Conservatives To Slash Federal Funding of Political Parties [Update-CPC backs down]

[FanIn80]

Originally Posted by Cheese

LOL...Politics! The only facts in all of this is that Harper is a buffoon who hasnt got the charisma or ability to get his party a majority even when the rest of the parties are in turmoil. Harper is the issue plain and simple...then Conservative politics a close second. Both are extremely distasteful to most Canadians.

Anything created by the Bloc & NDP wont last past the summer and we will be in another election this fall.

Two elections in a row proves your post is incorrect.

[ikaris]

Originally Posted by Iowa_Flames_Fan

I'm sure they have talked before. It's a bit like saying "I'm shocked.... shocked!" to find gambling in Rick's bar in Casablanca. The fake outrage over it is a little silly--Conservatives know just as well as other parties how the parliamentary system works.

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2008/11/30/politics.html

From the article (in response to the released transcripts of Jack):

NDP deputy leader Thomas Mulcair said at a news conference that nothing in the NDP-BQ talks is any different than the contingency planning Stephen Harper himself engaged in with the two parties during the last Liberal minority in 2004.

This pretty much reinforces what you are saying. While it may shock a lot of people, this happens on a regular basis in a parliamentary system. No need to panic.

[Iowa_Flames_Fan]

Originally Posted by FanIn80

Two elections in a row proves your post is incorrect.

Not really. Harper got less than 38% of the vote in 2008, pretty comparable to the 36% he received in 06. He doesn't have much of a mandate, and if he had understood that from the beginning, it's possible much of this could have been avoided.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by ikaris

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2008/11/30/politics.html

From the article (in response to the released transcripts of Jack):

NDP deputy leader Thomas Mulcair said at a news conference that nothing in the NDP-BQ talks is any different than the contingency planning Stephen Harper himself engaged in with the two parties during the last Liberal minority in 2004.

This pretty much reinforces what you are saying. While it may shock a lot of people, this happens on a regular basis in a parliamentary system. No need to panic.

If these are talks to topple the government and force an election... then fine. That is fair. But I don't think that's what's happening.

[Blaster86]

Originally Posted by peter12

Basing your entire worldview on conspiracy theories and unquantifiable positions.

Except it's not a conspiracy theory? My mom tried to get information from the Government that she got with ease 10 years ago. She is now unable to get it, they're saying she is not allowed to see it. And it's her own personal stuff. She requested to look at the Conservative fundraising reports to see how much they raised, she was denied and as far as I know, it is supposed to be public record.

She looks at all the social housing and people with money problems because they amount they're being taxed and programs that were cut by the Conservatives. He looks at insite which has all sorts of factual backing saying it helps, and the Conservatives are trying to close it.

There is no conspiracy theory, she's just a lot more sensitive to this stuff since she's had to live through the hardships herself. She doesn't think much better of the average Federal Liberal, either.

[Iowa_Flames_Fan]

Originally Posted by ikaris

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2008/11/30/politics.html

From the article (in response to the released transcripts of Jack):

NDP deputy leader Thomas Mulcair said at a news conference that nothing in the NDP-BQ talks is any different than the contingency planning Stephen Harper himself engaged in with the two parties during the last Liberal minority in 2004.

This pretty much reinforces what you are saying. While it may shock a lot of people, this happens on a regular basis in a parliamentary system. No need to panic.

Agreed--and the bolded part is worth taking particular note of. Harper knows this is within the rules--he should also know that it's a possible play for the opposition if he goes the brinkmanship route.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by Iowa_Flames_Fan

Not really. Harper got less than 38% of the vote in 2008, pretty comparable to the 36% he received in 06. He doesn't have much of a mandate, and if he had understood that from the beginning, it's possible much of this could have been avoided.

I don't understand this perspective though. Harper is supported by a minority of the people of Canada, but he is still supported by a plurality, which is the basis of the FPTP system. A majority of Canadians didn't support Harper, but they didn't oppose him either. Instead they voted for four centre-left parties that had a wide variety of difference on many policies.

The left isn't united and Canadians know that and want that. When it really boils down to it, a Montreal Liberal has nothing in common with a rural Bloc Quebecker. Or a Toronto Dipper has very little in common with a Bank Street Liberal. There is no common philosophical ground uniting these three parties and to pretend otherwise is a joke.

[ikaris]

Originally Posted by FanIn80

You're right. It turns out that it was I who didn't read your post... it actually made sense, once I got past the first sentence.

My apologies!

No problem. Here's to hoping that cooler heads prevail! Side rant: I can't believe a party like the Bloc Quebecois can even exist. If their sole existence is based on the separation of Quebec, why can't it be banned for being some sort of seditious group?

[peter12]

Originally Posted by Blaster86

Except it's not a conspiracy theory? My mom tried to get information from the Government that she got with ease 10 years ago. She is now unable to get it, they're saying she is not allowed to see it. And it's her own personal stuff. She requested to look at the Conservative fundraising reports to see how much they raised, she was denied and as far as I know, it is supposed to be public record.

She looks at all the social housing and people with money problems because they amount they're being taxed and programs that were cut by the Conservatives. He looks at insite which has all sorts of factual backing saying it helps, and the Conservatives are trying to close it.

There is no conspiracy theory, she's just a lot more sensitive to this stuff since she's had to live through the hardships herself. She doesn't think much better of the average Federal Liberal, either.

Funny, I just wrote a paper in a political science class 8 months ago which used to the most up to date fundraising numbers. And I found it pretty easily.

To act like the Dippers are somehow the caretakers of Canada's working classes is a fallacy that only a socialist could believe.

[FanIn80]

Originally Posted by Iowa_Flames_Fan

Not really. Harper got less than 38% of the vote in 2008, pretty comparable to the 36% he received in 06. He doesn't have much of a mandate, and if he had understood that from the beginning, it's possible much of this could have been avoided.

People keep bringing that up like it actually means something in this country.

First of all, even if they did only get 38%, it's still more than any other party got. But who cares? We are not the United States. Overall vote percentage means absolutely nothing. It's all about Seats, and the Conservatives have more than twice the number of Seats as the next closest party.

Like it or not, Canadians HAVE given the Conservatives a very CLEAR mandate over the last two elections.

Here's a novel idea: Why don't the Liberals take some time off to get their own party in order, to figure out the best way to run their own business.. BEFORE they try to overthrow a democratically elected Government, 6 weeks after the last election?

[Iowa_Flames_Fan]

Originally Posted by peter12

If these are talks to topple the government and force an election... then fine. That is fair. But I don't think that's what's happening.

Really??!? You'd rather have another election? I for one would like to see this group of elected officials find a way to create a stable coalition and get back to work. I'm a little tired of going to the polls.

Harper needs to recognize the situation he's in and make it work--I don't care how, but he needs to do it. Either Harper needs to build a functional majority through reaching out to individual MPs, or find some other way to compromise and end this crisis. He owes it to the Canadian people to find a way--and if he can't do it, he deserves everything he gets. Somebody's got to run this ship--if he can't, somebody else should.

For the record, I think the likeliest outcome is that Harper remains PM--but he will have to bring somebody in from the cold to help him govern. If he can't or won't do that, then he has a very poor grasp of the situation he's in.

[Blaster86]

Originally Posted by peter12

To act like the Dippers are somehow the caretakers of Canada's working classes is a fallacy that only a socialist could believe.

I never said working class. While she believes that both Liberals and Conservatives are making it harder for the middle class, she's worries about those lower than that. The homeless, the mentally ill, the addicted. She feels this is where the Conservatives and Liberals fail. This is what she wants to see change. My mom tried to get the donation information right after the election, she was denied.

[peter12]

Forcing an election is more in precedent with what has happened with instable Parliaments. Jury-rigging faux coalitions is not.

I do agree with you. I think Harper makes moves to bring in Opposition MPs that can't stand the fact that their party is working with the Bloc. Maybe that's what he wanted to do all along is get the other parties to show their real colours.

[Iowa_Flames_Fan]

Originally Posted by FanIn80

People keep bringing that up like it actually means something in this country.

First of all, even if they did only get 38%, it's still more than any other party got. But who cares? We are not the United States. Overall vote percentage means absolutely nothing. It's all about Seats, and the Conservatives have more than twice the number of Seats as the next closest party.

Like it or not, Canadians HAVE given the Conservatives a very CLEAR mandate over the last two elections.

Here's a novel idea: Why don't the Liberals take some time off to get their own party in order, to figure out the best way to run their own business.. BEFORE they try to overthrow a democratically elected Government, 6 weeks after the last election?

Just because it doesn't affect the number of seats doesn't make it completely meaningless.

Popular vote doesn't "mean anything" in the U.S. either, but it is often used to gauge the strength of a mandate. Not that hard to understand. More people didn't vote for Harper than voted for him. These things matter, whether you like it or not.

[FanIn80]

Originally Posted by Iowa_Flames_Fan

Really??!? You'd rather have another election? I for one would like to see this group of elected officials find a way to create a stable coalition and get back to work. I'm a little tired of going to the polls.

Harper needs to recognize the situation he's in and make it work--I don't care how, but he needs to do it. Either Harper needs to build a functional majority through reaching out to individual MPs, or find some other way to compromise and end this crisis. He owes it to the Canadian people to find a way--and if he can't do it, he deserves everything he gets. Somebody's got to run this ship--if he can't, somebody else should.

For the record, I think the likeliest outcome is that Harper remains PM--but he will have to bring somebody in from the cold to help him govern. If he can't or won't do that, then he has a very poor grasp of the situation he's in.

You need to stop looking at this like the problem is all Harper's. Did you ever think that maybe Layton and Dion actually ARE the morons they both appear to be? Ever think that the reason Harper won't listen to them is because they haven't had one single brilliant idea in the last 4 years?

This may be a shock, but quite a few people don't WANT Harper to listen and work with Dion or Layton. They are both clowns.

[Blaster86]

Originally Posted by peter12

Forcing an election is more in precedent with what has happened with instable Parliaments. Jury-rigging faux coalitions is not.

So because it hasn't happened before it can't be good?

Lulz....

[peter12]

Originally Posted by Blaster86

I never said working class. While she believes that both Liberals and Conservatives are making it harder for the middle class, she's worries about those lower than that. The homeless, the mentally ill, the addicted. She feels this is where the Conservatives and Liberals fail. This is what she wants to see change. My mom tried to get the donation information right after the election, she was denied.

I'm looking at it online right now. Maybe she should look harder.

I feel sorry for alot of Canadians too. I feel some deserve their predicament to some extent. Choices are choices and consequences are consequences. But certainly there needs to be a wide range of charitable and government services to help those who need (and want) help. I just would prefer that people do it willingly instead of taking the money forcefully out of the rich like the NDP wants to do.

As for Insite, I am mainly in favour of safe injection sites. I do think they have proven to stop overdoses and to some extent limit the spread of infection of HIV and Hep C. I am not totally sure if Insite in East Hastings is necessarily doing all of that. But yeah, on the whole, I do strongly disagree with the Conservatives on that issue.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by Blaster86

So because it hasn't happened before it can't be good?

Lulz....

Well, as stated before, the vast majority of Canadians did not vote for a coalition comprising of these three parties. It's a contradiction of democracy.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Flames in 07

This belief is just so unbelievable to me. Just because it benefits your party it doesn't make it democratic.

It is by definition the exact opposite of democracy. The voters didn't vote for a merged party, they voted for 2 mutually independant parties with different platforms. If they wanted to create new parties voters should have a choice to decide on that.

Lefties are throwing morals in the garbage can the first second they see a way manufacture a coup.

Dude, we're on the same side here. I didn;t throw that into Green text because it wasn't really sarcastic. Setting aside the democratic process is the only way by which the NDP will gain power.

[FanIn80]

If there's an election, the Conservatives will get their majority and it will be a landslide like this country has never seen before.