Jump to content

2006 Canadian Federal Elections


Who Are You Voting For?  

30 members have voted

  1. 1. So Which Party Would Get Your Vote On Jan. 23?

    • The Liberal Party (Grits)
      11
    • The Conservative Party (Conservatives)
      9
    • The New Democratic Party (NDP)
      4
    • The Bloc Québecois (Damn Separatists)
      2
    • The Green Party (?)
      2
    • Vote Yourself To Parliament (Smart)
      2
    • Undecided (Make A Choice Now!!!!!)
      0
    • Not Voting (Don't Complain About The Govt.)
      0


Recommended Posts

So people ready forrr another one of my amazing polls? I guess all u canadians out there are wondering who to vote for on the elections and im kinda jealous all these universtities are getting all the fun by having their own polls so i thought i'd have some fun and bring up a hot poll.

>REMEMBER U DONT HAV TO BE CANADIAN TO VOTE ON MY POLL!!

:hlogo: Forever

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 62
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Tough choice.

You have the Liberals lead by a slimey twit who has proved only that he's really not able to take the step from Finance Minister, where he was incredible, to Prime Minister. In NHL parlance, he's an AHLer and not ready for the big show. His party is buying votes by opening the vault, and if they get a majority, they'll close the vault again and be fiscally responsible after promising to spend but 'suddenly' realizing in a few months that Canada needs to trim the fat to pay off the debt.

Then you have the Conservatives led by an American wannabe who is giving every indication of fiscal responsibility, but the undertones that are offered in his ideals seem to indicate a willingness to spend like Brian Mulroney. He wants to cut the GST - that which was brought in to pay off Canada's debt and which is now only paying the interest on said debt - and that will inevitably put us further in the hole. He wants to improve education and health care, but gives the impressing that the money for that will come out of thin air.

Ah, the NDP. If we were to travel that route we'd be utterly socialist, which isn't necessarily a bad thing, but we'd be so far in debt, the International Banks would be putting us on the watch list and we'd hear things about Canada flirting with bankrupcy - something we haven't heard since the Mulroney years. Health care would be for everyone, education would be wonderful, university students might not take entire lives (if that) to get out of debt, but again, one has to wonder how he's going to find all this currency.

The Bloq is a statement, but at least they're big enough to make some kind of inpact on current politics. As far as I'm concerned, though, they Bloq is the most deceptive party out there. They tried to buy votes by enticing non-political, Quebec hockey fans to give them their vote when they gave this idea about the Quebec team in the Olympics, etc. If that isn't the most blatant vote-buying technique, then I don't know what is. If you believe in Quebec separating (not getting into that here), then this is your vote. If not, vote for one of the other three.

The Green party, as far as I'm considered, is a waste of a vote - and so is any other vote other than the big three (four). In voting for anyone else, you're basically tossing away the chance to give at least the best of what the three (four) offer a chance. People who vote Green, or anything like that like to say they're making a statement, and then when someone gets into power they don't want, or wanted less than another party, they whine and complain the whole time. Make the vote count and then write your MP if you have problems, don't make your voice meaningless by voting for something that has absolutely zero chance of making a difference in this country.

I don't know what other people think or are interested in, and I won't go into any more detail, however if the conversation becomes lively enough (and civil) I'd love to hear what everyone thinks and have a real debate. I'm not sure that's possible on a hockey site (where passions run way too high anyhow) at all, though.

*shrugs*

Just some opinions.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't been fully following the issues (I'll be paying attention soon though) but I can't even look at Harper without being creeped right the ###### out.

Liberals lost my vote, at least until they bring someone new in.

Jack Layton might get in simply because everyone seems sick of the Liberals and do not trust the Conservatives.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not my business for whom you vote but, for pete's sake, think twice before voting the liberals in again. that would be downright foolishness on our part. :blink:

people vote for them often out of fear (see trizzak) of the other parties - not a very good reason, really. :blink: :blink: :blink:

Edited by shortcat1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Tough choice.

The Bloq is a statement, but at least they're big enough to make some kind of inpact on current politics. As far as I'm concerned, though, they Bloq is the most deceptive party out there. They tried to buy votes by enticing non-political, Quebec hockey fans to give them their vote when they gave this idea about the Quebec team in the Olympics, etc. If that isn't the most blatant vote-buying technique, then I don't know what is. If you believe in Quebec separating (not getting into that here), then this is your vote. If not, vote for one of the other three.

What you're talking about is demagogy, and its an core part of democracy. Every party everywhere in any democracy on Earth does it.

I've heard a funny story about it not long ago, about the federal election. The Conservatives did the milk run of retirements home, bringing old folks to have some coffee at the Dunkin Donuts (or something similar), then brought them to a political rally... but when they arrived at the rally, the old folks suddenly realized it was the Conservative party and they balked since they were all Liberals and they asked to be brought back home.

Edited by KoZed
Link to post
Share on other sites

Why on earth don't the NDP and the Bloc sit down together and see if they might have enough in common to make an alliance? They are both social democratic in nature and if the NDP agreed to recognize Qc as a distinct part of Canada and give it a greater degree of self-government on social and cultural issues, this would be a serious threat to win. Hell, toss decriminalized marijuana and a new energy program into the mix (Bloc and NDP should support that) and you get the Greens and the Potheads in the coalition, they would win for sure!

Link to post
Share on other sites
Why on earth don't the NDP and the Bloc sit down together and see if they might have enough in common to make an alliance? They are both social democratic in nature and if the NDP agreed to recognize Qc as a distinct part of Canada and give it a greater degree of self-government on social and cultural issues, this would be a serious threat to win. Hell, toss decriminalized marijuana and a new energy program into the mix (Bloc and NDP should support that) and you get the Greens and the Potheads in the coalition, they would win for sure!

A formal alliance would paint the Bloc in a corner as far as his "We defend Quebec" platform goes (Contestation 101: you have more power outside the State institutions then in it) and for the NPD it would be a political suicide in the rest of Canada to side with "Those Who Wants To Break Up Our Country®". Speaking of the Greens, I -almost- worked for them for this election, but they seemed so disorganized I backed out.

Its really not an easy choice for someone like me.

- I can't stand the nation-building through State spending, and I think the Federal government should be more decentralized. In that same logic, I think my province should get more autonomy, so I can't vote for the Liberals.

- I'm fiscally on the Right, so I can't vote for the NDP.

- I'm socially on the Left, so I can't vote for the Conservatives.

- There's no Bloc Pot running in my circonscription.

- I'm an environmentalist but I dont want to support a party who only has ONE major preoccupation.

- I'm not a separatist, so I can't vote for the Bloc Quebecois.

Seriously, if there is an independant I'll probably vote for him. Democracy is about representation. An independant would probably be what represents me the most: a young middle-class white boy with a white-collar education working in a blue-collar job whom no party catters to.

Either that or I run myself, and once elected I plot for a putsh, crown myself Emperor of Canada and make History as a cruel but fair Enlighted Despot who people will remember as having united together canadians of all ehtnicity, religions and languages in a shared contempt of the Toronto Maple Leafs. :P

Link to post
Share on other sites

all you cool cats that are on the left but hate Martin.... vote NDP...

We are cool, we are the hip thing. Tell a girl at the bar you vote NDP and you are half way home! Harper is a jerk, martin is a tool, the greens are weird. NDP! NDP! NDP!

Okay, I'm done.

(guess who that 1 vote for NDP belongs to.... feels like the real election)

Link to post
Share on other sites
A formal (Bloc/NDP) alliance would paint the Bloc in a corner as far as his "We defend Quebec" platform goes (Contestation 101: you have more power outside the State institutions then in it) and for the NPD it would be a political suicide in the rest of Canada to side with "Those Who Wants To Break Up Our Country®".

Well, KoZed old friend I'm going to disagree with you here.

Yes a Bloc/NDP alliance would be weird but politics makes for strange bedfellows, as goes the adage adopted from Shakespeare. So consider this -- If a poll of declared voters for the Cons/Lids/NDP were held, and the question was "Would you consider granting some degree of autonomous self-rule to Québec in order to stabilize the Canadian federation?" then it's my bet that the NDP supporters would be the most open-minded of the three.

Both parties are leftist social democratic, so policy is similar.

The Bloc has already thrown its hat into the federal ring, so they are clearly willing to play their hand in that arena. This could be the next step.

The NDP has zero seats in Qc and the Bloc has zero seats outside Qc -- that reality alone clearly points to a win-win collaboration, the only challenge, and it is a big challenge, would be selling it properly. I think it could be done.

It's probably too late now, but if Layton and Duceppe were bold and looked at this possibility, it could reshape the Canadian political landscape.

As for the Greens, so long as Canada does not have a proportional representation system (I think it should), they would probably put in with the NDP if minimal platform concessions were made and a Green was guaranteed a place as an environmental advisor in the new gov't -- the Greens/NDP is an alliance waiting to happen, the demographics of the two parties' supporters are very similar.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Jean Luc, as a theoretical matter I think you are mostly right, but practically wouldnt the Bloc have a real hard time in that coalitioning with an ROC party ties them to the federation? Also, I fear that the ascendancy of Boisclair in the PQ indicates at least a small rightward tack in Quebec, which would hurt the viability of the coalition.

Frankly, aside from the whole separtism thing, I've always sorta had a soft spot for a lot of Blox guys.... Duceppe often sounds like the smartest guy in the room at leader's debates (in French and English).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Colin - good summary. I agree with much of what you say. Martin has been a huge disappointment as PM. I voted for him last time because of his performance as finance minister, but all he's been concerned with since is spreading enough money around to stay in power.

I'm on the right fiscally, so the scenario you described (Martin promising the sun to get into office, then closing the vault when elected) is the best result I can hope for IF the Liberals are elected.

The NDP aren't an option in my books. We have an economy to run, and we're competing for jobs against stiff competition to the immediate south. Higher taxes (or even taxes at their current level) and increased social programs will not help. It could be argued that our health system is an advantage in the fight, because companies pay a large chunk of the health care bill through benefits. More and different social programs will not be an advantage, and can only lead to Canada being uncompetitive because taxes (including corporate) will have to support it.

I share a certain unease about Harper. But thus far, he's run a pretty moderate campaign, and managed to keep all his redneck friends in check. (Actually, I'm more concerned about some of the more extreme elements of his party than Harper himself). His promise to reduce the GST is pure populist politics (which I hate), and he's come out with some expensive policies too. But, Martin is the main alternative, and he's promising lower taxes (income taxes, which are a better choice) and a big hunk o' spending too.

I agree with shortcat1. The Liberals attempts to wrap themselves in the flag, bash Americans for political gain, provoke fear of the Conservatives... I'm tired of it. They've been in power too long, and the oft-talked about sense of entitlement is widespread. Now, they're trying to bribe me with my own money (they all do this to a certain extent, of course, but Martin seems to be doing it more).

What we get can't be much worse than what we've got (can it?)... and regardless, I'm willing to take the chance. I'm voting Conservative.

Link to post
Share on other sites

wait.... lowering progressive income tax is better than lowering regressive sales tax?

Yes, you are fiscally right-wing.

Harper officially made me ill with the whole 'gay marriage vote even though you can't have a gay marriage vote' thing... thats pure pandering.

Link to post
Share on other sites
wait.... lowering progressive income tax is better than lowering regressive sales tax?

Yes, you are fiscally right-wing.

Harper officially made me ill with the whole 'gay marriage vote even though you can't have a gay marriage vote' thing... thats pure pandering.

Yes, it is. A lower income tax improves productivity, while a lower sales tax does not. Productivity (or lack thereof) is a major problem in Canada vis-vis the U.S. Besides, unlike the U.S., the proposed income tax cuts are all on the rate that applies to the lowest level of income, and an increase in the basic exemption (you can earn more $ before having to pay any tax). This makes income tax more progressive.

I agree with you on the gay marriage issue. Populist politics, pandering, placating the social conservatives... it's all pretty pathetic. (Sorry - got carried away with the alliteration). I disagree with certain policies of ALL the parties. If I'm going to vote (and I am), it will be for the candidates/parties which offend me least. Such is life in a democracy, no?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Jean Luc, as a theoretical matter I think you are mostly right, but practically wouldnt the Bloc have a real hard time in that coalitioning with an ROC party ties them to the federation? ....

Well, yes and no. If the Bloc repositioned themselves with a "neo-sovereignty" platform, and pointed to semi-autonomous regions (see Catalonia etc. and Spain; Sicily and Italy; Zanzibar and Tanzania) and pledged to develop and improve on this sort of arrangement, it would I believe satisfy the majority of "soft-nationalists" in Québec.

Meanwhile the NDP could put the plan forth as a compromise that could be acceptable for the majority of open-minded (read:NDP) voters in the ROC. Actually the idea of a viable resolution to the long-standing/nagging "Québec Question" might even draw in some Con/Lib voters, don't you think?

Anyway just an idea -- not going to happen soon, neither Bloc nor NDP have hired me as a consultant!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Excellent posts everyone.

But let me tell you right now what might be a shocker the Liberals will win another minority government and we will have another vote of non-confidence within 2 years. If anything other than this happens I will be floored.

As for the Bloq and the NDP forming an alliance I don’t think it is possible, but all that rests in the party leaders to work out a compromise.

Harper is scary I think he wants to become George Bush’s best friend up north and send Canadian kids to war. Maybe that’s just being its how I feel.

His followers are like cultists the ones I have seen anyways. I rode a train to Ottawa last year with him on it and when we were riding the escalator on the way up the train station which was full of his supporters chanting his name it was real eerie. After he got up the escalator about 4 beautiful women hugging him greeted him and kissing him taking pictures it was weird.

I remain undecided to whom I will vote for it is a tough decision to choose the lesser of 3 evils.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes, it is. A lower income tax improves productivity, while a lower sales tax does not. Productivity (or lack thereof) is a major problem in Canada vis-vis the U.S. Besides, unlike the U.S., the proposed income tax cuts are all on the rate that applies to the lowest level of income, and an increase in the basic exemption (you can earn more $ before having to pay any tax). This makes income tax more progressive.

I agree with you on the gay marriage issue. Populist politics, pandering, placating the social conservatives... it's all pretty pathetic. (Sorry - got carried away with the alliteration). I disagree with certain policies of ALL the parties. If I'm going to vote (and I am), it will be for the candidates/parties which offend me least. Such is life in a democracy, no?

fair enough, I'm always down for lowering the base rate when it is fiscally reasonable.

But lowering the sales tax often helps out poorer people more than base rate cuts and it generally increases consumption, which in turn helps the economy.

I don't quite get your apparent veheminence against populism, but don't you think that praying on the prejudices of our population is a particularly disgusting way to get votes?

Link to post
Share on other sites
fair enough, I'm always down for lowering the base rate when it is fiscally reasonable.

But lowering the sales tax often helps out poorer people more than base rate cuts and it generally increases consumption, which in turn helps the economy.

I don't quite get your apparent veheminence against populism, but don't you think that praying on the prejudices of our population is a particularly disgusting way to get votes?

On sales tax: it does increase consumption. Does it help poor people more than base rate cuts? I don't know about that. First, let's be clear that the proposal is to 'eventually' get the rate down from 7% to 5%, so it's not going to make a huge impact on most people. Secondly, I would argue it'll have more of an impact on rich people. Many basic items (mortgage payments/rent, groceries, some clothes) are GST-exempt already, and these make up a higher percentage of the poor's spending. The middle class and rich have more disposable income, and therefore spend more on 'goodies' which almost always have GST attached to them.

I agree that preying on prejudices is a particularly disgusting way to get votes. Also disgusting is lining the pockets of your own party and selected friends by defrauding taxpayers. This isn't a choice between an angel and a saint, it is true. However, the 'free vote' being promised, if it passes on the side of opposing same-sex marriage, is a parlour trick, since the Supreme Court has already decided the issue. I don't like that I have to make this kind of reasoning for the Conservatives, but there you have it. There's no shiny clean options to be found.

Getting to another issue (just to complicate things) that made me decide in favour of the Conservatives: day care. Martin has announced an agreement with the provinces ($5 billion, I believe) to create more subsidized day care, and his campaign platform calls for a further $6 billion on top of this. The Conservatives propose a tax break for people with children under 6. (I won't rant about how they're playing fast and loose with taxpayers money, because they're both doing it.) As someone who has made the decision to raise kids at home (at significant financial sacrifice), I am strongly opposed to subsidizing other people's day care with my tax money. This isn't health care, which everyone needs. If you can't afford kids, don't have them. If a party insists on doing something for families with young children, give me the money and I'll decide what to do with it. The Liberals don't trust us with our own money (as one of Martin's advisors made clear, when he commented that people would blow it on beer and lottery tickets). Ridiculous.

Now look what you did! You got me started!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have been away from Canada too long to remember the exact workings and applications of the GST... frankly I think we are splitting hairs over the relative economic benefits. As a elitist left-winger I generally wonder as to the necessity of 'tax relief', but Canadian taxes are certainly not low and there might be some room to play with. I must admit some level of ignorance as to that.

Don't forget that subsidized day care is in a way a public works program, it should help employment - doubly so since it not only employs day care workers, but also makes it easier for people to go to work full time (helping the productivity problem you noted earlier).

Another good reason to be for the subsidy instead of the child-credit is that this is somewhat of a scenario where what might be a relatively insignificant amount of money for each individual can be wielding in aggregate by the government to produce a very tangible and positive result.

Also, correct me if I'm wrong, but don't richer families not qualify for the subsidized day care? By expanding the subsidy we get to have rich families pay for poor families' day care (a good thing according to us lefties, maybe a bad thing according to others).

Of course you are smart with your money, I trust you. I'm smart with my money too, you can trust me. In fact, I'm sure that everybody on this board is a reliable, honourable person who could handle their money far better than any government ever could. But this is a big country and there are a lot of Leaf fans... so we need some controls.

Link to post
Share on other sites

NDP-Bloc Alliance

You made some good points JLP. What you wrote hits close to the truth... in theory. As someone pointed out, in practice such an alliance would be extremely hard to achieve and to maintain.

The way I personnaly sum up the entire constitutionnal problems, from a political (non-cultural) point of view is simply a matter of authority: which government has which authority, and how much of it does it have.

The Sovereigntist-Nationalist creed in Quebec is: we want authority over things instead of Ottawa.

On the other hand, you've got the NDP, who is your basic, run-of-the-mill left-wing party. Its primary cause is equality, and its primary tool is wealth redistribution. Tax, spend. Tax, spend. To tax and spend, a left-wing party relies on the State presence, on its authority to tax and spend.

So on one hand you've got a party who wants to shield Quebec from the authority of Ottawa; and on the other hand you've got a party who wants the State to be more present.

So although both parties are on the same side (left-wing), in practice they would have very different views when it'd come time to put forth policies. The conflict here would probably lead to something we've already seen before between the Bloc and the Liberals. The NDP would want to spend federal money and the Bloc would argue for that money to be given to the province. The alliance stops there.

Unless Layton accepts to pull the Federal government out of certain fields right from the start and give those dollars directly to the Quebec provincial governmant, I dont see how such a duo could work out when decisions starts to be made.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Don't forget that subsidized day care is in a way a public works program, it should help employment - doubly so since it not only employs day care workers, but also makes it easier for people to go to work full time (helping the productivity problem you noted earlier).

Another good reason to be for the subsidy instead of the child-credit is that this is somewhat of a scenario where what might be a relatively insignificant amount of money for each individual can be wielding in aggregate by the government to produce a very tangible and positive result.

Also, correct me if I'm wrong, but don't richer families not qualify for the subsidized day care? By expanding the subsidy we get to have rich families pay for poor families' day care (a good thing according to us lefties, maybe a bad thing according to others).

Of course you are smart with your money, I trust you. I'm smart with my money too, you can trust me. In fact, I'm sure that everybody on this board is a reliable, honourable person who could handle their money far better than any government ever could. But this is a big country and there are a lot of Leaf fans... so we need some controls.

I suppose it would help employment by providing more day care jobs. I guess that's the difference between the right and left: you guys are OK with direct intervention and having the government create the jobs, while the right wants government to monitor the controls, provide the right environment, but stay out of the way.

Subsidized day care would not help employment because it makes it easier for people to work. That helps increase the pool of available employees, not employment itself. At least, going by the usual definition of employment (people working/total people available to work).

The day care plan is universal. Link

So I'm paying for rich people's day care, too! Super.

On your last point, I agree that government coordination is required in some areas. Where to draw the line? Healthcare and pensions have more or less universal applicability, since the vast majority will use both. Child care has widespread applicability - but less than what is required for government involvement IMO. Not everyone has kids, not everyone with kids uses childcare, and in any event it's a cost that comes from a conscious decision (hopefully!) to have kids in the first place. More differing philosophy of right vs. left. That battle will rage for eons after we've had our say in this thread!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, some great posts so far.

I can't and won't vote liberal. They are so corrupt it isn't funny. I have heard the same crap from them for 12 years and I'm sick of it.

NDP will not form a government and I am sick to death of listening to Jack say "send more NDP to the house so we can make things work" NDP=bankrupcy for Canada

Green has a couple of interesting ideas such as low tax on good things and high tax on bad things but I agree with Colin it is a waste of vote.

Conservatives will have my vote. I am tired of the other parties telling me it is too scary to vote for them. I am an informed voter and that tactic won't work on me. I am liking the Harper platform and look forward to real accountability in government.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Are there any sites that outline what parties want to do? I've only heard bits and pieces so far but I'd like to educate myself a bit more. I just know my vote isn't going to the Tory's. Never have and never will trust the Conservative's. And I live in the homebase of Conservative land too :blink:

Link to post
Share on other sites
Are there any sites that outline what parties want to do? I've only heard bits and pieces so far but I'd like to educate myself a bit more. I just know my vote isn't going to the Tory's. Never have and never will trust the Conservative's. And I live in the homebase of Conservative land too :blink:

Not voting Conservative? I'm surprised King Ralph doesn't throw you out of the province! :lol:

Liberal

Conservative

NDP

Green Party

I won't bother with the Bloc - you can't vote for them anyway. ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites
Not voting Conservative? I'm surprised King Ralph doesn't throw you out of the province! :lol:

Liberal

Conservative

NDP

Green Party

I won't bother with the Bloc - you can't vote for them anyway. ;)

:lol: Thanks for the links. I think Ralph is the only Conservative I don't mind. Paying me $400 isn't too shabby either ;)

Although lately I've noticed a change in the youth in Alberta. Most of the young 'uns in the family are voting Liberal and just about everyone at the university likes the Green Party. Although I agree with what others have said, the Green Party is a waste of a vote. They're too pre-occupied with one issue and I can't help but think they'll half-ass everything else. If I had to vote today, it'd be Liberal but like I said, I'm still unedcuated on most issues. Reading some of the NDP's campaign is making me laugh though so I don't think I'll be voting for them. One thing these aren't mentioning though is what happens with our athletes. Does anyone know the different parties stance on our program in that sense? I realize it's not a big issue but I'd like to see something done with our Olympic athletes kind of like the way the Americans handle theirs.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




×
×
  • Create New...