Election 2015

[apl16]

Both getting a new electoral system and abolishing the senate would need major constitutional amendments. History hasn't been kind to amendments. It involves getting approval from both houses in Parliament, two thirds or more of the provinces need to support it, and of those two thirds, they must represent over 50% of the population. Overall, the amendments have been minor, and plenty of major ones failed. I could see the senate reform/abolishment possibly, but I could never see the provinces getting together and picking an electoral system that they can agree on.

If you don't try it will never happen. Too important to not try

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Not sure.
I must admit to being a Conservative but even I am disappointed by the antics of the current Federal Government. Unfortunately they have become what all governments of all parties become once they are in office for a while. They get a sense of entitlement and start to lie to us. Plus the MP in my area running for re-election is a useless twit.
The problem I have is, for me the options are not there.
I just can't convince myself to vote for the Liberals. The candidate in my area is a dick (I know him from previous political and business encounters), Trudeau is too inexperienced and says too many dumb things when he is talking without a script and with the Liberals I fear we are just back to the old style we had under Chretien and P.E.T
The NDP scare the hell out of me. I cannot, regardless of how Mulcair talks about fiscal responsibility, support a party which shares a common philosophy with the NDP here in Manitoba which has basically ruined this province for generations to come with their wasteful spending, excessive taxation, huge deficits and this attitude that they know how to run my life better than I do. I cannot imagine the cost and economic ruin that would be imposed on the nation by an NDP Federal Government.
I really can't comment on the Green Party since they don't have a candidate running in my area that I am aware of.

 

[Dharper]

Just a few of my 2 cent political thoughts:

It seems most of the MPs in my area are only MPs for 6-10 years. I imaging the job sucks, but what peeves me is, I bet from day 1, most plan to be there just long enough for the the Golden pension.

When I vote, I am sure I vote like most people that votes, I vote for what party is best for me. I can disguise my thought by saying I vote for what is best for the Country, the future, the economy, etc. But who will vote for a party that is not best for themselves?

I have only voted for the current Conservatives, or Liberals. Either or is fine by me. But I would have to agree, that after a government has been in power for 8-10 years, it usually needs a rebuild. Only thing is, when there is a rebuild, there seems to be a spike in government 'spite' spending, and contract buyouts.

I sure would hate to see the Country if run by the NDP.

 

[Cock Throppled]

We're 4 weeks in and I thought I'd bump to see if any more people have decided. I am still ABC, but haven't made a decision yet.

 

[Equity Market investor]

Im still leaning towards Libs or NDP, but, certainly not going to be an ignorant fool and cast my vote for Harper and his party lol. Fat chance.

 

[ogreray]

Used to be a Conservative supporter. Last time I voted for them was 2 elections ago. Last election I voted NDP. Still leaning that way this election, but I want to see all the announcements from both parties before I 100% commit. One of the Liberal promises would really help me out on a personal level, but I still havn't seen the NDP's stance on it yet. Just hope the votes don't get split in such a way that the Conservatives make it to power again.

 

[wetnose]

So embarassing to have a British newspaper point this out...

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/aug/28/canada-stephen-harper-harder-to-vote

"....on voting day, incumbent candidates and not Elections Canada will appoint polling supervisors. This hardly smells like democracy."

What??????????? This perverts our democracy, making us look like North Korea or Uganda.

 

[sdw]

If you don't try it will never happen. Too important to not try

The Supreme Court of Canada has already ruled on getting rid of or even modifying the role of the Senate. https://scc-csc.lexum.com/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/13614/index.do
The short version is NO.

Since changing the electoral system also requires the approval of the Provinces, the SCOC will say NO again.

It's kind of sad just how bad the Canadian Government is serving it's population. Problem is - there isn't one that I'd vote for. Harper has proven himself an idiot that takes advice from idiots. He doesn't even have the support of the people that he's appointed to very well paid patronage positions. Justin Trudeau is clearly willing to say anything to get elected, while he doesn't intend to follow through on a single promise. He's even recycled the Chretien/Martin/Dion/Ignatieff universal daycare promise. Of course nobody is supposed to remember that they were government under Chretien and Martin. Then there's Tom Mulcair. Who will be the next Prime Minister of Canada. So much for any industry that isn't "Green". Oh Well, houses will be cheaper in 2020.

 

[Equity Market investor]

Facebook blogs are also ripping it up . You won' t like Canada once Harper is through with it. Classic.


https://m.facebook.com/pages/I-dont...tive-Party-is-doing-to-Canada/641483102627942

 

[bcneil]

Latest poll has the cons in third. Looks like we might get a minority government this time. With the conservatives having little input.

 

[MrBrown]

These elections are a loose loose loose proposition.
We are going into an inevitable recession.
Conservatives are disconnected and cannot be trusted to deviate from their conservative rigidity and values.
Liberals have lots to offer in terms of their platform but the leader is inexperienced and irresponsible, sorry but the ads are on the money, he's not ready.
NDP have the most appealing leader but being a hard working tax paying capitalist I can predict much more free riding with them in power. I live in a strong NDP riding so my vote won't matter anyway.

 

[sdw]

Thomas Mulcair is lying through his teeth, pure and simple. He's promised billions of spending, and is saying he will balance the budget at the same time, it doesn't add up. Whether it's a GST hike back to 7 or higher, or personal income tax hikes or business killing corporate tax hikes, there's no way he can do what he's saying. The fact that the idiots in this province and elsewhere are eating that stuff up doesn't say much for their intelligence. Harper is a shitbag who needs to go, and he's lying too about balancing the budget. We are sliding into a recession and only Trudeau has had the stones to tell the truth and say deficits for a few years are required. I hate his genetic material, as I am old enough to remember the damage his father did to the country, but the Liberals are the lesser of the evils this time around.

The idiotic sheep supporting the NDP may not wake up fast enough, we can only hope at some point before October that Mulcair is finally pinned down about where the money will come from. And then his whole house of cards falls apart.

Unfortunately, both Harper and Trudeau have already proved that they aren't competent to lead Canada. With Harper, only one word is needed. DUFFY Now Duffy isn't the only demonstration of incompetence - however that one word sums it up. There is not anyone that ever worked with Duffy that didn't know what porker he is/was. That's why the reporter from CTV investigated and wrote the initial articles. The reporter had worked with Duffy and knew all about how he padded his expense claims. Anyone that ever worked with Duffy said "couldn't happen to a nicer guy". Everyone in Ottawa knew that Duffy had trolled every PM since P.E. Trudeau for an appointment to the Senate.

Then we have Nigel Wright. Now there is a man that has too much money and too few brains. What did he think was going to happen if he gave $90K to Duffy? The media would say "oh well, Duffy has paid the money back, no story now". Money thrown away to no effect and it was predictable what was going to happen.

What I still have difficulty with is understanding why the Harper Team wanted to save Duffy. They have no trouble throwing Women under the bus. Have people forgotten the Harper Teams treatment of Eve Adams, Helena Guergis, or Bev Oda? None of these women did anything as egregious as Duffy, but the Harper Team instantly threw them under the bus and then circled to go over them again - several times. The Harper Team demonstrably does not like women.

Then we have young Trudeau. Who thought that Eve Adams was the ideal candidate. Who promised open Nominations, but only allows the people he likes to win a Nomination. Who has never seen a broken Liberal promise of the past that isn't worth recycling in this election.

Canadians will most likely vote for whats left. Unfortunately that is Tom Mulcair.

Most Canadians recognize that it is only the party leader that is important. He/She is the one who makes all of the appointments. The remaining MPs - even Cabinet Ministers - are just votes in the House. It's silly to vote for the local candidate and think they will have any influence on what the Party Leader does.

 

[sdw]

Take back this Land - Chilliwack Aug 2015

 

[HankQuinlan]

Most election promises are meaningless...from all parties, including the spending promises -- from the NDP as well. The economy will do what the economy will do; none of them will make big enough changes to fix it or spoil it...although big business -- including the media -- will do everything to blame the NDP for everything that happens if they win.

The differences will be in other things, related to personal freedom and democracy. Hopefully the first things that will happen will include fixing the most egregious Harper stuff -- drug policies, the "Fair Elections" Act, re-establishing public access to government information, getting the religious nuts' influence out of policy.

I hold little hope for Senate reform or proportional representation from any winner; as soon as a party wins, they figure that the current system is to their advantage, so they never change the "first past the post" system, which we desperately need to avoid things like the last 10 years. Minority government is a good thing with the current system; it will always be that way in a proportional system unless a government is so popular they actually win a real majority -- not a fake one like we have now.

 

[sdw]

Most election promises are meaningless...from all parties, including the spending promises -- from the NDP as well. The economy will do what the economy will do; none of them will make big enough changes to fix it or spoil it...although big business -- including the media -- will do everything to blame the NDP for everything that happens if they win.

The differences will be in other things, related to personal freedom and democracy. Hopefully the first things that will happen will include fixing the most egregious Harper stuff -- drug policies, the "Fair Elections" Act, re-establishing public access to government information, getting the religious nuts' influence out of policy.

I hold little hope for Senate reform or proportional representation from any winner; as soon as a party wins, they figure that the current system is to their advantage, so they never change the "first past the post" system, which we desperately need to avoid things like the last 10 years. Minority government is a good thing with the current system; it will always be that way in a proportional system unless a government is so popular they actually win a real majority -- not a fake one like we have now.

"First Past The Post" is not perfect - but it's better than what Greece, Israel or Italy have. When a government can only be formed with a coalition, they are easy to blackmail by the very fringe parties that are recruited to get enough seats to form a government. Greece is busily electing another government that promises to not pay Greece's debts. The fourth such election in 2 years and the second election this year. Each time, the winning coalition has promised to not pay Greece's debt, not raise taxes, not change the pension system. Each time the winning coalition has had to promise the EU that they will impose austerity and higher taxes.

Israel, who once again has to give cabinet posts to the extreme parties. This time they had to give Justice to the party that thinks the only good Palestinian is a dead Palestinian and Housing to the the party that represents the Settler movement. There won't be Peace in Our Time in Israel.

Italy, who must allow known members of the Mafia to have Cabinet positions in order to eke out a majority.

Both types of Proportional Representation do not offer a stable government unless the number of legal parties are severely restricted. That's the system the Soviet Union used until 1986 and is still used in China in their direct elections at the "village level" (effectively an elected person for each 2000 citizens). Nominations must be approved by the Communist Party and every real position of power is by appointment.

I don't want Canada to find itself with a "National Church" which could easily happen with Proportional Representation, nor do I want to see a coalition government that will force anyone to parrot a parties dogma.

 

[hornygandalf]

"First Past The Post" is not perfect - but it's better than what Greece, Israel or Italy have.

It is also what New Zealand, Denmark, Germany, Mexico, Netherlands, Norway, Switzerland and some 80 other countries have. The devil is in the details of how it is made up, but generally results in a better democratic system with a more representative spread of views in the parliament. Coalitions are not necessarily a bad thing and can work very effectively.

And in terms of the outcome causing a recession, political parties have very little to do with economic performance, despite what many pundits suggest. The actual difference in economic performance of a country is marginal as economic cycles happen as they well anyway. There is a lot of fear mongering going on about what will happen if particular parties get it. Reality is that taxes in some areas can afford to go up. Higher taxes in itself is not necessarily THE determinate of economic performance. We have lived in periods when taxes were much higher and the economy and economic growth was much healthier. If taxes result in a redistribution of wealth such that there results in a much healthier economy, isn't that a good thing? What has been destroying economic growth has been the increasing concentrations of wealth as a result of lowering of tax rates, and the squeezing of the middle classes ability to consume as a result. It is an economic experience that hasn't worked unless you are in the upper few percent.

 

[sdw]

It is also what New Zealand, Denmark, Germany, Mexico, Netherlands, Norway, Switzerland and some 80 other countries have. The devil is in the details of how it is made up, but generally results in a better democratic system with a more representative spread of views in the parliament. Coalitions are not necessarily a bad thing and can work very effectively.

And in terms of the outcome causing a recession, political parties have very little to do with economic performance, despite what many pundits suggest. The actual difference in economic performance of a country is marginal as economic cycles happen as they well anyway. There is a lot of fear mongering going on about what will happen if particular parties get it. Reality is that taxes in some areas can afford to go up. Higher taxes in itself is not necessarily THE determinate of economic performance. We have lived in periods when taxes were much higher and the economy and economic growth was much healthier. If taxes result in a redistribution of wealth such that there results in a much healthier economy, isn't that a good thing? What has been destroying economic growth has been the increasing concentrations of wealth as a result of lowering of tax rates, and the squeezing of the middle classes ability to consume as a result. It is an economic experience that hasn't worked unless you are in the upper few percent.

Taxes were much higher in both Canada and the USA in the 1970s and both countries had a MUCH higher standard of living. What happened is that in 1978 California passed proposition 13 which reduced property taxes by 57%. Soon politicians at every level of government found themselves under pressure to reduce taxes.

There isn't much Canadian data available on the Internet. However there is:
https://deadfortaxreasons.wordpress.com/2014/03/10/a-short-history-of-canadian-income-taxation/

...The number of brackets peaked at 14 in 1973 and ranged from 4.58% to 61.34%...

http://www5.agr.gc.ca/resources/prod/doc/pol/pub/itdat60-05/pdf/tax_e.pdf Canadian Corporate Tax Rates 1960-2005
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_taxes_in_Canada Canadian Personal Tax Rates 1998-2014

There is a table of US Personal Tax Rates from the 1960s to the 1980s. https://web.stanford.edu/class/polisci120a/immigration/Federal Tax Brackets.pdf that shows that taxes at the highest bracket have dropped from 94.357% to 70%

Since governments, these days, exist in order to get re-elected in the perpetual election campaign - what money government does bring in is given directly to the sub-group of people most likely to vote to re-elect that government. That's why we have the Conservative's Child Tax Rebate vs the Liberal's Family Allowance of the past.

We couldn't build a Trans Canada Highway these days. We don't even repair the one that we do have. If there is an absolute need for a bridge, the only way it can be built is to make it a toll bridge.

 

[Lo-ki]

"We couldn't build a Trans Canada Highway these days. We don't even repair the one that we do have. If there is an absolute need for a bridge, the only way it can be built is to make it a toll bridge."

Living in Montreal, I remember that the highway going north had tolls and so did most of all the bridges from Montreal were tolled.
Once they were paid for the tolls came down.

This isn't anything new.

 

[marsvolta]

ouch that stings... from theguardian.com:

older, white, male, rural

Here’s a tip. If you’re running a hard-right government with a tyrannical sense of mission, don’t pass a law mandating US-style fixed-date elections. For you are Father Time’s plaything. It will bat you like a cat toy.

The Canadian prime minister, Stephen Harper, passed just such a law and so was forced to call an autumn election. And on Tuesday, Canada entered a recession, the only G7 nation to do so.

Harper had placed his tender hopes in the rough hands of the planet-poisoning Alberta tar sands. Oil prices collapsed. Canada’s economy is now based on cheap oil and job fear. The two main opposition parties are pumped, and it’s voting time!

Canadians will go to the polls on 19 October, many feeling worse off than they have in years. “The government has been in austerity mode since 2011,” economist Jim Stanford told the CBC, Canada’s national news network, which has been decimated by the Conservative government. “They’ve pulled back C$15bn [£7.4bn] of programme spending, eliminated tens of thousands of jobs in the broader public sector and helped create an environment where bad news in one sector, oil, could actually push the whole economy into the negative.”

Here’s another tip for Harper. Don’t pass a law mandating a balanced budget, as Harper’s Conservatives did this summer in another serious case of bad timing.

For all the neoliberal economics he has promoted, Harper doesn’t balance his budgets. Harper ran seven consecutive budget deficits while claiming to despise such things, and then his own law turned around to bite him. Thomas Mulcair of the leftist New Democratic party (NDP) declared he’d balance the budget. And then Liberal leader Justin Trudeau stepped in, saying with his air of quiet confidence that if elected, he’d run a deficit. Austerity was too damaging right now, he said. The Liberals instantly became Canada’s operating left wing.

Harper has always been at odds with Trudeau. He dislikes the young man, whose attractive hair and warm manner are frequently contrasted with Harper’s helmet-like mane and weird frigidity. Yes, hair is a campaign issue. An almost stationary man, Harper reacted by pinching his thumb and index finger together to mock Trudeau’s “tiny” deficit. And, of course, it looked as though he were describing his personal arrangements, or something worse. People stared at that photo.

For all the neoliberal economics he has promoted, Harper doesn’t balance his budgets

One last tip for our prime minister. In a country that, like Britain, prefers its election campaigns brisk, don’t copy the Americans twice over and drag the thing out. But Harper has. The campaign will last 11 long weeks, giving voters a chance to see just how strange Harper is. A controlling man, who dislikes being physically approached, Harper won’t meet just any voter. Anyone who wishes to attend a campaign rally must sign up, provide ID, be vetted and searched, and sign a gag order – though the last was subsequently dropped. Reporters are searched by the RCMP, Canada’s federal police force, sniffed by guard dogs, and allowed a total of five questions, which are generally dismissed by Harper while the audience boos.

At one rally, two female reporters were abused later by members of the audience. “You’re a lying piece of shit,” said one man, a propos of nothing, who became known as #AngryCon. Compared to the invariably courteous Trudeau, relaxed in the presence of other humans, and Mulcair, who happily holds public rallies of the NDP faithful and unfaithful, Harper sticks with his base: older, white, male, rural.

That base doesn’t photograph well. Canada is a genuinely multicultural nation. It’s almost as if Harper wants to win, but only with the votes of people he can stand. However, even those people worry about soaring house prices, lousy interest rates on savings, traffic jams from neglected infrastructure and unemployed children. Canadians are sick of this feeling of rot, this economic precariousness.

Summer polls are reliably unreliable, but Harper has walked into an electoral trap of his own making.

 

[westwoody]

Harper ran seven consecutive deficits. Then he says Trudeau is incompetent for planning it.

Typical Harper hypocrisy. "Stay the course"; he says. So the economy is in a nosedive and we should keep on a downward slide? He claims to be a financial genius while fucking up everything.