Shit, i'd kick in a hundred for a gofundme to get you the f**k outta here
ound: :crazy:JK, we do need opposing views and it would be pretty boring without a resident over the top Con Supporter.
2019 Election thread
- Thread starter MB Mod
- Start date
ound: :crazy:JK, we do need opposing views and it would be pretty boring without a resident over the top Con Supporter.
As I have said many times I actually used to vote Liberal and I even voted for the NDP Provincially for Harcourt.As a voter over the course of the years and after I have gotten some "skin" in the "Proverbial Game" after seeing the corruption by both the Liberals/NDP with regards to kickbacks/bribes/backroom deals and outright cronyism etc....I just jumped to the other side of the fence.The real turning point was the Lieberal "Sponsorship Administration Program" under Chretien who after he took the exit door fell on Paul Martin.All told the Lieberals STOLE 250 million from tax payers and doled it out to cronies in Quebec......how the fuck in the WIDE WORLD OF SPORTS does anyone forget that?Shit, i'd kick in a hundred for a gofundme to get you the f**k outta here
JK, we do need opposing views and it would be pretty boring without a resident over the top Con Supporter.
Next big thing was the Senate Scandal when Mike Duffy's illegal expences that were paid back with private money and it was a SCANDAL.....yet the Liberal Senator Mac Harb whose tab was more than Duffy/Wallin and Brazeau combined....his illegal tab got paid off in 1 lump sum....and no questions were asked...Mac Harb paid back $490,000+ of expences and it got "swept under the rug".
As I said I used to vote Liberal until IMO they became Lieberal.As far as I am concerned you can take a monkey and strategically shave it and dress it in a nice suit.Give it a blue tie and call it a Conservative and I would vote for said monkey.
That is after 30 years of being able to vote and having voted in each and every Provincial/Federal election I was able to.
That being said I am a "small C conservative" with regards to abortion.I am a proponent of gun rights and I stress in my opinion that guns are not a "right" they are a "privledge" in Canada.I want smaller Government and less taxes which are Conservative values.I dont want more taxes and bigger Government with regards to both the hand in my pocket as well as telling me what is "OK" to say or think.
If you wish to reply please(with sugar on top) take into consideration everything I have said and think about it and come up with a rational viewpoint that is in a juxtaposition to mine,with regards what drove me to "jump the fence".
SR
With all due respect, if you are putting lower taxes ahead of the liberty and equality of others, that's just Conservative, no small "c". I've said before that I know a lot of people who identify as "socially progressive, fiscally conservative" but in practice there's no such party, so you have to choose one or the other.
I understand not wanting to support corruption or lack of integrity. I couldn't vote Liberal last election because of their hypocrisy, but I damned well wasn't going to vote Conservative either. I can't endorse a wrong to fight a wrong. It's not even like the Conservatives are a bastion of integrity. You are choosing to ignore their faults because the part of the platform you support means too much to you. That's the same mind set as those who continue to be Liberal supporters.
In the end, when no party has positives without negatives, it's a question of what's most important to you and what you're willing to tolerate to get it.
Honestly, the parties spend more campaign time trying to hide their ideology and policies, instead of revealing it. (At least the 3-4 bigger ones.)
You can thank First-Past-The-Post for promoting such dishonesty. The careerist pols are all so afraid of citizens voting against what they don't want instead of what they do.
If FPTP was gone, there wouldn't be such pressure for parties to try and seem like they can be all things to all people. The could instead try to convince people to support their actual beliefs, instead of trying to deceive the public into giving a brief poll bump that might vault them into the position of a minority with absolute power.
We get treated like dummies, like suckers, and we know it - then after the election, we want to get away from the ugly bitter world of campaigns, and go on pretending that the results of such a system are legitimate.
Then we gnash our teeth over the "divisions" that this fucked up system amplifies, as if there isn't something better that we could have done instead.
The political parties are at fault, and the media - but let's not forget to blame ourselves for letting them tell us this bullshit narrative, without it being challenged.
You can thank First-Past-The-Post for promoting such dishonesty. The careerist pols are all so afraid of citizens voting against what they don't want instead of what they do.
If FPTP was gone, there wouldn't be such pressure for parties to try and seem like they can be all things to all people. The could instead try to convince people to support their actual beliefs, instead of trying to deceive the public into giving a brief poll bump that might vault them into the position of a minority with absolute power.
We get treated like dummies, like suckers, and we know it - then after the election, we want to get away from the ugly bitter world of campaigns, and go on pretending that the results of such a system are legitimate.
Then we gnash our teeth over the "divisions" that this fucked up system amplifies, as if there isn't something better that we could have done instead.
The political parties are at fault, and the media - but let's not forget to blame ourselves for letting them tell us this bullshit narrative, without it being challenged.
Paul Craig Roberts: The End Of Accountable Government Is Close At Hand
October 27, 2019
Authored by Paul Craig Roberts
https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2019/10/27/the-end-of-accountable-government-is-close-at-hand/
For about 70 years the CIA has been undermining a free press. It began with Operation Mockingbird, a Cold War operation against communism. The CIA recruited journalists into a propaganda network. The CIA paid journalists to write fake stories or to publish stories written by the CIA in order to control explanations that served the agency’s agendas. Student and cultural organizations and intellectual magazines, such as Encounter, were suborned into the CIA’s propaganda network.
Thanks to the German journalist, Udo Ulfkotte, we know that every European journalist of any significance is a CIA asset. In 1977 Carl Bernstein of Watergate fame wrote in Rolling Stone that the CIA “has secretly bankrolled numerous foreign press services, periodicals and newspapers - both English and foreign language - which provided excellent cover for CIA operatives.” Like most other people, Western journalists were all too willing to sell out their integrity for money. The few who were not were blackmailed into submission.
The few honest journalists who remain have been forced out of the “mainstream” or presstitute media onto Internet websites. Wikileaks is by far the best news organization of our time. To bring this organization to heel Washington, using its Swedish, British, and Ecuadoran vassals, has persecuted Wikileaks’ founder, Julian Assange, for years. The CIA’s media vassals, including the New York Times and The Guardian, both of which published the material leaked to Wikileaks that is being used to destroy Assange, have joined wholeheartedly in the persecution of the World’s Best and Most Honest Journalist.
Currently Assange is being tortured, apparently to death, while bring held in solitary confinement in a maximum security British prison awaiting his extradition to the US on false charges. As the CIA cannot be certain it has suborned all the federal judges, Washington is just as happy if Assange dies in a British prison as there is no valid case against him under current US law. Probably the absence of a valid case doesn’t matter as the rule of law in the US is very difficult to find.
The lack of any valid case against Assange is the reason the distinguished documentary film maker John Pilger describes Assange’s persecution as a Stalinist Show Trial.
The worst moment was one of a number of ‘worst’ moments. I have sat in many courtrooms and seen judges abuse their positions, This judge, Vanessa Baraitser—actually she isn’t a judge at all; she’s a magistrate—shocked all of us who were there.
Her face was a progression of sneers and imperious indifference; she addressed Julian with an arrogance that reminded me of a magistrate presiding over apartheid South Africa’s Race Classification Board. When Julian struggled to speak, he couldn’t get words out, even stumbling over his name and date of birth.
When he spoke truth and when his barrister spoke, Baraister contrived boredom; when the prosecuting barrister spoke, she was attentive. She had nothing to do; it was demonstrably preordained. In the table in front of us were a handful of American officials, whose directions to the prosecutor were carried by his junior; back and forth this young woman went, delivering instructions.
The judge watched this outrage without a comment. It reminded me of a newsreel of a show trial in Stalin’s Moscow; the difference was that Soviet show trials were broadcast. Here, the state broadcaster, the BBC, blacked it out, as did the other mainstream channels.
Having ignored Julian’s barrister’s factual description of how the CIA had run a Spanish security firm that spied on him in the Ecuadorean embassy, she didn’t yawn, but her disinterest was as expressive. She then denied Julian’s lawyers any more time to prepare their case – even though their client was prevented in prison from receiving legal documents and other tools with which to defend himself.
Her knee in the groin was to announce that the next court hearing would be at remote Woolwich, which adjoins Belmarsh prison and has few seats for the public. This will ensure isolation and be as close to a secret trial as it’s possible to get. Did this happen in the home of the Magna Carta? Yes, but who knew?
What is astonishing about the CIA’s destruction of Julian Assange is the silence of American law schools and bar associations, the silence of universities, the absence of student and labor union protests, the absence of any protection of Assange’s rights from courts as the last news organization willing and capable of holding governments accountable for their crimes is destroyed openly in full view of the law schools, intellectuals, bar associations, courts, and print and TV media.
The CIA’s control over explanations is as complete as the control Big Brother has in George Orwell’s dystopian novel, 1984. And this doesn’t bother the citizens of the US, UK, Australia, Canada, Sweden, Europe. Only a few individuals speak out for Assange, and they, too, are demonized in turn.
The Age of Tyranny has now descended upon the Western World.
In part I agree with you but if you suggest Proportional Representation as a change to the Electoral System the conversation ends right there.The Green party got 6% of the popular vote and won 3 seats under FPTP....under Proportional Representation
the Green party would have been awarded 21 seats with 18 of those seats not actually won by a counting of the votes and those 18 MP's being placed on 18 constituencies like a fucking millstone on the necks of the citizens in those constituencies....in short it is like fucking sports day on the last day of school.....aw that poor kid who is not athletic in any way has no ribbons....lets give the kid a "participation" ribbon so that kid does not feel so bad.Take a look a Britain to see how well it has gone.
More than three years ago in the largest vote in British electoral history over 52% of Britains voted to BREXIT and it still has not happened as the political ruling class are ignoring the will of the very people that elected them.
There will be a general election in Britain and I see the Brexit Party making a huge splash in it and hopefully a NO DEAL Brexit will be the result.
There is nothing wrong with Canada's electoral system.Every citizen that is allowed to vote gets to vote and votes per their choice.After votes have been cast they are tallied and the candidate in each riding with the most votes wins that riding for his/her party.It would nothing but utterly FUCKED for say a riding in Alberta when a Conservative candidate won the seat with 74% of ballots cast only to have that seat given to the Green party due to a participation trophy election result.
SR
That's a misrepresentation of how PR works.
The systems proposed last time electoral reform was a referendum in BC had mixed representation. Some reps. were elected via FPTP the way they always were: those were the regional reps. Others were more floater seats not tied so closely to geography. There's wasn't any consolation prize aspect to it. Rather there were just two categories of elected officials: some determined by geography and others determined by popular vote.
In one approach, rural ridings were untouched and FPTP and geographically as strong as always, while urban ridings (where regional needs varied little between neighbouring ridings) were merged (say 2:1) to free up some seats for the popular vote reps.
So, no participation trophies. Just a system of parallel representation.
What exactly is wrong with that?
Or then there's the Single Transferable Vote, which is basically still FPTP for anyone who casts a vote for a single candidate, but falls back to be the same as strategic voting otherwise. If your first choice doesn't stand a snowball's chance in hell, rather than "throwing away your vote" as people are fond of saying, your vote becomes one for your second choice instead. I also like that idea because e.g. you can see how many people support the NDP but vote Liberal instead because they're afraid of the Conservatives winning.
Both these systems encourage voting for someone instead of voting against someone, which IMHO is a good thing.
4 years, yeah right, it happened once, in the 20's, just after the war
every other time, it lasted 2 yrs and a bit
we'll be back here well before 4 is up
Turdeau will think he can win a majority at some point or Jimmy Singh will become even more deluded
or the Bloc will get pissed off
Turdeau got 20% of eligible voters, the left got barely 36% of the population who could have voted, add in the bloc, they still didn't get half it's barely 41%
people clearly didn't vote for it to go away for 4 yrs, minorities don't last
week after the election, EnCana head office is leaving Canada, yeah, it's going swimmingly, of too a good start!!
Yeah more "Sunny ways" for Canada and for Alberta under Trudeau 2.0....last time was under Pierre Trudeau with the NEP in the early 80's thankfully this time interest rates are not in the double digits.
With regards to the Bloc,they will get pissed off every chance they get and I did predict a resurgent Bloc Quebecois for this election.As for Jagmeet Singh his days are numbered till the next leadership review and he is out.Lots of insiders are planning the move for the NDP leadership with a lot of sneaky deals in the background for sure.
As for Andrew Scheer and the campaign he ran on,and his party did gain seats that resulted in a pretty much neutered Liberal Minority that MUST be propped up.I felt he and the team that was guiding him fucked up.Scheer should have been speaking on the hustings about the last 4 years of Governance.Scheer had Trudeau on the ropes before the election and at the start of it.The brownface scandal hit the water via a USA media outlet and Canadian media had to report on it....and it was quickly swept under the rug.Scheer was running this hustings against two opponents,them being the Lieberals and the Leftist Canadian Media.
SR
Well, the UK uses First Past The Post just as we do, and that's a big reason why they are fucked as well. So really, the UK is an argument against FPTP.
You keep using that sports analogy, but it's not a horse race. The mainstream media are always making this mistake in their election coverage (because more than being right wing or left wing, they're lazy). Parties don't "win" by being first across some imaginary line - they are supposed to represent the people. In other words, the "competition" aspect of it is less relevant than the issue of legitimacy. Do they really represent what their people want? Can they make decisions on their constituents behalf? Power is not just some 4 year ego trip, where you act like king of the mountain until someone finally knocks you off. If most of the people you represent hate your guts, then everything you do is illegitimate.
Most people can accept their own favourite party losing, as long as they can see that the larger community wanted that result. But when the majority of the community didn't want that result, people feel like they're being swindled. Well guess what? If the majority of people feel like they're being swindled, they are being swindled. This is a democracy not a dictatorship. Power belongs to them - they only let politicians borrow it to do things on their behalf.
The thing that people who support FPTP are clinging to is this false idea that it's normal to have one party take all the power, when they didn't get even a majority of support.
Taking a look at the parties people actually support, no party can command a majority of actual support. There's no way it is ever collapsing back to just two parties, to make that happen.
Even in so-called "landslide" wins, it is more determined by how the splits play out, not any real consensus support for one party ruling all by itself.
Trudeau 39% in 2015. Harper 39% in 2011. Did they deserve all the power that was handed to them, with nothing to limit it until their time in office expires? Nope.
Anyways, the other thing is that the Senate is useless because it's not elected. It's supposed to be the house that represents more regional concerns, not just a place where the PM of the day can plug in a bunch of party hacks who will still be there long after that PM is gone.
That's just not true.
First of all, most of the media in Canada is right wing. Basically, every private network, and every newspaper except the Toronto Star, are under standing orders to endorse the Conservatives. Scheer could have grabbed Elizabeth May and banged her behind a debate podium, he'd still be getting that endorsement from the Postmedia empire. And they are not even as rabid as the Sun, who in turn are not as rabid as the alt-right screwballs who run outfits like Rebel Media and True North.
So it's nobody's fault but Scheer and the Conservatives that Scheer and the Conservatives won't even get a "consider" from like 60% of the population. If they want to be realistic, they should take a hard look at why.
Scheer is a weakling, but I can't see any other Conservative who would have done better trying to sell the "return to pre-2015 Harperism" platform that he was running on.
No doubt the Liberals and NDP have some serious issues and need to get a grip as well. I doubt either of them have the wits to see how deep a hole they've dug themselves, but that's probably another post for another time.
Well I know I have an unpopular opinion on this one but I feel the Senate serves a purpose. In lieu of a system that accurately represents the mix of ideologies of the people, the Senate is, in some way, the closest we've got. If 50% of the time the Conservatives are in power and 50% of the time the Liberals are in power, the Senate ends up roughly representing that 50:50 mix. It's a "time averaged" reflection of our various governments. It's also not beholden to sham election promises so more likely to vote in line with the actual ideologies rather than what will keep their party in power.
The VERY Liberal Toronto Star receives 1% of it....$115,000 per week or just under $6million/year.
https://www.thepostmillennial.com/m...l-minister-completely-redacted-by-government/
And with the exception of a few major news outlets....eg Toronto Sun and the National Post virtually all media outlets are either center or far left publications, Globe and Mail being center and HuffPost Canada being pretty far left. Plus the union which represents 12000 journalists country wide, Unifor has declared itself the Conservative Party's "worst nightmare". The myth of a "rightwing" Canadian media is pretty much just that...a myth.
https://www.thepostmillennial.com/m...l-minister-completely-redacted-by-government/
And with the exception of a few major news outlets....eg Toronto Sun and the National Post virtually all media outlets are either center or far left publications, Globe and Mail being center and HuffPost Canada being pretty far left. Plus the union which represents 12000 journalists country wide, Unifor has declared itself the Conservative Party's "worst nightmare". The myth of a "rightwing" Canadian media is pretty much just that...a myth.
Ok if you think that the Majority of the Media in Canada is "right wing" or "Conservative leaning" you are just plain fucking delusional.The only Media that would be called "Conservative" that got to ask questions after the English langauge debate was Rebel Media and Rebel Media had to launch a court action to be able to be there and ask questions and not a week after the election the Trudeau government is filing an appeal to have that decision overturned.
The Media in Canada is so left wing biased it is off the charts,the only person at the CBC who has the balls to ask tough questions of ANY Lieberal government is Rex Murphy.As for the Toronto Star it is the Red Star as for how Lieberal biased it is.
Canadian Media got handed a 580 million welfare package from Trudeau and they DONT bite the hand that feeds them as they sure as fuck dont sell a lot of actual physical news papers these days.
SR
