It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

POLITICS: Canada Votes 2006

page: 5
1
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 24 2006 @ 12:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Odium
I'd worry more about it being almost "hung".

Nothing can change, the whole Nation will be static and it results in more harm than having one Group running the place.


Actually that is incorrect. Majorities have historically been the static part of Canadian policitical culture only doing what benefits the party in power and not Canadians as a whole. If it weren't for Minority gov't we wouldn't have Public Health Care. Nuff Said.

en.wikipedia.org...

Sam Bulte lost her riding WOOHOO. She is the RIAA/MPAA shill who got bribed to introduce American style copyright law into the house. The NDP beat her, in yo face!

www.boingboing.net...

[edit on 24-1-2006 by sardion2000]

[edit on 24-1-2006 by sardion2000]




posted on Jan, 25 2006 @ 10:57 AM
link   
My wish was answered. Yeah minority government. Keeps the bad guys in line. Forces them to cooperate, not shove their agenda down our throats.




posted on Jan, 25 2006 @ 11:40 AM
link   
I rather would of seen some other leader besides an Alberta oilman, but since the Gomery scandal I can't fault the people for how they voted. Good thing it's a minority government or Canada might be playing from the Bush handbook of cronism.



posted on Jan, 25 2006 @ 02:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by Regenmacher
I rather would of seen some other leader besides an Alberta oilman, but since the Gomery scandal I can't fault the people for how they voted. Good thing it's a minority government or Canada might be playing from the Bush handbook of cronism.


Historically no western leader has lasted for more then 7-8 months on average. Kim Campbell was the shortest at 4 months I think. I think Harper will last longer then that as no one is eager for another election just quite yet.

[edit on 25-1-2006 by sardion2000]



posted on Jan, 25 2006 @ 02:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by sardion2000
Historically no western leader has lasted for more then 7-8 months on average. Kim Campbell was the shortest at 4 months I think. I think Harper will last longer then that as no one is eager for another election just quite yet.

[edit on 25-1-2006 by sardion2000]


Kim wasn't elected PM though. She inherited the Mulroney mess. The PC's were on their way out and Kim was the sacrificial goat.



posted on Jan, 25 2006 @ 02:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by intrepid

Originally posted by sardion2000
Historically no western leader has lasted for more then 7-8 months on average. Kim Campbell was the shortest at 4 months I think. I think Harper will last longer then that as no one is eager for another election just quite yet.

[edit on 25-1-2006 by sardion2000]


Kim wasn't elected PM though. She inherited the Mulroney mess. The PC's were on their way out and Kim was the sacrificial goat.


She was still a "Western PM" though :shrug:



posted on Jan, 25 2006 @ 02:49 PM
link   
I think there is a chance that this minority government may last longer than we think.

The MPs understand that Canadians are kind of getting tired of going to the polls. The Liberal Party won’t want to force an election any time soon. They have to clean up their party and select a new leader.



posted on Jan, 25 2006 @ 03:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Umbrax
I think there is a chance that this minority government may last longer than we think.

The MPs understand that Canadians are kind of getting tired of going to the polls. The Liberal Party won’t want to force an election any time soon. They have to clean up their party and select a new leader.


Agreed, any election call in the next 2 years won't be a popular move. The point is moot though as long as Harper throws money at Quebec and keeps the Bloc happy. Mind you that will quickly bounce him out in 4 years.



posted on Jan, 25 2006 @ 04:15 PM
link   
I for one am sick and tired of throwing money at Quebec just beacuse they scream bloody murder when they do not get their way.

It's about time Quebec stood up or SHUT UP once and for all and joined the rest of Canada IMHO.

Just remeber Quebec if you do leave Canada you will leave our CANADIAN troops at the Border with a cheque in hand for your share of the National Debt.



posted on Jan, 25 2006 @ 04:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by like2learn
I for one am sick and tired of throwing money at Quebec just beacuse they scream bloody murder when they do not get their way.

It's about time Quebec stood up or SHUT UP once and for all and joined the rest of Canada IMHO.

Just remeber Quebec if you do leave Canada you will leave our CANADIAN troops at the Border with a cheque in hand for your share of the National Debt.


That's not quite the issue. The Lib's and NDP together can't topple the gov't, those 51 Bloc seats could though. If Harper wants to stay inb power I don't see how he can without the Bloc and Duiceppe has made it clear that his only interest is what he can get for Quebec.

Edit to add: Quebec would be foolish to leave now, they've never had the rest of the country over a barrel like they do now. I hope they don't get too spoiled.

[edit on 25-1-2006 by intrepid]



posted on Jan, 27 2006 @ 10:18 PM
link   
An amusing analysis I got in the mail today, worth the read...



The new prime minister has the support of less than 36 percent of the population. This is not a mandate to do anything but tread political water. Harper will get only two of his major campaign planks easily passed in the house. One, the GST cut, will go through because it is a budget item and to defeat it would mean another election -- it just won't happen. ...Ironically, the other major piece of the Conservative campaign that will easily pass is one that Harper actually has no real stomach for, his so-called Federal Accountability Act. This is richly ironic for a politician who spent most of his career defending corporate money in elections. Now he has to follow through on the centrepiece of his campaign.

As for his other right-wing promises, they are essentially still-born in a parliament where he is surrounded by parties either on the left, or pretending to be. His pledge to get out of Kyoto? Dead in the water. To reverse the Liberals' start on creating a national child care infrastructure? Ditto. Revisiting missile defence? Forget it. Reopening the historic Kelowna accord with First Nations? Not unless they have a keen desire for being pilloried by every First Nations' organization and every premier in the country. All of these promises are history because he has no mandate, nor the numbers, to pursue them. Will he mess with the long term agreement on Medicare? Maybe. But it would be a risky venture.

And what does this mean for the people to whom he made the promises? The extremists in the party in BC -- where racism towards First Nations, visceral hostility to abortion, opposition to the whole notion of child care, and a pro-war mentality are alive and well -- will be extremely unhappy when they realize their favourite policies are going nowhere. These are not people who appreciate the nuances of politics, the need for compromise or the fact that Harper received the support of barely more than a third of Canadians. For them it is simple: he's the prime minister, he should do what we want. Now that the election is over the howling of the populist right could begin in earnest, and not just from supporters. Harper managed to keep his old Reform MPs quiet for 55 days. To keep them, especially the right-wing Christians and anti-abortionists, quiet until the next election would take divine intervention.




posted on Jan, 28 2006 @ 05:00 AM
link   
This is something I thought I would never see.


Gore accuses big oil of bankrolling Tories

Canadians, Gore said, should vigilantly keep watch over prime minister-designate Stephen Harper because he has a pro-oil agenda and wants to pull out of the Kyoto accord -- an international agreement to combat climate change.

John Bennett, senior policy adviser for Sierra Club of Canada says,""I see them moving a lot closer to the Bush government. Talk a lot, but do nothing."

Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


Ironic, since it's usually Canada berating the US for their anti-eco, pro-oil policies.



posted on Jan, 28 2006 @ 02:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Regenmacher
This is something I thought I would never see.


Gore accuses big oil of bankrolling Tories


Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


Ironic, since it's usually Canada berating the US for their anti-eco, pro-oil policies.


i believe it's 'lefties' vs.' righties' more than 'canada' vs. 'the usa', no?

this harper guy has to be closely watched for sure. the albertans have become more 'seperatist' than the quebecers. these people are all idiots if they don't realise there is strength in numbers. canada's strength is it's shear size. if(when?) it is reduced to petty squabbling feudal territories, it will be easy pickings for victimisation by outside powers.

i thought it was funny and sad how 'the hudson's bay company' (a canadian symbol) FINALLY gave in to a hostile takeover by americans, despite strong effort to keep it canadian, JUST after harper was declared as the next pm.
kind of reminds me of bush torpedoing the u.s.s. america.



posted on Jan, 28 2006 @ 04:50 PM
link   


this harper guy has to be closely watched for sure


And he will by the "Liberals",NDP and Bloc. (Mostly the Bloc and Liberals though)

For reference here are the seat count.

Cons - 124
Libs - 103
Bloc - 51
NDP - 29
Indie - 1

As for Albertans being more separtist then Quebec that's a good one
, I've met many an Albertan and they bitch and whine but when it comes to broad public support for such a referendum there is little support out there for such a suicidal move. As you said we are strong together and weak when we're seperated even they have to realize this.

The only thing that would get their panties in a bunch to such a degree that they would want to leave the Confederation would be another nationalised energy program which I highly doubt will ever happen again as Truduex Liberals are as extinct as the dinosaurs unfortunately and the NDP will never be in a position to dictate such a program, they would need a majority to do such a thing.

[edit on 28-1-2006 by sardion2000]



posted on Jan, 29 2006 @ 10:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by billybob

i believe it's 'lefties' vs.' righties' more than 'canada' vs. 'the usa', no?



Oui, just found it strange how the tables have switched and dissappointed that oil barons are taking over society. It doesn't bode well for a balanced power structure in the US, if the surrounding countries all start shifting towards a Bush agenda.

It's another step closer towards empire or war.



posted on Jan, 29 2006 @ 09:49 PM
link   
Hate to break it to you but Martin was just as friendly to the Oil Barons as Harper will be if he should ever get a Majority(very very unlikely IMO)

[edit on 29-1-2006 by sardion2000]



posted on Jan, 30 2006 @ 12:32 AM
link   
Oil baron is but a facet on the gem of dillusion.

Martin was pro-Bush and pro- missile shield?
Haven't read that one, or seen Gore verbally attack him.

You have a info that supports Martin was a PNAC crony?



posted on Jan, 30 2006 @ 01:03 AM
link   
Actually he was Pro missile shield yet cynically decided against it(Political suicide and such). He also said he the only reason Canada did not send troops to Iraq is because we weren't equipped for such a task.(Again it would be political suicide to do such a thing) of course it wasn't his decision it was Cretiens. Apparently he did try to convince Cretien to go into Iraq with the US according to Sheila Copps.

cnews.canoe.ca...



Prime Minister Paul Martin says he believes Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction and they've fallen into terrorists' hands. Martin said the threat of terrorism is even greater now than it was following the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, because terrorists have acquired nuclear, chemical and biological weapons from the toppled Iraqi leader.

"The fact is that there is now, we know well, a proliferation of nuclear weapons, and that many weapons that Saddam Hussein had, we don't know where they are," Martin told a crowd of about 700 university researchers and business leaders in Montreal. "That means terrorists have access to all of that."



Sound familiar?


The True Liberal party of Canada is the NDP who are Social Democrats not Socialist as many of my Conservative and Liberal friends would have you believe.

Ask yourself this, why is it such an easy leap for conservatives to defect to the Liberals hmm? Balinda Stronach was the last. One of the supposed front runners for the Liberal leadership now that Martin has retired, Igenteiff(another front runner) is a Neocon Imperialist hawk, as is Stronach. Chretien Liberals and Trueduex Liberals are extinct which is why I no longer vote for that currupt party. Not saying the Conservatives are any better I'm just saying don't confuse the two, they are but different sides of the same coin.

Its not what he said that's important its what he didn't say that spoke volumes. Why did it take him so long to reject it(the missile shield)? That tells me he was trying to find a politically feasable solution to the problem of Canadian opposition obviously he didn't as Canadians are smarter then he thought.

www.ctv.ca...

He was only concerned with weapons in space which tells me that he was entertaining the idea of ground based systems
Also I got most of this info from interviews and such from the last election.

paulmartintime.ca...

www.vivelecanada.ca...



Manwhile, the reality in Canada is that our next Prime Minister has expressed his intentions to get even closer to the US, no matter who is running things or what their policies are. The Project for a New American Century is not that ideologically different from the Fraser Institute or other right-wing pressure groups in Canada. PNAC may be trying to take over the world for the benefit of wealthy few, but the right in Canada, including large and influential parts of our Liberal party, is all too willing to cheer them on.


[edit on 30-1-2006 by sardion2000]

[edit on 30-1-2006 by sardion2000]



posted on Jan, 30 2006 @ 01:40 AM
link   
Good thing he presided over a Minority Government eh?



posted on Jan, 30 2006 @ 06:44 AM
link   
Yeah, learn something new every day outside of my ethnocentric assumptions.

Thanks for taking the time to post all that. It further cements the idea that political parties that profess to have different ideologies are all cut from the same cloth. Takes the voting wind right out of my sails, when seeing this is so pervasive.

On a positive note: Loonie touches 14-year high



[edit on 30-1-2006 by Regenmacher]



new topics

top topics



 
1
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join