• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Canadian General Election (OT) - #elxn42: October 19, 2015

Status
Not open for further replies.
Bd61poO.jpg
 
The problem is that many people don't like the Liberals because of their history of corruption. I mean if you think of many of the faces that would be in their new cabinet, many were in Chretien and Martin's governments.

So the NDP were strategically okay doing that, I think, as people wanted change but maybe not back to the Liberals, who still stink of corruption in many places. But Trudeau as a personality changed that around I think. Obviously the Liberals are still completely corrupt and tied with business interests, but he as a person seems fresh, so it helped them.

There'll be, what, five, maybe six people from the Chretien cabinet who may stand a shot at being in cabinet. But sure, that's a lot.

More importantly, as I pointed out on the last page, the NDP campaign is being run by a lobbyist for the Canadian Fuel Association. In what world are they not "tied with business interests"? And why would we want a party that's completely unmoored from the business community?

While one can never anticipate the emergence of a particularly charismatic individual, just based on numbers in the various parties' candidate lists, the first non-white PM will almost certainly be Asian.

Specifically south Asian. It's possible that, say, Robert Falcon Ouellette will unseat Pat Martin and turn out to be the next leader of the Liberal Party, but I think we'd see a Sikh before we see an aboriginal.
 

Boogie

Member
Via the Globe & Mail, we have a winner for the most incomprehensible endorsement of the campaign: The Tories deserve another mandate – Stephen Harper doesn’t




Shorter Globe: Things must stay the same AND be different!


Wow. I didn't think we'd get an "endorsement" more nonsensical than the Macleans one, but there we are.

Vote in the conservatives so that they will turf Harper.....even though they would take that as a validation and endorsement of Harper. Wtf
 
Well if thats the case, I'd rather have a corrupt progressive guy than a corrupt conservative one... at least one of them is trying to get my vote by giving me things and/or bring society up to where we should be in the 21st century

But that is why we have multiple parties. If one progressive party is corrupt, then vote for the other one. More parties = better representation and choice. This is why I really want MMP PR implemented, so we can have lots of parties and no strategic voting.
 

pr0cs

Member
.... I just caught my old conservative classmate posting this to Facebook..... as a positive for the Conservatives <_<

It's really amazing how much anti-Trudeau spam he's constantly sharing, you'd think Trudeau is the devil incarnate.
Pretty rich compared to the commentary on these forums.
 
But that is why we have multiple parties. If one progressive party is corrupt, then vote for the other one. More parties = better representation and choice. This is why I really want MMP PR implemented, so we can have lots of parties and no strategic voting.

Completely with you on this. Its criminal that we don't have an electoral system that properly represents the actually will of the voters. Screw this 39% of the vote = 100% of the power bullshit.
 
That's funny. I was trying to sell a software solution into Just Energy at one time. They are shady as hell.

Which makes them a perfect fit for Brad Lavigne!

a ton of people became fed up with the G&M due to their endorsement

I mean what were they thinking? Most of their readers hate the CPC

But their owners don't -- and much like the Postmedia endorsements, who do you think decided who the papers were going to endorse?
 

GG-Duo

Member
Go check out Jeet Heer's Twitter timeline right now (twitter.com/heerjeet). The dude is making some pointed comments about Canadian media in general, using the Globe endorsement as a jumping point.
 
The Facebook chat with the E-in-C is a bloodbath. People are ripping them apart, and I don't think they have a single defender. The only person I can find who likes it (apart, presumably, from Jason Kenney) is a Star reporter, who tweeted that people shouldn't make jokes about it, lest it hurt their future employment prospects.
 

Vamphuntr

Member
[.img]http://i.imgur.com/BsIdiW9.png[/img]

A decade of deficits and two recessions later, "We endorse the economic stewardship of the Conservatives."

But of course. The big corporations that own the paper are probably quite happy with a conservative government since they cut them some slack taxes and regulations wise. They create the perception that they are the only party that takes the economy seriously. Unfortunately most newspaper or TV stations are owned by big corporations so...
 
since their rich wallets stay safe

But of course. The big corporations that own the paper are probably quite happy with a conservative government since they cut them some slack taxes and regulations wise. They create the perception that they are the only party that takes the economy seriously. Unfortunately most newspaper or TV stations are owned by big corporations so...

Exactly:
globe_richfpu2g.png
 

Tabris

Member
I wish these political analysts or politicians that support lower tax rates for the higher earners would look at the dead money statistics.

If you look at it superficially, you tax less, people spend more and corporations hire more. The issue is people don't spend more on the higher brackets and corporations keep the profits.

Now keeping the corporate tax rate low makes sense not due to the economic uplift via job creation from existing companies as that doesn't exist, but attracting corporations from the US to create new jobs here. As long as our corporate tax is low enough to offset the difference between the american corporate tax and the cost of moving and doing business in another country - it's an advantage for us.

There is no reason to keep taxes low on high earners. They just create dead money.
 

Dazzler

Member
The Facebook chat with the E-in-C is a bloodbath. People are ripping them apart, and I don't think they have a single defender. The only person I can find who likes it (apart, presumably, from Jason Kenney) is a Star reporter, who tweeted that people shouldn't make jokes about it, lest it hurt their future employment prospects.

wow that was enjoyable reading

Love the comment asking him was it a widespread endorsement across the entire editorial staff:

"Absolutely not"
 

jstripes

Banned
I still can't understand the Globe and Mail's endorsement.

I mean, I understand it, but it's not based in any sort of reality.

Expecting the man who insisted press releases refer to the government as "The Harper Government" rather than "The Government of Canada" to step down is insanity.

They probably should endorse Trudeau. It would make getting whatever quality shit they're smoking a whole lot easier for them.
 
Ekos looks steady

65+ is a 5 point spread now
Liberals are 3rd in 18-34......lol what

The McCallion effiect!

So has anyone actually seen the email from Gagnier to Transcanada? Because...wow, I take back anything I even said about the optics being bad. It's a civics lesson. It's about as scandalous as a high school class that teaches you how government functions. Anyone saying it's evidence of "business interests" having a backdoor to the Liberal Party is, quite frankly, an idiot.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom