The Shrine

be very afraid....

http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=37502

I don't think it's going to happen. The provincial governments wouldn't allow it (Manitoba, Quebec, and Saskatchewan at least) and Quebec would be able to overrule it in their parliament. If this is anything, it's probably just an idea from the Harper government to try and give these telecommunications companies more power as a trade off to their income trust crackdowns.

Harper is being quite the moron of late (as always). I am not even speaking on this article, it is mainly his attempted paranoia campaigns that he is trying to run (threats on family values, environmentalist 'hidden agendas,', threats by terrorists, etc. Threats that don't actually exist, but idiots actually listen to this horseshit). I am just SO glad he desn't have a majority government. I sincerely hope that this motherfucker gets his ass thrown out of office at the first possible opportunity. He's not even a real Conservative, he's a republican.

On a side note, this country needs proportional representation in a bad way. With 5 parties, it makes perfect logical sense to have it.

I'm just a bit surprised at how much support all these nutty neocons seem to enjoy...I don't know Harper, but from what you're saying, Seek, it sounds like good ol' Rovian neoconservativism with the imprint of the maple leaf.

Must be a lot more people out there who think in terms of bullying, fear, incompetence, and bigotry hidden behind a shield of religious defensibility than I think...

Pathetically, the Conservatives are already running anti-Liberal ad campaigns...and they just got their new leader elected!

Our current Conservatives are no better than the current Republicans in the US. They're just better at hiding it. The sooner we can make the West realize that the better. I don't have a preference which party has power, they all suck enormously large donkey cock. I just particularly hate Stephen Bushper

The reason you saw such conservative support in the west wasn't really because we back THEM, we just backed anyone to beat the Liberals. It's the same the west has always worked. It gets shit on by the current government, gets pissy, and swings the vote.

Oracle wrote:The reason you saw such conservative support in the west wasn't really because we back THEM, we just backed anyone to beat the Liberals. It's the same the west has always worked. It gets shit on by the current government, gets pissy, and swings the vote.

I know, I'm trying to say that you guys can't vote like that out there. You can't just vote out of spite you vote for what's better overall even if you hate the person (or you don't vote at all and ensure you're not a part of the problem like me).

I don't like how the "Conservatives" hold that particular name, they are the Reform Party, or the Canadian Republican Party. Looking at Provincial Progressive Conservative Parties, they have almost no similarities to the Federal Conservatives.

Anyways, on the election, Alberta was the only province in the country to have over half the population vote Conservative. It is just that with our winner take all system, that will translate into mostly Conservative votes throughout most of the west. British Columbia is a split province, the Eastern half, bordering Alberta, voted Conservative; the Western Half (the Pacific Coast) voted Liberal and NDP.

Zeus wrote:

Oracle wrote:The reason you saw such conservative support in the west wasn't really because we back THEM, we just backed anyone to beat the Liberals. It's the same the west has always worked. It gets shit on by the current government, gets pissy, and swings the vote.

I know, I'm trying to say that you guys can't vote like that out there. You can't just vote out of spite you vote for what's better overall even if you hate the person (or you don't vote at all and ensure you're not a part of the problem like me).

You see, we really don't have a choice. How else are we supposed to send a message that the current government fucked us? By voting for them again? Even if the Liberals were the lesser of two evils in the last election (and honestly, they were), why the hell should I vote for them again? I'll vote for the next big runner, let the Federal House get a major overhaul, and then rely on caring about Provincial politics. The Provincial government does far more to get us heard than our Federal votes ever will.

Until there is a Federal party that will ACTUALLY address issues in the west (and has a snowball's chance in hell at winning), there won't be a change. And honestly, vote for what's better overall? Politicians put up campaign agendas and drop major issues or flip-flop all the time. Maybe when we can get some accountable representation, then I'll really care about who I'm voting for.

See, the issue is this: if you feel you SHOULD vote just because you can, then you become a part of the problem. Right now, the political system is such that about half the people vote and the politicians figure that the other half just isn't interested. What needs to happen for REAL change to occur is that we have, say, a 15% turnout one election. Not necessarily federal, but at least one election somewhere.

Because we don't have a "none of the above" vote (in a perfect world, we'd have this vote and if greater than 50% of the voters voted for it, we redo the election with the same people not being allowed to run again), the only way right now those of us who want to vote but have nothing to vote for can show our displeasure is to not vote.

If you vote for any other reason other than to vote for someone you truly want, then the message you're sending to these politicians is "it's OK what you're doing, keep going". We need to find a way to say "you guys are morons, none of you should be in power". Of course this isn't going to happen through a change in law, no politician would ever support something like that. And they even want people like me who'll actually hold them accountable for their actions to NOT vote. One way or the other, one waste of skin and bones is going to win and do the same shit, so I really have no reason to vote.

Still, one of them can get the power and do what they want. What we need to do is find a way to keep them out of power and the only way we can do that with the current politican system is to NOT vote and hope that someone actually tries something different to gain the vote of what would be the HUGE number of non-voters out there. I've been racking my mind for years trying to find another way but this is the only thing I can think of. If you spoil your ballot you're the same as someone who can barely find the door to get out of the house in the morning. All you're saying is "I'm too stupid to vote, please ignore me". If you guys have better ideas, please let me know.

If we had a "none of the above" option, then there would be NO reason to not vote and I would have no reason to complain. But as it stands now, I'm at least not contributing to the problem even though I can't do anything about it. Really, by not voting I've actually given myself grounds on which to complain on whereas those who vote are causing the problem.

Trust me, if I could do ANYTHING different, I would. But people are too fucking lazy and comfortable, they don't want change. So it'll never change and I'll never be able to do anything about it.

Our Federal system is a bit messed up; in order to have it fixed, we really DO need proportional representation. It focusses almost completely on Ontario and Quebec. In every other province in Canada, people look MUCH more to the provincial government than the Federal governments. People in all other provinces (for the most part, this does not necessarilly hold true for immigrants or people who migrate all over the country), besides Ontario, associate themselves first with their province, and second as a Canadian. Ontario is the only province where you'll see many more national flags than provincial flags (seriously, I do not even think most Ontario citizens even know what their provincial flag looks like).

Zeus wrote: If we had a "none of the above" option, then there would be NO reason to not vote and I would have no reason to complain. But as it stands now, I'm at least not contributing to the problem even though I can't do anything about it. Really, by not voting I've actually given myself grounds on which to complain on whereas those who vote are causing the problem.

See, but we do have a "none of the above". Vote independent or green party :p

I look at it differently than you do. If I vote, and the person that I voted for doesn't represent me how they promised they would, I say that's a pretty good excuse for complaint.

I don't think that not voting will solve the problem. I honestly think that we need to get more people from fringe parties elected to parliament. This will show the main power parties that Canadians have lost faith in what our traditional government parties represent. Problem is most people don't have the balls to "throw away their vote" (at least that's how many people I know feel about voting for Green or Federal NDP), and I didn't either in the last election. This option is the closest thing we have right now to "none of the above."

Oracle wrote:

Zeus wrote: If we had a "none of the above" option, then there would be NO reason to not vote and I would have no reason to complain. But as it stands now, I'm at least not contributing to the problem even though I can't do anything about it. Really, by not voting I've actually given myself grounds on which to complain on whereas those who vote are causing the problem.

See, but we do have a "none of the above". Vote independent or green party :p

I look at it differently than you do. If I vote, and the person that I voted for doesn't represent me how they promised they would, I say that's a pretty good excuse for complaint.

I don't think that not voting will solve the problem. I honestly think that we need to get more people from fringe parties elected to parliament. This will show the main power parties that Canadians have lost faith in what our traditional government parties represent. Problem is most people don't have the balls to "throw away their vote" (at least that's how many people I know feel about voting for Green or Federal NDP), and I didn't either in the last election. This option is the closest thing we have right now to "none of the above."

But that's like wasting your vote or not voting at all. They have no chance and never will so they will never have the power to do anything. Whether I vote Green or not vote at all will result in the same garbage politicans running our city/province/country (especially after the NDP screwed up so much in Ontario in the 90's).

I vote NDP Federally.

Zeus, I don't think the Federal NDP party has ever done anything that even remotely effected Ontario in decades (since the 70's).

Zeus wrote:

Oracle wrote:

Zeus wrote: If we had a "none of the above" option, then there would be NO reason to not vote and I would have no reason to complain. But as it stands now, I'm at least not contributing to the problem even though I can't do anything about it. Really, by not voting I've actually given myself grounds on which to complain on whereas those who vote are causing the problem.

See, but we do have a "none of the above". Vote independent or green party :p

I look at it differently than you do. If I vote, and the person that I voted for doesn't represent me how they promised they would, I say that's a pretty good excuse for complaint.

I don't think that not voting will solve the problem. I honestly think that we need to get more people from fringe parties elected to parliament. This will show the main power parties that Canadians have lost faith in what our traditional government parties represent. Problem is most people don't have the balls to "throw away their vote" (at least that's how many people I know feel about voting for Green or Federal NDP), and I didn't either in the last election. This option is the closest thing we have right now to "none of the above."

But that's like wasting your vote or not voting at all. They have no chance and never will so they will never have the power to do anything. Whether I vote Green or not vote at all will result in the same garbage politicans running our city/province/country (especially after the NDP screwed up so much in Ontario in the 90's).

You were the one who wanted a "none of the above" option. This is the next best thing. It's a way to record voters who have no faith in the people running for election.

The Seeker wrote:I vote NDP Federally.

Zeus, I don't think the Federal NDP party has ever done anything that even remotely effected Ontario in decades (since the 70's).

Their fuckup as the heads of the Ontario Government in the 90s completed screwed them. If they had done something half decent and didn't look like they were lost (Rae admitted they weren't ready to win), we'd have a completely different political landscape here right now.

The reason they won is 'cause the general public said "fuck you Liberal and Conservatives, we're going to give these guys a shot 'cause you suck so hard". That was a big step for an entire province to take (well, a good chunk of it). But their incompetence screwed it up and now no one's willing to give them a real chance over here anymore. Otherwise we'd have 3 equal parties right now with the Bloc as a wildcard which would be much better.

Oracle wrote:

Zeus wrote:

Oracle wrote: See, but we do have a "none of the above". Vote independent or green party :p

I look at it differently than you do. If I vote, and the person that I voted for doesn't represent me how they promised they would, I say that's a pretty good excuse for complaint.

I don't think that not voting will solve the problem. I honestly think that we need to get more people from fringe parties elected to parliament. This will show the main power parties that Canadians have lost faith in what our traditional government parties represent. Problem is most people don't have the balls to "throw away their vote" (at least that's how many people I know feel about voting for Green or Federal NDP), and I didn't either in the last election. This option is the closest thing we have right now to "none of the above."

But that's like wasting your vote or not voting at all. They have no chance and never will so they will never have the power to do anything. Whether I vote Green or not vote at all will result in the same garbage politicans running our city/province/country (especially after the NDP screwed up so much in Ontario in the 90's).

You were the one who wanted a "none of the above" option. This is the next best thing. It's a way to record voters who have no faith in the people running for election.

The problem is you get lumped in with the "environmentalists" or "the crazy left-wing nuts" if you vote for either of them. You're considered a fringe voter that the parties write-off a simply a percentage of the population they just can't get to vote for them. Their habits/strategies won't chance 'cause of that vote.

I want a way for me to say "you all suck" and not be labelled anything else as a voter. There's no way I can do that. Putting the Green party or the NDP in power doesn't say that all.

Besides, if we had a true "none of the above" option, there would be ZERO excuse for anyone to NOT vote. As it stands right now, those of us who want to vote but have nothing to vote for have no say. Hence my non-voting even though I've closely followed the last couple federal and the last provincial elections and was trying to find a reason to vote.

This "none of the above" has enormous accountability ramifications. Even if you say that it's just for tracking purposes and it's the party with the highest number of ridings wins. Imagine if the news stations tracked "none of the above" as a dummy party, seeing how many ridings they would have actually won if it were a real party. Now imagine that it comprises either a win or a close win in any city or province. That would force the politicians to rethink strategy to try and get those voters who vote but won't vote for a party 'cause it would show these guys that there are a lot of truly disenchanted voters and not just fringe voters, especially if you're talking about a 75% voter turnout and about 25% of those (about 19% of all eligible voters) say "y'all don't deserve to be in power". Now, imagine if "none of the above" led on a federal level.....

Politicans have fought real accountability since the inception of democratic politics and will continue to do so 'til the end of time. It's up to the public to force them to be accountable. We have the ability to do so but people are too comfortable/selfish to care about anyone but themselves. We have far less sense of community and care/know far less about our neighbours or cities than the Americans do. They occasionally fight for something, we never do.

The only time I"ll ever have a reason to vote is to keep some crazy nut-job like Bush out of power (I wonder how many Americans would rather have the cardboard cutout Kerry in power now?). I almost did that in the last federal election to keep Bushper out of power, but our Liberal had a huge lead in our riding, it wasn't necessary. But I would have if it were close at all.

But that's all I can do, defensive voting. I'll never truly have a voice in our current political system and my vote truly doesn't mean anything. Regardless of who wins, I lose. I have to deal with the shit that any party throws at me and it's all severely fermented, week-old elephant dung. All I do is keep washing it off.

/rant

Zeus wrote:

The Seeker wrote:I vote NDP Federally.

Zeus, I don't think the Federal NDP party has ever done anything that even remotely effected Ontario in decades (since the 70's).

Their fuckup as the heads of the Ontario Government in the 90s completed screwed them. If they had done something half decent and didn't look like they were lost (Rae admitted they weren't ready to win), we'd have a completely different political landscape here right now.

The reason they won is 'cause the general public said "fuck you Liberal and Conservatives, we're going to give these guys a shot 'cause you suck so hard". That was a big step for an entire province to take (well, a good chunk of it). But their incompetence screwed it up and now no one's willing to give them a real chance over here anymore. Otherwise we'd have 3 equal parties right now with the Bloc as a wildcard which would be much better.

What does a Provincial politician from the 90's have to do with a Federal politician from this decade?

As for political parties, I was fine with Chretien, I thought his "scandals" were blown WAY out of proportion. Harper cares to much about paranoia policies and increasing military. Military is an incredibly stupid waste of money considering this is a time of peace (aside from a few issues in far off third world countries that are not really our problem). Martin I had a problem with, he was focussed too much on quick economic fixes without thinking through long-term policies that would improve our current situation. Privatized health is a stupid idea for a country that values freedom and equality; what needs to be done is the current system needs to be tightened, have its leaks fixed, etc... We need a lot more health education, we need tougher sanctions on unhealthy foods, etc... Health is probably the most important part of society where most people live more than 80 years.

The Seeker wrote:

Zeus wrote:

The Seeker wrote:I vote NDP Federally.

Zeus, I don't think the Federal NDP party has ever done anything that even remotely effected Ontario in decades (since the 70's).

Their fuckup as the heads of the Ontario Government in the 90s completed screwed them. If they had done something half decent and didn't look like they were lost (Rae admitted they weren't ready to win), we'd have a completely different political landscape here right now.

The reason they won is 'cause the general public said "fuck you Liberal and Conservatives, we're going to give these guys a shot 'cause you suck so hard". That was a big step for an entire province to take (well, a good chunk of it). But their incompetence screwed it up and now no one's willing to give them a real chance over here anymore. Otherwise we'd have 3 equal parties right now with the Bloc as a wildcard which would be much better.

What does a Provincial politician from the 90's have to do with a Federal politician from this decade?

Did you completely ignore my post or you just didn't understand what I wrote?

Zeus wrote:

The Seeker wrote:

Zeus wrote: Their fuckup as the heads of the Ontario Government in the 90s completed screwed them. If they had done something half decent and didn't look like they were lost (Rae admitted they weren't ready to win), we'd have a completely different political landscape here right now.

The reason they won is 'cause the general public said "fuck you Liberal and Conservatives, we're going to give these guys a shot 'cause you suck so hard". That was a big step for an entire province to take (well, a good chunk of it). But their incompetence screwed it up and now no one's willing to give them a real chance over here anymore. Otherwise we'd have 3 equal parties right now with the Bloc as a wildcard which would be much better.

What does a Provincial politician from the 90's have to do with a Federal politician from this decade?

Did you completely ignore my post or you just didn't understand what I wrote?

I don't understand why you are equating provincial politics with Federal politics.

The Seeker wrote:

Zeus wrote:

The Seeker wrote: What does a Provincial politician from the 90's have to do with a Federal politician from this decade?

Did you completely ignore my post or you just didn't understand what I wrote?

I don't understand why you are equating provincial politics with Federal politics.

If you're that shortsighted, there's no use in continuing this conversation.

Zeus wrote:

The Seeker wrote:

Zeus wrote: Did you completely ignore my post or you just didn't understand what I wrote?

I don't understand why you are equating provincial politics with Federal politics.

If you're that shortsighted, there's no use in continuing this conversation.

Sorry, Zeus, but what I got from your post is that the NDP fucked up as leaders of the Ontario provincial government, and therefore are not voted for Federally in Ontario.

Oracle wrote: Sorry, Zeus, but what I got from your post is that the NDP fucked up as leaders of the Ontario provincial government, and therefore are not voted for Federally in Ontario.

It's because they screwed up royally as the leaders of Ontario, the biggest province in the country, that they're not really a big party nationwide. It put a bad taste in the mouths of people here and made them look bad in the eyes of the rest of the provinces, not just Ontario. They had their opportunity and they blew it...big time. Now it's going to take them forever to gain any real ground again. If they had done well, they would potentially be as big as the other two big ones, instead, they're #4.

The provincial and federal parts of the parties do not operate in a vacuum, they do affect each other a lot

Zeus wrote:

Oracle wrote: Sorry, Zeus, but what I got from your post is that the NDP fucked up as leaders of the Ontario provincial government, and therefore are not voted for Federally in Ontario.

It's because they screwed up royally as the leaders of Ontario, the biggest province in the country, that they're not really a big party nationwide. It put a bad taste in the mouths of people here and made them look bad in the eyes of the rest of the provinces, not just Ontario. They had their opportunity and they blew it...big time. Now it's going to take them forever to gain any real ground again. If they had done well, they would potentially be as big as the other two big ones, instead, they're #4.

The provincial and federal parts of the parties do not operate in a vacuum, they do affect each other a lot

You are WAY off on that one on every single point. Federal and provincial politics are different branches with different obligations. If you look at the Canadian election stats: most people do not vote the same Federally as they do provincially. This is why I don't see why you are equating provincial and Federal politics, they are not the same thing.

Also, the only people who care about Ontario provincial politics are some of the people in Ontario. From what I get, from people in Ontario, is that they care the least amount about their provincial politics when compared to any other province in Canada.

Seek is moderately right. In Saskatchewan we voted in pretty much all Conservatives across the province in the federal election, but our Provincial government is NDP. Since the federal government and provincial governments split a lot of decision making power because of our system of government, you can vote different parties for different houses (federal or provincial) based on their objectives in those areas. Anyways, even though the provincial NDP from Ontario screwed up, the entire NDP party image is tarnished. Even though they vary slightly from issue to issue, they are all part of the overarching Canadian NDP framework. Since the NDP is so all over the board (and there is no proportional representation system), the NDP is forced to take a back seat to even small, regional parties (Bloc and the old Reform/Social Credit parties). So without me going into a rant about how regional issues are ruining the Canadian political landscape and how the Green party is also doomed to go the way of the NDP due to a harsh FPtP electoral system still haunting Canadians... you two are both right and arguing anyways! hoorays!

The only thing worse than American politics...is Canadian politics.

Lox you've had me locked up in your basement for months, now pull the trigger dammit, I can't take it anymore!

Ishamael wrote:The only thing worse than American politics...is Canadian politics.

Lox you've had me locked up in your basement for months, now pull the trigger dammit, I can't take it anymore!

Nah, American politics is still worse (You guys only have a choice between Democrats and Republicans), we are trying to get proportional representation, Federally, to move further away from that system and more toward the global democratic standard.

bovine wrote:Seek is moderately right. In Saskatchewan we voted in pretty much all Conservatives across the province in the federal election, but our Provincial government is NDP. Since the federal government and provincial governments split a lot of decision making power because of our system of government, you can vote different parties for different houses (federal or provincial) based on their objectives in those areas. Anyways, even though the provincial NDP from Ontario screwed up, the entire NDP party image is tarnished. Even though they vary slightly from issue to issue, they are all part of the overarching Canadian NDP framework. Since the NDP is so all over the board (and there is no proportional representation system), the NDP is forced to take a back seat to even small, regional parties (Bloc and the old Reform/Social Credit parties). So without me going into a rant about how regional issues are ruining the Canadian political landscape and how the Green party is also doomed to go the way of the NDP due to a harsh FPtP electoral system still haunting Canadians... you two are both right and arguing anyways! hoorays!

I never argued that the federal and provincial politics aren't different, just that the screw up in Ontario has been very costly to the NDP party on a federal level.

Zeus wrote:

The Seeker wrote:I vote NDP Federally.

Zeus, I don't think the Federal NDP party has ever done anything that even remotely effected Ontario in decades (since the 70's).

Their fuckup as the heads of the Ontario Government in the 90s completed screwed them. If they had done something half decent and didn't look like they were lost (Rae admitted they weren't ready to win), we'd have a completely different political landscape here right now.

The reason they won is 'cause the general public said "fuck you Liberal and Conservatives, we're going to give these guys a shot 'cause you suck so hard". That was a big step for an entire province to take (well, a good chunk of it). But their incompetence screwed it up and now no one's willing to give them a real chance over here anymore. Otherwise we'd have 3 equal parties right now with the Bloc as a wildcard which would be much better.

I see that you are saying that the NDP's image was tarnished federally by their actions in the Ontario Provincial Legislature, but I'm saying that the NDP is doomed to failure because of how they position themselves across the country in the Federal level. Since we have more than two parties running in each constituency (4 at the very least), only one party can win in each riding. I'm sorry for making this all basic, but this is for those out there that don't know about our system and want to know, or are reading this out of boredom and are being forced to learn! Anyways, since only one party wins, the other parties don't end up with anything to show for their efforts at all. This makes parties with strong regional backing [Bloc, and the Reform/Social Credit (sorry for rehashing)] have a large standing in the House of Commons, and leaves parties with low concentration, but high overall votes (Green and NDP) with little or no seats to show for their efforts.... Okay, so since you already know all that, I'll just say that since the Liberals and Conservatives used to have such concentrated regional power (Conservatives in the west, sans BC, and Liberals in Ontario), they have become what most people think are the only two choices. If the NDP continued to gain in the Ontario Provincial Legislature, they would still be viewed federally as a bad choice. This has Canadian voter logic has stemmed from the Mulroney win where the left vote split between the NDP and Liberal parties, and the Conservatives won out because of this. Ever since that election, Canadians were forced to choose who was the real choice for the left (yes yes, it's slowly becoming a more centerist party, but at the time it was viewed as the left) and the Liberals won out and the NDP became the joke party. So even if the NDP maintained their golden reputation, they would still be in the downward spiral that they have been in since the Mulroney election. I agree with you that their provincial and federal reputation is tied though.

On the one hand, I despise certain parts of two-party American politics...

...on the other hand, it does tend to simplify some things for all of us ignorant Yanks down here.

Dear God, how do you guys make any sense out of that confusing clusterfuck?

bovine wrote:

Zeus wrote:

The Seeker wrote:I vote NDP Federally.

Zeus, I don't think the Federal NDP party has ever done anything that even remotely effected Ontario in decades (since the 70's).

Their fuckup as the heads of the Ontario Government in the 90s completed screwed them. If they had done something half decent and didn't look like they were lost (Rae admitted they weren't ready to win), we'd have a completely different political landscape here right now.

The reason they won is 'cause the general public said "fuck you Liberal and Conservatives, we're going to give these guys a shot 'cause you suck so hard". That was a big step for an entire province to take (well, a good chunk of it). But their incompetence screwed it up and now no one's willing to give them a real chance over here anymore. Otherwise we'd have 3 equal parties right now with the Bloc as a wildcard which would be much better.

I see that you are saying that the NDP's image was tarnished federally by their actions in the Ontario Provincial Legislature, but I'm saying that the NDP is doomed to failure because of how they position themselves across the country in the Federal level. Since we have more than two parties running in each constituency (4 at the very least), only one party can win in each riding. I'm sorry for making this all basic, but this is for those out there that don't know about our system and want to know, or are reading this out of boredom and are being forced to learn! Anyways, since only one party wins, the other parties don't end up with anything to show for their efforts at all. This makes parties with strong regional backing [Bloc, and the Reform/Social Credit (sorry for rehashing)] have a large standing in the House of Commons, and leaves parties with low concentration, but high overall votes (Green and NDP) with little or no seats to show for their efforts.... Okay, so since you already know all that, I'll just say that since the Liberals and Conservatives used to have such concentrated regional power (Conservatives in the west, sans BC, and Liberals in Ontario), they have become what most people think are the only two choices. If the NDP continued to gain in the Ontario Provincial Legislature, they would still be viewed federally as a bad choice. This has Canadian voter logic has stemmed from the Mulroney win where the left vote split between the NDP and Liberal parties, and the Conservatives won out because of this. Ever since that election, Canadians were forced to choose who was the real choice for the left (yes yes, it's slowly becoming a more centerist party, but at the time it was viewed as the left) and the Liberals won out and the NDP became the joke party. So even if the NDP maintained their golden reputation, they would still be in the downward spiral that they have been in since the Mulroney election. I agree with you that their provincial and federal reputation is tied though.

I don't necessarily see it that way. If the NDP had done well over here, they would have proven they can handle the big show and woulda maintained their course as a strong alternative in the left whereas the Liberals are more central than anything. They actually changed their focus after getting their asses handed to them as Ontario's party.

With the PC party being all but dead in the mid-90s and the splintering with the Reform Party breaking off, they had a GOLDEN chance to be choice #2. But, they blew it and will now forever be also-rans

Nev wrote:On the one hand, I despise certain parts of two-party American politics...

...on the other hand, it does tend to simplify some things for all of us ignorant Yanks down here.

Dear God, how do you guys make any sense out of that confusing clusterfuck?

You guys desperately need a third party down there. Something, anything. We had 5 at one point (down to 4) and it makes it more interesting and doesn't give any one party too much power over the country.

This was an argument I used to have with Sine, vote for Reform just to get a third party. You need it

Proportional representation is all we need. If we can get that then we have NDP with a quarter of the seats (though it is depending on how they balance it).

Zeus wrote:This was an argument I used to have with Sine, vote for Reform just to get a third party. You need it

AFAIK, political science theory dictates somewhat that the type of voting system used in the U.S. (one vote per voter, no notion of strong vs. weak preference, and the highest percentage of the votes wins) will tend to produce a bipolar two-party system...IIRC you generally need something like range voting to get a true multiparty system. Not sure what you have up there.

As far as our third parties go, I'd vote Green every time if they actually had a shot at winning and weren't led by impractical idealists like Ralph Nader. I know it's been said many times before, but the man should have realized, as the final weeks approached in that election, that his decision to stay the course would possibly result in a Bush presidency, and we all know how well that's turned out for anyone with any real environmentalist leanings whatsoever...

There are plenty of people who would become registered Greens if the voting system were to change to allow it to be viable, myself included. I might anyway, just because so many of both of the major parties down here suck bananas. But you're not likely to see serious third-party support in the U.S. without some sort of voting reform, I think.

The Seeker wrote:Proportional representation is all we need. If we can get that then we have NDP with a quarter of the seats (though it is depending on how they balance it).

NOt really, you need them to at least push the big two somewhat. They and the Bloc have enough that they can't be ignored, especially in a minority government, but never enough to truly threaten, so they never have enough to have any real influence. They're both in the middle right now

Zeus wrote:

The Seeker wrote:Proportional representation is all we need. If we can get that then we have NDP with a quarter of the seats (though it is depending on how they balance it).

NOt really, you need them to at least push the big two somewhat. They and the Bloc have enough that they can't be ignored, especially in a minority government, but never enough to truly threaten, so they never have enough to have any real influence. They're both in the middle right now

The NDP would be considerably larger than the Bloc Quebecois if proportional representation was introduced: They only had 1.5 million as opposed to NPD's 2.6 million. Proportional representation would end strategic voting as well, which means a decline in Liberal, Bloc, and Conservative votes, and more votes for the Greens and NDP.

The Seeker wrote:

Zeus wrote:

The Seeker wrote:Proportional representation is all we need. If we can get that then we have NDP with a quarter of the seats (though it is depending on how they balance it).

NOt really, you need them to at least push the big two somewhat. They and the Bloc have enough that they can't be ignored, especially in a minority government, but never enough to truly threaten, so they never have enough to have any real influence. They're both in the middle right now

The NDP would be considerably larger than the Bloc Quebecois if proportional representation was introduced: They only had 1.5 million as opposed to NPD's 2.6 million. Proportional representation would end strategic voting as well, which means a decline in Liberal, Bloc, and Conservative votes, and more votes for the Greens and NDP.

"If". We go by seats, so they're still smaller. Forget about what may happen if the rules were changed. If that were the case, Gore would be president right now in his second term likely. As it stands, the Bloc is #3 with NDP #4. But they should be a strong #3 or even #2 and it would have happened if they hadn't left a bad taste in people's mouths in the 90s. It wasn't just Ontario they turned off, it was the entire country due to their incompetence. They proved they couldn't handle shit and they're still trying to recover.

Nev wrote:As far as our third parties go, I'd vote Green every time if they actually had a shot at winning and weren't led by impractical idealists like Ralph Nader.

It's more important to just have a third party regardless. All you need to do is give them 5% overall and they'll get federal funding. That's all I'm sayin'. Help them become a recognized party so you can actually have some choice in the future. Right now, you guys just have varying degrees of centre-right with only some slight teasing to the left by the Democrats. Nothing solid on the left. We at least have the NDP there even if they are #4.

Nader ain't gonna be around forever but right now, he's the only thing getting that party any recognition. If they became a federal party with federal funding, it's a whole different ballgame.

I've been meaning to attend a Green party meeting and see if I want to start giving them more support...problem for me is that impractical idealism is more likely to cause damage than anything else...

If the attitude of the party has a certain amount of practicality to it, I might join them wholeheartedly. Otherwise I'm quite content with them as a fringe group.

We have plenty of choice, as it were, down here, Zeus. None of our elections starts as a "this guy versus this other guy" kind of thing - we have primaries and the etc., as you know. They finish that way, but that doesn't necessarily make the system bad or inefficient. I can vote for committed, practical environmentalists in a two-party system, and I do - they're called "moderate Democrats", usually.

A two-party system is not always a whiny partisan catfight. I'll admit that it's certainly looked that way for some time, but I'm not convinced that we need third parties in the way you think we do...

That is a good point, that the primaries do lead to some variety in the type of leadership a party gets. I mean, there are Republicans who are against Bush and Democrats who are anti-Kerry. So you can get your variety that way (I assume you do vote for the party leaders). But it just seems from here that it's only a slight variety in the Republicans and a little more in the Democrats. But the Democrats are still central-left as any real left-wing politicans are the minority in it and don't get any real say. Gore, if he does decide to come back, may be an environmentalist and very left-wing that way, but I'm not so sure how much he'll deviate off of the central-left that is the party line on other issues.

But the idea of having a third federal party is still good and very important IMO. It's not always going to be Nader, the party will grow up and change if they're actually recognized as a federal party. They'll represent a different portion of the population than the Democrats and maybe give those fringe left-wing guys in there a party that'll really stick by them. It'll also give you proper representation across the spectrum (Green as left-wing, Democrats as central-left to central, and Republicans and right to centre-right).

And a decent third party keeps the others honest. Up here, the Conservatives (right wing) and the Liberals (centre-left) have to be mindful of the Bloc (a certain faction of right wing) and NDP (left wing) enough to not alienate them. So, they have to at least appeal to their followers/like-minded people, so you get a wider range of people with their needs met. It's much less so in the US system right now, especially since the Green is basically left wing and they can be (and are) ignored. That's a big enough portion of the population that's not being represented.

May also explain why voter turnout is pretty low (regularly less than 50%, no?), people just don't have anyone to represent them. Voter turnout is consistently higher up here (usually around 60% if I'm not mistaken; the other Canadians can correct me) than down there, I'm in the minority of people who don't vote. I think a lot of that has to do with the increased choice (4 parties vs 2). If we only had the Conservatives and the Liberals, the hardcore Frenchies would have no one to vote for. Whether or not this is a good thing is a personal opinion (I think it is), but they should still have say. With a party to represent them, they do. And considering they're the third biggest party with a signifcant enough number of seats in the parliment, they are being catered to by both the Conservatives and the Liberals. This is why both those parties have French-speaking (Conservatives) or French (Liberals) leaders.

I think a lot of people in the US think they only have two parties to choose from and will only ever have two parties. So they decide between the two and never even consider the possibility of a third. Even if that party/person doesn't really represent them but they may represent them better than the other choice; or, the one is the lesser of two evils. With a third party, you can actually have more people vote for someone/some party that more closely represents them than with just two parties. That's the reason it's important IMO.

Zeus wrote:

The Seeker wrote:

Zeus wrote: NOt really, you need them to at least push the big two somewhat. They and the Bloc have enough that they can't be ignored, especially in a minority government, but never enough to truly threaten, so they never have enough to have any real influence. They're both in the middle right now

The NDP would be considerably larger than the Bloc Quebecois if proportional representation was introduced: They only had 1.5 million as opposed to NPD's 2.6 million. Proportional representation would end strategic voting as well, which means a decline in Liberal, Bloc, and Conservative votes, and more votes for the Greens and NDP.

"If". We go by seats, so they're still smaller. Forget about what may happen if the rules were changed. If that were the case, Gore would be president right now in his second term likely. As it stands, the Bloc is #3 with NDP #4. But they should be a strong #3 or even #2 and it would have happened if they hadn't left a bad taste in people's mouths in the 90s. It wasn't just Ontario they turned off, it was the entire country due to their incompetence. They proved they couldn't handle shit and they're still trying to recover.

The Ontario thing is provincial, not Federal. Provinciallythey did very poorly, but Federally they won 12 seats in Ontario during the last election which is only 1 seat away from the best they have ever done in the province.

The Seeker wrote:

Zeus wrote:

The Seeker wrote: The NDP would be considerably larger than the Bloc Quebecois if proportional representation was introduced: They only had 1.5 million as opposed to NPD's 2.6 million. Proportional representation would end strategic voting as well, which means a decline in Liberal, Bloc, and Conservative votes, and more votes for the Greens and NDP.

"If". We go by seats, so they're still smaller. Forget about what may happen if the rules were changed. If that were the case, Gore would be president right now in his second term likely. As it stands, the Bloc is #3 with NDP #4. But they should be a strong #3 or even #2 and it would have happened if they hadn't left a bad taste in people's mouths in the 90s. It wasn't just Ontario they turned off, it was the entire country due to their incompetence. They proved they couldn't handle shit and they're still trying to recover.

The Ontario thing is provincial, not Federal. Provinciallythey did very poorly, but Federally they won 12 seats in Ontario during the last election which is only 1 seat away from the best they have ever done in the province.

Again, I give up

Zeus wrote:words the very very many

That response has, like, a lot of words and stuff.

...

...like, you should totally sit back and smoke a bowl with me instead...

...

Sorry to be such a stereotypical example of American political apathy. But I have a lot to do and probably lack the political clout or connections to do anything about what you were talking about, and my room desperately needs cleaning, so I sadly will have to leave it...