[Jmac]

LOL heard an ad on the radio this morning from the Conservatives basically saying "Remember the BC NDP from back in the day? Yeah...Mulcair is like that. Can't be trusted!"

Geez...why does every ad have to be a shit throwing contest? I'd love to see a politician just talk straight up about the issues and not pander to the lowest common denominator of idiots that just want to vote based on hair.
I wish they'd just ban negative ads/references to other parties in political ads.

Tell me what you're going to do, don't tell me what the other guys are going to do.

[jasonturbo]

Honestly, my vote would go to whomever had the strongest stance on combating foreign investment and levelling the playing field (real estate-wise) for Canadian citizens. As well as taking a tougher stance on immigration fraud, PR residency requirements, and in general creating tougher borders.

Call it small-minded but I'm able to pay for school without taking on debt and/or borrowing from the bank of Mom & Dad, I am studying and doing a co-op in a field that is 90% likely to get me a good job after graduation, and the only real "struggle" I think I will face is buying a house in today's inflated market.

But it's hard to choose as they all seem pretty wishy-washy with their "promises" and policies. Harper says if he is re-elected, he will look into whether Canadians are being held at a disadvantage in the real estate market. My question is, why didn't he do this for the last 7 years....? If he started taking a firm stance on foreign investment back in 2006, a lot of the problems we face in Vancouver, Toronto, et al., would be nonexistent. Then there's the matter of the immigrant investor program, which to me was a huge fucking joke...

I will make the assumption that you, like many others, have never really considered the macro economic impact of the housing market that we have seen over the last ten years.

The reality is this, if the gov did not fan the RE flames for the last decade, we would likely have experienced an extended period of limited growth or potentially even recession. Finance, real estate, and construction together make up nearly 25% of our GDP... if there was no housing bubble, what would be filling the void?

By "increasing the effectiveness" of the CMHC (40 year + Zero down mortgages) and cutting the overnight lending rate the Gov. made home ownership much more affordable (on a monthly payment basis anyway lol). The banks could now approve mortgages for people they would not have traditionally approved mortgages for as CMHC protects them from any significant financial losses. What did this do? Well obviously it got builders slapping houses/condos together at an alarming rate, this created thousands of jobs, consumed massive amount of raw materials, and supported a huge manufacturing base.

The gov knows that if mortgage rates were to revert to the mean tmw there would be a lot of people in deep shit, luckily Canada can keep rates depressed for many years to come as our debt to GDP ratio is the best of any G7 country which provides a financial insulation of sorts for the country. (Lower debt to GDP means you can borrow at a lower costs, less risk = lower bond yields)

It's not that the Gov doesn't realize what's going on, they facilitated it, and until some other economic segment can pick up the slack, don't expect any serious regulation to come in that would put downward pressure on home prices.

So what's it all mean, right now homebuyers are like "damn I don't make enough money"... if the housing bubble never happened it would probably be more like "damn I don't have a job".

It's a brief and ugly explanation... but it's all there.

Edit: BTW Manic, you know that harperman news about guy getting put on leave is almost a month old now right?

[MindBomber]

I've voted Green in every election in which I've been eligible but I have a Progressive Canadian Party (the closest successor to the Progressive Conservative Party) candidate running in my riding this time, and if I choose to not vote strategically, they may be my choice.

It would be great to see the return of a party with a center-right stance on economic issues and a center, or even a center-left, stance on social issues. I know that I'm far from alone in holding that opinion.

[Manic!]

Edit: BTW Manic, you know that harperman news about guy getting put on leave is almost a month old now right?

Yes I know that but not everyone follows politics and I bet a number of people in this thread did not know that. Plus it answers some of PeanutButter's question"
Also, what are the major Harper screw ups?" in a song format

[Roach]

This link, so far, is the most comprehensive list of Conservative party abuses while in power. It's a long read, but worth reviewing prior to voting to determine if these actions are acceptable to you or not:

Harper, Serial Abuser of Power: The Evidence Compiled | The Tyee (http://thetyee.ca/Opinion/2015/08/10/Harper-Abuses-of-Power-Final/)

Kev

[Porschedog]

Honestly, my vote would go to whomever had the strongest stance on combating foreign investment and levelling the playing field (real estate-wise) for Canadian citizens. As well as taking a tougher stance on immigration fraud, PR residency requirements, and in general creating tougher borders.

Call it small-minded but I'm able to pay for school without taking on debt and/or borrowing from the bank of Mom & Dad, I am studying and doing a co-op in a field that is 90% likely to get me a good job after graduation, and the only real "struggle" I think I will face is buying a house in today's inflated market.

But it's hard to choose as they all seem pretty wishy-washy with their "promises" and policies. Harper says if he is re-elected, he will look into whether Canadians are being held at a disadvantage in the real estate market. My question is, why didn't he do this for the last 7 years....? If he started taking a firm stance on foreign investment back in 2006, a lot of the problems we face in Vancouver, Toronto, et al., would be nonexistent. Then there's the matter of the immigrant investor program, which to me was a huge fucking joke...

That's what I was hoping for as well, but it doesn't seem like any of the parties are really going to put much effort into this issue.

[hchang]

This link, so far, is the most comprehensive list of Conservative party abuses while in power. It's a long read, but worth reviewing prior to voting to determine if these actions are acceptable to you or not:

Harper, Serial Abuser of Power: The Evidence Compiled | The Tyee (http://thetyee.ca/Opinion/2015/08/10/Harper-Abuses-of-Power-Final/)

Kev

Just a disclaimer that any party that is in power will abuse power to some extent

We gotta choose the lesser of evils when it comes to politicians

[Mr.HappySilp]

Honestly, my vote would go to whomever had the strongest stance on combating foreign investment and levelling the playing field (real estate-wise) for Canadian citizens. As well as taking a tougher stance on immigration fraud, PR residency requirements, and in general creating tougher borders.

Call it small-minded but I'm able to pay for school without taking on debt and/or borrowing from the bank of Mom & Dad, I am studying and doing a co-op in a field that is 90% likely to get me a good job after graduation, and the only real "struggle" I think I will face is buying a house in today's inflated market.

But it's hard to choose as they all seem pretty wishy-washy with their "promises" and policies. Harper says if he is re-elected, he will look into whether Canadians are being held at a disadvantage in the real estate market. My question is, why didn't he do this for the last 7 years....? If he started taking a firm stance on foreign investment back in 2006, a lot of the problems we face in Vancouver, Toronto, et al., would be nonexistent. Then there's the matter of the immigrant investor program, which to me was a huge fucking joke...

Not going to happen. As much as I love to see it happen. Like some countries foreign foreign investors can only buy real estate in certain area or they can't own at all so local is still able to afford a place. But we won't coz our gov like selling Canada away. Soon we will change to Canada repulic of China.......

[Vansterdam]

not sure if this has been posted here before (not gonna bother searching)

I found this quite useful and interesting.

https://votecompass.cbc.ca/

[Manic!]

Just like the last election cons are in hiding again. A number of con candidates have missed debates because harper knows if they speak they will put there foot in there mouth.

and this:

https://www.hilltimes.com/sites/hilltimes.com/files/story_image/2015/09/brochure.jpg

Star Tory candidate denies fear mongering in B.C. flyer controversy - The Globe and Mail (http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/star-tory-candidate-denies-fear-mongering-in-bc-flyer-controversy/article26501658/)

I wonder how many people in Surrey have died by the hands of ISIS vs the number shot in drug wars.

[capt_slo]

Granted it's a stupid flyer, but the drug war shootings have not really taken place in South Surrey- White Rock so both points are as irrelevant.

They just had that one incident where the cops shot a "suicidal" person outside the police station.

The yuppies and older fairly-affluent, mostly white residents in her riding are likely much more concerned about 'whacky muslim-extremist invaders' than drug dealers

[twitchyzero]

did everyone already got something in the mail from elections canada?
I've always gotten it in the past and i haven't moved....although usually for municipal and possibly provincial...not sure about federal

[Manic!]

did everyone already got something in the mail from elections canada?
I've always gotten it in the past and i haven't moved....although usually for municipal and possibly provincial...not sure about federal

Nothing yet but it's an extra long election.

[jasonturbo]

Got my election card today.

[xxxrsxxx]

wife got hers today but I haven't received mine

[Manic!]

harper has changed the law so there will be no election day black out. We will know who has won out east as it happens.

Also if you want to get rid of harper check out Vote Together (http://www.votetogether.ca/)

[lilaznviper]

got my election card ... they moved my voting location... instead of being at a school 2 blocks away its not at a school 10 blocks away..:rukidding:

[Traum]

got my election card ... they moved my voting location... instead of being at a school 2 blocks away its not at a school 10 blocks away..:rukidding:
So instead of driving 2 blocks, you are going to drive 10 blocks now? :troll:

(Honestly, I swear I've seen some of my neighbours do the driving 2 blocks thing... )

[carisear]

harper has changed the law so there will be no election day black out. We will know who has won out east as it happens.

Also if you want to get rid of harper check out Vote Together (http://www.votetogether.ca/)

FINALLY no blackout. so retarded in this day and age that we had the blackout for so long.

[Eff-1]

Definitely won't vote for Harper. He closed the coast guard base in Kits and zero fucks were given in the face of BC voters. Not sure about NDP. But if I vote Liberal, that means I have to vote for that useless bum Hedy Fry. We are better off voting for sideshow bob.

[CharlesInCharge]

Harpers the Queens jester.
Is Harper really the bad guy here when every political thing in this country is fixed? Sheeple on.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eCgnmROBczU

[Lomac]

Definitely won't vote for Harper. He closed the coast guard base in Kits and zero fucks were given in the face of BC voters. Not sure about NDP. But if I vote Liberal, that means I have to vote for that useless bum Hedy Fry. We are better off voting for sideshow bob.

Hedy Fry... good gods, I forgot about her. I won a government award back in 2001 for a stop-motion anti-racism film. Because she was the Secretary of State of Multiculturalism at the time, she was among those who presented it. Even up on stage, you could just see her oozing her useless charm. This was also shortly before she said crosses were being burnt in Prince George by the KKK (never happened).

[murd0c]

I so wish we were able to vote for the person in our riding and who we want for PM separately..

[Traum]

A little election music in case anyone is interested:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y3C1SWVquXA

The full blurb can be found here:

Stealin' All My Dreams : BlueRodeo.com (http://www.bluerodeo.com/stealingdreams/)

[Manic!]

I have a few questions for the local con but his 4 meet and greats are all during the day when people are working. Guess I am going to have to take some time off work to see him.

[murd0c]

can you ask him on Facebook?

[Hondaracer]

I so wish we were able to vote for the person in our riding and who we want for PM separately..

That's what I've been pushing for a while but the way the parliamentary system is setup it just wouldn't work.

Funny story about the typical Know-nothing Alberta oil pigs

Know a few guys who were alwaysssss on the "fuck this we need the NDP here in alberta! Life long union clowns who's parents were slim unions and always pushed NDP! NDP! We need somone who cares for the worker in alberta!

NDP comes into power, now not one has a job, lulz

[Manic!]

can you ask him on Facebook?

:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

Good luck with that.

https://www.facebook.com/markmacdonaldnanaimo



That's what I've been pushing for a while but the way the parliamentary system is setup it just wouldn't work.

Funny story about the typical Know-nothing Alberta oil pigs

Know a few guys who were alwaysssss on the "fuck this we need the NDP here in alberta! Life long union clowns who's parents were slim unions and always pushed NDP! NDP! We need somone who cares for the worker in alberta!

NDP comes into power, now not one has a job, lulz

Alberta job loss has nothing to do with the NDP taking power.

[Ronin]

I don't know about you but terrorism and ISIS are quite far down on my list of priorities. Why do the Cons think that's all we care about?

[Eff-1]

Hedy Fry... good gods, I forgot about her. I won a government award back in 2001 for a stop-motion racism film. Because she was the Secretary of State of Multiculturalism at the time, she was among those who presented it. Even up on stage, you could just see her oozing her useless charm. This was also shortly before she said crosses were being burnt in Prince George by the KKK (never happened).

Does anyone remember when she said people in Prince George were burning crosses as we speak?

Minister apologizes for cross burning remarks - Canada - CBC News (http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/minister-apologizes-for-cross-burning-remarks-1.279168)

Her direct mail in my mailbox is so ugly and such a waste of money and paper.

I assume in this riding it's always been a vote against the conservatives, not a vote for Hedy Fry. I bet a zebra could run for the liberals in her riding and still win.

[westopher]

NDP comes into power, now not one has a job, lulz
Anyone who believes the NDP had any real effect on Alberta's current economic situation hasn't been paying much attention to any global or even national economic standing. People aren't losing jobs because NDP wants to add more corporate taxes, people are losing jobs because all they had was a bunch of fucking temp jobs to begin with. I know plenty of people still raking in the money up in fort mac. The difference is, they weren't pushing brooms underneath an electrician for 100k a year.

[Tegra_Devil]

still probably gonna vote liberal or con.

[Hondaracer]

Anyone who believes the NDP had any real effect on Alberta's current economic situation hasn't been paying much attention to any global or even national economic standing. People aren't losing jobs because NDP wants to add more corporate taxes, people are losing jobs because all they had was a bunch of fucking temp jobs to begin with. I know plenty of people still raking in the money up in fort mac. The difference is, they weren't pushing brooms underneath an electrician for 100k a year.

To think it has had a small or insignificant impact is ignorance.

While the situation I mentioned is probably just irony, my friend works in a relatively high position for one of the largest staffing companies in the oil patch, JV driver. A massive company. As soon as the NDP came into power the CEO sent out a information package basically saying that depending on how tax structure and impact to the companies they supply forces to works out, they could be potentially pulling out of Alberta completely and focusing on their interests in the southern states.

This is a CEO reacting directly to the NDP coming into power, that isn't a coincidence like my scenario was.

[westopher]

Thats someone saying there is a possibility of something happening relating to the possibility of something that hadn't even happened at that point. People are being laid off because oil is high in supply and low in demand.
Granted what you are saying is a very important thing to take into consideration, that hasn't yet become the reason.
NDP most definitely could fuck shit up temporarily with higher tax structures, but thats not in play at the moment. If there was actually high demand and low supply for oil at the moment, those companies would still be clawing at our resources even with a tax increase.

[Lomac]

still probably gonna vote liberal or con.

Finding information about the candidates here in Kamloops is damn near impossible. :okay:

[jasonturbo]

I voted NDP for Alberta lol the Cons needed to go.

The people going off about how the NDP are destroying the Province.. well, they are simple folk.

Thought the dippers are totally fucking retarded for boosting their salaries by >7% while the Province is grinding to a halt financially lol

Doesn't matter what the NDP do in Alberta for the next 4 years, Cons will be back 100%, they are just on time out right now.

It's nice to see the current polls, people finally realize that Mulcair is full of shit and it's impossible for him to deliver on his every promise and still balance the books.

I'm voting Con (no shock there), more and more people seem to be coming to the dark side with me as the election date creeps closer.

[booge_man]

The uneducated and elderly are the target audience for the Conservative Party, it's pretty much like the Republican Party of the North. Fear, Fear, and you can't do anything yourself... Only we can save you philosophy, just like the South use religion and good old white folk talk to get the masses riled up

Study links low intelligence with right-wing beliefs - The Globe and Mail (http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/the-hot-button/study-links-low-intelligence-with-right-wing-beliefs/article543361/?service=mobile)

[Tegra_Devil]

Finding information about the candidates here in Kamloops is damn near impossible. :okay:

Lol. They all suck here haha

[Bouncing Bettys]

^Bring back Nelson Riis! Kamloops was voting NDP before it was cool. They weren't voting for a party or a leader, but for the local MP because he was good at it.

[pastarocket]

Co workers were talking about the election during lunch today. -learned a new acronym from one colleague: A.B.C.

A.B.C. = Anyone but Conservative. :troll:

[Hondaracer]

I'll take anyone's bet on a con minority since you guys sound so sure of the outcome.

$100 anyone?

[Traum]

I'll take anyone's bet on a con minority since you guys sound so sure of the outcome.

$100 anyone?
I suspect it will very likely turn out to be a Cons minority as well, with the Libs coming in for a close 2nd. What I cannot gauge, however, is how close that Libs 2nd will be.

Also, at this point, I wouldn't completely rule out a Lib-NDP coalition government as well. If the Libs & NDP try to pull that card, however, I suspect Steve Harpy would try the parliament prorogue card again (just like he did in the past).

[CRS]

I'll take anyone's bet on a con minority since you guys sound so sure of the outcome.

$100 anyone?

So your bet is $100 CAD on a conservative minority win?

Just want to clear that up.

If that's the bet. I'll take you up on it.

[Manic!]

I'll take anyone's bet on a con minority since you guys sound so sure of the outcome.

$100 anyone?

Done. Call it a draw it it's a NDP/LIB coalition?

[jasonturbo]

The uneducated and elderly are the target audience for the Conservative Party


:facepalm: Like... I can't even.

NDP promises more health care for seniors, increased pension amounts, reduced pension age, and lower/free tuition.. and you think the Cons are trying to capitalize on the young and the elderly?

The Cons target audience are those that are self sufficient and are more or less happy with the level of Gov. serivices that exist and want to avoid additional taxation.

Go educate yourself, dullard.

[Manic!]

:facepalm: Like... I can't even.

NDP promises more health care for seniors, increased pension amounts, reduced pension age, and lower/free tuition.. and you think the Cons are trying to capitalize on the young and the elderly?

The Cons target audience are those that are self sufficient and are more or less happy with the level of Gov. serivices that exist and want to avoid additional taxation.

Go educate yourself, dullard.

I thought it was Christians who believed the earth was around 10000 years old, wanted the government to fight the Muslim hoard, and cut vital services.

[underscore]

Co workers were talking about the election during lunch today. -learned a new acronym from one colleague: A.B.C.

A.B.C. = Anyone but Conservative. :troll:

Is it just me or does that seem like a great way to let a complete moron run our country?

[booge_man]

:facepalm: Like... I can't even.

NDP promises more health care for seniors, increased pension amounts, reduced pension age, and lower/free tuition.. and you think the Cons are trying to capitalize on the young and the elderly?

The Cons target audience are those that are self sufficient and are more or less happy with the level of Gov. serivices that exist and want to avoid additional taxation.

Go educate yourself, dullard.

Wow so much angry cranky Conservative talk... Why you so mad bro?

[westopher]

Is it just me or does that seem like a great way to let a complete moron run our country?
Seems like a way to stop a complete moron from running our country again.

[Manic!]

Great news everybody Harper plans to double the Panda population!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Harper's panda promise: If elected, Tory leader vows to double panda population | Election 2015 (http://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/election/harper-s-panda-promise-if-elected-tory-leader-vows-to-double-panda-population-1.2589265)



Cause it's really sad we have so few Panda's left in Canada.

[jasonturbo]

Great news everybody Harper plans to double the Panda population!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Harper's panda promise: If elected, Tory leader vows to double panda population | Election 2015 (http://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/election/harper-s-panda-promise-if-elected-tory-leader-vows-to-double-panda-population-1.2589265)

Cause it's really sad we have so few Panda's left in Canada.

Amid debate over trade negotiations, climate change and the economy, the federal election campaign took an odd turn Wednesday when the Conservatives issued a light-hearted statement on news that a panda at the Toronto Zoo is pregnant.

"With the exciting announcement by the Toronto Zoo this morning of giant panda Er-Shun's pregnancy, the Conservative party today committed that a re-elected Conservative government would set a target of doubling Canada's panda population by 2016," the party said in a press release.

Thanks for sharing, it gave me that warm-fuzzy conservative feeling inside.

[vitaminG]

Also, at this point, I wouldn't completely rule out a Lib-NDP coalition government as well. If the Libs & NDP try to pull that card, however, I suspect Steve Harpy would try the parliament prorogue card again (just like he did in the past).

a lot of people seem to think lpc or ndp would support each other, i doubt it. especially lpc supporting ndp, they might as well fold up shop if they were to do that. theres really only room for one party on the left and i think its going to get even more cutthroat between lpc and ndp

[Traum]

VitaminG, I am not disagree with you. What I mean by my above statement is, I expect the Cons to take the most MP seats in this election, but with only enough to form a minority government. At that point, the Libs and NDP can only face the vote results with 2 options. Either,

1) they stay content with each being the opposition parties, or
2) they join forces and try to form a coalition government

If I were Trudeau or Mulcair, Option #2 seems a heck of a lot more attractive than just being the leaders of the opposition parties, even if it means putting up with each other for the next 3 - 4 years. When you are the leader of a political party, you gotta have the ambition and hunger to go for the top job. When the top job is totally within reach -- all you gotta do is to form a coalition with your secondary "enemy" -- you go turn that competitor into your frienemy and topple the #1 bad guy for the win.

If you were to look back to the early days of the Cons when Steve Harpy could only form a minority government, he was constantly wooing Jacky Layton to get their bills done. The Cons and the NDP are as far apart as they can be on the Canadian political spectrum, but you do what you need to do to stay in power. I would highly recommend Mr. Trudeau and Mr. Mulcair to consider the same.

[jasonturbo]

Traum, what makes you think the Libs and Cons won't want to work together and leave Mulcair on the outs?

IMO that's a far more likely scenario, Mulcair is a brash dickhead, gives Trudeau zero respect... I'm sure that gets old.

(Not suggesting Harper gives Trudeau oodles of respect, but the debate exchanges between Trudeau and Harper have been far more civil than Mulcair with either IMO)

+ there is a factor where Politicians know a formal coalition Gov. might seriously rub a massive portion of the voting population in a bad way.

[StylinRed]

27 yr old Canadian born and raised guy is facing deportation to Pakistan simply because his parents are Pakistani, thanks to Harpers insane law

EXCLUSIVE: Tories move to strip citizenship from Canadian-born terrorist (http://www.macleans.ca/news/canada/exclusive-tories-move-to-strip-citizenship-from-canadian-born-terrorist/)

The Harper government is attempting to revoke the citizenship of a convicted terrorist who was born and raised in Canada, Maclean’s has learned—a first under a controversial new law that has triggered intense debate during the election campaign.

Saad Gaya, 27, is believed to be the only Canadian-born citizen (terrorist or not) to ever face the prospect of being stripped of his citizenship. Until now, there was no legal mechanism to undo what has long been considered an irreversible birthright.

A member of the so-called “Toronto 18,” Gaya pleaded guilty to his role in an al-Qaeda-inspired bomb plot and was sentenced to 18 years in prison. Although he was born in Montreal and grew up in Oakville, Ont., the Tories say recently enacted legislation provides the power to rescind Gaya’s citizenship because they believe he is a dual national of Pakistan—by virtue of the fact his parents, who immigrated to Ontario more than three decades ago, were born there.

i don't care if he's a terrorist, this is bigger than him, it's fucking insane


And Harper wants to do it to all criminals... http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2015/09/30/bill-c-24-harper-tories-criminals-trudeau_n_8223162.html?utm_hp_ref=canada

OTTAWA — A re-elected Conservative government might look to strip dual citizens of their Canadian citizenship if they commit other heinous crimes, Stephen Harper said in a radio interview Wednesday.

Harper was on The Andrew Lawton Show to talk about Bill C-24, a new law the Tories passed this spring that strips dual citizens convicted of terrorism of their Canadian citizenship.

Lawton asked Harper if he might strip other dual citizens in the future if convicted of other crimes, giving by way of example a serial killer, a rapist or someone who did something to children.

"Well, you know, obviously we can look at options into the future," Harper responded.

"The reason we did this expansion… to terrorists and treason offences really is consistent with the way the law has always worked. You know we've been able to revoke citizenship, for example, for war criminals. So it is really been in cases where the person's criminal acts are not just vile, but they actually demonstrate that the person has no loyalty of any kind to the country or its values."

Harper said he couldn't understand why Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau and NDP Leader Thomas Mulcair believe C-24 demeans Canadian citizenship.

[vitaminG]

i just dont see a scenario where mulcaire is prime minister and trudeau is just happy to help him. if things fall apart then libs get blamed, if things somehow last 4 years, then NDP did a good job and liberals helped out. either way makes the NDP seem more legit and the liberals fall further into 3rd place.

meanwhile conservatives sit on the outside and just take potshots at all the stupid shit the coalition will inevitably do. just makes them look like geniuses and puts them in great position for the next election which wont be far away.

[Traum]

Traditionally, the Canadian Prime Minister has always come from either the Conservative Party or the Liberals (we will casually ignore how the parties evolve over time, and aren't really exactly the same thing as they are today). More importantly, until the current administration, the Liberals and the Conservatives have almost always been the Official Opposition party while the other serves as the governing party. So suffice to say, I view the Libs and the Cons as more of the rivals for each other. So to me, it seems less likely that they will work together.

Also, current polling seems to suggest the Cons are at the top (in terms of popular support) with a slim lead, followed by the Libs in 2nd place, and the NDP in 3rd. Generally with situations like this, the 3rd place finisher will more often play the kingmaker role. So unless Libs' support drop back to 3rd place -- this seems unlikely to me -- I don't expect them to team up with the Cons to leave the NDP out.

But hey, anything can happen in politics. I certainly don't expect a Cons-Libs coalition / cooperative agreement happening, but if it does, I would not be super surprised.

[Traum]

i just dont see a scenario where mulcaire is prime minister and trudeau is just happy to help him. if things fall apart then libs get blamed, if things somehow last 4 years, then NDP did a good job and liberals helped out. either way makes the NDP seem more legit and the liberals fall further into 3rd place.

What about Trudeau as PM and Mulcair as some sort of deputy? That is really the scenario that would make the most sense from what I can see.

[EndLeSS8]

27 yr old Canadian born and raised guy is facing deportation to Pakistan simply because his parents are Pakistani, thanks to Harpers insane law

EXCLUSIVE: Tories move to strip citizenship from Canadian-born terrorist (http://www.macleans.ca/news/canada/exclusive-tories-move-to-strip-citizenship-from-canadian-born-terrorist/)



i don't care if he's a terrorist, this is bigger than him, it's fucking insane


And Harper wants to do it to all criminals... Bill C-24: Harper Says Tories May Consider Stripping Other Criminals Of Citizenship (http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2015/09/30/bill-c-24-harper-tories-criminals-trudeau_n_8223162.html?utm_hp_ref=canada)

This is INSANE

I'm born and raised in Canada, and I can be freaking deported to Hong Kong/ China if I'm a terrorist

We need to vote Steve out of here ASAP

[tool001]

This is INSANE

I'm born and raised in Canada, and I can be freaking deported to Hong Kong/ China if I'm a terrorist

We need to vote Steve out of here ASAP



in the case like Omar Khadr, dont understand what cad.govt was thinking. a kid brainwashed by his parents to fight in Afghanistan. and harper govt. totally against releasing him wasting tax payers $ to fight him in court regarding parole etc

im glad Elizabeth may said that he had more integrity than Harper..

it was amzing how Omar answered reporters, when asked about what harper would say about him.

Omar Khadr says will prove he's a good person | Reuters.com (http://uk.reuters.com/video/2015/05/08/omar-khadr-says-will-prove-hes-a-good-pe?videoId=364151372&mod=related&channelName=worldNews)

[underscore]

i don't care if he's a terrorist, this is bigger than him, it's fucking insane

So you'd rather keep a charged terrorist in Canada with a Canadian citizenship?

[Traum]

So you'd rather keep a charged terrorist in Canada with a Canadian citizenship?
The issue here is, the act to strip him of his citizenship is very likely unconstitutional, not whether we would rather keep a convicted terrorist in the country or not.

[EndLeSS8]

The issue here is, the act to strip him of his citizenship is very likely unconstitutional, not whether we would rather keep a convicted terrorist in the country or not.

EXACTLY.

[Manic!]

This is ridiculous. We let foreign criminals like Conrad Black into Canada but we are now trying to deport a Canadian citizen. One problem with Harpers plan. Pakistan will not take him.

[pastarocket]

Blah blah blah. Harper is trying to suck up to public service staff like me. I can't wait to vote to try to get the Tories out of office. Stop lying to me! :troll:

Prime Minister Stephen Harper?s Open Letter to the Public Service | Conservative Party of Canada - Protect our Economy (http://www.conservative.ca/prime-minister-stephen-harpers-open-letter-to-the-public-service/)

Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s Open Letter to the Public Service

October 1, 2015

For Immediate Release


Ottawa, ON – Prime Minister Stephen Harper released the following open letter to Canada’s public service:


Since coming to office, our Conservative government has made life more affordable for Canadian families and protected Canada’s fragile economy in the midst of the most severe global recession in a generation. We have worked to lower taxes on individuals and job-creating businesses, increase Canada’s economic opportunities around the world through new trade agreements, and protect Canadians here at home and from threats abroad.


We have accomplished all of this because of our partnership with, and the hard work, dedication and integrity of you: Canada’s public servants. Canadians are well-served by our world-class public service, and I have seen this first-hand as Prime Minister. During our time in Government, we have worked with you to ensure your efforts are focused on the things that matter most to Canadians, and to create a healthier workplace where good work is recognized, red tape is removed, and benefits meet real needs.


Unfortunately, in the current election context, misleading statements are being made about certain issues that matter to you and your families, including sick leave and pension entitlements.


I want to give you the facts to correct this misinformation.


Sick Leave


A new round of collective bargaining between the Government of Canada and federal public service bargaining agents began in 2014 to renew the Government’s collective agreements. The Government’s overarching goal in these negotiations is to reach agreements that are fair and reasonable for both employees and taxpayers.


The Government’s priority in the current benefit negotiations is to ensure public servants have a disability and sick leave program that is modern, comprehensive and actually meets your needs. The current, antiquated sick leave system is failing everyone. Here are the facts:

•Over 60 per cent of public servants do not have enough banked sick leave to cover a full period of short-term disability (13 weeks).
•25 per cent of employees have fewer than 10 days of banked sick leave.
•Many employees, especially new and younger employees, have no banked sick days at all.
•In contrast, a select few long-tenured individuals, including many executives, have far more banked sick days than they will ever reasonably need.


The current sick leave system leaves gaps. The Government wants to fill those gaps so that, if you get sick, you have seamless support. Canadians are best served by a healthy and productive public service. You want a healthy workplace and peace of mind knowing that, if you face a serious illness, you will have the support you need. Our Conservative government wants the same.


Some of you have accumulated sick days, but are being told that these will all disappear as though you are starting your career in the public service all over again. This is not true and has never been true. These days will be assigned an extra value under the new system, and will be available to those who need them. Discussions are ongoing about how best to integrate banked sick days into any new plan.


Pensions


Recently, some public sector union executives have alleged that the Government wants to take away your pension, in whole or in part. This is false.


In 2012, we moved to modernize and secure the public service pension plan by ensuring employees and taxpayers both pay a fair share towards pension contributions for public servants. Since 2012, the Government has not proposed any other changes to the public service pension plan nor are any contemplated. We will not be moving away from the current defined benefit plan to a defined contribution plan, target benefit plan, or any other shared-risk model. The public service pension plan is solid and fully-funded, and there is no need to make any such changes. These are the facts.


Our Conservative government has been proud of the good work done by Canada’s public servants as we navigated the global economic recession, cut taxes on families and job-creating businesses, and balanced the budget. Like other families across Canada, we know our public servants want Canada’s economy to grow and thrive, despite the continued economic turmoil we see around the world. We have protected Canada’s fragile economy, and our positive low-tax plan for the next four years will do even more, with your help, to make our country strong and prosperous.


Sincerely,


Rt. Hon. Stephen J. Harper
Prime Minister of Canada
Leader, Conservative Party of Canada

[StylinRed]

So you'd rather keep a charged terrorist in Canada with a Canadian citizenship?

like i said the issue is bigger than him, we're talking about our rights as Canadians here, you cant be blinded by this stepping stone case (that's what he's hoping); and yes it is a stepping stone, look at the subsequent article/interview with Harper, he wants to expand the scope

[jasonturbo]

This is ridiculous. We let foreign criminals like Conrad Black into Canada but we are now trying to deport a Canadian citizen. One problem with Harpers plan. Pakistan will not take him.

Conrad Black is not a foreign criminal, he was born in Canada and is a Canadian Citizen.

Muhammad Aqeeq Ansari was born in Pakistan and is NOT a Canadian citizen, he only has a Canadian PR card.

Perhaps you are referring to someone other than Muhammad Aqeeq Ansari, if that's the case feel free to correct me

Get your facts straight.

Countries do not deport their native citizens, there would be nowhere to deport them to.

Edit: Just saw you are talking about Omar K, which from my googles I could not determine if he holds more than one citizenship, but yes he was born in Canada.

[underscore]

The issue here is, the act to strip him of his citizenship is very likely unconstitutional, not whether we would rather keep a convicted terrorist in the country or not.

Ok, so what part of the constitution is this in violation of? If you're going to make that suggestion please back it up.

This is ridiculous. We let foreign criminals like Conrad Black into Canada but we are now trying to deport a Canadian citizen. One problem with Harpers plan. Pakistan will not take him.

He has a dual citizenship unless the article I read was wrong.

like i said the issue is bigger than him, we're talking about our rights as Canadians here, you cant be blinded by this stepping stone case (that's what he's hoping); and yes it is a stepping stone, look at the subsequent article/interview with Harper, he wants to expand the scope

We're talking about the rights of people with multiple citizenships who are convicted terrorists, last I checked acts of terrorism aren't particularly Canadian things to do. The only "expansion" I've heard of so far is to include other people who have moved here, have a dual citizenship, and have been convicted of a serious crime. That seems like a reasonable enough response to someone who has brought nothing but a negative impact to Canada.

[StylinRed]

We're talking about the rights of people with multiple citizenships who are convicted terrorists, last I checked acts of terrorism aren't particularly Canadian things to do. The only "expansion" I've heard of so far is to include other people who have moved here, have a dual citizenship, and have been convicted of a serious crime. That seems like a reasonable enough response to someone who has brought nothing but a negative impact to Canada.

did you ignore the article that i posted? the guy they want to deport ISN'T a dual citizen, Harper wants to consider him a dual citizen because his parents came from Pakistan 30+ years ago

as for the expansion of citizenship revocation, it's in the very next article i linked... again, stepping stones, you can assume or hope it stops at serious offenders but to allow the loosening of your rights based on hopes and dreams that a corrupt government will keep their word is far too big an ask

[Hondaracer]

Done. Call it a draw it it's a NDP/LIB coalition?

Sure.

So you and CRS I'm in for. $200 is probably enough to wager on an election lol.

Sorry for late reply I'm out in the bush hunting

[Manic!]

A member of the the party of family values in big trouble.

http://ak-hdl.buzzfed.com/static/2015-10/1/14/enhanced/webdr03/enhanced-3291-1443724718-8.jpg

http://www.buzzfeed.com/paulmcleod/conservative-mp-rick-dykstra-was-pictured-drinking-with-unde#.kmXKPXko9l

Coles notes.

Con PM goes clubing.
goes VIP and gets 6 bottles of Ciroc @ $170 each.
Takes pictures with with a bunch of girls.
Girls post pics and tweet they where parting with them and he was buying them drinks.
Girls are in high school so under age.
Brand manager for the company who sells Ciroc and is the MP's friend try's to bribe them free bottle service for life if they shut up.
One of them does not.
Cut off date for people running is the 28th. So if this guy resigns or Harper kicks him out no one can take his place.

[Traum]

Ok, so what part of the constitution is this in violation of? If you're going to make that suggestion please back it up.


If you read the newspaper just a bit, you would have known why advocates against the bill are calling it unconstitutional. For your convenience, I have the following resources for you:

Journalist group and civil liberties association start constitutional challenge to anti-terrorism Bill C-51 | Toronto Star (http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2015/07/21/journalist-group-and-civil-liberties-association-start-constitutional-challenge-to-anti-terrorism-bill-c-51.html)

https://bccla.org/2015/02/bill-c-51-is-unnecessary/

[CRS]

Sure.

So you and CRS I'm in for. $200 is probably enough to wager on an election lol.

Sorry for late reply I'm out in the bush hunting

:lol

I was a little worried when you said 'anyone' and the two of us jumped in so quickly. Was thinking a couple of other members would jump in.

[Hehe]

Ok, so what part of the constitution is this in violation of? If you're going to make that suggestion please back it up.

I'm leaving it here, it's the section 2 from most arguments.

Charters (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_Charter_of_Rights_and_Freedoms)





He has a dual citizenship unless the article I read was wrong.

He's not a dual citizen. According to Harpie, the subject *should* be eligible for Pakistani citizenship given the fact his parents were from there 30yrs ago. He's born and raised in Canada. Unfortunately, the bill (c-24) was written in a way that such condition is enough to grant gov't power to strip citizenship



We're talking about the rights of people with multiple citizenships who are convicted terrorists, last I checked acts of terrorism aren't particularly Canadian things to do. The only "expansion" I've heard of so far is to include other people who have moved here, have a dual citizenship, and have been convicted of a serious crime. That seems like a reasonable enough response to someone who has brought nothing but a negative impact to Canada.

The argument is that the bill itself is not fair. In this particular case, you want to kick him out of Canada because he's eligible to another citizenship. What if this terrorist were a Canadian pure and simple? Does that change your opinion about whether he should be deported and strip of citizenship?

If so, do explain.

If not, then you are on the same ground. You think bill C24 was BS.

[booge_man]

If you think that's unconstitutional, and not fair have a peek at Bill C-51. Way worse.

[7seven]

Candidates from all parties have been getting in trouble, especially with past social media

Santa has to be white’: B.C. Liberal candidate quits over Facebook posts

VICTORIA—A Liberal candidate in British Columbia who allegedly referred to mosques as “brainwashing stations” on social media has withdrawn her candidacy.
Cheryl Thomas was running in the riding of Victoria, but resigned Wednesday after contentious Facebook posts surfaced............

“The oppressed of the Warsaw ghettoes and the concentration camps have become the oppressors, keeping the Palestinians who are left in their ‘homeland’ in ghettos,” she allegedly wrote.
In another post, which the Star could no longer find on Thomas’ page, she also wrote: “Santa has to be white!!! You can’t have a brown guy with a beard sneaking into your house in the middle of the night! You’d be calling the bomb squad!”
The deadline for withdrawing candidates has already passed, meaning Thomas’ name will still appear on the ballot.


There is a list of other candidates who have had social media gaffes
?Santa has to be white?: B.C. Liberal candidate quits over Facebook posts | Toronto Star (http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2015/09/30/liberal-candidate-in-bc-resigns-over-facebook-posts.html)

[underscore]

did you ignore the article that i posted? the guy they want to deport ISN'T a dual citizen, Harper wants to consider him a dual citizen because his parents came from Pakistan 30+ years ago

From my understanding it still isn't clear if he is or isn't a dual citizen since Pakistan changed some laws. What seems stupid on both sides of this is I haven't seen anything stating Pakistan's stance on his citizenship, if his citizenship is revoked without confirmation from Pakistan then yes that's a problem.

If you read the newspaper just a bit, you would have known why advocates against the bill are calling it unconstitutional. For your convenience, I have the following resources for you:

Journalist group and civil liberties association start constitutional challenge to anti-terrorism Bill C-51 | Toronto Star (http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2015/07/21/journalist-group-and-civil-liberties-association-start-constitutional-challenge-to-anti-terrorism-bill-c-51.html)

https://bccla.org/2015/02/bill-c-51-is-unnecessary/

In both of those, I don't see any complaints about the ability to revoke citizenship.

The argument is that the bill itself is not fair. In this particular case, you want to kick him out of Canada because he's eligible to another citizenship. What if this terrorist were a Canadian pure and simple? Does that change your opinion about whether he should be deported and strip of citizenship?

If so, do explain.

If not, then you are on the same ground. You think bill C24 was BS.

I'm still waking up here, what part of section 2 is this no bueno with?

I think currently the most important thing is determining whether or not he has dual citizenship with Pakistan, directly from the Pakistani government. Like I said above since neither side seems to have sorted that part out yet, until then I can't say if I agree or don't with this application of C24.

[belka]

This is INSANE

I'm born and raised in Canada, and I can be freaking deported to Hong Kong/ China if I'm a terrorist

We need to vote Steve out of here ASAP

If you are a convicted terrorist you shouldn't just be deported back, you should be air dropped back into wherever the hell you, or your parents for that matter, came from. No parachute. I don't want those idiots running around Canada.

[Mr.HappySilp]

This is INSANE

I'm born and raised in Canada, and I can be freaking deported to Hong Kong/ China if I'm a terrorist

We need to vote Steve out of here ASAP

We should deport people have no clue what they are talking about or have no idea what's going on and just like to complain coz some media reported in a certain way to get attention.

If you are a terrorist you should be lock up and rot in jail. if you are a dual citizen terrorist we should deport your ass back to your home country and rot in jail.

[meme405]

I didn't read half the shit posted, cause I am at work, but I am a little confused by the general anger here.

Do you guys realize how few people get convicted of something like terrorism?

It's not like I could walk out of my house one day and be arrested and convicted of being a terrorist. You have to be into some seriously nefarious activities in order for this issue to even remotely become a fear.

[carisear]

man, people need to lighten up about peoples posts on social media.

I couldn't care less if I saw a picture of harper getting drunk when he was 21 years old, with a harem of sluts.

who gives a shit if trudeau would tweet something like "yo momma so ugly, she makes timpo's body kits look good!"

there's a reason why Trump is making waves .. people are fed up with being too PC

[Manic!]

Harper wants to expand it to other crimes outside of terrorism. Also does anyone think it's a good idea to sent someone back to the open arms of al qaeda?

[StylinRed]

I didn't read half the shit posted, cause I am at work, but I am a little confused by the general anger here.

Do you guys realize how few people get convicted of something like terrorism?

It's not like I could walk out of my house one day and be arrested and convicted of being a terrorist. You have to be into some seriously nefarious activities in order for this issue to even remotely become a fear.

This is exactly what Harper wants, for the idiots to be blinded by the larger issue and just see "oh terrorist gets sent out of canada...rock on!" even when you beat the facts in front of them all they see is "terrorist" the issue is larger than that

From my understanding it still isn't clear if he is or isn't a dual citizen since Pakistan changed some laws. What seems stupid on both sides of this is I haven't seen anything stating Pakistan's stance on his citizenship, if his citizenship is revoked without confirmation from Pakistan then yes that's a problem.


being able to apply for citizenship of another country based on ones ancestry should have no part in determining ones own natural born citizenship

if you want to play it like that, then every fucking criminal, or person Harper doesn't like?, can be sent to some foreign country (europe, asia, africa, america, first nation reserves) and since Harpers looking to expand it to lesser crimes, not just terrorism, everyone should be concerned...stepping stones

[jasonturbo]

This is exactly what Harper wants, for the idiots to be blinded by the larger issue and just see "oh terrorist gets sent out of canada...rock on!" even when you beat the facts in front of them all they see is "terrorist" the issue is larger than that

I think you might have unintentionally contradicted yourself there...

Having said that, would you be so kind as to explain to me what the greater issue is?

I'm not asking out of ignorance, I'm asking because I see the changes for what they are, I don't see a "hidden agenda". You make it sound like they want to revoke citizenship for all Canadians.

BTW, don't you live on the other side of the world?

Edit: Just to be clear, terrorism or not, the gov should be able to revoke the citizenship of child molesters etc. If there were people trying to immigrate to Canada that were convicted child molesters would you let them in? No fucking way I would, and if I could kick those people out, I sure as fuck would.

[meme405]

This is exactly what Harper wants, for the idiots to be blinded by the larger issue and just see "oh terrorist gets sent out of canada...rock on!" even when you beat the facts in front of them all they see is "terrorist" the issue is larger than that

Okay. Do you care to enlighten me on this bigger issue?

I'm not too up to date on this issue. I may be missing something, but your post doesn't at all help me understand what I may be missing...

EDIT: Me and Jason posted at the same time. Unlike him however I am asking out of ignorance.

[EndLeSS8]

If you are a convicted terrorist you shouldn't just be deported back, you should be air dropped back into wherever the hell you, or your parents for that matter, came from. No parachute. I don't want those idiots running around Canada.

We should deport people have no clue what they are talking about or have no idea what's going on and just like to complain coz some media reported in a certain way to get attention.

If you are a terrorist you should be lock up and rot in jail. if you are a dual citizen terrorist we should deport your ass back to your home country and rot in jail.

You guys don't seem to understand what this is leading up to and what this rule means to your constitutional rights

Let's say your parents are from China and moved here and are naturalized Canadian citizens about 20 years ago

You were born in Canada, and you have never been to China, but you are Chinese by race and a Canadian citizen by birth.

Because of the vagueness of the wording of Bill C51, if you are convicted of terrorism, you CAN be deported to China, EVEN if you have never been to China and have absolutely no relation to China, and no relatives in China, etc

No one here is saying that terrorists are good people etc

What we are saying that Bill C51 can be unconstitutional because it is a HUGE stepping stone towards revoking your Canadian citizenship, even if you are Canadian by birth. That's INSANE

[jasonturbo]

You guys don't seem to understand what this is leading up to and what this rule means to your constitutional rights

Let's say your parents are from China and moved here and are naturalized Canadian citizens about 20 years ago

You were born in Canada, and you have never been to China, but you are Chinese by race and a Canadian citizen by birth.

Because of the vagueness of the wording of Bill C51, if you are convicted of terrorism, you CAN be deported to China, EVEN if you have never been to China and have absolutely no relation to China, and no relatives in China, etc

No one here is saying that terrorists are good people etc

What we are saying that Bill C51 can be unconstitutional because it is a HUGE stepping stone towards revoking your Canadian citizenship, even if you are Canadian by birth. That's INSANE

You don't seem to understand Bill C51.

I just read it, nowhere in the bill did it touch on deportation or a loss of citizenship as a result of convictions arising from the use of the bill. The bill increases the Gov. ability to obtain information and use that information against someone who is suspected of being involved with terrorism - the court process still exists, you can still be found not guilty etc.

Bill C24 on the other hand... would expand the scope of those subject to citizenship revocation to include all those born in Canada presumed able to claim citizenship in another state through one of their parents. It would also significantly expand the grounds on which citizenship may be revoked.

The revocation process will primarily be a paper one, where the Minister gives notice of intent to revoke, the person responds and a decision is made by the Minister. The Minister may hold a hearing in some instances, and in limited circumstances there will continue to be a hearing before a Federal Court judge. There is no longer any recourse to the Governor in Council, who may take into account equitable considerations after a finding that revocation is warranted due to a breach of the Act.

What would constitute a breach of the act?

Basically any criminal offence.

Having read the bill yes it seems as though there should probably be additional checks in place, most notable for me was a recommendation by the CBA that said;

- The CBA Section recommends that a citizen facing revocation always have the right to a hearing before an independent and impartial decision-maker.

This would prevent the minister from making decisions with any bias etc.

Do I think either bill is evil or unconstitutional, no I do not.

I think there is an assumption among some immigrants/children born of immigrants that the Gov will start deporting every single person that commits any criminal if they meet the criteria.

Personally, I think that's crazy, I suspect the full scope of this bill and the associated act will only be used to get rid of the "worst of the worst". Plus, once these cases start to hit the books, expect the first few to hit the supreme court which could very well result in amendments to the bill/act.

Stepping back for a moment though, many people try to suggest that this is the first steps towards us ending up like London in V for Vendetta... I don't see that.

[Manic!]

WTF!!!!!!

A person I know went to a local coffee shop where the local con candidate we was going to be having a meet and greet at 3 P.M. Guess what he canceled. Now I check out his events section on his website and everything is gone. He has nothing listed anymore. Guys in hiding mode scared to talk to anyone waiting for the second coming of jesus. And that jesus part is not a joke.

Events | Mark MacDonald for Nanaimo-Ladysmith (http://markmacdonald.ca/events2/)

Also found out he got his degree in theology from a non accredited school in Texas.

[carisear]

to be fair, I would cancel my events if this was the type of quality person was going to ask me questions:

https://rjjago.xxxxxxx.com/2015/09/30/is-conservative-candidate-mark-macdonald-running-away-from-questions/ (xxxxxx is wordpress -- removed so that it doesn't generate auto clicks)

"anti-native extremist" "racist" .. yeah buddy, keep posting on your blog about the white man keeping you down.

[Manic!]

to be fair, I would cancel my events if this was the type of quality person was going to ask me questions:

https://rjjago.xxxxxxx.com/2015/09/30/is-conservative-candidate-mark-macdonald-running-away-from-questions/ (xxxxxx is wordpress -- removed so that it doesn't generate auto clicks)

"anti-native extremist" "racist" .. yeah buddy, keep posting on your blog about the white man keeping you down.

Then don't run for office if you don't want to answer questions.
Also this guy was the former editor of the local paper.

[belka]

Because of the vagueness of the wording of Bill C51, if you are convicted of terrorism, you CAN be deported to China,

So if you are convicted of doing stupid shit like killing a mass of people, frankly I don't give a fuck where you end up as long as its not in Canada. The day you are convicted of terrorism is the day you lose your right to being a human, let alone a Canadian.

Smarten the fuck up.

[meme405]

So if you are convicted of doing stupid shit like killing a mass of people, frankly I don't give a fuck where you end up as long as its not in Canada. The day you are convicted of terrorism is the day you lose your right to being a human, let alone a Canadian.

Smarten the fuck up.

This.

I mean fuck it if people are going to be so dumb about this, they can just scrap the deportation law, and just bring in the death penalty.

Balls in your court which one do you want?

[westopher]

The hidden agenda is to get a bunch of people talking about shit that will never effect them with polarizing views to keep them from discussing shit that matters like the environment and the economy.

[jasonturbo]

The hidden agenda is to get a bunch of people talking about shit that will never effect them with polarizing views to keep them from discussing shit that matters like the environment and the economy.

Don't you feel a little CIC ish when you say things like that?

I don't think people taking a stand against the niqab negates their ability to consider other political matters.

All I ever see in the CBC comments is leftists bashing the cons for their "hidden agenda", the trouble with this "hidden agenda" is that it may or may not exist, we will never really know... I vote based on certainty, not on conspiracy and speculation.

[westopher]

Not in the fucking slightest.
People taking a stand about issues like a niqab doesn't mean they don't understand political issues, but if you have to see its pitting people against each other with completely irrational extreme views that is clouding their judgement on who can properly run a country because they feel so pointlessly passionate about something because their Facebook activism feed told them to.
The hidden agenda isn't that hidden. Would it help if I just called it an agenda? Because its obvious.

[Manic!]

Why do people care so much about what people wear?

[Soundy]

Why do people care so much about what people wear?

Because all Muslims wear them, and all immigrants are refugees, and all refugees are Muslims, and all Muslims are terrorists, and they all want to come here and turn Canada into Syria, and that's the real reason, and if you don't agree with that then you're a fucking terrorist too. :accepted:

#paranoia

:ilied: :troll:

[Manic!]

Check this B.S. out.

Cons want a tip line for barbaric cultural practices at the same time selling weapons to the Saudis. A country that does not even let women drive.

Sarcastic Twitter users report 'barbaric cultural practices' to Conservatives | CTV News (http://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/sarcastic-twitter-users-report-barbaric-cultural-practices-to-conservatives-1.2592453)

[falcon]

You guys don't seem to understand what this is leading up to and what this rule means to your constitutional rights

Let's say your parents are from China and moved here and are naturalized Canadian citizens about 20 years ago

You were born in Canada, and you have never been to China, but you are Chinese by race and a Canadian citizen by birth.

Because of the vagueness of the wording of Bill C51, if you are convicted of terrorism, you CAN be deported to China, EVEN if you have never been to China and have absolutely no relation to China, and no relatives in China, etc

No one here is saying that terrorists are good people etc

What we are saying that Bill C51 can be unconstitutional because it is a HUGE stepping stone towards revoking your Canadian citizenship, even if you are Canadian by birth. That's INSANE

NO you can't. A country can NOT deport someone unless they hold another citizenship.

[jasonturbo]

Why do people care so much about what people wear?

Perhaps because people associate the niqab with a culture that severely oppresses women and is outright hateful to a number of other groups. (IE: Homosexuals)

I think the general issue is that people want foreigners to assimilate, they don't want to have to assimilate to the foreigners cultures.

Does that represent a racist/facist perspective? Perhaps, but I'm not sure it's really hurting anyone to establish a position of expectations that when you immigrate to Canada, you don't just immigrate here for the safety, jobs, health care, and education.. you immigrate here for the culture and way of life.

Again, the conservative hidden agenda is lost on me, if someone could spell it out, I would appreciate it.

I almost look forward to a scenario where the cons get punted and another party gets majority, then I can hear 80% of the current anti-cons bitching and complaining about the corrupt and ineffective NDP/LIBS etc.

Hopefully I'm wrong, but there is a reason why nobody ever speaks of previous governments with any nostalgia.

[Soundy]

I think the general issue is that people want foreigners to assimilate, they don't want to have to assimilate to the foreigners cultures.
I have yet to see a single news item claiming Muslim immigrants want to force all Canadian women to cover their faces.

Then again, I don't watch WorldTruth.tv :concentrate:

[Bouncing Bettys]

Unfortunately, many people are single-issue voters, especially in America where you see Republicans pandering to their base on issues like abortion, gay marriage, guns, Iran nukes, etc. Canada, especially under Harper, has begun using similar tactics so we see the focus shifting from broad, important issues like the economy and the environment to little issues like niqabs and terrorism. It's not some hidden agenda. It's pandering to simpletons because they aren't apathetic over single issues and will run to the polls.

[Manic!]

Perhaps because people associate the niqab with a culture that severely oppresses women and is outright hateful to a number of other groups. (IE: Homosexuals)

I think the general issue is that people want foreigners to assimilate, they don't want to have to assimilate to the foreigners cultures.

Does that represent a racist/facist perspective? Perhaps, but I'm not sure it's really hurting anyone to establish a position of expectations that when you immigrate to Canada, you don't just immigrate here for the safety, jobs, health care, and education.. you immigrate here for the culture and way of life.

Again, the conservative hidden agenda is lost on me, if someone could spell it out, I would appreciate it.

I almost look forward to a scenario where the cons get punted and another party gets majority, then I can hear 80% of the current anti-cons bitching and complaining about the corrupt and ineffective NDP/LIBS etc.

Hopefully I'm wrong, but there is a reason why nobody ever speaks of previous governments with any nostalgia.

I am sorry i don't want everyone to be the same like the Borg.

http://wpmedia.news.nationalpost.com/2014/08/angry_nun_with_ruler.jpg?w=620

Vatican acts after Polish priest reveals homosexuality - BBC News (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-34432701)


Big fan of this guy:

http://www.google.ca/url?sa=i&source=imgres&cd=&ved=0CAYQjBwwAGoVChMI1uqP_5unyAIVB5mICh0bIAAa&url=http%3A%2F%2Fleadersandlegacies.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2014%2F05%2FJean_Chr%C3%A9Tien-3.jpg&psig=AFQjCNE6YfOkcb8LN0xtapS_mtnuEUo5xg&ust=1443993199916510

and this guy:

http://www.biographi.ca/bioimages/original.1078.jpg

[jasonturbo]

Manic! I'm not really sure I know what you are getting at lol.

Just for the record I 100% support secularism, I am in no way shape fashion or form a religious individual and I do not think christians are better people than muslims etc. Personally I think the idea of an invisible man in the sky ridiculous, but I respect peoples rights to decide for themselves if they want to believe it or not... unfortunately people who do believe seem to really feel the need to associate their beliefs with politics.

Everyone on here has probably seen some of my posts on economics/finance. My vote has nothing to do with cultural issues, it has everything to do with lower taxes and less government spending.

You can throw out the "but look at how much debt the cons have blah blah blah" but that's totally disregarding the global economic situation over the course of Mr. Harpers reign. Meanwhile people will happily vote for Trudeau knowing he has committed to overspending (which I'm fine with actually, at least he's realistic) and the NDP who plan to spend way more and run a balanced budget (which is never ever going to happen)

My belief is that it's far more likely for government to increase taxes than it is for them to decrease taxes. This is ultimately my main concern when it comes to voting.

[Manic!]

Manic! I'm not really sure I know what you are getting at lol.

Just for the record I 100% support secularism, I am in no way shape fashion or form a religious individual and I do not think christians are better people than muslims etc. Personally I think the idea of an invisible man in the sky ridiculous, but I respect peoples rights to decide for themselves if they want to believe it or not... unfortunately people who do believe seem to really feel the need to associate their beliefs with politics.

Everyone on here has probably seen some of my posts on economics/finance. My vote has nothing to do with cultural issues, it has everything to do with lower taxes and less government spending.

You can throw out the "but look at how much debt the cons have blah blah blah" but that's totally disregarding the global economic situation over the course of Mr. Harpers reign. Meanwhile people will happily vote for Trudeau knowing he has committed to overspending (which I'm fine with actually, at least he's realistic) and the NDP who plan to spend way more and run a balanced budget (which is never ever going to happen)

My belief is that it's far more likely for government to increase taxes than it is for them to decrease taxes. This is ultimately my main concern when it comes to voting.


It does not matter how low the taxes are if you are not making any money. And honestly do you think the government should spend 12 million on some hot line when we already have 911 and the police?

[jasonturbo]

It does not matter how low the taxes are if you are not making any money.

If who isn't making any money? People or the gov?

[Bouncing Bettys]

Which tax base are we discussing? The middle classs, the wealthy, corporate, etc? There have been and will be increasea and decreases depending on which base we look at.

[Traum]

I almost look forward to a scenario where the cons get punted and another party gets majority, then I can hear 80% of the current anti-cons bitching and complaining about the corrupt and ineffective NDP/LIBS etc.

Hopefully I'm wrong, but there is a reason why nobody ever speaks of previous governments with any nostalgia.
I don't really see this as being odd at all -- that is just the nature of how people behave. As a matter of fact, that is how much of the civilized world acts. We are always trying to find that elusive balance point, but given our limited capabilities -- including memory, attention span, resources, time, etc. -- we can never find or stay at that perfectly balanced point. Issues of the day comes up, and then we tip our scale one way. Only to find out later that the scale has been tipped too far down one direction, so we try to correct, and almost always end over-correcting. And then we repeat the same balancing act again.

There is a reason history repeats itself. Suffice to say, it is almost never a good thing to have someone stay in power for too long, and right now, Steve Harpy is that someone who has stayed in power for too long.

In this regard, I actually like the 2 term limit of the US presidential system a lot more. 8 years tops, and then you're out.

[underscore]

Edit: Just to be clear, terrorism or not, the gov should be able to revoke the citizenship of child molesters etc. If there were people trying to immigrate to Canada that were convicted child molesters would you let them in? No fucking way I would, and if I could kick those people out, I sure as fuck would.

On the flip side though, if we actually gave terrorists and child molesters have fucking decent sentences (ie life) in some ways I'd prefer to keep them in Canada and in a Canadian prison only because then we know the asswipe is locked up. Sure it'll cost money but just write it off as doing the rest of the world a favour.

This is exactly what Harper wants, for the idiots to be blinded by the larger issue and just see "oh terrorist gets sent out of canada...rock on!" even when you beat the facts in front of them all they see is "terrorist" the issue is larger than that

if you want to play it like that, then every fucking criminal, or person Harper doesn't like?, can be sent to some foreign country (europe, asia, africa, america, first nation reserves) and since Harpers looking to expand it to lesser crimes, not just terrorism, everyone should be concerned...stepping stones

CiC is that you?

[jasonturbo]

My mom is so close to getting her American citizenship, my ass will be dual soon so I won't care who is in power... I'll just slide south and join the NRA, start advocating that less gun control increases gun safety and protest abortion etc like the rest of my incompetent right wing buddies.

Though I do worry Harper might deport me over a speeding ticket or revoke my citizenship for failing to file my taxes on time.

Seriously though, I don't know why I keep clicking this thread hahaha :nyan:

I came here because I like cars, fuck all the goons in Ottawa.

To quote Timpo, "GTR for president".

[quasi]

My mom is so close to getting her American citizenship, my ass will be dual soon so I won't care who is in power... I'll just slide south and join the NRA, start advocating that less gun control increases gun safety and protest abortion etc like the rest of my incompetent right wing buddies.

Though I do worry Harper might deport me over a speeding ticket or revoke my citizenship for failing to file my taxes on time.

Seriously though, I don't know why I keep clicking this thread hahaha :nyan:

I came here because I like cars, fuck all the goons in Ottawa.

To quote Timpo, "GTR for president".

Was one or both of your grandparents a US citizen? My Grandma was and my mom got her duel about 10 years ago but it ends at her, myself or my sister cannot get citizenship. Your mother may have a difference situation where you can get it to but if it's your grandparents that are allowing her to get it you probably cannot.

[jasonturbo]

I only get the added benefit of sponsorship by a parent who is a US Citizen, I can't remember if this allows me to cut the line for green card by 1 year or 5 years, it's been a while since I chatted with an immigration lawyer.

My mom married a 'murican, she can get her citizenship anytime now, has had the green card for a long time.

[Ronin]

The longer this campaign goes, the more I see how Harper and the Conservatives are about old politics...playing on people's emotions and fears rather than trying to win on actual policy. I can't stand this way of thinking...talking about relatively irrelevant issues like niqabs and fear of marijuana instead of things that matter.

Really who cares what some lady wears on her driver's license? In reality it's an overblown issue that stems from a false association of the niqab with terrorism and religious fanatics. Calling marijuana "infinitely worse" than tobacco just shows how out of touch he is with science. While we don't know what the effects of marijuana are long term, it damn well hasn't killed nearly the number of people tobacco has. Legalization would bring in tax revenue lost to organized crime. The war on drugs is an expensive one based in some ridiculous idea that drugs are immoral. These aren't the fights that I want my government fighting. I want my government to be economically responsible and that's about it.

But this shit works. Especially on older people. We might see the Cons win a minority the way things are going.

[SkinnyPupp]

Everything about Harper and the Conservatives is old politics... It's in their damn name!

They know young people just don't bother voting. Old people and stupid people will easily put them in power.

[Bouncing Bettys]

Another example of Harper's play to emulate American political dysfunction (yes I know it's old and Timpo'd but still relevant): Tories blasted for handbook on paralyzing Parliament | CTV News (http://www.ctvnews.ca/mobile/tories-blasted-for-handbook-on-paralyzing-parliament-1.241797)

Tories blasted for handbook on paralyzing Parliament
OTTAWA - The Harper government is being accused of a machiavellian plot to wreak parliamentary havoc after a secret Tory handbook on obstructing and manipulating Commons committees was leaked to the press.
Opposition parties pounced on news reports Friday about the 200-page handbook as proof that the Conservatives are to blame for the toxic atmosphere that has paralyzed Parliament this week.
"The government's deliberate plan is to cause a dysfunctional, chaotic Parliament,'' Liberal House Leader Ralph Goodale told the House of Commons.
New Democrat Libby Davies said the manual explodes the Tories' contention that opposition parties are to blame for the parliamentary constipation.
"So much for blaming the opposition for the obstruction of Parliament,'' she said.
"Now we learn, in fact, that the monkey wrench gang have had a plan all along and not just any plan, a 200-page playbook on how to frustrate, obstruct and shut down the democratic process.''
Bloc Quebecois MP Monique Guay said the manual demonstrates the government's "flagrant lack of respect'' for the democratic process.
The opposition demanded that the manual, given to Tory committee chairs, be tabled in the House of Commons.
Peter Van Loan, the government's House leader, ignored the demand and continued to insist that the Tories want the minority Parliament to work.
He again blamed the opposition parties for its recent dysfunction. He cited various justice bills which have been stalled by opposition MPs in committees for up to 214 days.
"The opposition pulls out every stop they can to obstruct (the justice agenda) and then they get upset when a matter gets debated for two hours at committee,'' he scoffed.
But Van Loan's arguments were weakened by the leak of the manual. The government was so embarrassed and annoyed by the leak, that, according to a source, it ordered all committee chairs to return their copies of the handbook, apparently in a bid to determine who broke confidence.
The handbook, obtained by National Post columnist Don Martin, reportedly advises chairs on how to promote the government's agenda, select witnesses friendly to the Conservative party and coach them to give favourable testimony. It also reportedly instructs them on how to filibuster and otherwise disrupt committee proceedings and, if all else fails, how to shut committees down entirely.
Some of those stalling tactics have been on display this week.
Tory MPs on the information and ethics committee stalled an inquiry into alleged censorship of a report on the treatment of Afghan detainees. They debated the propriety of the witness list for more than five hours while two critics of the government's handling of the matter cooled their heels in the corridor.
The official languages committee has been shut down all week after Tory chair Guy Lauzon cancelled a hearing moments before witnesses were to testify about the impact of the government's cancellation of the court challenges program. All three opposition parties voted to remove Lauzon from the chair but the Tories are refusing to select a replacement, leaving the committee in limbo.
Tories have also launched filibusters to obstruct proceedings in the Commons agriculture and procedural affairs committees and a Senate committee study of a Liberal bill requiring the government to adhere to the Kyoto treaty on greenhouse gas emissions.
The previous Liberal regime also tried to control the conduct of committees. Former prime minister Jean Chretien even faced a mini-rebellion during his final months in office from backbenchers who chafed at being told what to say and do at committee. They demanded the right to choose their own committee chairs.
But Davies, a 10-year parliamentary veteran, said the Tories have taken manipulation to extremes she's never seen before.
"They've codified it. They've set it down. They've given instructions.''
Both Davies and Goodale agreed that the recent dysfunction may be part of a long term Tory strategy to persuade voters that minority Parliaments don't work, that they need to elect a majority next time.
But Goodale predicted the ploy won't work because Canadians will realize that the Tories are the "authors of this stalemate.''
Goodale said the manual also demonstrates that the government is in the grip of an "obsessive, manipulative mania,'' run by a prime minister who has "a kind of control fetish'' in which there can't be "one comma or one sentence or one word uttered without his personal approval.''

[underscore]

Really who cares what some lady wears on her driver's license?

I'll admit I haven't looked into this issue much, but if you're allowed to cover your face for a photo ID does that not completely defeat the purpose of photo ID?

[Hondaracer]

I want to wear one when I go through the border and airport security, it's my right!

Or grocery shopping or the liquor store for that matter, how dare they descriminate against my beliefs!

Although anyone wearing one probably isn't buying liquor lol

[Manic!]

I want to wear one when I go through the border and airport security, it's my right!

Or grocery shopping or the liquor store for that matter, how dare they descriminate against my beliefs!

Although anyone wearing one probably isn't buying liquor lol

Just move somewhere a lot colder.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CQVX5riUAAQUqfo.jpg

[booge_man]

Unfortunately, many people are single-issue voters, especially in America where you see Republicans pandering to their base on issues like abortion, gay marriage, guns, Iran nukes, etc. Canada, especially under Harper, has begun using similar tactics so we see the focus shifting from broad, important issues like the economy and the environment to little issues like niqabs and terrorism. It's not some hidden agenda. It's pandering to simpletons because they aren't apathetic over single issues and will run to the polls.


Very well said Sir. They are basically the Tea Party of the North. Using Fear Mongering, and Racially Dividing the Country.... Old Stock Canadians.

This is why it is so important to Vote this time around.

[EndLeSS8]

NO you can't. A country can NOT deport someone unless they hold another citizenship.

Yes you can

https://www.cba.org/CBA/submissions/pdf/14-22-eng.pdf

See page 20 and onwards

[Ch28]

But this shit works. Especially on older people. We might see the Cons win a minority the way things are going.

This is why it's important that everyone goes out to vote this time, especially the younger population.

[GS8]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4qvNk52mXiU




Regardless of the winner, I just want this to be our new National Anthem

[booge_man]

This is why it's important that everyone goes out to vote this time, especially the younger population.

In total agreement with that. Well said.

[Manic!]

Just checked the votetogether.ca site for my ridding and hoilly crap!!! The con is in second by a lot in 2 different polls


Leadnow Sept 18 - 21 Dogwood Initiative Oct 1 - 5

Mark MacDonald
Conservative 24% 26%
Sheila Malcolmson
NDP 34% 34%
Paul Manly
Green Party 24% 21%
Tim Tessier
Liberal 17% 18%

Things are looking up.

[Ludepower]

Im voting Trudeau...because he'll decriminalize marijuana.

It strikes a nerve in me that a simple issue can go on for this long.
It's inevitable that marijuana will be legalize with millennials growing up and these old farts dying.

We need to stop with old school fear mongering and start thinking progressively.

[Manic!]

Im voting Trudeau...because he'll decriminalize marijuana.

It strikes a nerve in me that a simple issue can go on for this long.
It's inevitable that marijuana will be legalize with millennials growing up and these old farts dying.

We need to stop with old school fear mongering and start thinking progressively.

According to harper it's way worse than tobacco.

You should checkout votetogether.ca The more Liberals and NDP that get elected the better.

[Hondaracer]

Strategically voting just to get the ruling party out is fucking pathetic.

Also, if you're main reasoning behind voting liberal is the weed issue you're fucked too. I understand the tax implications of it all. However, if your agenda is simply "legalize it" it's basically legal already.. Anyone can walk into a dispencery and grab virtually as much as they need and smoke it practically anywhere. You really need it legalized?

[SkinnyPupp]

Strategically voting just to get the ruling party out is fucking pathetic.

Also, if you're main reasoning behind voting liberal is the weed issue you're fucked too. I understand the tax implications of it all. However, if your agenda is simply "legalize it" it's basically legal already.. Anyone can walk into a dispencery and grab virtually as much as they need and smoke it practically anywhere. You really need it legalized?
How can you criticize someone for voting for a leader that supports his views? You might think it's "pathetic" but this is something he would go to jail for in some countries - in some he'd never see the light of day. But here he is, in Canada, trying to elect a leader who will decriminalize it on a federal level. Eventually it could lead to some other important changes that could put Canada ahead of the rest of the world in many other social issues as well. That's not what I'd call "pathetic" or "fucked".

What's pathetic is basing your vote on whether people can wear burkas. What's fucked is supporting a war that we have no reason to be a part of.

[Manic!]

Strategically voting just to get the ruling party out is fucking pathetic.

Also, if you're main reasoning behind voting liberal is the weed issue you're fucked too. I understand the tax implications of it all. However, if your agenda is simply "legalize it" it's basically legal already.. Anyone can walk into a dispencery and grab virtually as much as they need and smoke it practically anywhere. You really need it legalized?

Well the Libs and NDP policies are more inline with my beliefs and weed may be easy to get in B.C. it's not the same in the rest of Canada. The cons are threatening to shut down dispensaries. They already banned flavored rolling papers and blunt wraps starting December 15th. With the cons out the government would not mast tax payers money on this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q7BZqjvMw-4

Also it's a more important issue than someones hare or what a person wears. Those 2 issues seem to be the most important with the cons.

[murd0c]

I'm voting today after work!! VOTE PEOPLE VOTE!!!

[Hondaracer]

I can get on board with people who actually have an informed opinion regarding the other parties. But it's seemingly "trendy" to use that strategic voting site amongst young people simply to try and get the conservatives out because they see shit on Facebook etc.

Amongst my siblings friends they are using the site to vote but don't know a single thing about the riding or candidates within it. They simply "want Harper out"

I really hope for some that it turns out like the HST, uninformed voters voting liberal etc. for in their mind a "gain" persoanlly albeit short term. Thinking tax breaks for "the middle class" will benefit them. Ultimately when the small business taxes, personal taxes, and taxing the "wealthiest" I hope that all those people running small business making the 80-300k a year who essentially drive the entire economy are forced to lay off the bottom % of losers who voted themselves into a corner by driving up the taxes for the very people and companies who employ them.

[westopher]

What's really pathetic is so many of the conservative supporters hoping for a disaster if the cons get voted out just so they can tell everyone "I told you so."

Shouldn't you be happy if a positive change is made in this country?
Jesus Christ what a stupid fucking attitude to have.

I want whoever is voted in, wether it be the party I have voted for or not to make some positive changes in this country based on environmental policies and reducing inequality. If that ends up being the conservatives after all that I'd be happy to say they did a good job IF they actually do. The attitude that people have that they are always right and are never willing to change their opinions when they learn something is what makes somebody a stupid, ignorant person.

[6o4__boi]

I find it hilarious that the people who support Harper because "he's good for the economy" actually have no fucking clue about his economic record and policies.

And often have no clue about economics at all. :facepalm:

[murd0c]

With the way our economy is going we need a government change plain and simple.

[SkinnyPupp]

What's really pathetic is so many of the conservative supporters hoping for a disaster if the cons get voted out just so they can tell everyone "I told you so."

Shouldn't you be happy if a positive change is made in this country?
Jesus Christ what a stupid fucking attitude to have.

That attitude is common amongst most who would vote conservative

"Them damn hippies don't know how bad they'll fuck things up for themselves if they take away my guns and money!"

[Hondaracer]

That's Politics.

[westopher]

Politics =/= ignorance.

[Hondaracer]

I highly doubt there are too many democratic societies on this planet who vote for "their" party thinking "I'll be happy either way"

[underscore]

How can you criticize someone for voting for a leader that supports his views? You might think it's "pathetic" but this is something he would go to jail for in some countries - in some he'd never see the light of day. But here he is, in Canada, trying to elect a leader who will decriminalize it on a federal level. Eventually it could lead to some other important changes that could put Canada ahead of the rest of the world in many other social issues as well. That's not what I'd call "pathetic" or "fucked".

What's pathetic is basing your vote on whether people can wear burkas. What's fucked is supporting a war that we have no reason to be a part of.

Anyone who votes based on a single issue should be open to being criticized. If someone is willing to ignore things like the economy, environment, foreign policy, etc because they're only concerned with burkas, weed or guns I think they're a fucking idiot and probably have a bit of a problem with one thing or another.

That attitude is common amongst most who would vote conservative

"Them damn hippies don't know how bad they'll fuck things up for themselves if they take away my guns and money!"

Of course the counter stupidity is those who think everything instantly improves by replacing Harper with anyone, without actually looking into any of the other candidates. I'm not saying it won't happen, but blindly voting for people isn't a good policy.

[westopher]

I highly doubt there are too many democratic societies on this planet who vote for "their" party thinking "I'll be happy either way"
Clearly, this is going over your head. I don't think I'll be happy if we vote Harper back in, but I don't hope he ruins the fucking country so I can tell some idiot "I was right."

[Hondaracer]

My opinions are based on the history of the parties involved. It's hard to be optimistic when I look back at their track record on the key items that concern/directly effect me. So in the end if a party that comes into power does what I suspect they might do, it will justify my opinion and my views against them.

Don't act like any three of these parties don't have the capacity to completely fuck up the country, clearly they do and have in the past. Therefore I'm just throwing my support behind who I think has the best interests for myself personally and the aspects that effect me directly.

While I've got the money on a conservative minority, I think that's just going to be a shit show of debate and veto's on critical topics that should be addressed directly. However, in most ways I feel like getting nothing done at all is better than the potential of what either the NDP or liberals have the capacity to do.

[Mr.HappySilp]

With the way our economy is going we need a government change plain and simple.

Yes because spending billions of tax payers money is the way the go. I always want to know if billions of money is spent on social programs where is the money coming from? No party ever gives a clear answer coz they know we won't like it. Money can only come from a few ways
1. Increase income tax
2. Increase corp tax
3 Borrow more thus increasing debt and future generations will have to pay for it.

SO is your pick which options you like to pick.

[Hondaracer]

"The way our economy is going"

You mean billions of dollars in surplus?

[westopher]

Lol 1.9 billion hardly constitutes the term "billions."
Does that make up for the deficits of $55.6 billion in 2009-10, $33.4 billion in 2010-11, $26.3 billion in 2011-12, $18.4 billion for 2012-13 and $5.2 billion for 2013-14?
He is literally run over 100 billion in deficit over the last 6 years.

[7seven]

If anyone is voting purely only based on 1 specific issue, I find that extremely short sighted. Let's face it, all parties, Conservatives, Liberals, NDP, won't be able to deliver or keep all their campaign promises/platforms, so I find the best method is to have an overall look at the platforms and ideals, rank what is at the top of your personal priority list and take it from there. Anyone insulting someone for voting for one party just because it doesn't agree with their views is ridiculous.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, I'm voting for Harper and the Conservatives as the issues that are at the top of my priority list are security/military and finances/taxes. Being involved as a PMC overseas and seen some of the things going on behind the scenes that most don't, I see the practical value and application of Bill C-51 for the most part. I support the increase in TFSA contribution limits, low corporate and small business rates, lower personal taxes and Nothern Gateway and other pipelines as it is a safer and more efficient method to transport oil than by rail.

It's not that I don't care about the other issues, but they are just personally lower on my personal list of priorities and concerns, such as stricter environmental regulations, legalizing marijuana (which I agree with, just not as important an issue for me compared to other issues) and social spending/programs. Everyone just vote on what ideals and policies are at the top of your personal priority list, no need to behave like children insulting someone for not voting for your party or being concerned with issues you find important.

[AWDTurboLuvr]

Trying to base the success of the economy on the size of deficit or surplus is incorrect. If GDP growth is next to nothing and median incomes have flatlined, then what's the point of trying to save a small surplus? That kind of economic strategy is terrible. I'm all for running a deficit to invest in infrastructure, education and technology try to jump start the Canadian economy.

[carisear]

everyone who uses 'strategic voting' basically are one-issue voters. they are the one-issue of A-B-C. It's obvious that they don't really care who their vote goes for, or what any of the parties represent, as long as it's not conservative.

I don't find anything wrong with being a single issue voter. that's what elections are all about. you pander to what you think the voters want. if the majority of people all believe that people should be forced to wear banana's on their head, then why isn't that a good reason?

I'm most concerned about keeping the most of my money. I couldn't give a fuck about niqabs, weed, making sure transgendered dogs are protected ... but I also respect the people who believe converting cities to all greenspace is their priority.

[westopher]

I'm not basing our economy on that at all, merely pointing out yet again hondaracer is spouting off facts he hasn't even bothered to verify.

[Hondaracer]

I'm not basing our economy on that at all, merely pointing out yet again hondaracer is spouting off facts he hasn't even bothered to verify.

Conservatives promise surpluses in the billions, if re-elected - NEWS 1130 (http://www.news1130.com/2015/10/09/conservative-platform-surpluses/)

[westopher]

OH WOW THEY PROMISED IT IT MUST BE ALREADY HAPPENING!!!!!
Lots of parties (all of them) will make promises they can't keep. This could easily be one of them.
Every single party has promised to grow the economy in some form or another, what makes the conservatives a guarantee and the others unrealistic?

[twixxer]

I would argue that strategically voting makes more sense for NDP and Liberal supporters because their platforms are closer to each others than they are to the Conservatives who are further right.

[Hondaracer]

OH WOW THEY PROMISED IT IT MUST BE ALREADY HAPPENING!!!!!
Lots of parties (all of them) will make promises they can't keep. This could easily be one of them.
Every single party has promised to grow the economy in some form or another, what makes the conservatives a guarantee and the others unrealistic?

Well, it is already happening (a surplus that is)

[Bouncing Bettys]

Well, it is already happening (a surplus that is)
As are spending cuts with with harmful long-term effects, but at least they look good for an election.

[Hondaracer]

Nigga, we all just playin the circle game

It's like the lion with a name, whatever happens, 8 months from now we all be back here not talking about it

[Manic!]

Voting ABC is voting against harpers policies. Most of the things harper is for the Libs/NDP are against. I'm a Liberal supporter but in district the lib candidate is in 4th place. The con is someone who gratuated from a non accredited bible in Texas. The Greens are in 3rd but have no change of winning so my only choice is the NDP. Anyone voting con should look at all the con candidates and see if find one that would make a good cabinet minister.

Now lets look at the issues.

Economy: harper has been terrible for the economy. My family owns a small bussiness and we has made our lives harder.

Pipeline: harper will never get a pipeline built. Just because someone is pro pipe does not mean they don't want the environment protected. If he would of come out and said we are changing/strengthening environmental laws so we will have the safest pipelines in the world he would have lat lots of support from people in the middle. He instead weakened environmental laws. The next president of the US will be a democrat and will not allow a pipe threw the US with harper in power.

Military: Bombing ISIS is all for show. We could have helped in other ways but harper wanted to look tough. The problem with ISIS has gotten worse but Canadian bombing have decreased since the election. Probably because harpers afraid if a plane goes down during the election he will lose votes.

Vets: Military vets hate him and are suing him.
Veterans declare war on Harper | National Observer (http://www.nationalobserver.com/2015/08/13/news/veterans-declare-war-harper)

[Gucci Mane]

As are spending cuts with with harmful long-term effects, but at least they look good for an election.

pretty much. cuts to public sector, selling off our country bit by bit to whoever wants it..

Stephen Harper government sells multibillion-dollar stake in General Motors | Toronto Star (http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2015/04/06/stephen-harper-government-sells-multibillion-dollar-stake-in-general-motors.html)

shit like that is what has created a "surplus" for this past year after years of huge deficits. go team harper.

[Timpo]

http://www.couscouscomedyshow.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/justin-bieber-harper-John-and-Yoko-Pierre-Elliot-Trudeau.jpg
http://i2.cdnds.net/12/48/618x496/showbiz_justin_bieber_stephen_harper.jpg

[StylinRed]

Voting today :thumbs:

hardly anyone at the polls for early voting, so save yourself some time and go early

[Manic!]

Just voted took about 15 minutes. Feels good.

[Mr.Money]

so who you voting for?.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=weAopdKILLw

[pastarocket]

-only waited about three minutes to get to the voting booth at my advanced poll station. :fullofwin: #ABC

[booge_man]

Hundreds of Canadian university professors are condemning the campaign strategy of Stephen Harper's Conservative Party, which they allege has turned, in the last weeks of the election, to mongering fear and hate in order to win votes.

In an open letter, signed by over 600 academics from a wide array of disciplines and published this morning in the Ottawa Citizen, the scholars state that the Conservative campaign has "flagrantly crossed the line" with its messaging about "barbaric cultural practices" — a term the letter claims is specifically tailored to play on bigotry without sounding bigoted.

C'mon we are Canadian we are better than this. This type of Racist bigot politics has no place in our society. I go to many car meets and meet amazing people of all colors it's what makes this Country great, this Politics by the Conservatives is just garbage. Please get out and Vote and show how great this Country can be.

[inv4zn]

I have a question - i emailed elections Canada but they haven't replied.

We moved about 2 weeks ago, and the voter cards were mailed to the old address - just picked them up yesterday. Obviously the address shown on the cards is wrong now, but we don't have any bills or anything mailed to the new address yet - it may come sometime next week, not sure yet.

Do I just show up on voting day and tell them what happened? Which voting station do I have to go to? My licence still shows the old address (the ones the voter cards were mailed to) - still haven't received the sticker yet from ICBC.

[Lomac]

I have a question - i emailed elections Canada but they haven't replied.

We moved about 2 weeks ago, and the voter cards were mailed to the old address - just picked them up yesterday. Obviously the address shown on the cards is wrong now, but we don't have any bills or anything mailed to the new address yet - it may come sometime next week, not sure yet.

Do I just show up on voting day and tell them what happened? Which voting station do I have to go to? My licence still shows the old address (the ones the voter cards were mailed to) - still haven't received the sticker yet from ICBC.

You can just go onto the Elections Canada website and fill out a form that addresses your change of... er, address. I just did it for myself a couple days ago. There is a deadline for how late you can fill it out, however.

[nah]

I'm actually leaning towards the Liberals and I've always been a Conservative voter. As my buddy said, Trudeau is the smartest of the bunch. We might think of having another kid and the 18 months Harper proposes is appealing but I don't think Harper the man to take us out of this recession. Frankly, we just need new blood in government, Harper's had 10 years and it's time for him to move on.

[Bouncing Bettys]

Hundreds of Canadian university professors are condemning the campaign strategy of Stephen Harper's Conservative Party, which they allege has turned, in the last weeks of the election, to mongering fear and hate in order to win votes.

In an open letter, signed by over 600 academics from a wide array of disciplines and published this morning in the Ottawa Citizen, the scholars state that the Conservative campaign has "flagrantly crossed the line" with its messaging about "barbaric cultural practices" — a term the letter claims is specifically tailored to play on bigotry without sounding bigoted.

C'mon we are Canadian we are better than this. This type of Racist bigot politics has no place in our society. I go to many car meets and meet amazing people of all colors it's what makes this Country great, this Politics by the Conservatives is just garbage. Please get out and Vote and show how great this Country can be.
Good luck with that. Harper has shown he has little respect if at all for intelligence. His government has actively silenced scientists and destroyed valuable data. When the profits of private sector cronies takes priority, facts become the enemy.

[falcon]

I have a question - i emailed elections Canada but they haven't replied.

We moved about 2 weeks ago, and the voter cards were mailed to the old address - just picked them up yesterday. Obviously the address shown on the cards is wrong now, but we don't have any bills or anything mailed to the new address yet - it may come sometime next week, not sure yet.

Do I just show up on voting day and tell them what happened? Which voting station do I have to go to? My licence still shows the old address (the ones the voter cards were mailed to) - still haven't received the sticker yet from ICBC.


If what LOMAC suggested doesn't work you can go in and vote on a Special Ballot for your old riding. A vote is still a vote even if it's not where you currently reside.

I'm in Ontario right now and voted for my BC riding by a Special Ballot. Came in, I wrote in who I was voting for in my riding, sealed the envelpe and EC mails it to my riding's EC office. No pre registration needed in the area you are just show up.

[falcon]

I'm actually leaning towards the Liberals and I've always been a Conservative voter. As my buddy said, Trudeau is the smartest of the bunch. We might think of having another kid and the 18 months Harper proposes is appealing but I don't think Harper the man to take us out of this recession. Frankly, we just need new blood in government, Harper's had 10 years and it's time for him to move on.

I've been a lifetime CPC supporter until the last few years. This year I voted Liberal. Justin has really started to shine int he last month or so and in my opinion really found his voice as a leader.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9vkb-yIzCiE&spfreload=10

[jasonturbo]

Listening to an NDP funded liberal party slam advert on the radio while you read about Mulcairs newfound interest in a Lib/NDP coalition government

- Priceless

I bet a coalition looks pretty good now that your party is on the outs, you donkey.

:fullofwin: Trudeau or Harper, I'll be happy either way.

[MindBomber]

I'm a tried and true Green supporter; this year, though, I voted strategically. I don't feel good about it but Trudeau would be an excellent leader and Harper needs to go.

[Gucci Mane]

voted today. fucking hell, had to wait a total of 50min's in the line to vote. so sick of this old school method of voting. we really need to go electronic.

[SkinnyPupp]

voted today. fucking hell, had to wait a total of 50min's in the line to vote. so sick of this old school method of voting. we really need to go electronic.
But then way more people, especially young people, would vote! And we don't want that Kappa

[westopher]

I'm a tried and true Green supporter; this year, though, I voted strategically. I don't feel good about it but Trudeau would be an excellent leader and Harper needs to go.
My thoughts, as usual MB are with you on this one. Voted today. Would have preferred to vote green but Trudeau has been quite charismatic this election and I hope his government can get us on the right track. No more fear mongering, racist tactics, disregard for the environment and social programs is the Canada I know and love, and I'm really missing it.

[DragonChi]

voted today. fucking hell, had to wait a total of 50min's in the line to vote. so sick of this old school method of voting. we really need to go electronic.

I think there's a law that allows your employer to go vote during work hours.

50 mins well spent :)

[MindBomber]

It's shocking to see the number of us defecting from our parties of choice to Justin Trudeau's Liberals.

[SkinnyPupp]

If I could vote, it would definitely be strategically to make sure a Conservative seat isn't won in my riding. Unless it was NDP which is possibly even worse

[will068]

I think there's a law that allows your employer to go vote during work hours.

50 mins well spent :)

Correct. We even got a charge code for it. I just approve away...

[cunninglinguist]

voted today. fucking hell, had to wait a total of 50min's in the line to vote. so sick of this old school method of voting. we really need to go electronic.

I don't think that will ever happen. There's the risk of hacking and no way to verify whether or not a vote was entered without undue influence. ie gun to the head

[Tegra_Devil]

Voted liberal...time to wait and see how it plays out

[will068]

I'm actually leaning towards the Liberals and I've always been a Conservative voter. As my buddy said, Trudeau is the smartest of the bunch. We might think of having another kid and the 18 months Harper proposes is appealing but I don't think Harper the man to take us out of this recession. Frankly, we just need new blood in government, Harper's had 10 years and it's time for him to move on.

Same here. I hope Trudeau has enough will power to push his agenda if he does voted. What I am afraid is his inexperience may make him end up like Obama.

Another thought comes to mind is how the Conservative Party (the historically more pro-giant corporation and most racist party out of the bunch) would have had an immigration policy that would have made Canada a lot of money while Canadian Citizens benefit since China became a member of the WTO (clearly, this is not the case). I'm afraid how much worst the Liberals may do in this department.

[nah]

One of the many reasons to NOT vote NDP.

http://wpmedia.news.nationalpost.com/2014/03/png_0321n_jennykwan_194.jpg?w=620

[CRS]

Jenny Kwan is just awful.

[murd0c]

Can a mod make a poll in this thread with the different parties to see who everyone voted for? I'm very curious as to what people have been voting especially since we are a younger crowd.

[cunninglinguist]

Although it might not be relevent to being PM, let's not forget Trudeau's a bit of a badass.

http://i.imgur.com/NhtZ2lP.jpg?1
http://i.imgur.com/UHRCqI2.jpg

[StylinRed]

i dislike Kwan too, and i was thinking, while i support the NDP, i dont think i could vote for her if i lived in her riding

[booge_man]

voted today. fucking hell, had to wait a total of 50min's in the line to vote. so sick of this old school method of voting. we really need to go electronic.

Yeah I can't see any party supporting that they would be paranoid of hacks. A worthy read below.

https://www.reddit.com/r/canada/comments/3nujab/list_of_reasons_not_to_vote_conservative/

[SpartanAir]

This needs to be heard.
https://youtu.be/iuNm-3_GHC8

[SkinnyPupp]

Can a mod make a poll in this thread with the different parties to see who everyone voted for? I'm very curious as to what people have been voting especially since we are a younger crowd.
Done! Results are public so only participate if you don't mind everyone knowing your politics

[DragonChi]

I only voted for the party that has the most chance to take out a conservative majority, and didn't have dirt on them from last election. Otherwise, it would have been green.

[AstulzerRZD]

Same here. I hope Trudeau has enough will power to push his agenda if he does voted. What I am afraid is his inexperience may make him end up like Obama.

Another thought comes to mind is how the Conservative Party (the historically more pro-giant corporation and most racist party out of the bunch) would have had an immigration policy that would have made Canada a lot of money while Canadian Citizens benefit since China became a member of the WTO (clearly, this is not the case). I'm afraid how much worst the Liberals may do in this department.

I'm not familiar with this.. could you explain further?

[StylinRed]

If I could vote, it would definitely be strategically to make sure a Conservative seat isn't won in my riding. Unless it was NDP which is possibly even worse

why can't you? just go to an embassy and bam

[supafamous]

Same here. I hope Trudeau has enough will power to push his agenda if he does voted. What I am afraid is his inexperience may make him end up like Obama.

Another thought comes to mind is how the Conservative Party (the historically more pro-giant corporation and most racist party out of the bunch) would have had an immigration policy that would have made Canada a lot of money while Canadian Citizens benefit since China became a member of the WTO (clearly, this is not the case). I'm afraid how much worst the Liberals may do in this department.

As a centre-left social liberal I would be thrilled if Trudeau ended up like Obama. Obama ain't perfect but his ability to work within a dysfunctional political system to get health care passed, to restart the economy and find a tenable place for the US in the world is going to be something historians will talk about in positive terms for a long time. He's found the balance between short term and long term thinking - health care will pay off for Americans for a long time and tilt the tables towards the Democrats over the years.

[EmperorIS]

How has been the line ups at Killarney?

[SkinnyPupp]

why can't you? just go to an embassy and bam
Long-term expats don't have right to vote in federal elections, court rules - Politics - CBC News (http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/long-term-expats-don-t-have-right-to-vote-in-federal-elections-court-rules-1.3160110)

This rule was was found to violate the charter, that ruling was overturned this year...

[Manic!]

Good to see so many Canadians united with one common goal to get harper out. It;s like Canada VS US in any sport.

[cunninglinguist]

Here's an interesting story. Trudeau, Muclair, and May had all done interviews with Global National News. Harper reneged at the last minute but would do Global Local interviews but to only questions he wanted to be asked.

Unpacking the Politics | Watch News Videos Online (http://globalnews.ca/video/2270583/unpacking-the-politics-3)

[tonyzoomzoom]

How has been the line ups at Killarney?

I was there last night around 6pm. Second person in line. Was talking to the lady at the door and she mentioned that later in the evening is probably better in terms of line ups.

[Manic!]

Here's an interesting story. Trudeau, Muclair, and May had all done interviews with Global National News. Harper reneged at the last minute but would do Global Local interviews but to only questions he wanted to be asked.

Unpacking the Politics | Watch News Videos Online (http://globalnews.ca/video/2270583/unpacking-the-politics-3)

Par for the course. Cons are in hiding because they know when they open there mouths they lose votes. Local con candidates are doing the same thing. Canceling events missing debates.

[EndLeSS8]

Did advance voting with the wife for the first time

[MR_BIGGS]

This is an interesting election. My dad, who has historically voted NDP both provincially and federally as well as municipally (based on their policies and positions), will be casting a vote as he perceives "strategically" on Monday. That vote will be for the Liberals.

He thinks the Liberal party has the best chance to take power and dethrone the Conservatives.

I kind of agree with that notion as well. I normally like to pick something that is tried and true, but I think change can be good also. While Trudeau does not have the political experience, he represents something new and fresh. Time will tell if he does win how effective his government will be if they win, but I'm willing to take that risk.

[supafamous]

Advanced voted at 3633 Tanner (Graham Bruce Elementary). Pretty short wait right now - about 10 mins.

[Soundy]

This is an interesting election. My dad, who has historically voted NDP both provincially and federally as well as municipally (based on their policies and positions), will be casting a vote as he perceives "strategically" on Monday. That vote will be for the Liberals.

He thinks the Liberal party has the best chance to take power and dethrone the Conservatives.

I kind of agree with that notion as well. I normally like to pick something that is tried and true, but I think change can be good also. While Trudeau does not have the political experience, he represents something new and fresh. Time will tell if he does win how effective his government will be if they win, but I'm willing to take that risk.

This is one of the things that really scares me about the whole #StopHarper campaign and people getting out to vote who are more interested in voting AGAINST someone than FOR someone.

Sure the Liberals probably have a better OVERALL chance than the NDP... but what about in your dad's riding specifically? If the NDP is running a stronger candidate there than the Liberals, or the NDP has a stronger base, then his vote is essentially useless toward his goal.

Extrapolating this, assuming this was a solid Conservative riding before and a number of people who would previously vote Conservative IN THAT RIDING, vote Liberal instead, because they have the stronger chance nationally... but the hardcore NDP supporters still vote NDP as well. You could then end up with less separation between the losing NDP and Liberal candidates, or may a reverse in who comes second, while still ending up with a winning Conservative MP... and thus one more seat for Harper in Parliament, one closer to keeping them in power.

To be clear, I'm not overly impressed with Harper and a lot of his policies, but I'm not rabidly anti-Harper like most of my Facebook feed. If anything I probably lean more toward the Liberals this time around. I'd be just as happy seeing Harper out of the PM's chair, if for no other reason to shut up all the whiners who base their whining more on fearmongering, conspiracy theories, and a general misunderstanding of how our system of government works.

I'd much rather see people understand how it works and vote FOR an appropriate local candidate... not AGAINST a party leader, which is something they don't get to directly vote for in the first place.

[Traum]

It is shaping up to be an interesting election for sure. I was reading the newspaper this morning, and both Trudeau and Mulcair have indicated that their parties would be unwilling to prop up a Harper minority government if the Cons take the most seats.

It'll be interesting to see how things play out.

[Manic!]

This is one of the things that really scares me about the whole #StopHarper campaign and people getting out to vote who are more interested in voting AGAINST someone than FOR someone.

Sure the Liberals probably have a better OVERALL chance than the NDP... but what about in your dad's riding specifically? If the NDP is running a stronger candidate there than the Liberals, or the NDP has a stronger base, then his vote is essentially useless toward his goal.


Thats why you check the polls in your riding and use a site like votettogether.ca . I'm a Liberal supporter but the libs are in 4th place in my ridding so I voted NDP.

[carisear]

To the people who are in the #abc campaign, and using strategic voting -- do you guys actually know what you are voting for, in changing ideologies to another party?

for example manic, do you realize that the ndp support something called the Sherbrooke Declaration, which essentially goes against the supreme court, in the fact that they would allow a simple majority in Quebec alone to separate?

Or do ndp supporters realized that the liberals have quite a few shared ideals as the conservatives?

I'm just wondering if the majority of people have actually looked into the other parties, or have just taken facebook posts to be their guiding principle?

As I said before, I have no issues with people voting to oust someone, but I have known people to not know who they were voting for, and then bitched when they did something that was clearly stated in their platform.

[Jmac]

Someone else joined me in the Green vote

[DragonChi]

Should I be voting for the person in my riding, or the party's ideals?

Sometimes, I find that just because a person is in a certain party, the MP is the reflection of the community and its interests in the house of commons. Not so much what the party promises.

[Hondaracer]

To the people who are in the #abc campaign, and using strategic voting -- do you guys actually know what you are voting for, in changing ideologies to another party?

for example manic, do you realize that the ndp support something called the Sherbrooke Declaration, which essentially goes against the supreme court, in the fact that they would allow a simple majority in Quebec alone to separate?

Or do ndp supporters realized that the liberals have quite a few shared ideals as the conservatives?

I'm just wondering if the majority of people have actually looked into the other parties, or have just taken facebook posts to be their guiding principle?

As I said before, I have no issues with people voting to oust someone, but I have known people to not know who they were voting for, and then bitched when they did something that was clearly stated in their platform.

no one i've talked to who is using that site has even read up on the candidate they are voting for. They only know the party which they put a check beside when they go in, thats it.

[murd0c]

Should I be voting for the person in my riding, or the party's ideals?

Sometimes, I find that just because a person is in a certain party, the MP is the reflection of the community and its interests in the house of commons. Not so much what the party promises.

Thats the shitty part of our voting process.. In this case I would vote for the party leader that suits your beliefs since this is one of the most important elections in recent years

[Manic!]

To the people who are in the #abc campaign, and using strategic voting -- do you guys actually know what you are voting for, in changing ideologies to another party?

for example manic, do you realize that the ndp support something called the Sherbrooke Declaration, which essentially goes against the supreme court, in the fact that they would allow a simple majority in Quebec alone to separate?

Or do ndp supporters realized that the liberals have quite a few shared ideals as the conservatives?

I'm just wondering if the majority of people have actually looked into the other parties, or have just taken facebook posts to be their guiding principle?

As I said before, I have no issues with people voting to oust someone, but I have known people to not know who they were voting for, and then bitched when they did something that was clearly stated in their platform.

Voting liberal in my riding would be a waste because he is so far back in the bolls in my riding. NDP are first and the Cons are second. Having actually talked to the con candidate and see current MP who was a member of the con party until he left the party because Christians where being prosecuted I cannot let the con win. Also voting NDP in my riding would actually help the liberals because that would be one less seat for the cons. Also if the election is close between the Libs and Cons some NDP MP's would support the LIbs and maybe even switch parties.


Check this out an 11 year old in Calgary interviews her local candidates for her you tube channel. 3 do the interview. One backs out. Guess what party they are from? An MP is a public servant, so to serve the public. Talking to the public is a key part of that. Looks like some parties don't understand that.

Calgary Centre candidates grilled by 11-year-old for school project - Calgary - CBC News (http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/calgary-centre-kent-hehr-jillian-ratti-thana-boonlert-joan-crockatt-1.3266921)

no one i've talked to who is using that site has even read up on the candidate they are voting for. They only know the party which they put a check beside when they go in, thats it.

You think people are actually voting for Con Nina grewal or are they voting for harper.

https://fbcdn-photos-f-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xaf1/v/t1.0-0/p480x480/12002268_1091660484200717_9049783677550722202_n.pn g?oh=df522a80621ee690b3cc7b3ddc5b7581&oe=56A40290&__gda__=1453108380_2b996c77027c5d0e978ba162085ed10 9

[MR_BIGGS]

This is one of the things that really scares me about the whole #StopHarper campaign and people getting out to vote who are more interested in voting AGAINST someone than FOR someone.

Sure the Liberals probably have a better OVERALL chance than the NDP... but what about in your dad's riding specifically? If the NDP is running a stronger candidate there than the Liberals, or the NDP has a stronger base, then his vote is essentially useless toward his goal.

Extrapolating this, assuming this was a solid Conservative riding before and a number of people who would previously vote Conservative IN THAT RIDING, vote Liberal instead, because they have the stronger chance nationally... but the hardcore NDP supporters still vote NDP as well. You could then end up with less separation between the losing NDP and Liberal candidates, or may a reverse in who comes second, while still ending up with a winning Conservative MP... and thus one more seat for Harper in Parliament, one closer to keeping them in power.

To be clear, I'm not overly impressed with Harper and a lot of his policies, but I'm not rabidly anti-Harper like most of my Facebook feed. If anything I probably lean more toward the Liberals this time around. I'd be just as happy seeing Harper out of the PM's chair, if for no other reason to shut up all the whiners who base their whining more on fearmongering, conspiracy theories, and a general misunderstanding of how our system of government works.

I'd much rather see people understand how it works and vote FOR an appropriate local candidate... not AGAINST a party leader, which is something they don't get to directly vote for in the first place.

The current MP (Stewart Kennedy with NDP) is running in a different riding due to the changes in the boundaries.

There is a new Liberal and NDP candidate in our riding and both are pretty good based on the debates we have seen. That said, this has historically been a NDP riding. My dad is definitely not voting blindly, he is well versed in the policies and ideologies of each party. I could see him sticking to the NDP come voting day also.

[Bouncing Bettys]

To the people who are in the #abc campaign, and using strategic voting -- do you guys actually know what you are voting for, in changing ideologies to another party?

for example manic, do you realize that the ndp support something called the Sherbrooke Declaration, which essentially goes against the supreme court, in the fact that they would allow a simple majority in Quebec alone to separate?

Or do ndp supporters realized that the liberals have quite a few shared ideals as the conservatives?

I'm just wondering if the majority of people have actually looked into the other parties, or have just taken facebook posts to be their guiding principle?

As I said before, I have no issues with people voting to oust someone, but I have known people to not know who they were voting for, and then bitched when they did something that was clearly stated in their platform.
It's no more an issue than people on the right only having one party to vote for. Fiscally conservative voters have to get in be with religious nut jobs. No party is going to line up perqfectly with each voter's ideals. It's a system of compromise.

[murd0c]

Voting liberal in my riding would be a waste because he is so far back in the bolls in my riding. NDP are first and the Cons are second. Having actually talked to the con candidate and see current MP who was a member of the con party until he left the party because Christians where being prosecuted I cannot let the con win. Also voting NDP in my riding would actually help the liberals because that would be one less seat for the cons. Also if the election is close between the Libs and Cons some NDP MP's would support the LIbs and maybe even switch parties.


Check this out an 11 year old in Calgary interviews her local candidates for her you tube channel. 3 do the interview. One backs out. Guess what party they are from? An MP is a public servant, so to serve the public. Talking to the public is a key part of that. Looks like some parties don't understand that.

Calgary Centre candidates grilled by 11-year-old for school project - Calgary - CBC News (http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/calgary-centre-kent-hehr-jillian-ratti-thana-boonlert-joan-crockatt-1.3266921)



You think people are actually voting for Con Nina grewal or are they voting for harper.

https://fbcdn-photos-f-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xaf1/v/t1.0-0/p480x480/12002268_1091660484200717_9049783677550722202_n.pn g?oh=df522a80621ee690b3cc7b3ddc5b7581&oe=56A40290&__gda__=1453108380_2b996c77027c5d0e978ba162085ed10 9

Nina Grewal is in my riding and I so hope she doesn't get voted back in, my dad and sister voted NDP and I voted Liberal cause I couldn't suck it up and vote NDP as well

[Lomac]

Having actually talked to the con candidate and see current MP who was a member of the con party until he left the party because Christians where being prosecuted I cannot let the con win.

Complete deviation from this thread's topic, but this is one thing that I don't understand. Of course you see it more down south, but it's starting to pop up here in Canada now as well.

:fulloffuck:

[StylinRed]

Complete deviation from this thread's topic, but this is one thing that I don't understand. Of course you see it more down south, but it's starting to pop up here in Canada now as well.

:fulloffuck:

thats what happens when we get a flood of american immigrants and the cons given a green light in the government to do whatever they want

[will068]

As a centre-left social liberal I would be thrilled if Trudeau ended up like Obama. Obama ain't perfect but his ability to work within a dysfunctional political system to get health care passed, to restart the economy and find a tenable place for the US in the world is going to be something historians will talk about in positive terms for a long time. He's found the balance between short term and long term thinking - health care will pay off for Americans for a long time and tilt the tables towards the Democrats over the years.

When Obama did not did not push through with his promises from his '08 campaign, it's when I realized (in the US anyways), that whoever is in power, special interests groups have a strong say in Government Policy.

Aside from Universal Health Care, most of his administration's decisions were GW Bush-like (E.g. Having the Same Fed Chair that Bush had, ongoing strong military presence in the middle east, pushing money - multiple QEs - to Wall Street that would primarily benefit Banks but not the middle class.). Again, this opposed his promises in his '08 campaign.

It just seemed that he was giving in too much to the GOP. He did not have strong enough leadership to unite the GOP and Dems in the Houses. Perhaps, this is because he was a young Junior Senator beforehand. Thus, I am equating his inexperience to that of Trudeau. Will Trudeau be able to execute his vision if he wins ?

[Manic!]

When Obama did not did not push through with his promises from his '08 campaign, it's when I realized (in the US anyways), that whoever is in power, special interests groups have a strong say in Government Policy.

Aside from Universal Health Care, most of his administration's decisions were GW Bush-like (E.g. Having the Same Fed Chair that Bush had, ongoing strong military presence in the middle east, pushing money - multiple QEs - to Wall Street that would primarily benefit Banks but not the middle class.). Again, this opposed his promises in his '08 campaign.

It just seemed that he was giving in too much to the GOP. He did not have strong enough leadership to unite the GOP and Dems in the Houses. Perhaps, this is because he was a young Junior Senator beforehand. Thus, I am equating his inexperience to that of Trudeau. Will Trudeau be able to execute his vision if he wins ?

In the US the house and senate are now both controlled by republicans. Any law has to pass threw both houses before the president can sign it. In Canada if you are prime minister you have the most MP's that means it's way easier to push threw laws. If you have a majority you can push threw any law as long as the members in your party follow you.

[zetazeta]

For some reason I was trippin this morning and thought it was the election day. Went to my assigned location at 11:50 to find out election is next week. Luckily advanced voting starts at 12 so I gladly waited the 10 mins to cast my ballot.

[StylinRed]

Long-term expats don't have right to vote in federal elections, court rules - Politics - CBC News (http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/long-term-expats-don-t-have-right-to-vote-in-federal-elections-court-rules-1.3160110)

This rule was was found to violate the charter, that ruling was overturned this year...

:fulloffuck: dont know how i missed that, thought it was still being argued

[Manic!]

:fulloffuck: dont know how i missed that, thought it was still being argued

Still has to go threw the Supreme court. Will not be deiced until after the election. But hey Skinnypup could still run for office in any riding he chose.

[SkinnyPupp]

It's really a stupid law, and I can't believe it is taking so long to argue about it. It's not like it's the 70's where if you leave the country, you have no idea what is going on there until someone comes and tells you, or get newspapers sent to you :fulloffuck:

[Ikkaku]

In the US the house and senate are now both controlled by republicans. Any law has to pass threw both houses before the president can sign it. In Canada if you are prime minister you have the most MP's that means it's way easier to push threw laws. If you have a majority you can push threw any law as long as the members in your party follow you.

Still has to go threw the Supreme court. Will not be deiced until after the election. But hey Skinnypup could still run for office in any riding he chose.

I am sorry to correct you on this, but the word is through.

[hotshot1]

The most important issue to me is Bill C51. The NDP said they would repeal it so I'm going to vote for them. Of course who knows what they'd actually do if elected.

Elections are such a bullshit event, it's unbelievable. We have the internet now and we're still voting for parties and officials who are supposed to act on our behalf when time and time again they lie. Humans are untrustworthy and power hungry, especially when it comes to politics. Just to be part of the system you have to have a giant ego and want to implement your ideas on everyone. We need a revolution!

Every time I think of politics I get mad... Bill C51, The TPP, NSA spying, Snowden exiled, the Pope with his 2030 plan... My god we're living in a fucked up movie. Also, I hate how the Pope has any influence over anyone. People are so stupid. I mean, he's a creepy old dude who believes in fairy tales and wears a Halloween costume. What the fuck does he know about climate change!?

/rant

[Traum]

Dude,

I am not religious by any means, but especially with Pope Francis, I have nothing but utmost respect for him, and I trust that a lot of people share the same view. So please, do not speak ill of him in a general, abstract sense.

[westopher]

Also, I hate how the Pope has any influence over anyone. People are so stupid. I mean, he's a creepy old dude who believes in fairy tales and wears a Halloween costume. What the fuck does he know about climate change!?

/rant

His views align with yours on climate change likely if you are voting NDP, so not sure why you are so mad.

[Hondaracer]

Dude,

I am not religious by any means, but especially with Pope Francis, I have nothing but utmost respect for him, and I trust that a lot of people share the same view. So please, do not speak ill of him in a general, abstract sense.

Yea, that ol' Catholic Church really aligns with my views on touching young boys penises and a complete intolerance of others!

[Manic!]

Yea, that ol' Catholic Church really aligns with my views on touching young boys penises and a complete intolerance of others!

and yet you are still voting con.

[jasonturbo]

and yet you are still voting con.

The more of your posts I read, the less I want to vote Conservative, you make it very clear that those cuts to adult literacy are really having a negative impact on society.

Conservative government abandoning us, literacy groups say | Ottawa Citizen (http://ottawacitizen.com/news/local-news/literacy-organizations-say-federal-government-abandoning-them)

From your join date you must be 30+, shame on you, learn to spell already (there, their, they're, through, threw, etc)

I'm actually leaning to the Liberals a bit now, not enough to vote, but enough to not vote for the Cons.

[willystyle]

Still deciding between Trudeau or Mulclair... There are some policy's that I like and dislike from both parties.

I live in a riding where NDP had won their seat for the past 4 elections, so......?????

[meme405]

Voted for the dude with the good hair...:fullofwin:

EDIT: Just to be more clear on this, I thank the conservative party for all their immensely informative ads. It really did solidify how important nice hair is.

It would be really embarrassing having our countries head (pun intended) look like this:

https://dekerivers.files.wordpress.com/2015/06/youhavetobekiddingme.jpg?w=600

[quasi]

I'll be honest I haven't followed the debates or promises that close but how are any of these party's going to keep any promises they've made? Unless i'm missing something we're headed to a minority government and nobody will be able to do anything without the support of at least one other major party. That worked really well when the Conservatives had a minority so well that we kept going back to the polls until they had a majority.

[Traum]

If Trudeau and Mulcair remain true to their word, it seems unlikely that'll be a Conservative minority government at all -- neither Trudeau nor Mulcair will support the Cons, and I doubt there'll be enough Greens / independents to prop Harper up to form a minority government. Reciting from my decidedly poor Canadian parliamentary history, I think there have been past precedence where the party with the most seats did not manage to form government -- the runner up received the blessings (and support) from the 2nd runner up to form government instead.

At this point, it seems most likely to me that we will see some kind of minority government lead by the Liberals, with support coming from NDP. IMO, it makes more sense for Mulcair to seek a coalition government with Trudeau since I think the NDP can squeeze more out of this election that way. If the NDP can secure a coalition government, it means they can have a few NDP MPs to be appointed to key positions -- probably a fixed number of ministers or something along those lines. This will give them a lot more say in federal government operations.

If the NDP are merely happy to play the supporter role, the ministers will all be Liberal MPs. While I see this being an inferior arrangement for NDP, they can still leverage their position and bend the Liberals to accommodate some of their demands when policies are drafted, but without actually doing the heavy duty lifting work themselves. Plus, if things go sideways with certain policies, they can wash their hands clean and claim that it was a Liberals-lead policy, instead of one that is lead by NDP.

Personally, I think a Liberals minority government is more likely, but I would prefer a Lib-NDP coalition instead, since I think a coalition government will likely last longer.

[willystyle]

I'll be honest I haven't followed the debates or promises that close but how are any of these party's going to keep any promises they've made?
They will likely forget most of their election promises when they win.

Our political system has failed, it does not run effectively and efficiently, and if you ask me what a better solution would be. I wouldn't know either.

It's really a matter of choosing the lesser of three evils. Which is sad in reality cause ideally, there shouldn't be any evils.

[willystyle]

If Trudeau and Mulcair remain true to their word, it seems unlikely that'll be a Conservative minority government at all -- neither Trudeau nor Mulcair will support the Cons, and I doubt there'll be enough Greens / independents to prop Harper up to form a minority government. Reciting from my decidedly poor Canadian parliamentary history, I think there have been past precedence where the party with the most seats did not manage to form government -- the runner up received the blessings (and support) from the 2nd runner up to form government instead.

At this point, it seems most likely to me that we will see some kind of minority government lead by the Liberals, with support coming from NDP. IMO, it makes more sense for Mulcair to seek a coalition government with Trudeau since I think the NDP can squeeze more out of this election that way. If the NDP can secure a coalition government, it means they can have a few NDP MPs to be appointed to key positions -- probably a fixed number of ministers or something along those lines. This will give them a lot more say in federal government operations.

If the NDP are merely happy to play the supporter role, the ministers will all be Liberal MPs. While I see this being an inferior arrangement for NDP, they can still leverage their position and bend the Liberals to accommodate some of their demands when policies are drafted, but without actually doing the heavy duty lifting work themselves. Plus, if things go sideways with certain policies, they can wash their hands clean and claim that it was a Liberals-lead policy, instead of one that is lead by NDP.

Personally, I think a Liberals minority government is more likely, but I would prefer a Lib-NDP coalition instead, since I think a coalition government will likely last longer.
Trudeau didn't appear to have any issues siding with Harper with the passing of Bill C-51. ;)

Mulclair stated yesterday that he will not support the Liberals to form a coalition government. Take it for what it's worth cause politicians always change their damn minds.

[Soundy]

I am sorry to correct you on this, but the word is through.
Thank yew.

[jasonturbo]

Mulclair stated yesterday that he will not support the Liberals to form a coalition government. Take it for what it's worth cause politicians always change their damn minds.

Other way around, Mulcair expressed an interest in joining forces with Trudeau, Trudeau said he wasn't interested in working with the NDP if Mulcair was in the picture.

Video: Mulcair says Trudeau 'slammed the door' on coalition - The Globe and Mail (http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/news-video/video-mulcair-says-trudeau-slammed-the-door-on-coalition/article26750243/)

If I was to make a bet, there will be no coalition, there will a silent partnership between the Libs and Cons, regardless of which party wins the most seats.

[Traum]

Trudeau didn't appear to have any issues siding with Harper with the passing of Bill C-51. ;)

Mulclair stated yesterday that he will not support the Liberals to form a coalition government. Take it for what it's worth cause politicians always change their damn minds.
Well, we know they are all flagrant liars. Trudeau has previously stated that he will not support the Cons to form a minority government with Liberal support, so that is where I drew my conclusion from.

I would not at all be surprised to see them changing stance as soon as election results come out. But we will see.

[nah]

If/when the NDP lose, Mulcair will be gone and they will elect a new leader.

[StylinRed]

so the cons are placing chinese ads stating the liberals support brothels....are they trying to help the libs win??

Conservatives repeat Liberal brothel claim despite no evidence - NEWS 1130 (http://www.news1130.com/2015/10/13/conservatives-repeat-liberal-brothel-claim-despite-no-evidence/)

[Jmac]

The Greens would be less likely to support the Cons than the NDP and Libs. They're more left than either.

I saw on Global's site that the projections are 1 seat for the Greens and 3 for the Bloc. No independents. It's very much a 3-way race with the NDP being the dark horse.

[StylinRed]

Other way around, Mulcair expressed an interest in joining forces with Trudeau, Trudeau said he wasn't interested in working with the NDP if Mulcair was in the picture.

Video: Mulcair says Trudeau 'slammed the door' on coalition - The Globe and Mail (http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/news-video/video-mulcair-says-trudeau-slammed-the-door-on-coalition/article26750243/)

If I was to make a bet, there will be no coalition, there will a silent partnership between the Libs and Cons, regardless of which party wins the most seats.

You would think Trudeau would be all for working with the NDP considering thats how his dads government survived in the 70s (though it also wasnt an official coalition)

Not to mention the greatest achievements for Canadians occurred when Tommy Douglas and Lester Pearson worked together

[CorneringArtist]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1V4ZoTnnovE

[nah]

The Greens would be less likely to support the Cons than the NDP and Libs. They're more left than either.

I saw on Global's site that the projections are 1 seat for the Greens and 3 for the Bloc. No independents. It's very much a 3-way race with the NDP being the dark horse.

Oh thank god we might eventually see the Bloc going away...

[tool001]

cheez,, they can't say they will support each other before the elections... cause that's a given way to lose votes... people will think it don't matter if i vote ndp or lib.. in the end they will form a coalition either way..

wait for elections to pan out, then the dealing start.

[murd0c]

WOW I'm surprised and happy about how many people are voting Liberal compared to the Conservatives.. Hopefully this is more of the case out side of RS

[underscore]

Looking at the poll options, are you guys calling a spoiled ballot a throwaway? Or is that referring to something else?

[Lomac]

cheez,, they can't say they will support each other before the elections... cause that's a given way to lose votes... people will think it don't matter if i vote ndp or lib.. in the end they will form a coalition either way..

wait for elections to pan out, then the dealing start.

This.

Saying you're willing to form a coalition is basically stating you're going to lose and are trying to hedge your bets. No one wants to admit they're going to lose ahead of voting day.

[Jmac]

Looking at the poll options, are you guys calling a spoiled ballot a throwaway? Or is that referring to something else?
I think it means voting for some esoteric party (eg. Marxist-Leninist) not because you support their ideals, but to protest the mainstream parties.

[underscore]

Interesting, I thought a spoiled ballot was the best way to do that.

[dachinesedude]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T5Wx50YqRGA