NDP is not a bad vote Shannon at least you are supporting a party that is straight forward with their intentions.
Although I do not personally vote NDP (Read Jack Layton's book Homelessness - Lots of info but no substance), I do agree with many of Jack Layton's principles.
Such as Electoral Reform and increasing the role of Cabinet Solidarity and Ministerial Responsibility.
If you look at the political systems of Germany, Australia and New Zealand you will notice much greater representation for the voters.
A mix of proportional representation and first past the post would benefit Canada. Multi member plurality is far advanced.
To quote Layton: "Our electoral system was invented before the telephone - maybe its time for a change"
Voting against someone instead of voting for someone is fundamentally flawed.
To steal from the words of Gandhi: "You must be the change you want to see in the world"
The Liberals see themselves as a natural ruling party in Canada - which for our greater history has been true.
However, power tends to corrupt; but absolute power corrupts absolutely.
That is why Canada is a great place to live as we can all agree to disagree and most of the time can have a beer or two while doing so.  MMM beer
LOL - that made me think of the hockey game from "Canadian Bacon". Say anything you want, vote for who you want, but never ever say "Canadian beer sucks!".
Excellent point! This is a great country and I don't think anyone is wrong to believe what they believe, regardless of what side of the fence you are on just don't personally attack people on the other side...and don't ever say a bad thing about beer, ever!!!!! Friends can debate and keep it friendly...I find all this discussion fun!
I have to quote a friend of mine as we were discussing the upcoming election he voiced some of his opinions to me and I think what he says below sums up exactly how I feel, I could not have said this any better.
"The NDP have a lot of great ideas, but their policies would run our economy into the ground.
The Conservatives would slowly try to turn us into the Great White Republican Religious Military Right (Northern Edition).
I've always been Liberal, but I do agree that it's time for a change due to their abuse of power, sense of complacency, etc...
HOWEVER, I think the change should be within the Liberals, not removing the Liberals. Â Despite the scandals, they have brought Canada lightyears ahead...the economy is booming, unemployment is way lower, civil liberties increasing, distancing Canada from the US, and all kinds of other great things. Â Granted, there is still LOTS of issues they haven't dealt with properly...health care & its privatisation (bad), actually living up to the Kyoto Accord as opposed to just blaming the US, education (although that's provincial), etc etc etc
My hope would be that the Liberals win another minority, but that this election puts a big-time fear into them so that they make the necessary internal changes, and address the big issues, with support from the NDP (mainly) and approval of the Conservatives. Â A lot to ask for I know, but ya never know.
Even a Conservative minority would be tolerable, because the Liberals & NDP would be able to put the kaibosh on anything too nutty.
A Conservative majority scares the shit out of me, and everyone I've talked to!"
NDP is not a bad vote Shannon at least you are supporting a party that is straight forward with their intentions.
totally agree, they have some great ideas....but who and how would we pay for them....they would either have to raise taxes dramatically or cut funding in necessary areas....if they ever became fiscally responsible they would have my vote.
However, power tends to corrupt; but absolute power corrupts absolutely.
For all you idiots buying this conservative bullshit about the sponsorship 'scandal' turning the Liberal Party 'corrupt':
- In 03-04, Canada collects 186 BILLION dollars in tax revenue.
- Somewhere between 250million and 350 million were spent on sponsonship programs over like 7 years. Mind you, this was during the quebec seperation movement, so most of this money was to appease them. I can't determine how much of that 250M was wasted. but 250M in the context of 186B is peanuts.
- Liberals apprently get a kickback of 1 million.
So our blantantly 'corrupt' goverment 'stole' a million bucks out of a potential 186 billion. Or say around 0.000005% of the buget. I'm sure we lose more money via rounding error than by this 'corruption'. A million bucks may sound like a lot to normal people, but think about how the other 186Billion safely made it to thier destinations before you use this ridiculous waste of time called the sponsorship scandal to affect your vote.
Are there people out there who will try and rip of gov't off? Yup, they exist on the conservative side too.
I can't imagine anyone in K-W voting conservative. You guys have so much man-love for each other and they'll ban those same sex marriages you guys want so bad.
I really do not appreciate having $800 deducted from my pay cheque.
Yeah, the conservatives will get rid of that. 1% GST cut at the expense of raising the income taxes on the poorest people in the country. Do you like social programs? They cost MONEY, you'll always pay massive taxes in Canada if you want a free heathcare system.
And regardless, if I were to steal a single Xbox from Wal-Mart a company worth billions can I use that argument to justify my actions.
You miss the point and I hate metaphors when used in debates because they NEVER accuratley reproduce the event they are trying to simulate.
I made a mistake of voting NDP once (remember Bob Rae).
Now, I have no intention of voting NDP, but in fairness to the Ontario NDP government, I think part of the reason they had managed to plunge Ontario into severe deficit situation was more economic timing (ie. the recession in '91) than anything. Â That being said they will forever be viewed as a tax and spend party that can't manage the economy... But back to the point...
As for the Liberals, do you really want someone in charge of the country that:
steals from us and gives to their friends
wastes our hard earned $$
Not an excuse, but other parties have had their share of scandals too, I don't think any single party can claim the moral high ground (possibly the NDP, but then again, they've never had the responsibility of governing either).
thinks we cannot take care of our kids without putting them in daycare
Personally, I think the liberals are bang on here (sort of). Â In general, I view the general public as fairly stupid (maybe I have an elitest view, but whatever). Â If you give the idiots money, they'll spend it, not necessarily in the best ways. Â Eg. look at the record debt levels and refinancing rates of homeowners in the US. Â Take out a second mortgage to buy a boat... Â Nice move genius. Â Now whether the federal gov't is better at implementing the program is another story...
only gets tough on crime when i suits them
What does "tough on crime" mean? Â Crime levels have been DROPPING. Â The only problem is the constant stream of 24h news channels that would like you to believe that the apocalypse is coming and that crime levels have never been higher. Â This is just an election catch phrase.
brags about budget supluses (that were actually created cause they cannot properly forecast) and will not give the money back to the people that it belongs to
Agreed that the Liberals are probably low-balling the estimates. Â Which in general I view as a good thing. Â I think it makes sense to have a contingency reserve and a bit set aside for "economic prudence", if the economy goes south, then at least there's a little wiggle room and we aren't immediately dipping into the red (remember budgets are forecast on estimated GDP numbers, it's not like the government has a standard "paycheque"). Â And as far as running surpluses, in times of relative economic stability with low inflation and low unemployment it makes sense that there should be a surplus and it should go towards reducing the federal debt. Similarly when the economy hits a rough patch and goes into recession, it makes sense that the government should be running (temporary) deficits. Â In reality, the federal cuts made by the liberals in the early 90's have reduced gov't spending to close to it's lowest post-war levels in terms of GDP. Â And this is a LIBERAL gov't which supposedly are known for spending like drunken sailors. Â On the other hand the US has a conservative government (in terms of social policy, but not in terms of fiscal). Â They have managed to simultaneously cut taxes (mainly to higher income earners which in general will do less to stimulate the economy than a cut to low to middle class earners), while increasing gov't spending through the war in Iraq, adding a whole new gov't dept (Homeland Security). etc. etc. etc, leading to the massive structural deficit that now exists (and no, it's not because of 9/11).
Anyways back to this country...
Although I'm somewhat annoyed with all the ridiculous rhetoric thrown around in this election (the Liberal ads are brutal). I don't think the Conservatives are as crazy neo-conservative (as portrayed by the scare-mongering ads of the Liberals) as say the Republican party, but I still see their social agenda as a little to the right of my own views. Â As well, I view the Liberals as more capable of handling the economy and keeping the gov't finances in order, which is probably what it comes down to for me...
In a nutshell, for me, I plan to vote socially progressive and fiscally conservative, which is clearly a Liberal vote for me.
And btw guys, a good discussion so far, no matter what your views are...
I'm sure we lose more money via rounding error than  by this 'corruption'. A million bucks may sound like a lot to normal people, but think about how the other 186Billion safely made it to thier destinations before you use this ridiculous waste of time called the sponsorship scandal to affect your vote.
A rounding error is a mistake, or possibly ignorance. Â Corruption is a choice, and shows a lack of integrity. Â I'd rather have someone stupid and honest then smart and dirty. Â As far as the $ % , this goes back to the disconnect argument (ok if its only a few $, bad if it's more). Â Do you want a corrupt government as long as they're only a little corrupt?
Are there people out there who will try and rip of gov't off? Yup, they exist on the conservative side too.
you betcha, aren't the Conservatives made up mostly from members of the old Alliance Party...not good!
I can't imagine anyone in K-W voting conservative. You guys have so much man-love for eachother that they'll ban those same sex marriages you guys want so bad.
Sorry BBZ sometimes you need use metaphors because those you are debating with lack the intelligence to draw the similarities on their own. My point was that it is not the dollar value – but the ethical decision made.
And Canada's Healthcare system is no longer what it used to be. See Northern European countries and France for good healthcare systems. The UN has not rated Canada's healthcare system favorably in sometime.
The lack of family doctors in this country is concerning - You only need to look at the line-ups when new family physicians come to town. People waiting for hours to get a family doctor - Not a Healthcare system worth bragging about.
Corruption is a choice, and shows a lack of integrity.
Agreed, but I think the point is it's a draw. The Conservatives have no moral high ground over the Liberals here. And the other point of it being a miniscule fraction of the gov't budget is that the media has blown this WAY out of proportion. Tag the word "scandal" on it because it's a slow news day...
A rounding error is a mistake, or possibly ignorance. Â Corruption is a choice, and shows a lack of integrity. Â I'd rather have someone stupid and honest then smart and dirty. Â As far as the $ % , this goes back to the disconnect argument (ok if its only a few $, bad if it's more). Â Do you want a corrupt government as long as they're only a little corrupt?
A very valid point...if it could be proven without a doubt that Martin is the only corrupt politician, or the Liberal Party is the only corrupt party....but I highly doubt this is the case. What remains to be seen is how corrupt the others are.
haha Did you actually use France as an example of things working perfectly?
I don't call weeks worth of riots and declining job rates an example of utopia. You know what? Maybe I get it now. I think that THIS is the conservative utopian view and the future of Canada you are striving to achieve.
Funny part is, I'm a fiscal conservative at heart. But once they started spewing all this crap about same-sex marriages, religion and war, I realised it's not the party for me.
I always thought that given the choice, Canada would never have elected a GW Bush. Seeing/Hearing/Reading about a potential conservative gov't sends a chill down my spine that maybe, my fellow canadians aren't as able to see through the rhetoric as I thought them able.
The Conservatives have no moral high ground over the Liberals here.
I disagree. Â The sponsorship issue is the most publicized example, but there are other examples, and a number of the other issues (same sex marriage, for example) are moral issues. Â Whether they have the high-ground or low-ground is dependant on your view, but they do have staunch differences.
haha Did you actually use France as an example of things working perfectly?
I never claimed the entire French system was better, rather that we could learn a few things from their healthcare system.
I too am fiscally conservative and socially progressive. Last year I campaigned for Bev Shipley, Middlesex Centre (Con), Tim Gatten North London (Con), and Irene Tietz - Oxford (Green).
The point being that I am not willing to toss out all morals in the name of monetary gain.
I have written at length about preserving the rights of gay marriage and the importance of environmental policies. However, I do not see Harper jeopardizing either.
For any of you thinking of voting conservative in the next election, I dare you to take the following challenge:
Say the following three times. I guarentee you will not be able to complete the third iteration without throwing up.
Primie Minister Stephen Harper
Ugh, I think I'm gonna be sick..
Done.
I feel better already.
As for the surpluses...while I agree that a small suplus is good. The ones that they have delivered have been way out of line. When you are saying until the end of the year that the suplus will be X billion dollars and then say after the year is over it's 9X billion dollars. You need to go back to school and get a math lesson.
The Mulroney government was given extreme confidence by the Canadian public and an overwhelming majority. As I suggested this leads to corruption.
I am not arguing with a political bias on which party is more likely to become corrupt rather that power itself has that impact. This is why I strongly advocate for an improved electoral system.
It is not that I am "full" of myself Big E, instead I am confident:)
Even when the Conservatives win, we will still be seen as a left leaning country by the US right wing.
I made a mistake of voting NDP once (remember Bob Rae).
As for the Liberals, do you really want someone in charge of the country that:
steals from us and gives to their friends
wastes our hard earned $$
thinks we cannot take care of our kids without putting them in daycare
only gets tough on crime when i suits them
brags about budget supluses (that were actually created cause they cannot properly forecast) and will not give the money back to the people that it belongs to
Just my hard earned 2cents....
Hobbes
Personally I feel that this election 2 years pre-mature is a gigantic waste of $$. For that I blame the opposition, which is mostly the conservatives. We will likely end up with another minority government which means we haven't taken a step forward, but prolonged the pain and might have another upheaval in 2 years again anyway. Elections are not cheap to run (the actual vote counting/collecting/etc.). That is actually the issue that has angered me the most this election.
I would say that it is the Liberal party's fault for the pre-mature election since they thought that they could run the government like they had a majority.
I am not arguing with a political bias on which party is more likely to become corrupt rather that power itself has that impact.
And yet you say:
I will accept a few arguments about why Liberals may be better than Cons - but not moral gound.
So maybe I'm confused. How can "corruption" be an issue in this election if the Conservatives are no better than the Liberals. The Conservatives platform is: "Vote for us because the Liberals are corrupt".
I'll admit the Liberals have butchered the campaign. All that they REALLY needed to argue was:
1) The gov't accounts are in good hands, there hasn't been a deficit in like 8-9 years. The federal debt to GDP ratio is dropping year by year.
2) The economy is in good shape, unemployment is low.
3) The liberals don't have any off the wall socially conservative right wing agenda.
Period. Game, set, match. Liberal majority. End of story. But instead they argue about stupid things like notwithstanding clause, gov't scandal, banning weapons in space, etc. etc. etc. I think they must have a bunch of monkeys on typewriters writing their ads.
1) The gov't accounts are in good hands, there hasn't been a deficit in like 8-9 years. The federal debt to GDP ratio is dropping year by year.
There has been no deficit cause
they slashed health care (which in turn meant the provinces had to cut).
they gutted the Military (still have no new Helicopters)
they have reduced the EI program and funnel the $$$ into general coffers
2) The economy is in good shape, unemployment is low.
Our crappy $$ and a good US economy has more to do with that than their management.
3) The liberals don't have any off the wall socially conservative right wing agenda.
The conservatives allow their members to speak their minds. There were many Liberals that voted against same-sex marriage, just as there were Conservatives that we for it.
They have no agenda (other than getting re-elected). That is part of the problem. They just go which ever way the wind takes them. Gun shootings in TO.....let's ban handguns. What a joke.
Period. Game, set, match. Liberal majority. End of story.
Conservative majority.
I think they must have a bunch of monkeys on typewriters writing their ads.
hmmm...I thought we had heard the last of Group Action  :D
Comments
Bleeding heart Liberals please visit:
http://www.ndp.ca/credibilityhunt
If you are really voting because of the value gap vote NDP not Liberal.
Prime Minister Stephen Harper
Prime Minister Stephen Harper
Prime Minister Stephen Harper
Ahh its a beautiful thing!!
Oh - And personally I am more afraid of someone who decides (albeit on a whim) to remove the notwithstanding clause!!
Should Canada really be an Oligarchy of Unelected Supreme Court judges???
NDP!
stp
Although I do not personally vote NDP (Read Jack Layton's book Homelessness - Lots of info but no substance), I do agree with many of Jack Layton's principles.
Such as Electoral Reform and increasing the role of Cabinet Solidarity and Ministerial Responsibility.
If you look at the political systems of Germany, Australia and New Zealand you will notice much greater representation for the voters.
A mix of proportional representation and first past the post would benefit Canada. Multi member plurality is far advanced.
To quote Layton: "Our electoral system was invented before the telephone - maybe its time for a change"
Voting against someone instead of voting for someone is fundamentally flawed.
To steal from the words of Gandhi: "You must be the change you want to see in the world"
The Liberals see themselves as a natural ruling party in Canada - which for our greater history has been true.
However, power tends to corrupt; but absolute power corrupts absolutely.
Excellent point! This is a great country and I don't think anyone is wrong to believe what they believe, regardless of what side of the fence you are on just don't personally attack people on the other side...and don't ever say a bad thing about beer, ever!!!!! Friends can debate and keep it friendly...I find all this discussion fun!
I have to quote a friend of mine as we were discussing the upcoming election he voiced some of his opinions to me and I think what he says below sums up exactly how I feel, I could not have said this any better.
"The NDP have a lot of great ideas, but their policies would run our economy into the ground.
The Conservatives would slowly try to turn us into the Great White Republican Religious Military Right (Northern Edition).
I've always been Liberal, but I do agree that it's time for a change due to their abuse of power, sense of complacency, etc...
HOWEVER, I think the change should be within the Liberals, not removing the Liberals. Â Despite the scandals, they have brought Canada lightyears ahead...the economy is booming, unemployment is way lower, civil liberties increasing, distancing Canada from the US, and all kinds of other great things. Â Granted, there is still LOTS of issues they haven't dealt with properly...health care & its privatisation (bad), actually living up to the Kyoto Accord as opposed to just blaming the US, education (although that's provincial), etc etc etc
My hope would be that the Liberals win another minority, but that this election puts a big-time fear into them so that they make the necessary internal changes, and address the big issues, with support from the NDP (mainly) and approval of the Conservatives. Â A lot to ask for I know, but ya never know.
Even a Conservative minority would be tolerable, because the Liberals & NDP would be able to put the kaibosh on anything too nutty.
A Conservative majority scares the shit out of me, and everyone I've talked to!"
totally agree, they have some great ideas....but who and how would we pay for them....they would either have to raise taxes dramatically or cut funding in necessary areas....if they ever became fiscally responsible they would have my vote.
In Canada can you do a write-in? I'm thinking Tyler Durden is as good as anyone.
Mark
P.s. please note that anyone who A: Knows who I'm talking about and B: agrees with me, really shouldn't be allowed to vote.
For all you idiots buying this conservative bullshit about the sponsorship 'scandal' turning the Liberal Party 'corrupt':
- In 03-04, Canada collects 186 BILLION dollars in tax revenue.
- Somewhere between 250million and 350 million were spent on sponsonship programs over like 7 years. Mind you, this was during the quebec seperation movement, so most of this money was to appease them. I can't determine how much of that 250M was wasted. but 250M in the context of 186B is peanuts.
- Liberals apprently get a kickback of 1 million.
So our blantantly 'corrupt' goverment 'stole' a million bucks out of a potential 186 billion. Or say around 0.000005% of the buget. I'm sure we lose more money via rounding error than by this 'corruption'. A million bucks may sound like a lot to normal people, but think about how the other 186Billion safely made it to thier destinations before you use this ridiculous waste of time called the sponsorship scandal to affect your vote.
Are there people out there who will try and rip of gov't off? Yup, they exist on the conservative side too.
I can't imagine anyone in K-W voting conservative. You guys have so much man-love for each other and they'll ban those same sex marriages you guys want so bad.
And regardless, if I were to steal a single Xbox from Wal-Mart a company worth billions can I use that argument to justify my actions.
Not likely.
However, I am glad you brought up the $186 Billion dollars in tax revenue. I really do not appreciate having $800 deducted from my pay cheque.
Yeah, the conservatives will get rid of that. 1% GST cut at the expense of raising the income taxes on the poorest people in the country. Do you like social programs? They cost MONEY, you'll always pay massive taxes in Canada if you want a free heathcare system.
You miss the point and I hate metaphors when used in debates because they NEVER accuratley reproduce the event they are trying to simulate.
It is for this reason that party’s must have checks placed on them by the electorate.
I fear Canada may become complacent like Japan and Mexico (Under Vicente Fox).
Now, I have no intention of voting NDP, but in fairness to the Ontario NDP government, I think part of the reason they had managed to plunge Ontario into severe deficit situation was more economic timing (ie. the recession in '91) than anything. Â That being said they will forever be viewed as a tax and spend party that can't manage the economy... But back to the point...
Not an excuse, but other parties have had their share of scandals too, I don't think any single party can claim the moral high ground (possibly the NDP, but then again, they've never had the responsibility of governing either).
Personally, I think the liberals are bang on here (sort of). Â In general, I view the general public as fairly stupid (maybe I have an elitest view, but whatever). Â If you give the idiots money, they'll spend it, not necessarily in the best ways. Â Eg. look at the record debt levels and refinancing rates of homeowners in the US. Â Take out a second mortgage to buy a boat... Â Nice move genius. Â Now whether the federal gov't is better at implementing the program is another story...
What does "tough on crime" mean? Â Crime levels have been DROPPING. Â The only problem is the constant stream of 24h news channels that would like you to believe that the apocalypse is coming and that crime levels have never been higher. Â This is just an election catch phrase.
Agreed that the Liberals are probably low-balling the estimates. Â Which in general I view as a good thing. Â I think it makes sense to have a contingency reserve and a bit set aside for "economic prudence", if the economy goes south, then at least there's a little wiggle room and we aren't immediately dipping into the red (remember budgets are forecast on estimated GDP numbers, it's not like the government has a standard "paycheque"). Â And as far as running surpluses, in times of relative economic stability with low inflation and low unemployment it makes sense that there should be a surplus and it should go towards reducing the federal debt. Similarly when the economy hits a rough patch and goes into recession, it makes sense that the government should be running (temporary) deficits. Â In reality, the federal cuts made by the liberals in the early 90's have reduced gov't spending to close to it's lowest post-war levels in terms of GDP. Â And this is a LIBERAL gov't which supposedly are known for spending like drunken sailors. Â On the other hand the US has a conservative government (in terms of social policy, but not in terms of fiscal). Â They have managed to simultaneously cut taxes (mainly to higher income earners which in general will do less to stimulate the economy than a cut to low to middle class earners), while increasing gov't spending through the war in Iraq, adding a whole new gov't dept (Homeland Security). etc. etc. etc, leading to the massive structural deficit that now exists (and no, it's not because of 9/11).
Anyways back to this country...
Although I'm somewhat annoyed with all the ridiculous rhetoric thrown around in this election (the Liberal ads are brutal). I don't think the Conservatives are as crazy neo-conservative (as portrayed by the scare-mongering ads of the Liberals) as say the Republican party, but I still see their social agenda as a little to the right of my own views. Â As well, I view the Liberals as more capable of handling the economy and keeping the gov't finances in order, which is probably what it comes down to for me...
In a nutshell, for me, I plan to vote socially progressive and fiscally conservative, which is clearly a Liberal vote for me.
And btw guys, a good discussion so far, no matter what your views are...
A rounding error is a mistake, or possibly ignorance. Â Corruption is a choice, and shows a lack of integrity. Â I'd rather have someone stupid and honest then smart and dirty. Â As far as the $ % , this goes back to the disconnect argument (ok if its only a few $, bad if it's more). Â Do you want a corrupt government as long as they're only a little corrupt?
you betcha, aren't the Conservatives made up mostly from members of the old Alliance Party...not good!
LOL!
Agreed, but I think the point is it's a draw. The Conservatives have no moral high ground over the Liberals here. And the other point of it being a miniscule fraction of the gov't budget is that the media has blown this WAY out of proportion. Tag the word "scandal" on it because it's a slow news day...
A very valid point...if it could be proven without a doubt that Martin is the only corrupt politician, or the Liberal Party is the only corrupt party....but I highly doubt this is the case. What remains to be seen is how corrupt the others are.
I don't call weeks worth of riots and declining job rates an example of utopia. You know what? Maybe I get it now. I think that THIS is the conservative utopian view and the future of Canada you are striving to achieve.
Funny part is, I'm a fiscal conservative at heart. But once they started spewing all this crap about same-sex marriages, religion and war, I realised it's not the party for me.
I always thought that given the choice, Canada would never have elected a GW Bush. Seeing/Hearing/Reading about a potential conservative gov't sends a chill down my spine that maybe, my fellow canadians aren't as able to see through the rhetoric as I thought them able.
A vote for Martin is a vote for Durden.
Jack (Edward Norton)- The real Paul Martin - btw a great Finance Minister (that is with the utmost sincerity)
Tyler Durden - The Paul Martin that Paul Martin wants to be at election time.
But remember the gun is in the same mouth.
Totally agree. Â The sponsorship scandel is AN issue, but not THE issue. Â But as mentioned above, that's simply a pattern with the media.
I never claimed the entire French system was better, rather that we could learn a few things from their healthcare system.
I too am fiscally conservative and socially progressive. Last year I campaigned for Bev Shipley, Middlesex Centre (Con), Tim Gatten North London (Con), and Irene Tietz - Oxford (Green).
The point being that I am not willing to toss out all morals in the name of monetary gain.
I have written at length about preserving the rights of gay marriage and the importance of environmental policies. However, I do not see Harper jeopardizing either.
Again see:
http://www.ndp.ca/credibilityhunt
For a chance at a free trip wherever Martin's ships are docked.
I will accept a few arguments about why Liberals may be better than Cons - but not moral gound.
Done.
I feel better already.
As for the surpluses...while I agree that a small suplus is good. The ones that they have delivered have been way out of line. When you are saying until the end of the year that the suplus will be X billion dollars and then say after the year is over it's 9X billion dollars. You need to go back to school and get a math lesson.
Hobbes
I refer you to the Mulroney years...
someone is pretty full of himself?
The Mulroney government was given extreme confidence by the Canadian public and an overwhelming majority. As I suggested this leads to corruption.
I am not arguing with a political bias on which party is more likely to become corrupt rather that power itself has that impact. This is why I strongly advocate for an improved electoral system.
It is not that I am "full" of myself Big E, instead I am confident:)
I would say that it is the Liberal party's fault for the pre-mature election since they thought that they could run the government like they had a majority.
And yet you say:
So maybe I'm confused. How can "corruption" be an issue in this election if the Conservatives are no better than the Liberals. The Conservatives platform is: "Vote for us because the Liberals are corrupt".
I'll admit the Liberals have butchered the campaign. All that they REALLY needed to argue was:
1) The gov't accounts are in good hands, there hasn't been a deficit in like 8-9 years. The federal debt to GDP ratio is dropping year by year.
2) The economy is in good shape, unemployment is low.
3) The liberals don't have any off the wall socially conservative right wing agenda.
Period. Game, set, match. Liberal majority. End of story. But instead they argue about stupid things like notwithstanding clause, gov't scandal, banning weapons in space, etc. etc. etc. I think they must have a bunch of monkeys on typewriters writing their ads.
Our crappy $$ and a good US economy has more to do with that than their management.
The conservatives allow their members to speak their minds. There were many Liberals that voted against same-sex marriage, just as there were Conservatives that we for it.
They have no agenda (other than getting re-elected). That is part of the problem. They just go which ever way the wind takes them. Gun shootings in TO.....let's ban handguns. What a joke.
Conservative majority.
hmmm...I thought we had heard the last of Group Action  :D
Hobbes
Game.Set.Match. You dont know what you are talking about.
The US economy is in the tanks and our Dollar is going very well right now. 0.86 to the USD last time I checked. We're doin' great.