Czar Stephen Harper

[Titanium48]

^Parties largely control the actions of their MPs, even moreso here than in the USA. Unless a local candidate is exceptionally talented and willing to speak his/her mind, I am going to vote on the basis of party affiliation.

[Paul Turnbull]

Originally Posted by Gemini

^It's an election. Someone has got to win, someone has got to loose. Now, if the opposition parties can except that and let the reigning government govern we might actually move forward. After this election if the winning party gets in with a minority do you want the dog and pony show to continue. It's a minority, let's form a coalition and force another vote. That's nitpicking.

You need to read up on how a parliamentary democracy works. The only level at which there are guaranteed winner's and losers is at the riding level. After that a government (aka the Executive Branch) is formed from whichever party in the Parliament can get enough support. That's traditionally the party of with the most seats or a coalition of parties with the most seats. That government must have the confidence of the House (aka the Legislative Branch) to maintain it's position.

This contrasted with systems where the Executive (usually called a President) is directly elected separately from the Legislature. Of course in those systems the cabinet is not elected but chosen/hired by the President.

If you are unhappy with our system either start a movement to change it or move to a country with a political system more to your liking.

[jizzaldo]

So does Harper have people pre-screen your facebook profile before you can attend a rally? I'm not voting conservative this election, but something with this story does sound fishy.

[Gemini]

^^I'm fully aware of how democracy works Mr. Turnbull and if I have missed anything I can always look it up. I don't need your lecture. I'm aware also that if a party does not win more than 50% of the seats it cannot form a majority government. That being said, there is no excuse for the opposition to try and force elections on a whim. Using the system for power grabs. Instead of even trying to reach a consensus on legislation they circle the wagons, form coalitions and, bang another election. Yes, this is definitely the 'Seinfeld Election'. An election over nothing.

[etownboarder]

Originally Posted by Gemini

^^I'm fully aware of how democracy works Mr. Turnbull and if I have missed anything I can always look it up. I don't need your lecture. I'm aware also that if a party does not win more than 50% of the seats it cannot form a majority government. That being said, there is no excuse for the opposition to try and force elections on a whim. Using the system for power grabs. Instead of even trying to reach a consensus on legislation they circle the wagons, form coalitions and, bang another election. Yes, this is definitely the 'Seinfeld Election'. An election over nothing.

Dude, parliament stopped working months ago... This election is 100% necessary.

[etownboarder]

Originally Posted by jizzaldo

So does Harper have people pre-screen your facebook profile before you can attend a rally? I'm not voting conservative this election, but something with this story does sound fishy.

Yes, it is a well known fact that the Conservatives pre-screen individuals before you can attend one of their rallies.

[North Guy66]

Originally Posted by Gemini

^Yes, it is the same in every party. Have the liberals been lily white when they have been in power, resounding NO. There could be a few volumes written about liberal indiscretions. Yes, for the most part I would say I am honest but, I don't have to answer to the Canadian electorate.

In the last two election campaigns, Harper and the Conservatives were preaching accountability and transparency in government. This was after the Liberal Adscam affair.

So one would believe that the Conservatives would have higher standards in governing the country. But look at how the Bev Oda "Not" affair and the Togneri scandal (amongst other scandals) were handled by Harper? I don't see any accountability happening at all.

[etownboarder]

^That's what I find so frustrating about Harper. Had he not campaigned on transparency and openness in 2006, which is exactly what gave the Conservatives a minority gov't, I might actually have been able to overlook some of the BS Harper has pulled over the last 5 years.

[Paul Turnbull]

Originally Posted by Gemini

^^I'm fully aware of how democracy works Mr. Turnbull and if I have missed anything I can always look it up. I don't need your lecture. I'm aware also that if a party does not win more than 50% of the seats it cannot form a majority government. That being said, there is no excuse for the opposition to try and force elections on a whim. Using the system for power grabs. Instead of even trying to reach a consensus on legislation they circle the wagons, form coalitions and, bang another election. Yes, this is definitely the 'Seinfeld Election'. An election over nothing.

My apologies but most of what you've said doesn't seem to indicate much of an understanding of parliamentary democracy and more of a willingness to twist reality to support your party of choice.

Given that only one minority government in the last 100 years has lasted longer than each of Harper's two the idea that the opposition parties are doing this on a whim doesn't wash. Harper's minority style has always been to dare the opposition to vote him down and it's worked extremely well. I give him enormous credit for that. Minorities are hard to keep alive but Harper realized the opposition parties were disinclined to go the polls and that he could go a long way before they'd feel obliged to force a vote.

Two and half years is a long time for a minority government and the simple fact is that Harper wanted this election just as much if not more than the opposition parties. He can taste that majority and the freedom that it would give him. No more holding back to ensure that at least one opposition party voted with him. No more negotiating.

However he knows most people don't want an election so he spins it so it's all the opposition parties fault. As long as his base buys that story he's solid. As long as he can convince enough of the rest he's golden.

Given the way things are looking I suspect a stronger minority rather than a majority. In which case he may even be able to aim for the title of longest minority government (William Lyon Mackenzie King had one 3 1/2 years long starting in 1921).

[trojonowicz]

Originally Posted by jizzaldo

So does Harper have people pre-screen your facebook profile before you can attend a rally? I'm not voting conservative this election, but something with this story does sound fishy.

I'm admitting that I helped vote Harper in but something about this story is the last straw. Maybe it's a tiny straw compared to others but it just pulls my attention to how many brothers and sister-straws there really is.

This was a public event--even if it was a rally solely in support of Harper. Those two girls could have been left alone. Everyone pre-registered and that should have been enough. Now maybe I just don't know enough about these kind of things--someone feel free to correct me; it's okay. And they are SO paranoid they can't even resist checking facebook?

In my opinion the RCMP had no business kicking them out as they were doing nothing legally wrong. And Harper has absolutly no right using the RCMP as his personal bodyguard. For some weird reason this bothers me most of all. Maybe because I've always supported the police and felt an affinity with them. Maybe I've been blind and naive all my life. I could just tear my hair out right now.

[whynow99]

[SIZE=3]Wow! When Harper was a candidate all those years ago his entire platform was about transparency and accountability. I can't say I've ever even imagined that a person representing the government of Canada could conduct themselves in such a disgraceful manner, passing the buck every time he is caught in secrecies and in lies. God help us all in Canada as we fight to save our democracy and our freedoms in the next four weeks.[/SIZE]

[whynow99]

Again it seems the Harper Gov't has it's own rule book for hiring staff. Someone with no integrity is allowed a senior position while our " Average Canadians" are being tossed out of Conservative rallies.

What does that say about Mr. Harper ... Ohh that's right he blames someone else(always it seems).. I don't believe he ever takes responsibility for his party. He sure tries to make the other leaders take responsibility for their party when something happens to Mr Harpers advantage.

I am worried that if he gets in with a majority we will have a "Dictatorial" type leader who will not be a positive for Canada.

I can't believe how many people in Canada are hoodwinked by this this man and his lack of integrity and morals with the insulting attack ads which if you have half a brain can see they are bordering on lies.

For that matter his "Coalition" rants are lies because this is not the future so how does he know? I notice he never mentions maybe a "Liberal" majority....how arrogant he is.

[whynow99]

Harper is scary and clammy....he does not look at the camera, mainly he looks at the teleprompter........even his wife feels out place in his photo shoots.............remember HITLER got voted in by ONE vote..................be sure to vote...................ABC.......he is not a Leader, he is a shill for the USA.

[whynow99]

WE NEED a one on one debate..............CONS vs LIBS...............CLEAR THE AIR........what is going on here??????.......................does not matter who u prefer..............gloves off.......truth vs bull............HOW CAN THIS KIND OF DEBATE HAPPEN?........who asks the questions, what questions are asked?.............in a limited time, like 3 minutes................but lets get the gloves off!!!!! INPUT.....RESPONSE.......................PLEASE.

[jizzaldo]

Originally Posted by whynow99

WE NEED a one on one debate..............CONS vs LIBS...............CLEAR THE AIR........what is going on here??????.......................does not matter who u prefer..............gloves off.......truth vs bull............HOW CAN THIS KIND OF DEBATE HAPPEN?........who asks the questions, what questions are asked?.............in a limited time, like 3 minutes................but lets get the gloves off!!!!! INPUT.....RESPONSE.......................PLEASE.

You..................need.....................to.. ................stop..................posting

[jmart81]

Originally Posted by whynow99

Harper is scary and clammy....he does not look at the camera, mainly he looks at the teleprompter........even his wife feels out place in his photo shoots.............remember HITLER got voted in by ONE vote..................be sure to vote...................ABC.......he is not a Leader, he is a shill for the USA.

Hitler won by one vote in the Nazi party leadership vote, not any general election. Not the same thing.

[Dialog]

Godwin'd at #113. How could you compare Harper to Hitler? Hitler was way more popular with the Germans!

[edmonton daily photo]

Originally Posted by Paul Turnbull

My apologies but most of what you've said doesn't seem to indicate much of an understanding of parliamentary democracy and more of a willingness to twist reality to support your party of choice.

Given that only one minority government in the last 100 years has lasted longer than each of Harper's two the idea that the opposition parties are doing this on a whim doesn't wash. Harper's minority style has always been to dare the opposition to vote him down and it's worked extremely well. I give him enormous credit for that. Minorities are hard to keep alive but Harper realized the opposition parties were disinclined to go the polls and that he could go a long way before they'd feel obliged to force a vote.

Two and half years is a long time for a minority government and the simple fact is that Harper wanted this election just as much if not more than the opposition parties. He can taste that majority and the freedom that it would give him. No more holding back to ensure that at least one opposition party voted with him. No more negotiating.

However he knows most people don't want an election so he spins it so it's all the opposition parties fault. As long as his base buys that story he's solid. As long as he can convince enough of the rest he's golden.

Given the way things are looking I suspect a stronger minority rather than a majority. In which case he may even be able to aim for the title of longest minority government (William Lyon Mackenzie King had one 3 1/2 years long starting in 1921).

You know harper is down in the polls right?

And the recent staffer found to have 5 causes of fraud against him that somehow got a security clearance that the fact that the person in charge of the RCMP, the people investigating this incident, is the SAME person who cleared said staffer to work in the PMO.

Things are not looking good for him.

[Hilman]

Which polls are that? The ones I have seen have him with a large lead.

[edmonton daily photo]

He may have a lead but he has fallen in the pools... in all major polls except one.

There are plenty of websites that compile the poll data.. just Google it.

[Hilman]

I did, seems one of the biggest polls shows his lead getting larger.

The Nanos poll, commissioned by CP24, CTV, and the Globe and Mail, shows that as of Friday, April 1, support for the Conservatives has increased slightly, putting them ahead of the Liberals with an 11-point lead*with 41.3 per cent of the vote.

http://www.cp24.com/servlet/an/local.../?hub=CP24Home

[Paul Turnbull]

The current breakdowns I've seen show Harper still winning more seats than last time but enough for a majority. For that to change he needs to do more than 'slip' in the polls, he needs to collapse.

It's possible this could happen but personally I don't think it's likely. The possible range of options is from Liberal minority through Conservative minority with a slim change of a Conservative majority. I think the odds a Liberal majority are next to none short of a Harper sex scandal.

Three Hundred Eight is a decent breakdown on the polls.

[Hull534]

A question? Are the interactive media sites, notice boards , commentary sites basically a new type of "Salt Lick " to gather and focus strong points of view and basically keep them out of the mainstream ? It always seems to me a big disconnect from what I see on the web versus the results we see on poll day.

Points are argued much more strongly electronically on the web than they seem to be in person to person discussion, Moreover the more vehement the argument ,the less it seems to have purchase. Mostly forums of preaching for the converted or to ignored ,in the end not much import. It really is the voting in the end which counts . An old fashioned concept

[Admin]

Originally Posted by Dialog

Godwin'd at #113. How could you compare Harper to Hitler? Hitler was way more popular with the Germans!

That took longer than I thought. Ususally these threads hit Godwin earlier.

[edmonton daily photo]

Here is a poll link.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/interactives/cv11-poll-tracker/

[edmonton daily photo]

Seat estimates...

http://www.electionalmanac.com/canada/projections.php

[Marcel Petrin]

short of a Harper sex scandal.

C'mon man. I was eating.

[alex69]

Originally Posted by Admin

That took longer than I thought. Ususally these threads hit Godwin earlier.

The new rule for determining the nonsense-point in a conversation should be not a Hitler reference but a Godwin reference.

Please don't treat Hitler as some sort of unapproachable idea of evil.

He is very approachable indeed, and Nazi Germany in whole AND in part has been approximated several times in the (only) seven decades since.

Nobody is talking about gas ovens, but clearly some of what is happeniong in Canada today has German antecedents in the 1930s.

[ralph60]

Whynow calls Harper a shill for the Americans?
From the lifelong Democrat himself:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=49We8...embedded#at=17

[whynow99]

[SIZE=3][FONT=Times New Roman]WE NEED a one on one debate..............CONS vs LIBS...............CLEAR THE AIR........what is going on here??????.......................does not matter who u prefer..............gloves off.......truth vs bull............HOW CAN THIS KIND OF DEBATE HAPPEN?........who asks the questions, what questions should be asked?.............in a limited time, like 3 minutes per question per candidate to answer................but lets get the gloves off!!!!![/FONT][/SIZE]
[SIZE=3][FONT=Times New Roman]INPUT.....RESPONSE needed from all us Canadians for this one-on-one to follow. Post your input.[/FONT][/SIZE]

[etownboarder]

Please stop with the excessive formatting and "..." every few words. It's incredibly frustrating to read.

[North Guy66]

Originally Posted by ralph60

Whynow calls Harper a shill for the Americans?
From the lifelong Democrat himself:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=49We8...embedded#at=17

Maybe it's time to pull out quotes when Harper was the leader of the National Citizens Coalition.

[etownboarder]

Originally Posted by North Guy66

Maybe it's time to pull out quotes when Harper was the leader of the National Citizens Coalition.

I think it might be.

[Gemini]

Originally Posted by Paul Turnbull

My apologies but most of what you've said doesn't seem to indicate much of an understanding of parliamentary democracy and more of a willingness to twist reality to support your party of choice.

Given that only one minority government in the last 100 years has lasted longer than each of Harper's two the idea that the opposition parties are doing this on a whim doesn't wash. Harper's minority style has always been to dare the opposition to vote him down and it's worked extremely well. I give him enormous credit for that. Minorities are hard to keep alive but Harper realized the opposition parties were disinclined to go the polls and that he could go a long way before they'd feel obliged to force a vote.

Two and half years is a long time for a minority government and the simple fact is that Harper wanted this election just as much if not more than the opposition parties. He can taste that majority and the freedom that it would give him. No more holding back to ensure that at least one opposition party voted with him. No more negotiating.

However he knows most people don't want an election so he spins it so it's all the opposition parties fault. As long as his base buys that story he's solid. As long as he can convince enough of the rest he's golden.

Given the way things are looking I suspect a stronger minority rather than a majority. In which case he may even be able to aim for the title of longest minority government (William Lyon Mackenzie King had one 3 1/2 years long starting in 1921).

I sense your frustration on the Liberals not doing too well in the polls. It should not be a reason to criticize my knowledge of democracy. If you feel I am twisting reality to suit my party of choice, well, I think you are doing exactly the same. If you want to vote for a party lead by a visiting professor so be it. That's your democratic right. If I want to vote for a conservative MP that's my choice. The only other choice is not to vote at all. How does that work for you. That's also democratic, the right not to vote. I have also asked this question before, if Iggy does not win how long will he stay with the Liberal party?.

[armin]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nbZjGGWk528

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L8YwJC_nBgw

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I6z2zqPMcik

http://www.youtubedoubler.com/?video...2=0&authorName=

[KC]

It may be a carefully timed election where Canada is past making the tough recessionary decisions and before things get either better (or worse) and serious concerns have to be addressed. They are riding on the coattails of the recovery.

[Hilman]

Liberals sack Quebec candidate who founded white-supremacist group
JANE TABER

COMPTON, QUE.— Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff has fired one of his Quebec candidates over disparaging remarks he made about aboriginal Canadians.

André Forbes had been the candidate in Manicougan, a community in northern Quebec. He was the founder and former spokesperson of l’Association des droits des blancs, or the Association for the Rights of Whites.

"We do criminal and financial background checks, plus social media and other online searches to cover the bases. What's important though is regardless of the thoroughness of the background check, if something does come to light at any point, as it did today with Mr. Forbes, we're willing to act swiftly and decisively to ensure that Liberal values are reflected in the team we're putting forward."

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/...rticle1973542/

[etownboarder]

At least someone has the balls to admit to making mistakes and corrects them.

[Hilman]

I should hope so, they had to do it before another party reported it. How does the leader of a white supremacy group become a liberal candidate?

[grish]

^ you're surprised he didn't become a BQ or a PC?

I don't think it is necessarily the fault of the party, although I would hope they have some standards in approving of candidates. I am surprised this particular thing didn't show up at nomination/ consituence association phase of being selected as a candidate.

[Chmilz]

Polls are crap. The only people who have landlines are 80 year olds and my parents, and both are probably equally hard at hearing and will answer randomly, then offer hard candy to the pollster. The only number I believe to be even remotely accurate is the final count of the votes on election day.

[Hilman]

I think a lot of polls are done online now.

[whynow99]

"
[SIZE=3]So if they're looking into peoples backgrounds how did Snover Dhillon get in?[/SIZE]

[SIZE=3]"A Toronto businessman and self-described campaign volunteer who circulates in Conservative circles is facing a criminal charge for allegedly fraudulent credit and debit card withdrawals -- a background that did not prevent him from sitting right behind the Harper family at a rally last week. " (from CTV.ca)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=3]One poorly expressed sentiment already retracted. It pales into insignificance compared to Harper`s litany of serial assaults on the truth.

Harper`s record, in case you haven`t been paying attention
Breached his own fixed election laws
Taxed income trusts despite a pre-election promise to never tax them
Answer the allegations he bribed Cadman to vote with the harper party
Produced a guide to disrupting parliamentary committees
Has ministers misleading parliament (Clements, MacKay and Oda)
Prorogued parliament twice
Found in contempt of parliament 3 times
Muzzled his ministers and mps
Leads the most secretive government in Canadian history
Created the largest deficit in our country`s history
Spent $1.2 billion on a weekend fest
spending $10 billion on prisons for unreported criminals, when crime is declining
spending $30 billion on planes that have yet to be built, and no case made for why we need them
Sacked any watchdog that does not do his bidding
Cancelled the longform census to get unreliable data and spending more of our money doing so
Spent $100 million advertising to us how wonderful a leader he is, and thereby `bought`` the support of the media
Earned Canada more fossil fuel awards than any prior Prime Minister
Being the only Canadian PM to fail to win a seat on the UN Security Council
For hiding information about the abuse of Afghan detainees
For losing the rights to use Camp Mirage only months before the withdrawl of troops from Afganistan, endangering our troops and costing us $300 million more?
Bribed two provinces to bring in the Harper Sales Tax, but won`t offer the same deal to Quebec[/SIZE][SIZE=3].
Gave a standing ovation to a minister who mislead parliament and forged a document
Appointed two senators who had 67 forged invoices falsely claiming tax rebates for election expenses.
Found guilty by the Appeal court of Canada for breaching the Election Act spending limits for political parties in 2006 and thereby stealing an election.
Changed the Government of Canada[/SIZE][SIZE=3] to the Harper Government
Spending $6 billion on further ineffectual tax cuts for the largest corporations.
Has staff being investigated by police about 3 separate incidents.

Vote for the candidate in your riding with the best chance of defeating Harper`s muzzled member."[/SIZE]

[grish]

dude, I dislike harper and will not vote for him, but can you cut down on the formatting? you aren't going to be winning any support for your cause like this.

[hello lady]

Originally Posted by Hilman

I think a lot of polls are done online now.

I was phoned

[hello lady]

Originally Posted by etownboarder

At least someone has the balls to admit to making mistakes and corrects them.

Hmm , not so with the ex judge running for the libs who thinks far differently than me about sexual advances.

[Hilman]

Originally Posted by hello lady

I was phoned

Are you 80 years old?

[hello lady]

I sense your frustration on the Liberals not doing too well in the polls. It should not be a reason to criticize my knowledge of democracy. If you feel I am twisting reality to suit my party of choice, well, I think you are doing exactly the same. If you want to vote for a party lead by a visiting professor so be it. That's your democratic right. If I want to vote for a conservative MP that's my choice. The only other choice is not to vote at all. How does that work for you. That's also democratic, the right not to vote. I have also asked this question before, if Iggy does not win how long will he stay with the Liberal party?.

This is the only way to be rid of him , once he has lost.he will be gone.

[armin]

Chmilz is right. Polls are privately funded and the people who answer the phone are either seniors, bored, stupid, lonely, or curious.

[hello lady]

Originally Posted by armin

Chmilz is right. Polls are privately funded and the people who answer the phone are either seniors, bored, stupid, lonely, or curious.

Something wrong with curious? my goodness. We just got from a tropical vacation, and I was curious about everything.

[hello lady]

Originally Posted by Hilman

Are you 80 years old?

No much younger( much) and you, are you 80- 85?

[armin]

Originally Posted by hello lady

Something wrong with curious? my goodness. We just got from a tropical vacation, and I was curious about everything.

That's why I added 'curious'. Technically, the original story said it was just bored, stupid, and old people but with the election coming, even people who don't fit those demos are answering the phones. That's also probably another reason why we're seeing a change in the polls.

[Hilman]

Originally Posted by hello lady

No much younger( much) and you, are you 80- 85?

Nope, 30's yet have a landline and have done surveys

[Paul Turnbull]

To be fair to the pollsters they use census data to weight the demographics of their respondents. Pollsters have noted that the it's getting increasingly difficult to do accurate polling because of the predominance of cell phones and the tendency of people not to answer calls from unknown sources.

[PrairieBoyinExile]

Originally Posted by Paul Turnbull

To be fair to the pollsters they use census data to weight the demographics of their respondents. Pollsters have noted that the it's getting increasingly difficult to do accurate polling because of the predominance of cell phones and the tendency of people not to answer calls from unknown sources.

Another important factor not reflected by polling is turnout. Many Liberals stayed home in the last election due to their disillusionment with Stephane Dion. I think in this election Liberal supporters will be more galvanized. I'm not saying the Liberals will win, just agreeing the polls probably aren't reliable.

[hello lady]

Originally Posted by armin

That's why I added 'curious'. Technically, the original story said it was just bored, stupid, and old people but with the election coming, even people who don't fit those demos are answering the phones. That's also probably another reason why we're seeing a change in the polls.

True, very true.

[MrOilers]

Originally Posted by PrairieBoyinExile

Many Liberals stayed home in the last election due to their disillusionment with Stephane Dion.

You don't think there's similar disllusionment with Ignatieff?

[Gemini]

Sometimes I get the impression that Iggy would just like to phone it in.

[Redd Foxx]

Originally Posted by alex69

The new rule for determining the nonsense-point in a conversation should be not a Hitler reference but a Godwin reference.

Please don't treat Hitler as some sort of unapproachable idea of evil.

He is very approachable indeed, and Nazi Germany in whole AND in part has been approximated several times in the (only) seven decades since.

Nobody is talking about gas ovens, but clearly some of what is happeniong in Canada today has German antecedents in the 1930s.

Maybe you should research Godwin's "law".

http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/2...win.if_pr.html

Originally Posted by Wikipedia

Godwin's law is often cited in online discussions as a deterrent against the use of arguments in the widespread Reductio ad Hitlerum form. The rule does not make any statement about whether any particular reference or comparison to Adolf Hitler or the Nazis might be appropriate, but only asserts that the likelihood of such a reference or comparison arising increases as the discussion progresses. It is precisely because such a comparison or reference may sometimes be appropriate, Godwin has argued[4] that overuse of Nazi and Hitler comparisons should be avoided, because it robs the valid comparisons of their impact.

We're not talking Idi Amin Dada, or Slobodan Milošević.

Wait a minute alex69! Let's take a look at your position! You're narrow minded, single purpose focus to eliminate Harper and anyone who supports him, combined with your desire to dehumanize anyone who could or would support the Conservatives seems to align quite well with Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei of the 1930's and beyond. Maybe we should equate you to Hitler's approach? Sounds just as valid of a comparison as you make! I saw another post of yours today that was rather Hitler-esque in its speech patterns in the thread about Alberta being a ghost province, and something about human vacuuming in a suburban thread. Talk about trying to eliminate undesirables in your eyes!

I really missed this forum and all of its leaps of logic.

[danielleg]

Voting for a federal leader is voting for the "least worst" candidate - I agree with armin that you should vote for your representative. The choice is much easier to make. I highly doubt everybody in a party agrees on everything, so if you lined them all up you would get a spectrum from one end to another like a gradient from black to white.

I agree that the girls should have been allowed in, but Harper likely had no clue about this particular incident. I think there is more to the story - both the RCMP and Harper are too busy to look up people on Facebook to see if they have pictures of themselves with Liberal party leaders. Seriously, that is a lot of work. I don't trust that this is why they were removed.

[PrairieBoyinExile]

While Stephen Harper may be courting votes in the suburbs, the band behind The Suburbs has a counter-message.

On their blog at arcadefire.com, Montreal-based Arcade Fire is urging Canadians to vote — just not for the Conservative Party.

http://www.edmontonjournal.com/news/...966/story.html

Very happy Arcade Fire is speaking out against the Harper government

[edmonton daily photo]

Originally Posted by danielleg

Voting for a federal leader is voting for the "least worst" candidate - .

You know you can take this pessimistic approach to anything not just politics... Try looking for things that you like instead of looking at all the things you don't.

[soycd]

Originally Posted by PrairieBoyinExile

Very happy Arcade Fire is speaking out against the Harper government

Why?

Would you also say that if it was Geddy Lee or Shania Twain or the ex-Barenaked Ladies dude, Steven Page?

[edmonton daily photo]

^ anything that get's people engaged in the political process is great.

[Blueline]

this is good and also important because this type of comment from a non political source may encourage a greater overall voter turnout (from the youth to boot !)
To bad if someone doesn't like or agree with the message

[MrOilers]

I think it's pathetic when musicians start telling people how they should vote.

Stick to entertaining, please. Nobody cares what you think.

[Blueline]

what ?
Maybe politico types should stay out of music
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JOt2Qp0H9G8

[MrOilers]

Yes, politicians should stay out of the entertainment business. Just as entertainers should stay out of poltics.

I don't see any politicans recording and performing music professionally, do you?

[edmonton daily photo]

Originally Posted by MrOilers

I think it's pathetic when musicians start telling people how they should vote.

Stick to entertaining, please. Nobody cares what you think.

People have been telling other people what to do since time began. Pop stars are the new Catholic Church... meh...It's your choice to listen or not...

at least pop stars don't have the equivalent of teh spanish inquisition.

[PrairieBoyinExile]

Originally Posted by MrOilers

I think it's pathetic when musicians start telling people how they should vote.

Stick to entertaining, please. Nobody cares what you think.

Read the article. They aren't telling anyone how to vote. They're encouraging people to vote and expressing their opinion about the most recent government. What's pathetic is a highly corrupt government being defended so vigorously. No one's expecting Conservative supporters to vote Liberal, but stop making excuses for their conduct.

[PrairieBoyinExile]

Originally Posted by Gemini

Sometimes I get the impression that Iggy would just like to phone it in.

That's the impression I get from the Conservatives in Alberta. This was talked about on CBC Radio's noon show today with Chaldeans Mensah from Grant MacEwan. Local conservative candidates are nowhere to be found...not even putting up signs. It's suspected they're trying to help win races in other parts of the country.

[Gemini]

^I only started to seen election signs yesterday going down 66 Street 137 Ave. Anyway, I thought signs could not be put up before a certain time, so many days before an election. Maybe Alberta Conservatives think their Federal counterparts are shoe-ins. That's why they are not trying so hard. Just a thought.

[Turtle]

Originally Posted by MrOilers

You don't think there's similar disllusionment with Ignatieff?

How many Liberals voted for Micheal Who as leader?

[DiscoBandit]

Originally Posted by Turtle

How many Liberals voted for Micheal Who as leader?

Probably not many, since that isn't an actual person who ran.


More trouble with the RCMP helping in a partisan fashion and blocking people with environmentally friendly slogans on their shirts.

I can't decide if creeping someone's facebook is more ridiculous than being afraid of "environmental slogans" or not.

[ralph60]

As expected, the poor Poli-Sci student kicked out of the Conservative rally was hardly a political neophyte.
From Glen McGregor's column in the Ottawa Citizen:
"I spoke to Aslam by phone today and asked her about the email. She confirmed that, when she was in high school, she was a member of the NDP and had volunteered on both provincial and federal campaigns in Hamilton, her hometown"

[Dialog]

Originally Posted by MrOilers

I think it's pathetic when musicians start telling people how they should vote.

Stick to entertaining, please. Nobody cares what you think.

Do you listen when Professional Sports Entertainers speak out on issues?

[Dialog]

Originally Posted by edmonton daily photo

People have been telling other people what to do since time began. Pop stars are the new Catholic Church... meh...It's your choice to listen or not...

at least pop stars don't have the equivalent of teh spanish inquisition.

Have you watched TMZ?

[MrOilers]

Originally Posted by Dialog

Do you listen when Professional Sports Entertainers speak out on issues?

Only when the issue is related to sports (i.e. concussions, injuries, amateur sports, steroid use, etc.).

[grish]

Originally Posted by ralph60

As expected, the poor Poli-Sci student kicked out of the Conservative rally was hardly a political neophyte.
From Glen McGregor's column in the Ottawa Citizen:
"I spoke to Aslam by phone today and asked her about the email. She confirmed that, when she was in high school, she was a member of the NDP and had volunteered on both provincial and federal campaigns in Hamilton, her hometown"

And...?

You need to explain how it could possibly be bad to have someone who may have had or still has a different political view to attend the rally. What is so dangerous?

[Paul Turnbull]

Originally Posted by MrOilers

I think it's pathetic when musicians start telling people how they should vote.

Stick to entertaining, please. Nobody cares what you think.

What about plumbers or welders or nurses or shopkeepers. Are they allowed to have political opinions? Or is it just musicians that lose their citizenship with their profession?

[DiscoBandit]

Originally Posted by ralph60

As expected, the poor Poli-Sci student kicked out of the Conservative rally was hardly a political neophyte.
From Glen McGregor's column in the Ottawa Citizen:
"I spoke to Aslam by phone today and asked her about the email. She confirmed that, when she was in high school, she was a member of the NDP and had volunteered on both provincial and federal campaigns in Hamilton, her hometown"

Do you even listen to yourself?

If they aren't heckling, there's no reason to kick them out. I don't see why there is such a fetish for kicking people out if they don't agree with you, it's common in the US to have mixed gatherings. If a politician is representing the people, the crowd should be representative of those people and not filtered through the RCMP facebook creeping your pictures or determining your t-shirt is too eco-friendly.

[edmonton daily photo]

^ it's ok now Harper said he is sorry.

What really scares me is the level of involvement re: the RCMP.... I used to be proud of our national force and the optic of this whole things reaks of 3rd world dictatorship... not canada.

[DiscoBandit]

If they just didn't know better then I'm more okay with it, but if they continue doing it after that statement saying they were going to stop... sort of too early to assume it'll be a gestapo-like problem. I guess I'd never be able to go to a rally and see if they're doing it / hear what he has to say, though, since I have ties to the left. Gasp!

[edmonton daily photo]

The Rcmp shouldn't be political... The head of it is a conservative cronie.. The head of the RCMP should not be decided by the PMO

[DiscoBandit]

I agree, and if this were the US where it happened it would've been a national scandal and destroy political careers.

Hell, they ruin careers over SUSPICION of this kind of thing happening, and here it's been proven it actually did occur. Interesting dynamic :P

[Paul Turnbull]

Originally Posted by DiscoBandit

I agree, and if this were the US where it happened it would've been a national scandal and destroy political careers.

Hell, they ruin careers over SUSPICION of this kind of thing happening, and here it's been proven it actually did occur. Interesting dynamic :P

It's standard practice in the U.S. for town hall meetings to be carefully vetted so only supporters are in the room. Harper is importing the practice of only speaking to safe audiences.

[Paul Turnbull]

Speaking of controlling the audience:

Harper to create government-run media centre

...the new centre could give the government control over which journalists attend news conferences. The government would also have the ability to do its own filming at the events, and could provide the footage to journalists, instead of letting them film the events themselves

Harper always wants to control the situations he's in. They already dictate which reporters can ask him questions. The manipulation of the media and the message means the public gets an inaccurate view of his government.

Also related is: The Conservatives Commitment to Internet Surveillance.

...new laws that would establish massive Internet surveillance requirements and the potential disclosure of personal information without court oversight...

Again the continuing centralizing of power towards the PMO.

[whynow99]

Harper has to fire millions of civil servants to keep his promise; that would send us all spiraling into a major depression.

Civil servants spend cash on cars, clothing, houses, insurance, cable, cell phone, food, small businesses and so on.

We are all dependent on each other.

Harper would destroy our economy, just to win

[edmonton daily photo]

5 million...

Ok, I'm all for drama.. but that is taking it a BIT far.

The reality is that many of the civil servants are set to retire... I am sure the gov't has a plan in place simply not to replace them as they drop out of their jobs and move resources from one department to another.

I am sure gov't can be streamlined somewhat... but I also understand why a bureaucracy is important and why gov't can and shouldn't run like a fortune 500 company. No matter how much harper thinks it should.

[MrOilers]

Originally Posted by Paul Turnbull

What about plumbers or welders or nurses or shopkeepers. Are they allowed to have political opinions? Or is it just musicians that lose their citizenship with their profession?

Of course they are allowed to have political opinions. What a stupid question. Nobody is losing their citizenship, either... don't know where you picked that up from.


My point is, if the plumber, welder, shopkeeper, or nurse told their clients who they should vote for while on the job, then I'd say they are crossing a line in terms of professional behaviour. It would be like if the signature in your work emails or on your profession's letterhead told your client what party to vote for.

But it's especially unprofessional and patronizing when someone like a celebrity uses his/her fame as a tool to tell their fans how to behave in their personal lives. It's incredibly off-putting and tacky.

[soycd]

Originally Posted by whynow99

We are all dependent on each other.

Harper would destroy our economy, just to win

Probably less impact on the economy as opposed to what Iggy wants to do with raising corporate taxes and the talk of the cap and trade. He can essentially kill the momentum in the petroleum sector.

[PrairieBoyinExile]

Originally Posted by MrOilers

Of course they are allowed to have political opinions. What a stupid question. Nobody is losing their citizenship, either... don't know where you picked that up from.


My point is, if the plumber, welder, shopkeeper, or nurse told their clients who they should vote for while on the job, then I'd say they are crossing a line in terms of professional behaviour. It would be like if the signature in your work emails or on your profession's letterhead told your client what party to vote for.

But it's especially unprofessional and patronizing when someone like a celebrity uses his/her fame as a tool to tell their fans how to behave in their personal lives. It's incredibly off-putting and tacky.

Can you not read, or are you just full of crap? They didn't tell anyone who to vote for. They expressed their opinion on the Harper government, which is completely their right to do, and encouraged everyone to get out and vote. Arcade Fire know that most of their fans would not be Conservative supporters and that they don't vote in great numbers.

And what do you mean by "on the job?" Does expressing political opinions somehow compromise their effectiveness as a band? Get a life.

[grish]

Originally Posted by soycd

Probably less impact on the economy as opposed to what Iggy wants to do with raising corporate taxes and the talk of the cap and trade. He can essentially kill the momentum in the petroleum sector.

not raise, but cancel the decrease. the moment is being gained as we type under current corp taxation levels.

cap and trade or any other thing--there needs to be a cost assigned to CO2 release to make innovations in the industry an economic necessity.

[DiscoBandit]

Originally Posted by soycd

what Iggy wants to do with raising corporate taxes and the talk of the cap and trade.

Hmm. Do you think if we raised taxes on the corporations then they'd leave us for somewhere cheaper?

[etownboarder]

Originally Posted by DiscoBandit

Hmm. Do you think if we raised taxes on the corporations then they'd leave us for somewhere cheaper?

Like where? We already have some of the lowest corporate tax rates on earth.

[Marcel Petrin]

Originally Posted by etownboarder

Like where? We already have the lowest corporate tax rates on earth.

Source please. And don't forget to take in to account that corporations in Canada also pay provincial rates as well. Near as I can tell, there's a couple dozen countries with lower rates than ours, although many aren't exactly places I'd like to live. But Ireland unquestionably has a lower rate than we do (12.5% vs. somewhere around 25-30% in Canada when including provincial rates), and Switzerland appears to be lower as well. Singapore, Hong Kong, Russia and South Korea all appear to have lower total corporate tax burdens as well.

[Admin]

Folks, the last 2 posts are a bit troubling. I see the edit, and the word "some" was added after the following poster quoted the remarks seeking clarification.

For thread integrity, if you are going to change your wording after someone has quoted you, please indicate you have in the edit remarks, or better yet clarify in a follow up post.

thank you.

[Titanium48]

^^And where's that got Ireland? Last I heard they were bankrupt. If our rates are competitive with the USA there's no reason to lower them further.

[Jimbo]

Originally Posted by soycd

Why?

Would you also say that if it was Geddy Lee or Shania Twain or the ex-Barenaked Ladies dude, Steven Page?

That changes everything. Thank God we now know where Arcade Fire stand on this election. It was the great unanswered question on everyone's mind.

[Jimbo]

Originally Posted by whynow99

Harper has to fire millions of civil servants to keep his promise; that would send us all spiraling into a major depression.

Civil servants spend cash on cars, clothing, houses, insurance, cable, cell phone, food, small businesses and so on.

We are all dependent on each other.

Harper would destroy our economy, just to win.

Ridiculous. Your credibility is now absolute zero.

The best indicator of where each party stands now, is where they've stood for the last few years. The Conservative government obviously hasn't destroyed our economy. Quite the opposite.

There are pluses and minuses to each party. We can debate what they are, what they mean to us, and what they might mean to our country. But assertions like the one above (and many others) really say nothing about the particular party or leader, and instead point to a bias that bypasses reality in favour of a slanderous fiction and innuendo.

It may be too much to expect, but I'd hoped we could have a substantive debate on the real issues, not whether Stephen Harper takes a lot of time each day to go over the facebook postings of anyone considering attending the rallies.