Canadian Election

[sabrelady]

Posted: 6/21/04 at 6:50pm

With all the Sturm und Drang of our American Cousins politial dances very little has been said about our own electoral clown show that finishes next week. Any fellow Ca-Nuckleheads have any thoughts. Or even Yankees?
I myself voted early and sl leftist.

[Type_A_Tiff]

Posted: 6/21/04 at 10:10pm

Looks like we're the lonely few. I'm on the fence right now - I tend to be more liberal, but I can't stand Paul Martin, and Conservation Steve Harper is out of the question. I can't vote for Duceppe so my only other option is Leyton.

Et tu?

*Edited for my bad spelling. *

Updated On: 6/22/04 at 10:10 PM

[Dollypop]

Posted: 6/21/04 at 10:49pm

I wonder if TAMrMcC voted?

[judy_in_disguise]

Posted: 6/22/04 at 11:01am

um, first of all if you're going to vote NDP you might want to get the name of the leader right....it's LEYTON.
This whole thing has turned into a circus ring, you're right. The Liberals are laughable- trying to make people forget the Sponsership Scandal, trying to make Ontario forget the health care premiums Mr. McGuinty so generously thrust upon us. How are they doing this? By making false accusations against the Conservatives. Saying that they're going to ban abortion and gay marriage. Admittedly, some conservative candidates have been vocal about pro-life or anti-gay marriage OPINIONS, but they are only opinions. Anyone watching the english debate would have seen Stephen Harper keep his cool, reassuring Canada that the Conservatives DO NOT and WILL NOT have any plans of banning abortion or gay marriage, while he was under attack by a desperate Martin and smirking Leyton.
My advice to Canadians is to be well educated, but not via the Liberal ad campaign. You know- the Liberal ads don't explain ANYTHING about their platform. Pretty much every ad is a direct hit against the Conservatives. Now that's not playing very nice is it?
Vote Liberal but be aware of the Sponsership Scandal and their knack for broken promises and huge deficits (I don't know why it took the Sponsership Scandal for people to figure out that the Liberals can't be trusted). Vote Conservative but be aware that they want to create some form of Canadian Military instead of putting all that money into the Kyoto Protocol. Vote NDP but be aware that they're extreme socialists who think anyone making over $15 grand a year is rich and should be taxed heavily. Vote Bloch if you want but be aware that their sole function is to break up Canada, now doesn't that make you feel patriotic?
Just please, see through all of the bulls**t these parties are throwing around at each other. It's gotten to be quite ridiculous, and it's pretty much because for the first time in years the Liberals are scared out of their minds they're going to lose.
Please be educated of the pros and cons of ALL the parties, make the decision that's best for you, and for pete's sake GO VOTE- we're killing democracy by being passive.

[bwaysinger]

Posted: 6/22/04 at 12:23pm

Judy,
Do you guys have strong parties outside two major ones? INteresting.
And it's also interesting how the bulk of attacks in ads in your country are coming from the liberal party while the reverse has tended to be the case for us. Are the liberals incumbents? That tends to send out the mudslingers (when they're trying to cling to their positions against strong opponents).

[papalovesmambo]

Posted: 6/22/04 at 1:03pm

uh, bway, you haven't seen any of the democratic 527 pac ads have ya? moveon.org's stuff? like where the portray bush as hitler? and what's negative about making a candidate explain their positions (no matter how many they've taken on a single issue)? but it's funny that the perception is that all attack ads come from the right when the left spent the 90's perfecting the art of the smear. but i will go out on a limb and suggest with no knowledge whatsoever of the situation that the canadian media would say that the majority of the attack ads come from the conservatives. am i right?

[judy_in_disguise]

Posted: 6/22/04 at 2:19pm

The attack ads come from the underdogs. There's no point in making attack ads if you already have the upper hand.
For the first time in many, many years the Conservatives have the lead. The Liberals are, shall we say, freaking right out. They're grasping at straws for anything they can jump on to make the Conservs look bad. In the past, it has been the other way around- although never to this extreme.
The Liberals are about to lose the power they've held in monopoly for years. They're desperate.
And in Canada, the Liberals and Conservatives are the main two parties (left wing and right wing). We also have the New Democratic Party, which is quite socialist- this party has done well in some provincial elections but they are never in federal parliament (although they have been the official opposition). The other big party is the Bloc Quebecois, which only exists in Quebec, and they are the Quebec Separatist party. Sadly, they have been the official federal opposition before, as Quebec has enough ridings and enough separatists to vote in a huge number of them. Then we have little parties, like the Green Party (environmentalists), which has actually grown a lot over the past few years and is garnering much of the youth vote. We also have the Marijuana Party (haha truly Canadian), Christian Heritage Party, and a bunch of little parties that only exist in a few ridings and most likely will never win a seat in the house of commons.
But yes- mainly red and blue. And the reds are scared, so they're attacking the blue.
There's your politics lesson for today :) haha.
If I didn't go into theatre I was going to study polisci....go figure.

[papalovesmambo]

Posted: 6/22/04 at 2:23pm

in an irony, what you refer to as red and blue is the opposite down here. here the reds are the conservos and the blues are the liberal. wouldn't lenin have been proud?

[judy_in_disguise]

Posted: 6/22/04 at 5:22pm

hmm that is strange.
I've always seen red more as a more open, "liberal" colour, blue as more reserved, "conservative" colour.

[papalovesmambo]

Posted: 6/22/04 at 5:34pm

eh, the media came up with it so they could finally use on their opponents those "better dead than red" epithets that followed them out of the 50's.

[bwaysinger]

Posted: 6/22/04 at 5:50pm

I need to search the NY Times online, but there was quite a nice article showing the breakdown of negative ads re: Bush and Kerry. Even with independent companies like Move On (and don't the right-wing Christian coalitions have more ads out than HRC and MOve ON combined?), Bush's ads were markedly hire in their attacks on the opposition.

[papalovesmambo]

Posted: 6/22/04 at 5:58pm

yeaha, well, what the ny times posits as the truth is quite often about as far from it as me and a vote for kerry.

http://www.c-span.org/vote2004/campads.asp

http://www.c-span.org/vote2004/campads.asp>http://www.c-span.org/vote2004/campads.asp

target=new HREF=http://www.disinfopedia.org/wiki.phtml?title=U.S._presidential_election%2C_2004:_Campaign_Ads

and>http://www.disinfopedia.org/wiki.phtml?title=U.S._presidential_election%2C_2004:_Campaign_Ads>http://www.disinfopedia.org/wiki.phtml?title=U.S._presidential_election%2C_2004:_Campaign_Ads

and this is a pretty even handed site the skewers both sides
http://www.factcheck.org/http://www.factcheck.org/>http://www.factcheck.org/

[bwaysinger]

Posted: 6/22/04 at 6:04pm

Are you saying they're pundits now? :) I prefer their version of the "Facts" to Coulter or Limbaugh.

I'm not sure what the other links were supposed to show me, Papa. I see a listing of political organizations but I couldn't figure out how to determine which "side" any given group is on. I thought it was broken down by color but that was not the case.

[BlueWizard]

Posted: 6/22/04 at 6:11pm

One thing that must be explained, though, is that this is a new Conservative party. In Canada, we used to have the Progressive Conservatives (sounds like an oxymoron, I know), who were fiscally conservative; and the Canadian Alliance, who were the freaky extreme-right-wing party. They recently amalgamated because both parties were suffering from fractured support: now they're just the Conservative Party.

The problem that most people don't realize is that the New Conservative Party doesn't have a set policy on a lot of issues. The PC and Canadian Alliance disagreed on many issues, including gay marriage. Even now that the parties have amalgamated, they still haven't ironed out their differences. So if the Conservative party is elected (shudder), we really don't know what we're going to get. Fiscal conservatism, yeah, but how about socio-cultural issues? The Conservative party has remained tight-lipped about a lot of things.

For those who don't know, here's a generalization of the major Canadian parties:
LIBERAL - Considered middle-left. But by US standards, it's leftist.
CONSERVATIVE - Described above, they're right-wing. No one knows how how right-wing, though, and that's the scary thing.
NEW DEMOCRATIC PARTY - Left-wing. I wouldn't call them extreme left-wing: they're not socialists or anything. But they're like the Canadian equivalent of Ralph Nader.
BLOC QUEBECOIS - Although they have candidates in ridings across the country, their main objective is to make sure Quebec (Canada's mainly-french-speaking province) has substantial recognition in Parliament.
GREEN PARTY - Their main focus is on environmental issues, but they have plans for health care and other arenas too.

I'm just happy we have more than just 2 major choices in Canada. I don't really see Republicans and Democrats as binary.

[EponineThenardier]

Posted: 6/22/04 at 6:14pm

I need to register

[sabrelady]

Posted: 6/22/04 at 8:20pm

BlueWizard got it pretty correct. I was an old "Red" Tory in the Trudeau years when the party was just not Media savy enough. Then Brian( who if there is a g*d will rot in hell!)Mulroney happened. Anything seemed better, then we got Uncle Jean & U knew all politico's were all the same just different names. The only thing is this time there will be a Minority Gov & since there will have to be comprimises on everyones agenda the electorate just MIGHT come out ahead this time!(from my lips to G*D's ears!)

[papalovesmambo]

Posted: 6/22/04 at 9:31pm

well, i prefer wild dogs yapping at my door to coulter and limbaugh, so we're not so far removed there, bway.

[Type_A_Tiff]

Posted: 6/23/04 at 10:21pm

Judyindisguise wrote:

um, first of all if you're going to vote NDP you might want to get the name of the leader right....it's LEYTON.

~~

*blush* The sad thing is I swear I knew that, it's the heatwave in Vancouver getting to me. Honestly.

For those who know about this, what do you think about Martin's statement yesterday, that to vote for the NDP is to vote for the Conservatives? While I think he has as point in the sense that realistically, this race is really btwn the Liberals and Conservatives now, I thought it was really rude, even by politician's standards. As Leyton said during the debate, Harper and Martin are acting as if there's only 2 parties running now, which isn't true.

On the flip side, the NDP support is a tiny but critical percentage since it's such a tight race. Since realistically, they probably won't win, is it worth voting for them, if this turns out to be a Nader Complex, who costed Gore the election, so to speak?

[judy_in_disguise]

Posted: 6/23/04 at 11:21pm

It's a tough call.
I mean, the Conservatives just combined the PCs and the CA because they were splitting the vote.
NDP is going to split the vote for SOMEONE- whether it be Conserv or Lib is up in airs.
And speaking of importance....
Right now the Green Party has about 15% of the vote. That's the same the NDP and Conservatives have had in previous years. And yet they weren't involved in the televised debates. My question is- with this kind of support- why is the media not taking them seriously? They're not the Marijuana Party!
******
Question: 15% of decided voters are in support of the Green Party. And yet sadly, they will probably not win a single seat. This is because the support of the Green Party in each separate riding will probably not be enough ANYWHERE (well except maybe BC- gotta love you guys) to actually overthrow the Conservs, Libs or NDP in that riding.
New Zealand has a system where if 15% of voters voted for, lets say, the Green Party- then 15% of the seats in the house would be occupied by the Green Party. I'm not sure how the allot the seats, but there has been talk of adopting such a system in Canada.
What do you think? Proportional support or regional support?
And how do Americans do it?

[Type_A_Tiff]

Posted: 6/23/04 at 11:41pm

I'm for proportional support. I'm not sure how the US does it, but I believe it's similar, right?

On a semi-related note, didn't they recently change the regulations so that party funding depended on the number of *votes* received instead of the number of seats obtained? So maybe my NDP vote won't be a waste after all...

[Broadwaybaby614]

Posted: 6/24/04 at 2:14am

i've got a question for any Canadian who wants to answer...

What DO you think of America? Because, as an American, I've always hated it here. The system, the government, the culture, everything. And when I go to Canada, everything seems so much different, which is why I want to someday get out of here and live in Toronto. But I'd like to know what you guys think. Do you see us the way I see us? Overweight, under-motivated, power-hungry, imperialistic, shallow folks with insanely large egos? WHat kills me around here are the Americans who make fun of Canada. They think we're soooooo much better. Anyway, sorry I've rambled on for so long, and I'm sorry to any of my fellow Americans who I may have offended...I'll leave now...

[judy_in_disguise]

Posted: 6/24/04 at 9:54am

BroadwayBaby,
It's hard for Canadians not to feel a little smug when we see some of the things the American government does.
We are SO not fans of Bush- but then, I don't think very many Americans are either.
We have this show here called "Talking to Americans". This Canadian comedian, Rick Mercer, goes around to various people in the states (everyone from people on the streets of Chicago to students and professors at Harvard) and asks them questions or makes statements about Canadian things to see their response.
Example:
American: "Congratulations Canada on legalizing stapelers."
He's had Americans sign petitions to stop such things as...
- Sending the elderly to live on the ice flows.
- Pummeling moose with timbits.
- The destruction of the Peter Mans Bridge (Peter Mansbridge is one of our top news anchors).
Canadians do have a GREAT time poking fun at Americans. I've had the pleasure of working with many Americans at renaissance festivals throughout the U.S., and I must say I find you a very enjoyable and good-hearted lot.
But as perceptions of the countries go, Canada has always been seen as a milder (haha in everything except the weather), safer, healthier country....slightly passive- but that means we're not under constant terrorist threats. Canadians travelling to Europe are practically regarded as heroes over there, we have a great international reputation, and it generally just feels GOOD to be Canadian.
Of course, I've never lived in the States. Y'all have a stronger economy, you're the world leaders. All the big-time opprotunity is in the States. But for general quality of life.....I'd vote Canada.
Wow I just spent way too much time on that.
I still love you Americans :) I just don't like your government!
Oh. If you're not a hockey fan when you move to Canada, just give it till next playoff season. It's contagious. You'll be a die-hard fan in no time.

[papalovesmambo]

Posted: 6/24/04 at 10:04am

"[w]e are [so] not fans of [b]ush- but then, [i] don't think very many [a]mericans are either."

you speak for all of canada? wow, such power! will you be the one whom muslim women turn to when the sharia tribunals that canadian law just sanctified tell her that her husband has every right to beat her? or what about when she wants to escape an abusive marriage without being cast out if her insular, non-assimilating, muslim only community? will you be leading the charge in there to force them to accept her as a human being and not just as a piece of property?

last time i checked down here, ol' georgie boy was polling at about 50% +/- 5%. that's both in approval rating and in election polls. now you can find polls in the etreme on both sides. i saw one with gw ahead by 10 points and one with him down by 10. regardless, the average still puts it at a statisical dead heat when the margin of error is factored in. i'd say that qualifies as many in any book.

[Zola Q. LaPlaya]

Posted: 6/24/04 at 10:14am

What exactly is Canada? Never really undertood the whole idea of it.

[papalovesmambo]

Posted: 6/24/04 at 10:17am

if i forgot to mention it, welcome back, zola.