Canadian Conservative Party Supporters

RockinInCanada

polaris_x wrote:

RockinInCanada wrote:

Not all the CP members are awful people, I was watching Real Time a few months ago when ex CP MP Kim Campbell was on and there was a discussion in regards to the extension of tax cuts for the wealthy in the USA. When she had her time to speak she told a story of discussing this issue with Finace Minister Flaherty and he was just blown away that the government would do that, how he said that is the most moronic thing you could do especially given their economic situation. I actually like Flaherty for some reason, cannot explain it but he is not a nut-bar like the old Reformists from here in the west.

I still maintain the Conservatives here are no more than Democrats in the USA.

flaherty is a crook ... he was key in the harris debacle here in ontario where they basically raped the province for all its worth for their friends ... which is what they are doing now ...

i don't actually think conservatives are awful people ... i just don't believe in their ideology which is very right wing ... in line with george w. bush ... their stance on israel is a key example ...

having said that - layton would be bad for the oil and gas industry in alberta ... they have definitely a right to be concerned ... but having said that - they are a big problem for canada and someone has to take them on as opposed to making it better for them ...

Unsure of what happened into regards to the Provincial politics in Ontario but from out west I can for sure state how the NDP were the biggest disgrace of a political party that represented Saskatchewan. They single handily closed down multiple urban/rural hospitals and it is still an issue today. Fighters of health care my ass (at least provincially).

The Saskatchewan Party (formely PC) has taken the province to new heights, great Conservative party as they are very moderate but econimically sound. My mom used to be a huge NDP fan until they stabbed the people in the back with all those hospital closures. The same party that still fear mongers the people that the privatization of liquor stores will be the end of everything. Yeah because paying fracking $40 for 12 beer after "board" hours is awesome, idiots.

Since my area is in O&G as an engineer that designs multi million dollar projects for the O&G sector (I do not work for a producer) it does kind of concern me but I doubt anything would kill the western economy like the NEP did, I think most concerns are fear mongering.

I hope my fellow country-men know the amount of money that is gained for use by them because of O&G out west (cough Quebec....cough). I kind of wish a similar deal that Newfoundland got in regards to natural resources fit here, I laugh at some Conservatives that bitch about equalization (as i Do but I am not Conservative) do not realize how Harper has promised removal of natural resources from the equalization calculation but has like many things lied about....shakes head at how complacent Alberta (especially southern) voters are.

RockinInCanada

New Nano's poll:

CPC: 36.6%
NDP: 30.4%
LIB: 21.9%
BQ: 6.0%
GRN: 4.1%

Love seeing the BQ getting pounded the list.

polaris_x

RockinInCanada wrote:

New Nano's poll:

CPC: 36.6%
NDP: 30.4%
LIB: 21.9%
BQ: 6.0%
GRN: 4.1%

Love seeing the BQ getting pounded the list.

anything but a harper majority ...

it is pretty crazy to see the NDP at 30.4% ... i'm pretty sure if anyone said they would be polling that high - they would have laughed and said to whoever they were crazy ... :shock:

RockinInCanada

polaris_x wrote:

RockinInCanada wrote:

New Nano's poll:

CPC: 36.6%
NDP: 30.4%
LIB: 21.9%
BQ: 6.0%
GRN: 4.1%

Love seeing the BQ getting pounded the list.

anything but a harper majority ...

it is pretty crazy to see the NDP at 30.4% ... i'm pretty sure if anyone said they would be polling that high - they would have laughed and said to whoever they were crazy ... :shock:

Yeah I will agree with you on that one, that is some epic heights for the NDP.

polaris_x

RockinInCanada wrote:

Yeah I will agree with you on that one, that is some epic heights for the NDP.

and i suspect none of it is based on their policies ... just simply, they appear to be the most trustworthy party with at least some integrity ...

bytterman

polaris_x wrote:

RockinInCanada wrote:

Yeah I will agree with you on that one, that is some epic heights for the NDP.

and i suspect none of it is based on their policies ... just simply, they appear to be the most trustworthy party with at least some integrity ...

If my memory serves, that's at least part of why Ontario wound up with the Rae government in 1990, but correct me on that if need be. That didn't turn out so well, although it was by no means entirely Rae's fault.

polaris_x

bytterman wrote:

If my memory serves, that's at least part of why Ontario wound up with the Rae government in 1990, but correct me on that if need be. That didn't turn out so well, although it was by no means entirely Rae's fault.

yeah ... pretty much ...

it didn't turn out so well mainly because he inherited a huge defecit from petersen (liberal) at the beginning of a recession ... it would have turned out pretty crap for anyone ...

haffajappa

RockinInCanada wrote:

haffajappa wrote:

RockinInCanada wrote:

My NHL rule is ABC (Anyone but Calgary) or for this year's play-offs ABV (Anyone but Vancouver) .

Hey hey heyyy... watch ya'self.

I would rather choke on my own vomit then cheer for Vancouver.... .

In all seriousness I am an Oilers fan first and will never cheer for a rival. Yeah my team sucks right now (actually let me correct that, really sucks right now).

I also never buy into this cheer for Canada bull-shit, considering both the Hawks/Preds have more Canadians than the Canucks.

Anyway good luck to your team, hope you lose and you guys think of something even more lame to hang in your rafters next year...keep it going to 41!

I understand... I'm usually an ABC person too (when it comes to hockey AND politics) for me though its oil > flames, if they play each other. the predicament is calgary vs toronto... which team do i hate more?!?!

bytterman

polaris_x wrote:

bytterman wrote:

If my memory serves, that's at least part of why Ontario wound up with the Rae government in 1990, but correct me on that if need be. That didn't turn out so well, although it was by no means entirely Rae's fault.

yeah ... pretty much ...

it didn't turn out so well mainly because he inherited a huge defecit from petersen (liberal) at the beginning of a recession ... it would have turned out pretty crap for anyone ...

Absolutely, but you have to admit that Rae days were a less than useful economic policy

RockinInCanada

quote="RockinInCanada"]

haffajappa wrote:

RockinInCanada wrote:

My NHL rule is ABC (Anyone but Calgary) or for this year's play-offs ABV (Anyone but Vancouver) .

Hey hey heyyy... watch ya'self.

I would rather choke on my own vomit then cheer for Vancouver.... .

In all seriousness I am an Oilers fan first and will never cheer for a rival. Yeah my team sucks right now (actually let me correct that, really sucks right now).

I also never buy into this cheer for Canada bull-shit, considering both the Hawks/Preds have more Canadians than the Canucks.

Anyway good luck to your team, hope you lose and you guys think of something even more lame to hang in your rafters next year...keep it going to 41!

[/quote]
I understand... I'm usually an ABC person too (when it comes to hockey AND politics) for me though its oil > flames, if they play each other. the predicament is calgary vs toronto... which team do i hate more?!?![/quote]

Easy you pick Toronto, I can not bring myself to cheer for the Flames.

Canucks > Flames in my books.

polaris_x

bytterman wrote:

Absolutely, but you have to admit that Rae days were a less than useful economic policy

it wasn't so much an economic policy as it was about saving money ... when you are straddled with a defecit and you are in a recession ... you have to find ways of managing the books ... i can see why people were pissed at rae for those rae days but he cut gov't spending ... so, the conservatives just cut programs altogether and no one cares but he tries to cut from the payroll and its his lasting legacy ...

polaris_x

to all you toronto haters ...

just know that while you guys use energy to put a hate on ... us folks in toronto for the most part are cheering for you guys ...

lukin2006

Layton under fire for vacationing candidates

http://toronto.ctv.ca/servlet/an/local/ ... ub=Toronto

This is why I don't vote in advance poles...usually something happens in the last week...

First off, I will state that I on't care who called the election and I don't care if their on vacation.

But all he had to say is the truth...he wants to be different, but he does what everybody else does...blames someone else...what a crock of shot

Like I've said their all corrupt bullshitters that couldn't take responsibility for anything...yet people run out to vote for corruption.

ACCBootlegGoddess

bytterman wrote:

polaris_x wrote:

bytterman wrote:

If my memory serves, that's at least part of why Ontario wound up with the Rae government in 1990, but correct me on that if need be. That didn't turn out so well, although it was by no means entirely Rae's fault.

yeah ... pretty much ...

it didn't turn out so well mainly because he inherited a huge defecit from petersen (liberal) at the beginning of a recession ... it would have turned out pretty crap for anyone ...

Absolutely, but you have to admit that Rae days were a less than useful economic policy

I actually think it was a fair compromise at the time. They were hugely backed by Unions then, and ran on a platform of protecting the working man. At the same time they deficit was WAY bigger than Peterson told anyone prior to the election and we were at the beginning of an election - All of which was said by another poster I know. As much as people bitched and moaned about them at the time..at least they HAD THEIR JOBS! When Mike the Knife Harris got his first majority...he cut thousands of jobs expecially in the public sector - civil service. Hell both the Conservatives and the liberals ran on a platform saying flat out they were cutting a shitload of civil service jobs and people still voted for them. Their excuse after "well I didn't think it would be MY job!" Rae Days aren't looking so bad now huh?!?! was my feeling.


I'm kind of excited and scared about this election at the same time. I hope that this NDP surge translates into a lot of seats - esp at the conservatives expense! I'm scared that it won't though.

bytterman

ACCBootlegGoddess wrote:

bytterman wrote:

Absolutely, but you have to admit that Rae days were a less than useful economic policy

I actually think it was a fair compromise at the time. They were hugely backed by Unions then, and ran on a platform of protecting the working man. At the same time they deficit was WAY bigger than Peterson told anyone prior to the election and we were at the beginning of an election - All of which was said by another poster I know. As much as people bitched and moaned about them at the time..at least they HAD THEIR JOBS! When Mike the Knife Harris got his first majority...he cut thousands of jobs expecially in the public sector - civil service. Hell both the Conservatives and the liberals ran on a platform saying flat out they were cutting a shitload of civil service jobs and people still voted for them. Their excuse after "well I didn't think it would be MY job!" Rae Days aren't looking so bad now huh?!?! was my feeling.


I'm kind of excited and scared about this election at the same time. I hope that this NDP surge translates into a lot of seats - esp at the conservatives expense! I'm scared that it won't though.

Sorry I meant that to be tongue-in-cheek; I can't argue the economics but it is a significant part of the Rae-NDP legacy in Ontario, fairly or otherwise. Assuming that unpaid days off aren't a deal breaker, to me it seems more likely that the NDP will take votes from the Liberals and Bloc, but will that be votes or actual seats? Could reduce Green support to near zero, as well.

lukin2006

ACCBootlegGoddess wrote:

bytterman wrote:

polaris_x wrote:

[

yeah ... pretty much ...

it didn't turn out so well mainly because he inherited a huge defecit from petersen (liberal) at the beginning of a recession ... it would have turned out pretty crap for anyone ...

Absolutely, but you have to admit that Rae days were a less than useful economic policy

I actually think it was a fair compromise at the time. They were hugely backed by Unions then, and ran on a platform of protecting the working man. At the same time they deficit was WAY bigger than Peterson told anyone prior to the election and we were at the beginning of an election - All of which was said by another poster I know. As much as people bitched and moaned about them at the time..at least they HAD THEIR JOBS! When Mike the Knife Harris got his first majority...he cut thousands of jobs expecially in the public sector - civil service. Hell both the Conservatives and the liberals ran on a platform saying flat out they were cutting a shitload of civil service jobs and people still voted for them. Their excuse after "well I didn't think it would be MY job!" Rae Days aren't looking so bad now huh?!?! was my feeling.


I'm kind of excited and scared about this election at the same time. I hope that this NDP surge translates into a lot of seats - esp at the conservatives expense! I'm scared that it won't though.

There is way to many public servants today and there were way to many when Rae was premier...that being said...here locally the catholic school has issued 100 layoffs to librarians and secretaries because of declining enrolment...the only thing I agree about the union who is of course pissed is they want to know why in 2004 there was 6 administrators making 100 grand, now there is over 90 administrators making 100 grand...hum Dalton came to power about that time...there is no difference from 1 to other there all crooked...Rae tried to take care of the unions...Harris looked out for the business community...Dalton looking out for the high salaried government worker.

polaris_x

lukin2006 wrote:

Layton under fire for vacationing candidates

http://toronto.ctv.ca/servlet/an/local/ ... ub=Toronto

This is why I don't vote in advance poles...usually something happens in the last week...

First off, I will state that I on't care who called the election and I don't care if their on vacation.

But all he had to say is the truth...he wants to be different, but he does what everybody else does...blames someone else...what a crock of shot

Like I've said their all corrupt bullshitters that couldn't take responsibility for anything...yet people run out to vote for corruption.

yeah ... that's weak for sure ...

having said that ... there are over 300 ridings and i'm pretty sure every party has candidates that are doing little or no campaigning whatsoever ... elections cost money and parties need to strategize as to how to spend that money ...

lukin2006

polaris_x wrote:

lukin2006 wrote:

Layton under fire for vacationing candidates

http://toronto.ctv.ca/servlet/an/local/ ... ub=Toronto

This is why I don't vote in advance poles...usually something happens in the last week...

First off, I will state that I on't care who called the election and I don't care if their on vacation.

But all he had to say is the truth...he wants to be different, but he does what everybody else does...blames someone else...what a crock of shot

Like I've said their all corrupt bullshitters that couldn't take responsibility for anything...yet people run out to vote for corruption.

yeah ... that's weak for sure ...

having said that ... there are over 300 ridings and i'm pretty sure every party has candidates that are doing little or no campaigning whatsoever ... elections cost money and parties need to strategize as to how to spend that money ...

I agree...but he wants to be seen a different...all he would have said is that they had vacations booked for some time...I think most Canadians would understand and appreciate that...to me if your going to beat around the truth on the little things, then what about the big things that will come up in government...

polaris_x

lukin2006 wrote:

I agree...but he wants to be seen a different...all he would have said is that they had vacations booked for some time...I think most Canadians would understand and appreciate that...to me if your going to beat around the truth on the little things, then what about the big things that will come up in government...

i've read about 2 articles and watched a clip on it ... i think that's what he says but after a dozen or so questions he's basically looking for a diversion ... standard political procedure ...

zarocat

lukin2006 wrote:

Harris

... boils my blood