I say yes, you say no, OR People are Strange

covertanjou

imell, I just took the "test" on Vote Compass.  Very interesting.  No real surprises (lean left on social issues and right on the economy).

I am TOTALLY against a coalition with the BLOC. If any party or leader suggests that, I am definitely not voting for them.  As a Quebecer & Canadian, I am horrified that any national leader would suggest having a coalition with a separatist party.   Iggy wanting to open constitutional talks with Quebec is one of the reasons I don't like him.

crazy4carrots

Lassie, you said it so well - thanks!  Harper is a control freak and while he may exert tight control over his caucus, I've no intention of letting him have control over me!  And this old shibboleth of tax and spend liberals was totally disproven when Liberals were in power - thanks to major belt-tightening and bank regulation and a host of other things.  Harper may have a graduate degree in economics but he sure doesn't know how to manage the Canadian economy.  He's beginning to look more and more like that new beverage party in the U.S. and his attack ads before the election were disgusting.

Angel -- I saw Black's take on Trump and nearly fell off the sofa I was laughing so hard!

konakat

I just finished the Vote Compass.  I was not surprised by the results.  It is a very useful tool to get a quick summary of where the various parties stand on the main issues. 

-angel-

lindasa - me too on the Black bit!  Thank goodness we have humor to help us through the political chaos!

edit for grammatical error 

pip57

Did I miss Ignatieff saying that he would not form a coalition with the Bloc party?  I would have more respect for him if he would just answer the question instead of treating us like children.  I don't think the reporters are going to let up on this.

Off to take the test.  I suspect I will be a social liberal and fiscal conservative. 

Edited to add: Just as I thought.  I lean a little more left than right. 

pickle

Lassie,

The information that was requested was there, however, it was to the unliking of the Budget officer.  They were saying the methods used to specially calculate the costs of the F35 jets was flawed as it is based on historical data.  Of course this is flawed but it is the only way to predict expected costs.  They looked at average maintenance costs of the F-18's and extrapolated.  How else do you suggest that this is done?  EVERYTHING in economics is retrospective - hence it is a flawed science. The contempt of parliament was a witch hunt.  If you get enough people together that don't like you, of course you are going to find fault .  It was a bogus committee and for any validity it should have been made up of NON-PARTISAN people.

"It looks like he managed the recession all right because he inherited a healthy surplus and the banks were already regulated". This is not a valid argument.  That is like saying you managed a car accident OK because you had insurance in place.  That is not how the economy works. We had a surplus largely due to trading surpluses with the USA (our largest trading partner).  When they went broke - they stopped buying.  Just as you would if you lost your job.  If you take away a significant portion of Canada's income - regardless of how big a surplus was it is going to end up being a deficit.  Do you think that the government was immune to the down turn?  If the majority of Canadians were effected in a negative way, they will also reflect on the governments books.  Everyone lost money and jobs - the government was no exception as they are NOT above economics.

"Now we have a huge deficit. That's how he managed the economy" If you recall, there was a much more modest def icit  in place  to stabalize the economy  however, the liberals and NDP cried that it was too little being done to protect and create jobs in the recession.  So, they spent more as request.  But wait - now it is too much.  There is a reason that Canada was last in first out of the recession and it is largely due to stimulus spending.  The MAJORITY of which was spend t  on infrastructure improvements providing tens of thousands of jobs.  Increased jobs = increased spending power of the Canadian people = increased tax revenues which when the economy improves and there are private sector jobs available, tax revenue will still be there.

"That and spending a lot of tax payers' money for advertizing companies to tell us how well he was doing". Really? Time to do a little fact checking.  You need to look at the advertising budgets of the Martin and Chretien governments.  You tell me what's worse....

"Of course Harper had to put in things the opposition parties wanted in previous budgets. That's how a minority government is supposed to work. He complained about it a lot because he'd rather be Emperor than Prime Minister of a minority government. A higher percentage of Canadian voters did not vote for him than those who did." Actually, in our system of government we don't vote for PM.    If you want to break down this argument, there was an even HIGHER percent of people that didn't vote for the Libs or NDPs COMBINED!!  If Iggy formed a coalition, less Canadians would have voted for the coalition then the Conservatives.  (Excluding the Bloc).  

"He was obligated to work with the other parties and did not" You tell me what is being more cooperative - adding items in the budget opposition parties wanted or blindly voting down a budget and forcing an election costing $300,000,000.00 of tax payers dollars when the polls clearly indicate there will be no change in results....again

"And tough on crime?! He wants to build prisons to house the prisoners for "unreported crimes". How do you put people in prison if the crimes weren't even reported? In fact, we have declining crime rates but that doesn't suit Harper's fear mongering." I'm sorry but I sincereley don't understand what you mean by unreported crimes. His tough on crime bills were designed to mandate minimum sentencing for a lot of white collar crimes.  Additionally, the bills were created to protect the rights of the victims instead of the criminals.  The OPPOSITE of what Chretien was doing.  Prisons in Canada are over crowded as is.  More space is needed and we need minimum sentences for serious crimes like murder (which is EXACTLY what the bills were designed for).  Personally, I don't feel comfortable with bogus minimum sentences that have murderers and rapists back in the street in a matter of years.  Only violent crime is decreasing.  We are seeing a huge increase in white collar crime like fraud.  It is the majority of the tough on crime bills that were directed here.  And just because crime is on the decrease doesn't mean we should let violent offenders out early or provide extended old age pensions.

"Now he is fearmongering about a coalition which is perfectly legal within our system and saying , despite the facts, that he didn't try to join a coalition in 2004. The Liberals have said they won't go for a coalition, but Harper carrys on with his delusion about coaltions not being good for the country."  You want to talk fear mongering?  Well the only platform iggy is standing on is the contempt (bogus) and the jets.  If you want to look at the jets.  Yes there was no tender because these are the only available NATO compatible jets.  Why tender something that is sole source?  Iggy will try and cancel the contract, put it up for tender the only jets compatible will be the F35's and we will end up paying more because of the delay.  The purchase of the jets is nothing new.  Canada has been a level three partner on the development since project inception (under the libs). A coalition is a valid form of government.  My only problem with it is that it needs to be supported by a separatist group (Bloc)  that is hell bent on destroying Canada.  The NDP and Liberals do NOT have enough seats by themselves to form a coalition.  In reality, if the Bloc were not a federal party, then we would have a majority Conservative government and real work on the hill could be done.   

I guess we do differ...lol and I love that there seems to be some passion about our politics.

pip57

I have two relatives in the air force.  They are very concerned about the safety of flight crews on the current jets.  Remember the helicopter?  

I am so tired of political parties complaining about the present governments methods when they have done the same in the past.  It is no different in either country, Canada or USA.  I just wish that the public would sort out the political hype that is intended to keep us from looking at the real platforms and not let them manipulate us so much.  Both countries, all parties included.

crazy4carrots

I've been trying to get into the Vote Compass site for the last half-hour and I can't!  It's as though my computer freezes.  Weird!  However, I expect I'd be socially liberal and fiscally conservative too -- so long as the poor are not regulated into more misery.......  My biggest problem with Harper and the former "Reformers" is their social conservatism, which they try to keep hidden because they know the general populace does not lean that way.  But, if they get a majority -- watch out folks.

Pickle -- The Bloc Quebecois should not be allowed to be a national party, IMO, unless they run a candidate in every riding across the country (which would never happen, of course).

pickle

Linda...maybe we are all scrambling onto Vote Compass at the same time...overload..lol.

 I couldn't agree with you more about the Bloc running in every province, however the Green Party is allowed to run and they don't have representation in each province either. I think every Federal Party should have candidates in each province

crazy4carrots

Yes, I think the Green Party should have candidates running in every riding.  And that would be my step 1 in parliamentary reform!  (Finally got on to Vote Compass, BTW).

imbell

PBS announced that the reason for the election was a mismanaged economy and that Harper was overly secretive. OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOH That explains everything.

There is no reason why the French Canadians in Manitoba could not run Bloc candidates. Too bad they are separatists. If they had been smarter they could have run the country from within.

River_Rat

Bravo, Canadian ladies!

A spirited, and yet respectful debate.  I would have a hard time deciding which way to vote in Canada.  This is amazing because for about the last decade here my choice has been pretty clear.  Oh, on political compass the last time I did it I was pretty darned close to Gandhi.

I wish that political contributions from corporations and unions were banned here and that our maximum personal contributions were more in line with Canada's. 

crazy4carrots

River -- Your choice would be made even more difficult because we have more than 2 parties!

I did finally get on to Vote Compass -- socially liberal, and tending towards fiscal conservatism.

bluedahlia

Yep, no blood was spilled.  No harsh name calling.  No conspiracy theories. 

pip57

So far all of us have been socially liberal and fiscally conservative.  Does that say more about the contributors to this particular thread or about the test?

River_Rat

Well, I'm not sure how the Canadian test differs from the one I've done.  But once again I'm over there with Gandhi.  Liberal both socially and economically.

Economic Left/Right: -6.25
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -5.08http://www.politicalcompass.org/test 

rosemary-b

Me too -River rat

Economic Left/Right: -7.88
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -4.26

I like hanging out with Ghandi

bluedahlia

 I guess this explains it!

Economic Left/Right: -5.50
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -4.26

otter

 Well, I ended up about where I expected I would be:

[Got it!]  Very interesting....

otter

River_Rat

Otter, pretty cool.   I've never seen anybody end up smack in the middle of either axis.

Rosemary and Bluedahlia, hello fellow lefties.   

Alpal

Hijack alert! Kentucky beats NC - on to the final four. Woo Hoo!

otter

[Edited to delete complaining about being unable to post the Political Compass graph correctly. It finally worked.]

YAY CATS!!!

otter

River_Rat

Congratulations to Cat athletic supporters! 

crazy4carrots

Congrats to all the CAT lovers!

1Athena1

Interesting....I couldn't complete the questionnaire. I found the questions simplistic, reductionist and "gotcha"-like. For example, I had trouble with the one asking about whether the people with skill should give to the people in need, as though the two groups had to be different (the assumption is that somehow meritocracies exist with 100 percent purity). And how is the survey going to judge me if I express dismay at the existence of bottled water? That doesn't mean I don't support companies like Perrier or Evian. As for the distribution/private ownership of land, should I give a moral response or a response I would support in the public realm? They may well be very different. 

Edited to add: Sorry if I sound neurotic. I really am a joiner and a follower and easygoing in other ways - promise!  

Very interesting conversation on Canadian politics....I agree with Blue's observation about it. 

molly52

Pickle - you mentioned Bill Graham as a leader of the Federal Liberals?   Did you mean Paul Martin? 

I think the reason the Liberals have chosen two so-so leaders is due to Martin.  He wanted to be Prime Minister and cut off his seasoned competition at the knees.  

I don't think Iggy has run an election as leader.  Still to be tested.

lassie11

Pickle - clearly we don't agree on politics. You have bought the Tory line. I have not.

One thing I must say though is that even though Mr Harper has dismissed it, his government really was found to be in contempt by a committee of parliamentarians. That is unprecedented and really serious. It could not be a non partisan committe because it was made up of MPs who all come from parties. Because it was a minority government, the Tories were a minority on the committee. The Tories present there were not able to present a convincing argument to the contrary.  Mr. Harper called that the "tyranny of the majority". I call it democracy. It wasn't taken lightly. There really really was contempt.

I don't get it about the "unreported crimes" either. That was the justification the Tories presented for the new prisons they wanted to build. You will have to ask them about it.

molly52

I did vote compass too.  Really interesting.  I got some squed circle with the Conservatives at the bottom.

Pickle, Harper hasn't been even handed when dealing with Ontario.  That's why few here like him.  I think he has been good to the western provinces - so there will be a difference in view points.

208sandy

I say a big NO to all of them Harper, Iggy and Layton - they are all old men - what about the majority in this country - WOMEN!!!!!  Surely in Canada we have some well educated, lively, women who CARE about the people and are leaders!  Isn't it time to bring them forward and put them in as many ridings as we can and run them for leadership and then PM - I think it is disgraceful that in this day and age we are letting the old, bumbling fools try to run a country when none of the three have any idea how to do this - they've had enough chances IMHO.  It's easy to all sit here and wait for Justin to get just a little more experience and then run but I say let's try something else first.  As a Liberal I wish they'd ship Ignatieff back to Harvard or wherever they'll take him and let us get on with it, who's brilliant idea was it to bring him back home in the first place? (I was out of the country at the time so not sure how this came about).

Sandy

crazy4carrots

Sandy -- my Liberal candidate is a woman (woohoo!) but I agree -- there are not nearly enough women in leadership positions.  But, with all the nastiness (attack ads etc.) why would any woman want to subject herself to that?  Women generally have more sense!  But kudos to Elizabeth May leading the Green Party....

For those countries (I'm thinking mostly Scandianavian ones) that have a majority of women in their parliaments, I wonder if their elections have a far more civil tone?