2011 Canadian Election Thread

[MelBridgeman]

Originally Posted by evman150

Assign a truth value to the following statement:

75% of Canadians did not vote for the Conservatives.

The answer is true. You can plea all you want, but the statement is still valid.

Doesn't mean the claim is substantive in any way, however, which is obviously your point.

How are you spining that? Are you including people who did not vote and those who can't vote? Cause that is the only way i can see how you came up with that number and yes its not substantive in any way.

[Ark2]

Originally Posted by MarchHare

Surely she knew this stunt would get her fired, but she went ahead with it anyway. I don't agree at all with her actions, but I'll admit that what she did was courageous (and stupid).

Sounds like she was fed up with her job and was probably going to quit anyway. It would be like calling your boss and #@%! to his face when you already planned on leaving. I guess we could say that she stood up for what she believes in, but I doubt that even she knows what she believes in. She said that she needs to "stop Harper's agenda" but what is it that she finds so heinous about his agenda in the first place? What has he done or plans on doing that is so bad that she feels warrants Canadians rising up and overthrowing the government? I guarantee she doesn't even know. Just a dumb kid that got swept up in the rhetoric of a bunch of losers.

[Ark2]

Originally Posted by MelBridgeman

How are you spining that? Are you including people who did not vote and those who can't vote? Cause that is the only way i can see how you came up with that number and yes its not substantive in any way.

If you look at all eligible voters, only 25% voted Conservative (or so she claims). .

[MelBridgeman]

Originally Posted by Ark2

If you look at all eligible voters, only 25% voted Conservative (or so she claims). .

So 25% of the 60% who showed up vote cons.

Is it fair to say that a good majority of the 40% of who didn't show prob would of voted con?

If they didn't care either way may as well chalk that up for the cons.

[The Goon]

Originally Posted by Ark2

How so? I don't really get what was so ballsy about it?

To stand in that forum, with the Prime Minister, the House, the Senate, the media and others, and do an organized single-person protest? That's pretty ballsy. I would have pooed my pants in the same position.

Like I said, I don't agree with her stance. But good on her for having the courage of her convictions.

[Byrns]

The Flames streaker was more "ballsy" than this girl.

She got her 15 min of fame including a interview on CBC where she asked for a job... I'm pretty sure that was her goal all along.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by The Goon

I don't agree with the page, but man, that was pretty ballsy.

Replace ballsy with outright stupid and you'd be closer to the mark.

Maybe she should have held up a sign that said

Booga booga booga hidden agenda.

[peter12]

Counting non-voters as part of the great deciders in a democracy is literally one of the stupidest things ever.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by peter12

Counting non-voters as part of the great deciders in a democracy is literally one of the stupidest things ever.

Its giving credit to the concept of vote by proxy.

The bottom line is there's no offical way to track a non voters vote, so saying that x percentage of people that didn't vote for Harper makes no sense.

For all we know they could have figured that a conservative majority was in hand and they didn't vote because they were confident of that result.

[NBC]

"We have to stop him from wasting billions on fighter jets, military bases, and corporate tax cuts while cutting social programs and destroying the climate. Most people in this country know what we need are green jobs, better medicare, and a healthy environment for future generations."

The Senate's page program website says DePape is from Winnipeg and studying international development and globalization. She interned last summer at the Manitoba office of the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives and wrote about travelling in a van with other activists to the G20 protests in Toronto last June.

I like what Mike Duffy has said about this incident, "These things are unfortunate because every time there's some kind of event like this it means security gets tightened," Duffy said. "And we want this to be the people's place, where people can come and talk to politicians and make their point, and so now who knows what the end result will be, but it will not be more relaxed security. It will mean tighter security.

[zuluking]

It's not ballsy when you've been brainwashed for years with "international development", "globalization", "policy alternatives", and G20 protesting. It's merely par for the course.

[Resolute 14]

The biggest problem there is that the media gave some stupid little attention whore far more attention than she deserved.

All that should have been said was "a senate page was removed from her job and fired after disrupting the speech from the throne", and that's it. No name, no platform to spew her idiocy.

[Reggie Dunlop]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

The biggest problem there is that the media gave some stupid little attention whore far more attention than she deserved.

All that should have been said was "a senate page was removed from her job and fired after disrupting the speech from the throne", and that's it. No name, not platform to spew her idiocy.

Um no. That's not how it works.

[Resolute 14]

Actually, yes it is. Go disrupt a legislative session. If you are lucky, the media might make a footnote on a story about the day's session. More likely, you'll either just get tossed out on your ass and forgotten, or if you are truly disruptive, fined for it.

But because some idiot decided to make it a "political protest", the media ran with it for its own advantage. There is a great deal of irony in this girl wanting an "Arab spring" to overthrow a democratically elected government given the hope of achieving democracy is among the hopes of many of the Arab protestors.

So yes, lets throw some idiot on the front page of the news because she abused her position as a page to try and make the throne speech all about her. Bravo, media. Bravo.

If nothing else, things like this really do show that we are not at all like the US. In America, it is the extreme right that is full of brain-dead morons. In Canada, it is the extreme left.

[Reggie Dunlop]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

Actually, yes it is. Go disrupt a legislative session. If you are lucky, the media might make a footnote on a story about the day's session. More likely, you'll either just get tossed out on your ass and forgotten, or if you are truly disruptive, fined for it.

But because some idiot decided to make it a "political protest", the media ran with it for its own advantage. There is a great deal of irony in this girl wanting an "Arab spring" to overthrow a democratically elected government given the hope of achieving democracy is among the hopes of many of the Arab protestors.

So yes, lets throw some idiot on the front page of the news because she abused her position as a page to try and make the throne speech all about her. Bravo, media. Bravo.

If nothing else, things like this really do show that we are not at all like the US. In America, it is the extreme right that is full of brain-dead morons. In Canada, it is the extreme left.

That you don't like it really isn't important.

Seriously, do you want what happens in the Senate and House of Commons to go unreported?

If the nation's business is being disrupted, I want to know by whom and why.

[Reggie Dunlop]

Oh, and if Mike Duffy wants Hill security tightened, a good place to start with would be his porkbarrel riff-raff colleagues.

[Resolute 14]

Attention seeking clowns do not deserve the attention. As I said, a one sentence note would have covered, in its entirety, her little outburst.

In the House and Senate, the nation's business is what the Government and Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition are doing. That is what I want the media to be focusing its attention on, as that is what will affect Canadians.

[Reggie Dunlop]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

Attention seeking clown do not deserve the attention. As I said, a one sentence note would have covered, in its entirety, her little outburst.

In the House and Senate, the nation's business is what the Government and Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition are doing. That is what I want the media to be focusing its attention on, as that is what will affect Canadians.

Those benches are filled with attention-seeking clowns.

Any media outlet is free to publish or broadcast a one-sentence note, or elaborate if they wish.

Not sure why you want to restrict this freedom.

[Resolute 14]

Freedom to do something does not constitute an obligation to do something. The claim that I wish to "restrict" this freedom is a product of your own delusions. My argument is that the media should not be wasting ink on this girl, not that they should not be allowed to.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by NBC

"We have to stop him from wasting billions on fighter jets, military bases, and corporate tax cuts while cutting social programs and destroying the climate. Most people in this country know what we need are green jobs, better medicare, and a healthy environment for future generations."

This is great, and laudable, but its typical of people that study globalization which is the boogey man of the radical left, and the flock of people that protest at events like the G20 that don't understand that things like corporate tax cuts and financial support of the military are things that have to take a large part in the government of the country.

Sure its great that you feed the starving puppies, but you have to protect the country that the puppy lives in and you have to create programs that stimulate jobs so that people can afford to feed their own damn puppies.