• 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.

Boogie

Member

Sidestepping the marijuana part of the article:

The Conservatives promised today that, if re-elected, they would spend almost $27 million a year to help the RCMP root out drug labs and change the focus of the national mental health commission that it created in 2007.

The campaign pledge would see an extra $4.5 million per year, on top of the $22 million currently budgeted, for an RCMP team designed to crack down on illegal drug labs and marijuana grow-ops.

The first paragraph is irrelevant. They are not promising $27 million in new funding to the RCMP clan lab team, because the second paragraph says that takes into account the 22 mill that already exists.

Instead, they are pledging $4.5 million a year.

The Conservatives have gutted Federal Policing in this country to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars in the past four years. And then they have the balls to boast about pledging a piddly-ass $4.5 million a year increase for Clan Lab investigations?!

The Clandestine Lab program has been hurting for years in terms of funding and support. But now, after nine years in power neglecting it, we're supposed to believe that they're going to properly support the program? Mmmkay.
 
Obama has been talking lately about the overpopulated prison population in the US due to long sentencs for small drug possession being crowding jail

now, Harper wants to devolve and toss more people in jail for possessing small quantities of weed

man, Colorado has been raking the money in ever since they made marijuana legal.

Harper is 30 years behind
 

S-Wind

Member
The Conservatives have gutted Federal Policing in this country to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars in the past four years. And then they have the balls to boast about pledging a piddly-ass $4.5 million a year increase for Clan Lab investigations?!

The Clandestine Lab program has been hurting for years in terms of funding and support. But now, after nine years in power neglecting it, we're supposed to believe that they're going to properly support the program? Mmmkay.

In you opinion, do you think the majority of federal LEOs will vote Conservative this time around like they usually do?
 
Yeah the military overall is pitiful.
Regarding the Navy specifically.

Remember the 2006 Lebanon evacuation? Didn't Canadians have to hitch a ride on the ships of other countries and Canada have to scrounge up ship leases?
 
Just checked out They Called Me Number One: Secrets and Survival at an Indian Residential School from the library. First Nation issues is one thing about this federal election that I'm completely ignorant about. I wish they would've taught these things at school; I learnt nothing other than "Natives don't pay taxes and get free university".

What sparked my interest was reading Nelson Mandela's biography Long Walk To Freedom, where the languages surrounding Bantustans (land reserved for Blacks) eerily reminded me of Indian Reserves. A quick Google search, and sure enough, the Canadian Indian Reservation system directly influenced Apartheid in South Africa. You'd never hear about that in school or in Canadian media. I felt lied to >_<
 

Sch1sm

Member
Ontario just wants to see Canada burn :(

Hey, hey. It's not our fault we have questionable neighbours who vote Conservative.
I blame rural Ontario and southwestern Ontario.


I'll actually never understand why we vote in a Conservative PM but a Liberal Premier. It makes no sense to me. Zero. None. It's as backward as the American GOP being mainly Repub, with a Democrat President.
 
Toronto* just wants to see Canada burn. I don't understand why the hell the Conservatives are so popular in GTA ridings.

Conservatives got 73 seats from Ontario, about 25-35 of which were from the GTA, depending on your definition of GTA. All of Southern Ontario's responsible for this mess, you can't really single out Toronto.
 
Don't forget the Conservatives have dropped six and a half points (according to Nanos). If their vote falls from last time, suddenly a whole lot of ridings -- especially in the GTA -- are in play. Fingers crossed that downward trend continues.

Hey, hey. It's not our fault we have questionable neighbours who vote Conservative.
I blame rural Ontario and southwestern Ontario.


I'll actually never understand why we vote in a Conservative PM but a Liberal Premier. It makes no sense to me. Zero. None. It's as backward as the American GOP being mainly Repub, with a Democrat President.

Balance, historically. It's practically been that way since Confederation: when one party is in power federally, a different one's in power provincially. There's been the odd period of overlap, but it's pretty rare. I once read that Ontario liked thinking of itself as the counterweight to the federal government, and that seems like a pretty accurate assessment.
 

Silexx

Member
Toronto* just wants to see Canada burn. I don't understand why the hell the Conservatives are so popular in GTA ridings.

For whatever reason, Ontario has historically voted for the opposite party in federal election to whichever party is in power provincially. Many theories have been put forth to explain this, but just been one of those things that seem happen.

So tell me now, fellow Ontarians, in hindsight would you rather have a Tom Hudak Ontario government or a Stephen Harper Canadian government?
 

Stet

Banned
Toronto* just wants to see Canada burn. I don't understand why the hell the Conservatives are so popular in GTA ridings.

HmnbdA6.jpg




it's lonely down here :(
 

ryan-ts

Member
For whatever reason, Ontario has historically voted for the opposite party in federal election to whichever party is in power provincially. Many theories have been put forth to explain this, but just been one of those things that seem happen.

So tell me now, fellow Ontarians, in hindsight would you rather have a Tom Hudak Ontario government or a Stephen Harper Canadian government?

Nightmare. I'd pick Harper, if only for the fact that Hudak tried to hurt our teachers.

edit: Also, Hudak's job creation plan was insane.
 

Silexx

Member
I got to admit though, it's not as damn cloying as the Conservative interview commercials. Kind of amusing.

But it's basically doing the same thing that the CPC did with the 'The budget will balance itself' quote. It's taken completely out of context and it's completely dishonest. I don't care for these kinds of political ads.
 

MMarston

Was getting caught part of your plan?
But it's basically doing the same thing that the CPC did with the 'The budget will balance itself' quote. It's taken completely out of context and it's completely dishonest. I don't care for these kinds of political ads.

I was referring more to the stylistic execution. But yes, it's still a manipulated cheap shot nonetheless.


Have the Liberals done anything as cheap yet with their ads? They've still been pretty friendly/somewhat passive-aggressive so far.
 

jstripes

Banned
Toronto* just wants to see Canada burn. I don't understand why the hell the Conservatives are so popular in GTA ridings.

Most of Toronto didn't vote Conservative.

You're thinking of the self-satisfied yuppies in the exurbs, and the easily influenced working class within and beyond that.
 

Silexx

Member
I was referring more to the stylistic execution. But yes, it's still a manipulated cheap shot nonetheless.


Have the Liberals done anything as cheap yet with their ads? They've still been pretty friendly/somewhat passive-aggressive so far.

Liberals have vowed not to resort to attack ads and seem to be sticking to that so far. However, they seem keen on continuously hammering their buzzword 'the middle class' but are deliberately not defining what they consider the middle class to be. This is because they know people who consider themselves 'middle class' don't always actually fall into that category economically speaking. Thus this allows them to pander to a wider audience while sticking to one theme.

Certainly not the most egregious tactic one could use, but I think it's worth calling out.
 
So the Conservatives just released their new ad against Trudeau: https://twitter.com/NDP_HQ/status/631223951209803776

... Wait a sec... sorry that's actually from the NDP. Man, could have fooled me.

One of these two parties needs to die or they will split the vote and Harper wins.

Trudeau is a flake, so he makes for an easy target.

The difference between the NDP attack ads and the Conservative ones is that the NDP bits aren't out of context and based on facts.
 
Most of Toronto didn't vote Conservative.

You're thinking of the self-satisfied yuppies in the exurbs, and the easily influenced working class within and beyond that.

We're also going by the ridiculous unrepresentative FPTP system. It would be like talking down Saskatchewanians*, for not voting NDP, even though 33% of them did.

*Gosh what a mouthful of a demonym. Is that the actual name?
 

SRG01

Member
We're also going by the ridiculous unrepresentative FPTP system. It would be like talking down Saskatchewanians*, for not voting NDP, even though 33% of them did.

*Gosh what a mouthful of a demonym. Is that the actual name?

Saskitonians, I think.

But yeah, Saskatchewan has a lot of core NDP voters since they had a provincial NDP government for many years. However, that may also make it less likely for the others to consider voting NDP since they did vote them out in favor of Brad Wall...
 

lacinius

Member
The difference between the NDP attack ads and the Conservative ones is that the NDP bits aren't out of context and based on facts.

That ad takes exactly what Trudeau said in the debate out of context... clipping four words from a larger oration and holding them up as some sort of "smoking gun" is a classic example of taking something out of context.
 

MMarston

Was getting caught part of your plan?
Vancouver radio reporter tossed from Conservative event over marijuana queries
CKNW 980 reporter Shelby Thom was booted from a Conservative Party rally in Richmond on Tuesday evening because she was asking Tory supporters about marijuana, she claimed on Twitter.

The Prime Minister and most local CPC candidates were in attendance at the event, which was held at Pacific Gateway Hotel. It was Stephen Harper&#8217;s first appearance in B.C. during the 2015 election campaign.

via her Twitter
Just got kicked out of @pmharper campaign rally for talking to supporters post rally about marijuana. #elxn42

. @pmharper speech was over. Began interviewing supporters about marijuana. Told [by] staffer event was over , I continued , approached by...

another staffer to follow him. I walked towards lobby, he directed me to door, I walked outside and he closed door behind me .
 

jstripes

Banned
We're also going by the ridiculous unrepresentative FPTP system. It would be like talking down Saskatchewanians*, for not voting NDP, even though 33% of them did.

*Gosh what a mouthful of a demonym. Is that the actual name?

My family goes by Sasquatchistan, so that would be Sasquatchistanians.
 

Mission

Member
But it's basically doing the same thing that the CPC did with the 'The budget will balance itself' quote. It's taken completely out of context and it's completely dishonest. I don't care for these kinds of political ads.

While I agree it's the same sort of Ad and I don't like it, the quote is 100% in context. He actually said that voting in favour of C-51 may have been naive.
 

Walpurgis

Banned
Why are they doing this? I thought the Conservatives were 100% against marijuana so marijuana questions should be easy.
While I agree it's the same sort of Ad and I don't like it, the quote is 100% in context. He actually said that voting in favour of C-51 may have been naive.
I agree. I don't see why he didn't include the entire quote. It's not like it would make him sound much better.
 

lacinius

Member
While I agree it's the same sort of Ad and I don't like it, the quote is 100% in context. He actually said that voting in favour of C-51 may have been naive.

He did not say that at all... here is what he said:

Paul Wells: Mr. Trudeau, you’ve had to make difficult decisions on issues of war abroad and security at home: opposing the government’s decision to take part in the international action against ISIL in Iraq and Syria; supporting the anti-terrorism legislation, Bill C-51, in Parliament, even though you say you would change it later. Why do these issues raise the most persistent questions about your judgment?

Justin Trudeau: The fact is the Government of Canada and the Prime Minister is expected to do – to do two things by Canadians. The first one is to keep us safe; the second is to uphold and defend our rights and freedoms. Now, Mr. Harper doesn’t think we need to do anything more to protect our rights and freedoms, and Mr. Mulcair, with his position on counterterrorism laws, doesn’t think we need to do anything more on security. The Liberal Party has been very clear. We need to do both of them together. We supported that legislation because there were specific elements in there that immediately and concretely protect Canadian security, and we’re committed to repealing the problematic elements that have been highlighted and actually bringing in the proper oversight that our Five Eyes allies all have by elected legislators over our national security agencies to make sure that we are protecting; also, bringing in sunset and review clause, and making sure that we are narrowing and specifying the definitions.

We managed at committee to encourage the government to bring in significant amendments that removed a number of very problematic elements in it, and we will continue to be productive and constructive in not pretending that there’s a political choice to be made. Perhaps it was naive. Perhaps there was something that I put forward and said, you know what, we can take a responsible position at a time of politics of attack and division, because Mr. Harper wants to be – everyone to be scared that there are terrorists hiding behind every leaf and rock; Mr. Mulcair wants us to be scared for our Charter and our basic rights and freedoms. The fact is any Canadian government needs to do them both together. And that is what the Liberal Party has demonstrated in the years following 9/11. That’s what we continue to demonstrate in terms of getting that balance right.
 

Maximus.

Member
Obama has been talking lately about the overpopulated prison population in the US due to long sentencs for small drug possession being crowding jail

now, Harper wants to devolve and toss more people in jail for possessing small quantities of weed

man, Colorado has been raking the money in ever since they made marijuana legal.

Harper is 30 years behind

Well to be fair, Harper is comparable to Republicans, whereas Obama would be more like NDP/Liberal.

I think if the word was clearly out that NDP/Liberals want to legalize marijuana, there would be a huge turn out of voters just to get that settled.
 
Saskitonians, I think.

But yeah, Saskatchewan has a lot of core NDP voters since they had a provincial NDP government for many years. However, that may also make it less likely for the others to consider voting NDP since they did vote them out in favor of Brad Wall...

Saskatchewanians (as horrible as it is) is right if you're referring to the province. Saskatonians is for citizens of Saskatoon.
 

Tabris

Member
You know what I wish was a platform for any of the parties - Cleaning up our telecom industry? I want some decent offerings.
 

lupinko

Member
Well to be fair, Harper is comparable to Republicans, whereas Obama would be more like NDP/Liberal.

I think if the word was clearly out that NDP/Liberals want to legalize marijuana, there would be a huge turn out of voters just to get that settled.

The Liberals already said they would legalize marijuana, while the NDP will only decriminalize it. A quick google search can bring up many articles and press statements on the issue.
 

Boogie

Member
In you opinion, do you think the majority of federal LEOs will vote Conservative this time around like they usually do?

Well, I can only speak for the mood in my own office, I don't know if it is exactly mirrored across the country, but the Conservatives are well and truly "persona non grata" in my workplace.

There is a lot of dissatisfaction in the morale of the Force.
 
Not sure if this was mentioned, but a CKNW reporter here in Vancouver got kicked out of a Harper event for asking about pot.

Can't find an article, but it was reported by Global BC.
 

Azih

Member
I'm not happy about the NDP attack on Trudeau either. The 'naive' comment wasn't a great moment in the debate for JT though. It was an off note in context (We were being responsible! it was the right thing to do!, maybe naive, it was way better than fear fear Cons and fear fear NDP!) and a 'budget will balance itself' level soundbite out of it.

I prefer the quote out of context as it shows maybe a willingness to accept a mistake and learn from it. IN CONTEXT it's worse as it seems to show that the Liberals are alright with C51 based on the amendments they managed to wrangle out of it. C51 is toxic in its final form and should not have been supported by anybody.
 
Yeah the military overall is pitiful.
Regarding the Navy specifically.

Remember the 2006 Lebanon evacuation? Didn't Canadians have to hitch a ride on the ships of other countries and Canada have to scrounge up ship leases?

Forget 2006: just a few months ago, we had to rely on Russia to evacuate Canadian citizens out of Yemen. While I'm all in favour of engaging with "enemies" rather than taking the Harper approach of loudly badmouthing them at every opportunity, that's pretty embarrassing.

So the Conservatives just released their new ad against Trudeau: https://twitter.com/NDP_HQ/status/631223951209803776

... Wait a sec... sorry that's actually from the NDP. Man, could have fooled me.

Hey now, Mulcair stuck to his pledge to avoid negative ads for a whole month. By his standards, that's pretty steadfast.

Liberals have vowed not to resort to attack ads and seem to be sticking to that so far. However, they seem keen on continuously hammering their buzzword 'the middle class' but are deliberately not defining what they consider the middle class to be. This is because they know people who consider themselves 'middle class' don't always actually fall into that category economically speaking. Thus this allows them to pander to a wider audience while sticking to one theme.

Certainly not the most egregious tactic one could use, but I think it's worth calling out.

Just because they haven't defined "middle class" in their ads doesn't mean they haven't done so in their proposed policies:


Some people may disagree with what constitutes middle class in Canada, but the Liberals have defined what they mean when they say it.
 
That ad takes exactly what Trudeau said in the debate out of context... clipping four words from a larger oration and holding them up as some sort of "smoking gun" is a classic example of taking something out of context.

Trudeau blankly admitted that their decision to vote for C51 was naive.

What more context is needed?
 

MMarston

Was getting caught part of your plan?
Trudeau blankly admitted that their decision to vote for C51 was naive.

What more context is needed?

Actually, I'm pretty sure he was talking about the expected reaction to their decision, which is a rather different context.


Also, Duffy trial starts again today with Nigel Wright now doing testimony.


What I personally think will be revealed
3a0.gif
 

SRG01

Member
Actually, I'm pretty sure he was talking about the expected reaction to their decision, which is a rather different context.


Also, Duffy trial starts again today with Nigel Wright now doing testimony.


What I personally think will be revealed
3a0.gif

I think the point of contention, especially for the cross-examination, is how the prosecutors gave Nigel Wright immunity while Duffy is on trial. Or, in other words, how can a bribe be one-sided?
 
Saskitonians, I think.

But yeah, Saskatchewan has a lot of core NDP voters since they had a provincial NDP government for many years. However, that may also make it less likely for the others to consider voting NDP since they did vote them out in favor of Brad Wall...

Saskatchewan has a huge number of NDP supporters who are ready to come out of the woodwork at any time, it's just hard to predict. It's basically a battle between Conservatives and NDP in the province depending on the direction the wind is blowing. It looks like my riding is predicted to be going for the NDP.

The NDP's first leader was Tommy Douglas, a Saskatchewan Premier, and he is the reason why we have universal healthcare in Canada today, so there's a lot of history of the party in Sask.
 

Cynar

Member
For whatever reason, Ontario has historically voted for the opposite party in federal election to whichever party is in power provincially. Many theories have been put forth to explain this, but just been one of those things that seem happen.

So tell me now, fellow Ontarians, in hindsight would you rather have a Tom Hudak Ontario government or a Stephen Harper Canadian government?
I think I just vomited in my mouth at the idea of either possibility.

We did have liberal provincial and federal before so let's hope Wynne backs down on privatizing hydro or hope the NDP can pull it together provincially.
 

gabbo

Member
For whatever reason, Ontario has historically voted for the opposite party in federal election to whichever party is in power provincially. Many theories have been put forth to explain this, but just been one of those things that seem happen.

So tell me now, fellow Ontarians, in hindsight would you rather have a Tom Hudak Ontario government or a Stephen Harper Canadian government?

That's like asking would I like to be burned alive or slowly drowned. Neither option is a good outcome. I just hope the rest of the province wakes up to reality and vote red/orange this time around. I know my home town won't, but I can dream.
 

ItIsOkBro

Member
For whatever reason, Ontario has historically voted for the opposite party in federal election to whichever party is in power provincially. Many theories have been put forth to explain this, but just been one of those things that seem happen.

So tell me now, fellow Ontarians, in hindsight would you rather have a Tom Hudak Ontario government or a Stephen Harper Canadian government?

There's a map of the flip floppers

http://politics.theglobeandmail.com/infographics/
 

Boogie

Member
So tell me now, fellow Ontarians, in hindsight would you rather have a Tom Hudak Ontario government or a Stephen Harper Canadian government?

Federally, I voted Conservative in 03, 06, and 08. In 2011 I voted Liberal. I don't know who I will vote for this time, but it will not be Conservative.

In contrast, provincially, I have never voted conservative. Always Liberal.

So I guess that puts me in the "better Harper than Hudak" camp.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom