

I'm not sure I get this, but the Liberals were certainly big tippers as they threw around our money like it was a manhole cover. They tipped huge on the gun registry, and the HRDC. Look at how much they tipped the recent convict investigator. They tipped thier friends hugely in Quebec, and spent money they didn't have. They are certainly open handed when nobody demands answers from them.

a person who favors an economic theory of laissez-faire and self-regulating markets
Are you sure your talking about the current Liberals, you should ask Bombardia(sp) about the definition of Laissez-faire. Or the companies that benefited from winning government bids that they had no right to win because they were generious in thier donations to the Liberals. How about the farmers victimized by the wheat board. Or the Liberals stance on a carbon tax which would exclude the automotive industry.

free: not literal; "a loose interpretation of what she had been told"; "a free translation of the poem"

I don't know, I felt less free under the Liberals, mostly on the financial side then anything else.

What I think the Liberal party (not liberal's, lets seperate that) really stand for.

• Getting into power no matter what the costs.
• Making sure that thier friends benefit from thier assent to power
• Burying promises then denying them
• tilting competition to benefit thier buddies.
• making more promises and then doing nothing about them
• Being wussies and doing nothing productive on the world stage.
• treating our countries soldiers like disposible assets to be killed due to a lack of proper care or concerns.
• Going to war internally with anyone who they don't agree with, and trying to cripple them through government polices.
• The old boy networks.
• Being accountable to nobody.
• taking as much money from the working Canadian's as possible
• **** poor social engineering
• being soft on crimes of all types and screwing over the victims of crime
• cronyism

Watching the current Liberal leadership convention, and following the liberals with great interest, it dosen't matter who wins the leadership convention, this party is still Paul Martin's and Jean Chretien's Liberals with a new face in charge.

Watching the speeches last night they are still use same smear and deny tactics that they used in the last election, as they put the focus externally instead of the sad state of affairs that thier party is. Undoubtedly there will probably be another spring election, and I really hope that it drives the Liberal party into a funding crisis and bankruptsy because real change won't come to this sad and distorted party until they completely change the direction of the party and get rid of the old guard that still runs the backroom politics.

Again...Im not a Liberal...but when it comes to the voting public its not policy that generally wins. A charismatic and sometimes flambouyant leader is first and foremost a gift, <see PE Trudeau>, and then very generally what that party stands for. What I quoted would be what the average citizen would see when confronted with choice. There would be no filling in their sandwich...maybe a basic bread with some condiments, but no real perception of reality or meat. In saying that, the Conservatives are not the answer either. Im almost parallel with Table5 in ideology right now. The Cons lost me awhile ago with their move to the TaliBaptist Reform party and their refusal to move far away from that area. The east is still very cognizant of that fact regardless what Alberta wants to think.