"Stephen Harper" Ad

[Flames in 07]

Originally Posted by Devils'Advocate

Aye. But they were voted in on a promise to clean up government, to stop these kind of shenanigans, to restore faith in our public institutions. Instead, they've been the same old same old....

I don't recall them saying they'd eliminate the 10% thing.

I don't think the conservatives are perfect by any means but they are head and shoulders more responsible with public money ... this silly commercial notwithstanding we haven't had massive gong shows with public money the way we had with Jean.

[Hemi-Cuda]

add another to the pile of would-be Liberals who won't vote that way because of the idiot they put in charge. why can't we have primaries and let the voting public actually choose our leaders?

[peter12]

Originally Posted by Devils'Advocate

Aye. But they were voted in on a promise to clean up government, to stop these kind of shenanigans, to restore faith in our public institutions. Instead, they've been the same old same old....

The 10% rule helps all parties. Not just the Conservative Party.

[evman150]

When you're in Alberta your vote doesn't matter nearly as much as it does in other places in the country, like say my riding, for example.

In most ridings in Alberta, only one candidate has a chance of winning. In my riding there are three candidates (Liberal, NDP, Cons don't really have a chance but they're not too far off), in other ridings there are three or even four possible winners.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by evman150

When you're in Alberta your vote doesn't matter nearly as much as it does in other places in the country, like say my riding, for example.

In most ridings in Alberta, only one candidate has a chance of winning. In my riding there are three candidates (Liberal, NDP, Cons don't really have a chance but they're not too far off), in other ridings there are three or even four possible winners.

What does that even mean so far as logical arguments go?

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by peter12

What does that even mean so far as logical arguments go?

i dont know...but man it was funny.

A vote in victoria means more than a vote in Calgary...you read it here first folks!!!

Awesome.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by transplant99

i dont know...but man it was funny.

A vote in victoria means more than a vote in Calgary...you read it here first folks!!!

Awesome.

Or that it's somehow a bad thing when a bunch of people decide to vote Conservative all at once.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by peter12

Or that it's somehow a bad thing when a bunch of people decide to vote Conservative all at once.

Or any other party in certain areas of the country that vote consistently one way or another.

bizarre statement.

[Flames in 07]

Originally Posted by transplant99

i dont know...but man it was funny.

A vote in victoria means more than a vote in Calgary...you read it here first folks!!!

Awesome.

well at first I thought he meant the disproportionate voters to seats ratio that Alberta has had in the past ... but then the second sentence goes a bit OT to that ... so anyone's guess, but yes, a vote in say Charlottetown means more than a vote in Calgary.

[evman150]

Just means that my vote has a higher chance of mattering than somebody's in Alberta.

Votes have the same absolute value. Votes in close contests go up in (relative) value. What meant more in 2000, a vote in Florida or a vote in California?

[evman150]

Originally Posted by peter12

Or that it's somehow a bad thing when a bunch of people decide to vote Conservative all at once.

Never said that. I think it is, but I'm biased. Objectively, it's not a bad thing.

[mykalberta]

Originally Posted by guzzy

The guy is the most honest and arguably the best PM we have seen in decades. He is by far the most competent leader Canada has right now.

If you don't like it move south.

Quoted for truth, however he will likely move back to BC to dodge something eventually.

[Russic]

I don't really fit in with my alberta brethren, so I'm not going to stir this pot any more than it already has been! Over the past few years I've really grown to despise arguing about government. Some people really like getting shoulder deep in a good heated debate, but it seems to me that it always ends with nothing accomplished and everybody pissed. Personally I think the whole lot of them should be tossed (but I'm a bit of a downer).

The commercial made me laugh ... I found it funny how obviously a good amount of money went into something as simple and basic as making the guy look human, and it managed to fail miserably. The smile at the end was the best.

[Bring_Back_Shantz]

Originally Posted by Hemi-Cuda

add another to the pile of would-be Liberals who won't vote that way because of the idiot they put in charge. why can't we have primaries and let the voting public actually choose our leaders?

Ahhh, are you serious?
You do realize that if you wanted to vote for the leader of the Liberal party, you are totally able to do so don't you? Just join the party.

[octothorp]

Originally Posted by Russic

The commercial made me laugh ... I found it funny how obviously a good amount of money went into something as simple and basic as making the guy look human, and it managed to fail miserably. The smile at the end was the best.

Yeah, it really is a Burnesque smile. You can just imagine an off-screen exchange; "The public sees me as an ogre? I ought to club them and eat their brains." I have a mixed opinion on him and his policies, but as far as any sort of personal charisma, he's dreadful. Good thing for him he's running against an equally unsympathetic Liberal leader.

[onetwo_threefour]

The other thing about this ad I haven't seen mentioned is how obviously (and blatantly for a stronger word) it targets the US Republican-style demographic. I mean, the mother at the park, they had to put a soccer shirt on her to make sure we knew she was a soccer mom. It's like they feel that the public is so stupid that they need cues to figure out whether the actor is talking to them or some other demographic. The characters in this commercial seemed overtly modeled on demographics pulled from the pundits analyses of Republican victories of the past decade south of the border. The Conservative Party seem incapable of subtlety which the Lberals always had in spades.

[FanIn80]

No matter which way you shake the tree, Harper is the best apple out of the bunch.

That gets my vote.

[Thunderball]

Originally Posted by onetwo_threefour

The other thing about this ad I haven't seen mentioned is how obviously (and blatantly for a stronger word) it targets the US Republican-style demographic. I mean, the mother at the park, they had to put a soccer shirt on her to make sure we knew she was a soccer mom. It's like they feel that the public is so stupid that they need cues to figure out whether the actor is talking to them or some other demographic. The characters in this commercial seemed overtly modeled on demographics pulled from the pundits analyses of Republican victories of the past decade south of the border. The Conservative Party seem incapable of subtlety which the Lberals always had in spades.

Subtle? Like the whole "Stephen Harper will put soldiers on our streets" subtle, like "hidden agenda" subtle?

Conservative ads do resemble the Republican ads, I'll give you that... but the Liberals don't exactly churn out cerebral ads either. They are notorious for scaring the median voter into voting for them.

[FanIn80]

Originally Posted by Thunderball

Subtle? Like the whole "Stephen Harper will put soldiers on our streets" subtle, like "hidden agenda" subtle?

Conservative ads do resemble the Republican ads, I'll give you that... but the Liberals don't exactly churn out cerebral ads either. They are notorious for scaring the median voter into voting for them.

Exactly.

Liberal M.O.: Lie to Canadians, steal money from Canadians, embarrass Canadians on the world stage. Blame the Conservatives for everything and scare Canadians into voting against the Conservatives.

Conservative M.O.: Try to appear as human and non-threatening as possible, so voters will finally elect them to make the changes that this country needs (whether people who fear change like it or not).

NDP M.O.: Hang around and look for crumbs.

Why people have such a hard time climbing out from beneath the Liberal wool is beyond me.

[MarchHare]

The corruption of the Liberal party is still unmatched in the free world - the Gun Registry, Shawinigate, Sponsorship... just to name a few.

All of those scandals occurred under Chretien, who has been retired for five years now. If you're going to attack the party, at least go after current Liberal MP/candidates (and there's certainly plenty to attack Dion over). Is it fair game for someone opposed to the CPC to bring up issues they had with Preston Manning or Brian Mulroney?

i dont know...but man it was funny.

A vote in victoria means more than a vote in Calgary...you read it here first folks!!!

Awesome.

I love how you twist his words so they fit into your worldview of poor alienated Albertans. All he was saying is that an individual vote in a "swing" riding has greater importance than a vote in a riding that solidly votes for one party. This is true whether he's talking about Albertans who overwhelming elect conservatives or voters in PEI who always elect Liberals. It's also true in the US -- a vote in a swing state like Ohio has a much greater influence on the outcome of the election than a vote in a "safe" state like California or Mississippi.