ClumsyMonkey.net

we have an NDP govt and our schools still don't get money.

SpiritualJunkie wrote:I'd still rather see proportional gov't. Then maybe, it wouldn't be a sure thing that the Liberals or the Conservatives always get a seat. The NDP and the fringe parties would get more representation.

Would you rather have fringe parties get represented, or you getting represented? Because with Proportional govt you're not getting represented. Sure your vote is, but you personally are not since you won't have a representative in your riding that knows the plights and tribulations that happen within your region.

People don't realize that you're not voting for the party. You're voting in your representative. People think nationally far too much. Let's face it, we all know most of the promises made nationally by any party are more than likely lies, so why do we care what they say? If anything we should be listening locally and voting in the candidate that can do the best work in your riding, and that thats where the real change can be found.

Would you rather have fringe parties get represented, or you getting represented? Because with Proportional govt you're not getting represented. Sure your vote is, but you personally are not since you won't have a representative in your riding that knows the plights and tribulations that happen within your region.

I wouldn't mind having the fringe parties represented. I'm just one person and with the 33 million other opinions and interests in this country, there couldn't possibly be a single party who's going to fulfill everyone's every wish. It's impossible. So I'm for the party who shares the values and basic ideas as I have.

People don't realize that you're not voting for the party. You're voting in your representative. People think nationally far too much.

We are voting for a party. The representives in your riding represent a party. Voting for them means voting for the party their in. It's that simple. Well, not quite. The tricky part is when you like a rep but you hate the party they represent. But when it all comes down to it, people should think nationally. After all, this IS a federal election.

im voting for randy white(pc) here in abbotsford bc.he won the last election by a landslide(70%) and has done a great job as an mp

i generally look for whats good for my community and try not to worry too much about the natiional result.

SpiritualJunkie wrote:I wouldn't mind having the fringe parties represented. I'm just one person and with the 33 million other opinions and interests in this country, there couldn't possibly be a single party who's going to fulfill everyone's every wish. It's impossible. So I'm for the party who shares the values and basic ideas as I have.

What difference will it make if one fringe party member exists among 300 members from major parties? The guy will be ignored and generally no one will care much of his ideas, since odds are they'll be of the extreme nature in a political sense. So basically he's just there to make you feel good about yourself. You'll know you helped make that guy live extremely comfortably for the next 3-5 years. He almost seems like a pity member if you ask me. "See guys, we changed the voting system so that way everyone's a winner, and that's how you (points up to the farest corner) got to be a member. Now sit down and shut up for the next 5 years, and you'll get a nice paycheque."

SpiritualJunkie wrote:

J-Neli wrote: People don't realize that you're not voting for the party. You're voting in your representative. People think nationally far too much.

We are voting for a party. The representives in your riding represent a party. Voting for them means voting for the party their in. It's that simple. Well, not quite. The tricky part is when you like a rep but you hate the party they represent. But when it all comes down to it, people should think nationally. After all, this IS a federal election.

Members only join parties because thats the easiest way to gain office. They get loads of money, and advertising just because they happen to represent a party. It doesn't mean they have the exact same ideals as the party. They may be similar, I don't deny that, but I doubt thats the case with every issue. The fact is that when it comes to voting in the house of commons, each member does not have to side with their party if they believe that it is not in the best interest of their riding. So you should be voting for the person - no matter who they may "represent" - who will represent your riding the best.

Why should we think nationally? We complain and complain that politicians can't keep promises, and where are 99% of the promises made? On the national level. So why should we be listening to them? Individually, we don't have the power to elect a party into power. We only have the power to vote in our representative. So shouldn't we be paying the most attention to him/her?

I don't know how "federal election" automatically denotes that we are voting on a national level. Last time I checked we don't vote in the PM like the US votes in the President. It's called a federal election because it is an election which takes place at the highest level of government, and last time I checked, governments don't consist of parties voting on issues, but rather, people voting on issues.

J-Neli wrote:The problem with proportional representation is that a party would only need to win in the bigger cities. If you were to get 50% of the vote in Vancouver, Montreal, Toronto (and the golden horseshoe from Oshawa to Niagara) and Ottawa you'd basically win the election. With the current system, if you win those cities, you might only be 1/3rd of the way to victory.

Under PR, you wouldn't have regional reps either, since the parties would appoint the members of their elected party based on the proportions, so if you have problems in your region, you might not have a rep to talk to. Even if each member of parliament was appointed to a different riding, you might have a bigshot conservative being the representative of nowhere's land Nunavut, where the values are completely different.

I personally don't think PR is the answer.

if you win those cities you ussually win the election, in most cases all you need is Ontario and Qubec, and a mismatch of smaller provinces

Thus far, the (pre-election) polls are showing Liberals at 39%, Conservatives at 26% and NDP at 15%.

Anyone else find the prospect of Stephen Harper with power just a tad bit ... scary? How do people want him in?

they're called conservitives...no one quite understands them. In most cases they fall into 3 categories as far as i can see.

1) Rich
Conservitives are very good for your intrests if your rich.

2) Right-wing Nazi's
There are some hardcore hate mongering, racist psycho's out there. Luckily not many conservitives are these guys.

3) Raised
Conservitive's raise conservitives. They don't know quite what it means they just know they hate liberals, and NDP are for hippies

i suppose there's some drawn to the party by tax cuts, not realizing that the money comes from somewhere or another

I'm a conservative. Why? Because they stand for a lot of what I stand for.

I'm just curious what you stand for... Cause I understand the Conservative agenda, but I'm just wondering why their agenda follows your beliefs. This isn't an attack, so don't get all defensive. I'm just curious.

Alright as far as beliefs go the Conservative Party are againts both Abortion, and Bill C-250. They would also rather have the issue of "The definition of Marriage" decided in Parliment rather than the Courts.

I'm all for that. Especially their beliefs on Abortion and Bill C-250.

what about tax cuts that drain away at social services. Wasted referendum money, racist poilicy, privatized health care, higher tution fees. Not to mention becoming America's servant.

Not to mention Harper's entire campaigning so far has been riding on bad mouthing Martin, instead of talking about his plans, if he has any.

It's easy to grab the oppertunity and and start trashing an already weak leader.

*sigh*

I'm not here to debate anything. I was just stating why i'm voting for the Conservative party because I was asked to.

lol sorry my bad

Joe Cool wrote:Alright as far as beliefs go the Conservative Party are againts both Abortion, and Bill C-250. They would also rather have the issue of "The definition of Marriage" decided in Parliment rather than the Courts.

I'm all for that. Especially their beliefs on Abortion and Bill C-250.

Alright, but I must say that I think that banning both of these issues, abortion, and gay marriage goes against the charter of rights and freedoms, and for a country as liberal as Canada it would be a step backwards to go against what we fought so hard to achieve. I don't think either of these could be implemented without going to the courts where the Charter of rights and freedoms will deem that this is illegal.

Ok, ok I know I said I didnt come here to argue but I want to make a few points on abortion.

Out of the few things that i've mentioned i definetely feel the most strongly about Abortion. In all honesty the topic makes me sick. The thing is an unborn child has absolutely no rights. The "choice" of a mother is held in higher regard than the life of a child. When that baby is inside the mother its almost viewed as an object to many. Its living, its thinking and yet an abortion can destroy that life if the mother chooses to allow it. In some places you can abort a child a few days before its due to be born and its perfectly "ok." However if you were to kill that child a few days after it was out of the womb it would be seen as one of the most ugly crimes imaginable. Also has anyone read up on how a child is actually killed? Its insanely cruel. None of them are humane in any form of the world. I'd list a few but in all honestly it makes me very sick to even think about even the most commonly used methods.

I hate abortion. I believe its wrong and the choice a mother has should not overide the life of her baby.

a few things:

why do people vote conservative?

the canadian conservative party is for smaller government, lower taxes, more personal responsibility and ultimately more power to the individuals.

those are the good things that a guy like me could embrace.

unfortunately they also endorse a larger military, restrictions on gay rights and abortions and tighter drug laws.

baaaaad.

i don't want to touch the abortion issue except to say that i am for a womans choice.

Joe Cool wrote:I believe its wrong and the choice a mother has should not overide the life of her baby.

One of my friends and I had this talk a few days ago. What she's majoring in basically prepares you to become a politician. We were talking about how politicians always say they are against abortion but are pro choice as well.

She had an interesting point- abortions are always going to happen, whether they are done legally in a clinic or illegally in an alley. She'd rather give people access to a clinic where at least there would be less risk of something going wrong than on a dirty street with few safety measures for anyone.

mosaik wrote:a few things:

why do people vote conservative?

the canadian conservative party is for smaller government, lower taxes, more personal responsibility and ultimately more power to the individuals.

those are the good things that a guy like me could embrace.

unfortunately they also endorse a larger military, restrictions on gay rights and abortions and tighter drug laws.

baaaaad.

i don't want to touch the abortion issue except to say that i am for a womans choice.

I agree with everything. If the conservatives didn't delve into moral dilemmas within their platform I think I'd vote for them. Thankfully, Trudeau made the Charter so we're basically safe from any of these ideas being implemented.

I don't think a larger military is the answer. We're Canada, our biggest threat comes from a country which wants to build a big giant Star Wars-esque missile shield over us to protect us from the world, but not eachother. If the Americans ever wanted to invade, never could any amount of funding we put into the military be able to compete with their multi-trillion dollar military budget, so why bother? Why not invest that in education, and instead of teaching kids how to shoot a gun, teach kids how to read.