Massage Adagio

Now that the Election is real, who will you vote for?

Which party will you be voting for on June 28?

  • Liberal

    Votes: 33 26.0%
  • Conservative

    Votes: 48 37.8%
  • NDP

    Votes: 20 15.7%
  • Green Party

    Votes: 4 3.1%
  • Marijuana Party

    Votes: 6 4.7%
  • Undecided

    Votes: 7 5.5%
  • Couldn't give a rat's ass

    Votes: 9 7.1%

  • Total voters
    127

Makhno

Recidivist
Nov 11, 2003
696
0
0
Beyond the Pale
qwerty said:
Makhno, I'm sure it all depends on where these polls are taken.

qwerty:
You're probably right. The Globe polls (showing the Liberals ahead by 6%) was carried out Friday, Saturday and Sunday. The National Post results (Cons 126, Libs 95) showed the Liberals pulled ahead slightly Friday and Saturday, but by Sunday night the Grits and Conservatives were in a dead heat again.
 

qwerty

New member
Jun 19, 2003
214
0
0
Vancouver
It's all going to come down to who actually shows up. Every election I know lots of people who don't make it, something always comes up. Lots of people don't care either. I don't think the actual results will be as predictable as the polls suggest.

So no matter who you're voting for, go out and vote
 

Makhno

Recidivist
Nov 11, 2003
696
0
0
Beyond the Pale
Interestingly enough, even if the Conservatives win more seats than the Liberals (as the polls seem to project), the Liberals may still end up forming the government if no party manages to win a majority. We may not get rid of the little b*ggers after all! The following article explains the reasons and the options available.
_______________________________________________

Minority report: A guide to forming government
Kieron Lang, CTV.ca News Staff
June 23, 2004 4:10 PM ET

Forming a government, one imagines, is a fairly straightforward affair. Get the votes, pick a cabinet, form a government.

And so it is, if the party hoping to form the Government has won enough seats to command the House of Commons.

With 308 seats in the Commons, a party must win at least 155 to form an uncontested majority.

The polls, however, have been suggesting Canadians aren't prepared to hand any of the parties a clear majority. Instead, the leading parties have been registering neck-and-neck support countrywide.

Come election night, pollsters say, voters could give the Liberals more seats than any of their rivals, but not enough to form a majority. And even if they don't win more seats than their closest rival, the Liberals would still be invited to form another government.

To better understand how it all adds up, perhaps a brief civics lesson is in order.

You might be surprised to hear that Canada's head of state is not the prime minister. Instead, the Governor General leads the nation through the Cabinet, headed by the first, or prime, minister.

Not elected for a specific "term" in office, the Cabinet governs from the moment the prime minister is sworn in until he or she resigns or dies. That means that, unlike in the United States, where a president who wins a second term in office must be sworn in all over again, a Canadian prime minister does not.

All through an election campaign, and even after, the prime minister who called the vote remains the nation's leader.

If election results hand a party opposed to the sitting prime minister and his Cabinet a clear majority, the Governor General's job is simple. After the outgoing Cabinet resigns, all the Governor General has to do is call on the leader of the victorious party to choose new ministers.

Once they are approved and formally appointed by the Governor General, the handover of power is said to be complete.

The transition is complicated, however, if no party emerges with a clear majority. In that case, the incumbent Government has two choices.

It can immediately resign, leaving an opening for the Governor General to invite the leader of the next-largest party to form its own Cabinet.

Because voluntarily relinquishing power is a rare occurrence in politics, the more likely outcome is for the sitting Cabinet to stay in office and test its mandate in the House of Commons.

Such a government is known as a minority, because it does not automatically enjoy the support of most members in the House.

It can test the waters, however, and hope that it can patch together support of other party's membership to get its bills passed.

If the Cabinet fails the test on a motion of censure or a confidence vote, it then has no choice but to resign.

But that doesn't automatically mean voters will be called back to the ballot box.

If there appears to be a reasonable possibility that the next-biggest party can get the support of the House, the Governor General can invite the Leader of the Opposition to try and form a government.

Then if that government also fails to draw the confidence of the House, the Governor General could grant requests for another vote.

The Governor General's authority on this issue stems from the fact her principle responsibility is not to entertain foreign dignitaries or lead international diplomatic missions, but rather to ensure Canada always has a prime minister.

Even above the crucial role of approving cabinet, signing bills into law and getting the whole thing rolling with the delivery of the Speech from the Throne, the Governor General does have the final say over who can lead the House.

To that end, she has the authority to summon, adjourn and dissolve Parliament.

Her powers are bound by the basic principles, laws and rules outlined in the country's Constitution, and convention dictates she can only do so on the advice of the Prime Minister, but there are rare circumstances when she can strike out on her own.

Scenarios

So, what does all this mean for the day after June 28?

If voters hand any of the parties a majority of at least 155 seats, of course, it will mean very little.

But, if not, the possibilities are rife.

In one possible scenario, the Liberals could win more seats than any other party, but still fall short of a majority.

In that case, Martin would lead a standard minority government that needs to attract the support of a handful of other parties' members in order to pass legislation.

In another scenario, however, the sailing might not be so smooth.

For instance, if you believe the seat projections in an Ipsos-Reid poll released ahead of the final week of the campaign, the Conservatives could emerge with as many close to 130 seats.

Martin's Liberals would end up with no more than 100 seats, while the NDP and the Bloc would win less than 30 and 70, respectively.

Obviously, that's not enough for the Liberals to claim a majority.

But, as we learned in our earlier civics lesson, Martin's still-sitting Cabinet would have first crack at forming the government.

According to CTV's Mike Duffy, the Liberal Leader has already considered the possibility voters will hand his party second place -- and decided he will nevertheless do his best to hang on to the keys to the PMO.

"Senior Liberals tell me even if they're 30 seats behind the Conservatives they will insist on the opportunity to meet Parliament and they will bring forward a left wing speech that the NDP and the Bloc can support and therefore keep Stephen Harper out of the prime minister's office," Duffy told CTV Newsnet.

"Their biggest fear is that if he's there even a day or week, people will start to think of him as prime minister. Paul Martin's strategy is to try to hold on to power no matter the cost or the result on June 28th."

As for Harper, his chance of grabbing power is a much longer shot.

Short of winning an outright majority, his opposition status heading into the vote means he must hope Martin loses on a vote of confidence.

Only then might he be granted his own chance to fill the government benches.

But that's not guaranteed either.

As Lord Byng illustrated, the decision remains at the discretion of the Governor General.

If the Governor General is unconvinced that an alliance of the Conservatives and the separatist Bloc Quebecois is not in the country's national interest, she could opt for another election rather than invite Harper to form a government.
 

Makhno

Recidivist
Nov 11, 2003
696
0
0
Beyond the Pale
Get ready for the NEXT election -- six months from now.....

Liberals edge into seat lead
Seat projections, National Post poll have parties in dead heat
Robert Fife
CanWest News Service
Friday, June 25, 2004

OTTAWA - As another national poll shows a razor-thin divide separating the Conservatives and Liberals, the latest seat projections point to a one-seat advantage for Paul Martin in the House of Commons.

Barry Kay, a political science professor at Wilfrid Laurier University in Waterloo, projects 112 seats for the Liberals, 111 for the Tories, 60 for the Bloc Quebecois and 25 for the NDP, based on three national polls released this week.

Those numbers are a sharp increase for the Liberals, who last week were forecast to win 98 seats compared with 126 seats for the Conservatives.

The revised projections reflect the results of a new National Post/Global National poll that has the two leading parties in a statistical tie with three days left before the June 28 vote.

The COMPAS Inc. survey shows the Liberals at 34% of decided voter support compared with 33% for Stephen Harper's Conservatives.

Dr. Kay, who has been doing seat projections for every federal election since 1980 and has been accurate to within about five seats per party, said Canada will certainly have its first minority government since 1979.

"It's too close to call and say absolutely which party will have the most seats," Dr. Kay said.

"We are heading toward a dysfunctional Parliament. There is just no way this can work given the numbers. The Bloc will hold the balance of power and they won't work with either the Conservatives or the Liberals. We are going to have a new election probably within six months." ..............
 

wilde

Sinnear Member
Jun 4, 2003
3,040
44
48
 

wilde

Sinnear Member
Jun 4, 2003
3,040
44
48
qwerty said:
Someone mentioned that before, that just means another election in a year or so. Now that's a waste of money:Þ
We owe a big thank you to the so called punishment and dissention votes. The ones who advocate "vote anything but the Liberals". Ignoring the fact that despite all of their short comings, they are the ones with the best fiscal record in recent Canadian history. Fiscal management may not be everything in terms of runing a country, but good fiscal management can go a long way. Yes they screwed up with the Sponsorship scandal but that was under JC's watch. If we will in fact have another election in 6-12 months. I wonder about the monetary impact of another election compared to the spnsorship scandal? On June 28th, I will vote for the best man for the job regardless of party affiliations, platforms and promises. You know who that is........

If you were the human resources director of a multi-national corporation, who will you hire as the CEO? Who appears to be the most competent and has the most experience? I think we will make the right choice.

This election is the perfect opportunity to address western alienation issues. Lets use our votes to send the right MPs to the parliament. Finally, let our voices be heard.
 

wilde

Sinnear Member
Jun 4, 2003
3,040
44
48
dufferin said:
The goal of business is simple, make the most profit at the least cost.

I disagree, the goal of a company is to maximize the wealth of it's shareholders.
 

sirlickheralot

Gold Member
Mar 10, 2003
1,266
0
0
121
Vancouver
Randy White (Conservative MP) - I guess his fellow Conservatives must be pissed with him for revealing their true stripes. What a moron, admitting on film that if elected the Conservatives will likely use the Not Withstanding Clause to change the Charter of Rights and overturn any court decisions that clash with their bigotted, oppressive, right-wing social views, such as court decisions allowing gay marriage or abortion.

Before so many people went insane and started supporting the Conservatives I might have voted for the NDP, or a fringe party as a protest vote against the liberals, but now I'll definately vote Liberal. I might have even voted for the old Progressive Conservatives, but after joining forces with the Alliance this isn't the same Conservative party it is a much scarier, far more right-wing party. I'd rather have the evil I know with the Liberals than risk a far greater and unknown evil with the Conservatives.

Also the Conservatives promises of lower taxes and increased spending can only mean one thing, deficit spending and I hate deficites. Don't mortgage our future to pay for today.
 

rickoshadows

Just another member!
May 11, 2002
902
0
16
66
Vancouver Island
The issue of same sex marriage being supported by the courts is because it is illegal to discriminate on the basis of sex. Sexual orientation has nothing to do with this issue. By not recognizing a marriage of two people of the same sex you are discriminating because the one of the couple isn't male or female depending on the gender of the first.

But what amazes me is that the entire population isn't enraged by the fact that a potential leader is willing to use the "Not withstanding" clause to limit the rights of a minority without any evidence that this would cause harm to society as a whole. Just because it is legal to marry a person of the same sex doesn't mean it's illegal not to. The trouble with Harper and his ilk is that they never have had to live in the real world without the protection of wealth and privilege.

rickoshadows
 

sirlickheralot

Gold Member
Mar 10, 2003
1,266
0
0
121
Vancouver
Randy White and his cronies feelings towards gays goes beyond just outlawing gay marriage, these guys are hate mongers. This lunatic has come right out and said he would repeal hate crime laws for people who target homosexuals. I'm sure this SOB would offer rewards for the heads of homosexuals if he thought he could get away with it.

For people who might try to argue that this guy is just some fringe player, he isn't, he was considered a potential Minister of Justice in a Conservative Cabinet should they form the government. I'm suprised that this party has so much support on an escort review board, where do you think the Conservatives would position themselves on the subject of prostitution. The Liberals may not soften prostitution laws but they aren't likely to make prostitution itself illegal either.
 

qwerty

New member
Jun 19, 2003
214
0
0
Vancouver
I want the gay community to be able to marry. So what if that means a couple of thousand per couple in tax cuts, I can't wait till they start getting divorced and having to pay alimony, split the belongings, and pay outrageous fees for lawyers.

It's not that I do not like gays, but I'd bet that 10 years after they finally legalize this, there will be plenty of them wishing they never got married:Þ
 

wolverine

Hard Throbbing Member
Nov 11, 2002
6,384
9
38
E-Town
See, this is why I don't get the "sanctity of marriage" argument.
Too many heterosexual couples marry and divorce at the drop of a hat these days, such that this "sanctity" is all but dead. Why would gay marriages be any better or worse?

The perversion argument doesn't work either, because this is involving two consenting adults, whereas one can't really get that same level of consent from, say, a child or a sheep or a corn cob.
 

sirlickheralot

Gold Member
Mar 10, 2003
1,266
0
0
121
Vancouver
Ditch_Canyon said:
Ha found it....
The Definition of marriage in Canada, for all of the nation’s 136 years, has been based on the classic formulation of Lord Penzance in Hyde v. Hyde and Woodmansee (1866), L.R. 1 P.&D. 130 at 133: “I conceive that marriage, as understood in Christendom, may for this purpose be defined as the voluntary union for life of one man and one woman, to the exclusion of all others.” The central question in this appeal is whether the exclusion of same-sex couples from this common law definition of marriage breaches ss. 2(a) or 15(1) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (“the Charter”) in a manner that is not justified in a free and democratic society under s. 1 of the Charter.

Then as long as one Religion recognizes same sex marriages and defines it as a volutary union of two individuals, by law the state has to reconize this new definition of marriage. Since they included the Christian definition they have to accept the definitions of any other religions or they are guilty of religious discrimination. Since some of the more liberal church organizations are already performing marriage ceremonies for same sex couples, the state has an obligation to recognize these unions and not try and make them illegal.
 

wilde

Sinnear Member
Jun 4, 2003
3,040
44
48
dufferin said:
i'm voting for Kimball Cariou, not because i agree with all his thoughts (i don't think i have ever agreed 100% with any candidate). i am voting for him because he has articulated, better then anyone else, views that are most important to me. The other candidates may have some similar views but they either haven't addressed them to me with the same priority or have been too wishy washy on other matters.
The Communist party should thank you for your $2.00.
 

Makhno

Recidivist
Nov 11, 2003
696
0
0
Beyond the Pale
dufferin said:
i'm voting for Kimball Cariou,
OMFG. I remember Cariou from his Edmonton days when he was a the most dogmatic Stalinist defender of the Soviet Union as paradise on earth. He was a leading light of the Young Communists at the University of Alberta (I think there were 3 in the club). Talk about "hidden agendas". I hope he knows more about democratic values today than he did then!
 

Commander Chode

Old school Chode
Apr 24, 2004
465
1
0
Event Horizon
Is anyone else getting this spam?
I've gotten 3 copies so far.

Is it the Conservatives spamming or the Liberals pretending to be the Conservatives or the NDP being really smart?

Here is the start:
---
Interesting point of view...
>
> My name is Alan Robberstad I am a Canadian.
> One voter out of millions of Canadian voters.
...
 
Ashley Madison
Vancouver Escorts