Well in the end it's CBC's show and obviously this is the direction that the producers wanted the show to go in, shows like that need a bad guy, and what makes O'Leary any less qualified than the turds that we usually elect, some of you act like politicians know more than the rest of us when in reality it's their staffers that constancy brief them on this issues and give them talking points...it takes a special person to be a politician today...
I have certain rules I live by ... My First Rule ... I don't believe anything the government tells me ... George Carlin
"Life Is What Happens To You When Your Busy Making Other Plans" John Lennon
Well in the end it's CBC's show and obviously this is the direction that the producers wanted the show to go in, shows like that need a bad guy, and what makes O'Leary any less qualified than the turds that we usually elect, some of you act like politicians know more than the rest of us when in reality it's their staffers that constancy brief them on this issues and give them talking points...it takes a special person to be a politician today...
I already said that I think you shouldn't even qualify legally if you haven't already been voted into public office. So there is that. But I also said that my specific concern about O'Leary is that he is particularly money-focused. People, including politicians, have degrees of concern for their fellow human beings and where they place that vs money on their list of priorities. I think O'Leary's behaviour and actions and words have proven him to have close to zero concern for his fellow human beings if making or saving more money is in the way... Even more than all the politicians. That's bad. He is, IMO, an extreme case as far as that goes.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
Oh well, i refuse to hold politicians to any specific levels, politicians should walk amongst us not in the clouds and pretend their shit don't stink. I do not fucking care if you've been in public office one day, makes no fucking difference to me...maybe if people quit pretending you need special skill sets to be a politician maybe just maybe everything would not be so fucked up, maybe if people got elected because they display some common sense, truly care about the taxpayers money that they are elected and essentially entrusted to make good decisions with (which they don't)...
So you want the Status Quo...Im glad for you, Im glad that you support the present status quo of liars and corruptness that takes place. These are the clowns you want? A PM who campaigned on running more deficits, thats leadership, pile more debt on future generations as our social programs get eroded and are starved of the money they deserve because our politicians dating back decades can not/will not live with in their/our means as a country...and the great part of these politicians who can't add, they eventually leave office with generous pension/severance while making somewhere around 4 times the average Canadian, and they leave the mess behind, us holding more debt, no these current clowns are selfish and greedy, well at least i know where O' Leary stands ... sounds like he'd fit in with the rest of the greed and corruption.
I have certain rules I live by ... My First Rule ... I don't believe anything the government tells me ... George Carlin
"Life Is What Happens To You When Your Busy Making Other Plans" John Lennon
Oh well, i refuse to hold politicians to any specific levels, politicians should walk amongst us not in the clouds and pretend their shit don't stink. I do not fucking care if you've been in public office one day, makes no fucking difference to me...maybe if people quit pretending you need special skill sets to be a politician maybe just maybe everything would not be so fucked up, maybe if people got elected because they display some common sense, truly care about the taxpayers money that they are elected and essentially entrusted to make good decisions with (which they don't)...
So you want the Status Quo...Im glad for you, Im glad that you support the present status quo of liars and corruptness that takes place. These are the clowns you want? A PM who campaigned on running more deficits, thats leadership, pile more debt on future generations as our social programs get eroded and are starved of the money they deserve because our politicians dating back decades can not/will not live with in their/our means as a country...and the great part of these politicians who can't add, they eventually leave office with generous pension/severance while making somewhere around 4 times the average Canadian, and they leave the mess behind, us holding more debt, no these current clowns are selfish and greedy, well at least i know where O' Leary stands ... sounds like he'd fit in with the rest of the greed and corruption. Fuck that, I expect better, far better ... I especially feel bad for my nieces and nephews...as they watch social programs shrink.
I have certain rules I live by ... My First Rule ... I don't believe anything the government tells me ... George Carlin
"Life Is What Happens To You When Your Busy Making Other Plans" John Lennon
So you think that just anyone with common sense can walk into office and do a bang-up job, eh? I would argue that people do indeed need several special skill sets and talents to be a functional politician. And I think they should have had to hold an elected public office before running for leader because that is how they would have proven (ideally) that they do display common sense, caring for the taxpayers money and entrusted to make good decisions. If they haven't held public office before, you just have to take their word for it, and assume that they won't immediately be pulled into the status quo themselves, as most of them are.
I have no clue why you are suddenly talking about me wanting and supporting the status quo. I never said anything about that. Don't read between the lines - you're not good at it. You refuse to hold politicians to any specific level of expectation? Well, that's pretty weird.
Post edited by PJ_Soul on
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
Oh well, i refuse to hold politicians to any specific levels, politicians should walk amongst us not in the clouds and pretend their shit don't stink. I do not fucking care if you've been in public office one day, makes no fucking difference to me...maybe if people quit pretending you need special skill sets to be a politician maybe just maybe everything would not be so fucked up, maybe if people got elected because they display some common sense, truly care about the taxpayers money that they are elected and essentially entrusted to make good decisions with (which they don't)...
So you want the Status Quo...Im glad for you, Im glad that you support the present status quo of liars and corruptness that takes place. These are the clowns you want? A PM who campaigned on running more deficits, thats leadership, pile more debt on future generations as our social programs get eroded and are starved of the money they deserve because our politicians dating back decades can not/will not live with in their/our means as a country...and the great part of these politicians who can't add, they eventually leave office with generous pension/severance while making somewhere around 4 times the average Canadian, and they leave the mess behind, us holding more debt, no these current clowns are selfish and greedy, well at least i know where O' Leary stands ... sounds like he'd fit in with the rest of the greed and corruption. Fuck that, I expect better, far better ... I especially feel bad for my nieces and nephews...as they watch social programs shrink.
So you think that just anyone with common sense can walk into office and do a bang-up job, eh? I would argue that people do indeed need several special skill sets and talents to be a functional politician. And I think they should have had to hold an elected public office before running for leader because that is how they would have proven (ideally) that they do display common sense, caring for the taxpayers money and entrusted to make good decisions. If they haven't held public office before, you just have to take their word for it, and assume that they won't immediately be pulled into the status quo themselves, as most of them are.
I have no clue why you are suddenly talking about me wanting and supporting the status quo. I never said anything about that. Don't read between the lines - you're not good at it. You refuse to hold politicians to any specific level of expectation? Well, that's pretty weird.
I'd take my chance with people of common sense, good management skills and money management skills over the current crop of clueless dicks that get elected...and anyone who don't think for 1 minute these current crop of dingy aren't selfish and greedy...
Is often been said municipal politics are the least corrupt, why is that...I think because they live in the community full time, not nearly as easy to hide from the electorate, many in municipal politics come from all walks of life, at least in my community they are, they are accountable...we have good services, no service cut back, a debt management plan, no infrastructure deficit and money put a side for future infrastructure projects...not sure many of these so called quality federal and provincial politicians can say the same...actually I know they can't. when where running 30 billion dollar deficits annually...
I have certain rules I live by ... My First Rule ... I don't believe anything the government tells me ... George Carlin
"Life Is What Happens To You When Your Busy Making Other Plans" John Lennon
So you think that just anyone with common sense can walk into office and do a bang-up job, eh? I would argue that people do indeed need several special skill sets and talents to be a functional politician. And I think they should have had to hold an elected public office before running for leader because that is how they would have proven (ideally) that they do display common sense, caring for the taxpayers money and entrusted to make good decisions. If they haven't held public office before, you just have to take their word for it, and assume that they won't immediately be pulled into the status quo themselves, as most of them are.
I have no clue why you are suddenly talking about me wanting and supporting the status quo. I never said anything about that. Don't read between the lines - you're not good at it. You refuse to hold politicians to any specific level of expectation? Well, that's pretty weird.
I'd take my chance with people of common sense, good management skills and money management skills over the current crop of clueless dicks that get elected...and anyone who don't think for 1 minute these current crop of dingy aren't selfish and greedy...
Is often been said municipal politics are the least corrupt, why is that...I think because they live in the community full time, not nearly as easy to hide from the electorate, many in municipal politics come from all walks of life, at least in my community they are, they are accountable...we have good services, no service cut back, a debt management plan, no infrastructure deficit and money put a side for future infrastructure projects...not sure many of these so called quality federal and provincial politicians can say the same...actually I know they can't. when where running 30 billion dollar deficits annually...
Okay, so we agree they do need specific skills besides common sense. I'm not sure who you are actually talking about. Are you claiming that there isn't a single politician in Canada's government who is competent? If so, I guess they are doing a pretty good job then, considering, lol. I have often said that I don't trust politicians as far as I can throw them, but you seem to be under some other impression (I think because I am capable of objective thoughts). I just wanted to remind you of where I stand. Not where you think I do, it looks like.
Post edited by PJ_Soul on
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
0
Options
brianlux
Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 40,736
Oh well, i refuse to hold politicians to any specific levels, politicians should walk amongst us not in the clouds and pretend their shit don't stink. I do not fucking care if you've been in public office one day, makes no fucking difference to me...maybe if people quit pretending you need special skill sets to be a politician maybe just maybe everything would not be so fucked up, maybe if people got elected because they display some common sense, truly care about the taxpayers money that they are elected and essentially entrusted to make good decisions with (which they don't)...
So you want the Status Quo...Im glad for you, Im glad that you support the present status quo of liars and corruptness that takes place. These are the clowns you want? A PM who campaigned on running more deficits, thats leadership, pile more debt on future generations as our social programs get eroded and are starved of the money they deserve because our politicians dating back decades can not/will not live with in their/our means as a country...and the great part of these politicians who can't add, they eventually leave office with generous pension/severance while making somewhere around 4 times the average Canadian, and they leave the mess behind, us holding more debt, no these current clowns are selfish and greedy, well at least i know where O' Leary stands ... sounds like he'd fit in with the rest of the greed and corruption.
I absolutely totally agree. If I wanted a god or goddess as ruler, I'd make up some crazy shit about a bearded guy or a fleet-winged woman flying in the clouds (but I won't). But when looking for a good, honest politician, I'm looking for someone who stands on the ground among the rest of us mortals- someone who thinks and acts like the best among us, not one of the super wealthy or self serving types who pretend they are immortals.
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.”
Well in the end it's CBC's show and obviously this is the direction that the producers wanted the show to go in, shows like that need a bad guy, and what makes O'Leary any less qualified than the turds that we usually elect, some of you act like politicians know more than the rest of us when in reality it's their staffers that constancy brief them on this issues and give them talking points...it takes a special person to be a politician today...
it's also temperament, and willingness to listen to advisors. I gather that Oleary is much like trump, in that he always thinks he's right no matter what anyone else says.
Oh well, i refuse to hold politicians to any specific levels, politicians should walk amongst us not in the clouds and pretend their shit don't stink. I do not fucking care if you've been in public office one day, makes no fucking difference to me...maybe if people quit pretending you need special skill sets to be a politician maybe just maybe everything would not be so fucked up, maybe if people got elected because they display some common sense, truly care about the taxpayers money that they are elected and essentially entrusted to make good decisions with (which they don't)...
So you want the Status Quo...Im glad for you, Im glad that you support the present status quo of liars and corruptness that takes place. These are the clowns you want? A PM who campaigned on running more deficits, thats leadership, pile more debt on future generations as our social programs get eroded and are starved of the money they deserve because our politicians dating back decades can not/will not live with in their/our means as a country...and the great part of these politicians who can't add, they eventually leave office with generous pension/severance while making somewhere around 4 times the average Canadian, and they leave the mess behind, us holding more debt, no these current clowns are selfish and greedy, well at least i know where O' Leary stands ... sounds like he'd fit in with the rest of the greed and corruption.
so would you hire someone as CEO of a company who has never worked in an office before? that doens't make any sense at all. if he wants to be in a cabinet position for a while or at least on a provincial level, but to go directly from the private sector to leader of a country? that's ludicrous.
I don't know where this god shit came from. No one is holding them to any higher standard other than EXPERIENCE. like you need in any job that requires leadership.
Flight Risk out NOW!
www.headstonesband.com
0
Options
brianlux
Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 40,736
Oh well, i refuse to hold politicians to any specific levels, politicians should walk amongst us not in the clouds and pretend their shit don't stink. I do not fucking care if you've been in public office one day, makes no fucking difference to me...maybe if people quit pretending you need special skill sets to be a politician maybe just maybe everything would not be so fucked up, maybe if people got elected because they display some common sense, truly care about the taxpayers money that they are elected and essentially entrusted to make good decisions with (which they don't)...
So you want the Status Quo...Im glad for you, Im glad that you support the present status quo of liars and corruptness that takes place. These are the clowns you want? A PM who campaigned on running more deficits, thats leadership, pile more debt on future generations as our social programs get eroded and are starved of the money they deserve because our politicians dating back decades can not/will not live with in their/our means as a country...and the great part of these politicians who can't add, they eventually leave office with generous pension/severance while making somewhere around 4 times the average Canadian, and they leave the mess behind, us holding more debt, no these current clowns are selfish and greedy, well at least i know where O' Leary stands ... sounds like he'd fit in with the rest of the greed and corruption.
so would you hire someone as CEO of a company who has never worked in an office before? that doens't make any sense at all. if he wants to be in a cabinet position for a while or at least on a provincial level, but to go directly from the private sector to leader of a country? that's ludicrous.
Not ludicrous at all...
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.”
Oh well, i refuse to hold politicians to any specific levels, politicians should walk amongst us not in the clouds and pretend their shit don't stink. I do not fucking care if you've been in public office one day, makes no fucking difference to me...maybe if people quit pretending you need special skill sets to be a politician maybe just maybe everything would not be so fucked up, maybe if people got elected because they display some common sense, truly care about the taxpayers money that they are elected and essentially entrusted to make good decisions with (which they don't)...
So you want the Status Quo...Im glad for you, Im glad that you support the present status quo of liars and corruptness that takes place. These are the clowns you want? A PM who campaigned on running more deficits, thats leadership, pile more debt on future generations as our social programs get eroded and are starved of the money they deserve because our politicians dating back decades can not/will not live with in their/our means as a country...and the great part of these politicians who can't add, they eventually leave office with generous pension/severance while making somewhere around 4 times the average Canadian, and they leave the mess behind, us holding more debt, no these current clowns are selfish and greedy, well at least i know where O' Leary stands ... sounds like he'd fit in with the rest of the greed and corruption.
so would you hire someone as CEO of a company who has never worked in an office before? that doens't make any sense at all. if he wants to be in a cabinet position for a while or at least on a provincial level, but to go directly from the private sector to leader of a country? that's ludicrous.
Not ludicrous at all...
well if Oleary can make a wish at a carnival not to be such a dick, I'm all for it.
Oh well, i refuse to hold politicians to any specific levels, politicians should walk amongst us not in the clouds and pretend their shit don't stink. I do not fucking care if you've been in public office one day, makes no fucking difference to me...maybe if people quit pretending you need special skill sets to be a politician maybe just maybe everything would not be so fucked up, maybe if people got elected because they display some common sense, truly care about the taxpayers money that they are elected and essentially entrusted to make good decisions with (which they don't)...
So you want the Status Quo...Im glad for you, Im glad that you support the present status quo of liars and corruptness that takes place. These are the clowns you want? A PM who campaigned on running more deficits, thats leadership, pile more debt on future generations as our social programs get eroded and are starved of the money they deserve because our politicians dating back decades can not/will not live with in their/our means as a country...and the great part of these politicians who can't add, they eventually leave office with generous pension/severance while making somewhere around 4 times the average Canadian, and they leave the mess behind, us holding more debt, no these current clowns are selfish and greedy, well at least i know where O' Leary stands ... sounds like he'd fit in with the rest of the greed and corruption.
so would you hire someone as CEO of a company who has never worked in an office before? that doens't make any sense at all. if he wants to be in a cabinet position for a while or at least on a provincial level, but to go directly from the private sector to leader of a country? that's ludicrous.
Not ludicrous at all...
Exactly..But hey look at all that experience Clinton has...
It's fucking politics, they have staffers that constantly brief them and educate them, not to mention talking points...and the O'Leary should be the perfect candidate...he's built multiple companies successfully...lol
I have certain rules I live by ... My First Rule ... I don't believe anything the government tells me ... George Carlin
"Life Is What Happens To You When Your Busy Making Other Plans" John Lennon
I would think after electing politicians that continue the same old failed Middle East policies you'd think people would wake up and look at someone like Jill Stein...and if I was a us voter that's where my vote would go even in a close election...
I have certain rules I live by ... My First Rule ... I don't believe anything the government tells me ... George Carlin
"Life Is What Happens To You When Your Busy Making Other Plans" John Lennon
And all of these experienced politician like the Clintons have failed to bring the US citizenry what should be a basic right, universal health care. In the case of Canada all these experienced politicians have brought us all these great trade agreements, and failed to protect the auto pact...can't beat experience like that...no sir...quality, quality people...
I have certain rules I live by ... My First Rule ... I don't believe anything the government tells me ... George Carlin
"Life Is What Happens To You When Your Busy Making Other Plans" John Lennon
0
Options
hedonist
standing on the edge of forever Posts: 24,524
But...Tom Hanks was a toy-tester/marketing guy, and Loggia was the CEO...no?
Oh well, i refuse to hold politicians to any specific levels, politicians should walk amongst us not in the clouds and pretend their shit don't stink. I do not fucking care if you've been in public office one day, makes no fucking difference to me...maybe if people quit pretending you need special skill sets to be a politician maybe just maybe everything would not be so fucked up, maybe if people got elected because they display some common sense, truly care about the taxpayers money that they are elected and essentially entrusted to make good decisions with (which they don't)...
So you want the Status Quo...Im glad for you, Im glad that you support the present status quo of liars and corruptness that takes place. These are the clowns you want? A PM who campaigned on running more deficits, thats leadership, pile more debt on future generations as our social programs get eroded and are starved of the money they deserve because our politicians dating back decades can not/will not live with in their/our means as a country...and the great part of these politicians who can't add, they eventually leave office with generous pension/severance while making somewhere around 4 times the average Canadian, and they leave the mess behind, us holding more debt, no these current clowns are selfish and greedy, well at least i know where O' Leary stands ... sounds like he'd fit in with the rest of the greed and corruption.
so would you hire someone as CEO of a company who has never worked in an office before? that doens't make any sense at all. if he wants to be in a cabinet position for a while or at least on a provincial level, but to go directly from the private sector to leader of a country? that's ludicrous.
Not ludicrous at all...
Exactly..But hey look at all that experience Clinton has...
It's fucking politics, they have staffers that constantly brief them and educate them, not to mention talking points...and the O'Leary should be the perfect candidate...he's built multiple companies successfully...lol
as many if not most have said, ad nauseum, Clinton is far from ideal. She's just also far better an option than the p**** grabbing nuke monger.
Flight Risk out NOW!
www.headstonesband.com
0
Options
brianlux
Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 40,736
OK, now let's take a more serious look at the business of "leadership experience". Some here have suggested that Hillary is best qualified among those running for the job of president. But among her qualifications are experience in propagating war, being in favor of the use of fracking and receiving funding from the super rich. Jill Stein, some of you would argue, lacks the experience to be a leader. But what are some of her qualifications? Highly educated. Experience in caring for people. A strong desire to protect the planet. Much more in favor of seeking diplomatic solutions as opposed to starting wars. Which experience is more important? If you like war, don't care about the health of the planet and believe in the super rich and a shrinking middle class, you should vote for Hillary. If you believe in compassion, caring for people, peace, a healthy planet, you should vote for Stein.
The other thing some of you might add is that someone like Stein doesn't have the experience in government someone like Hillary has. To that I say, quite sincerely, so what? The president does not work every aspect of government any more than a CEO works every aspect of a corporations. Someone like Stein would be able to cover the areas she is inexperienced in with a strong cabinet and good advisors. She is smart. She would learn what she needs to know in areas in which she is weak and would find good advisors for those areas. Clinton is not going to do that. She doesn't show as strong concern for the environment as for big business. Guess which one is going to get priority? Guess which one is going to ruin your land base the quickest?
So if experience means status quo including war, wealth vs poor and a ruined planet, vote for Hillary. If you want a crack at a more equitable world with a healthier environment and a greater chance for peace, vote for Stein.
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.”
OK, now let's take a more serious look at the business of "leadership experience". Some here have suggested that Hillary is best qualified among those running for the job of president. But among her qualifications are experience in propagating war, being in favor of the use of fracking and receiving funding from the super rich. Jill Stein, some of you would argue, lacks the experience to be a leader. But what are some of her qualifications? Highly educated. Experience in caring for people. A strong desire to protect the planet. Much more in favor of seeking diplomatic solutions as opposed to starting wars. Which experience is more important? If you like war, don't care about the health of the planet and believe in the super rich and a shrinking middle class, you should vote for Hillary. If you believe in compassion, caring for people, peace, a healthy planet, you should vote for Stein.
The other thing some of you might add is that someone like Stein doesn't have the experience in government someone like Hillary has. To that I say, quite sincerely, so what? The president does not work every aspect of government any more than a CEO works every aspect of a corporations. Someone like Stein would be able to cover the areas she is inexperienced in with a strong cabinet and good advisors. She is smart. She would learn what she needs to know in areas in which she is weak and would find good advisors for those areas. Clinton is not going to do that. She doesn't show as strong concern for the environment as for big business. Guess which one is going to get priority? Guess which one is going to ruin your land base the quickest?
So if experience means status quo including war, wealth vs poor and a ruined planet, vote for Hillary. If you want a crack at a more equitable world with a healthier environment and a greater chance for peace, vote for Stein.
Brian, very well said...
I have certain rules I live by ... My First Rule ... I don't believe anything the government tells me ... George Carlin
"Life Is What Happens To You When Your Busy Making Other Plans" John Lennon
OK, now let's take a more serious look at the business of "leadership experience". Some here have suggested that Hillary is best qualified among those running for the job of president. But among her qualifications are experience in propagating war, being in favor of the use of fracking and receiving funding from the super rich. Jill Stein, some of you would argue, lacks the experience to be a leader. But what are some of her qualifications? Highly educated. Experience in caring for people. A strong desire to protect the planet. Much more in favor of seeking diplomatic solutions as opposed to starting wars. Which experience is more important? If you like war, don't care about the health of the planet and believe in the super rich and a shrinking middle class, you should vote for Hillary. If you believe in compassion, caring for people, peace, a healthy planet, you should vote for Stein.
The other thing some of you might add is that someone like Stein doesn't have the experience in government someone like Hillary has. To that I say, quite sincerely, so what? The president does not work every aspect of government any more than a CEO works every aspect of a corporations. Someone like Stein would be able to cover the areas she is inexperienced in with a strong cabinet and good advisors. She is smart. She would learn what she needs to know in areas in which she is weak and would find good advisors for those areas. Clinton is not going to do that. She doesn't show as strong concern for the environment as for big business. Guess which one is going to get priority? Guess which one is going to ruin your land base the quickest?
So if experience means status quo including war, wealth vs poor and a ruined planet, vote for Hillary. If you want a crack at a more equitable world with a healthier environment and a greater chance for peace, vote for Stein.
Brian, no one is saying that experience is the be-all end-all for choosing a candidate. But experience in government is but ONE of the qualifiications that must be considered. Does it disqualify, in my opinion, Trump or O'Leary from being a decent candidate? No. it's part of the full package.
Stein is a great candidate. It's unfortunate that the US election process doesn't give any official time to anyone outside of the establishment. There is no question that needs to change. In the past, Canada has included all 5 parties in the official debates. One of them even being a nonsensical party that only has the interests of Quebec in its platform.
We all know the only reason Clinton is getting elected is that it's too risky to split the left vote and let Trump win. That's it. That's all.
Do you think that, if Stein had been given the same benefits as the R and D candidates, she would have had a legitimate chance? Even in Canada, our Green Party got about 3-4% of the vote. Because splitting the vote and handing the government to the right is a very real concern for many on the left.
But not all of Canada's parties are represented. Only those with representation in the House of Commons are allowed to participate in the Canadian leadership debates. So that excludes the Communist Party, the Marijuana Party, the Libertarian Party of Canada, the Democratic Advancement Party of Canada, the Marxist-Leninist Party of Canada, the Animal Alliance Environment Voters Party of Canada, the Christian Heritage Party of Canada, the Canadian Action Party, Alliance of the North .... and the list goes on! The Green Party can only participate if they did win a seat (they've had all of 1 seat for a awhile now, which is why we've seen them in the debates in more recent years, but they weren't eligible before then. Did they win a seat in the last election? If not, they won't be in the next debates. I can't remember if they won anything or not). So okay, Canada includes more parties, but still only the major ones. We just have 2 - 3 more major parties than the US... which is definitely good. But it's not like we allow for fair representation of what are considered the fringe parties, just like the US Green and Libertarian parties, Communists, etc are considered fringe in the US.
Post edited by PJ_Soul on
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
OK, now let's take a more serious look at the business of "leadership experience". Some here have suggested that Hillary is best qualified among those running for the job of president. But among her qualifications are experience in propagating war, being in favor of the use of fracking and receiving funding from the super rich. Jill Stein, some of you would argue, lacks the experience to be a leader. But what are some of her qualifications? Highly educated. Experience in caring for people. A strong desire to protect the planet. Much more in favor of seeking diplomatic solutions as opposed to starting wars. Which experience is more important? If you like war, don't care about the health of the planet and believe in the super rich and a shrinking middle class, you should vote for Hillary. If you believe in compassion, caring for people, peace, a healthy planet, you should vote for Stein.
The other thing some of you might add is that someone like Stein doesn't have the experience in government someone like Hillary has. To that I say, quite sincerely, so what? The president does not work every aspect of government any more than a CEO works every aspect of a corporations. Someone like Stein would be able to cover the areas she is inexperienced in with a strong cabinet and good advisors. She is smart. She would learn what she needs to know in areas in which she is weak and would find good advisors for those areas. Clinton is not going to do that. She doesn't show as strong concern for the environment as for big business. Guess which one is going to get priority? Guess which one is going to ruin your land base the quickest?
So if experience means status quo including war, wealth vs poor and a ruined planet, vote for Hillary. If you want a crack at a more equitable world with a healthier environment and a greater chance for peace, vote for Stein.
Remember 2008? People against Obama said he didn't have enough experience to be president, he was only a community leader...
But not all of Canada's parties are represented. Only those with representation in the House of Commons are allowed to participate in the Canadian leadership debates. So that excludes the Communist Party, the Marijuana Party, the Libertarian Party of Canada, the Democratic Advancement Party of Canada, the Marxist-Leninist Party of Canada, the Animal Alliance Environment Voters Party of Canada, the Christian Heritage Party of Canada, the Canadian Action Party, Alliance of the North .... and the list goes on! The Green Party can only participate if they did win a seat (they've had all of 1 seat for a awhile now, which is why we've seen them in the debates in more recent years, but they weren't eligible before then. Did they win a seat in the last election? If not, they won't be in the next debates. I can't remember if they won anything or not). So okay, Canada includes more parties, but still only the major ones. We just have 2 - 3 more major parties than the US... which is definitely good. But it's not like we allow for fair representation of what are considered the fringe parties, just like the US Green and Libertarian parties, Communists, etc are considered fringe in the US.
but you can't have 12 people on stage during a debate. if you do, you run into the US primary schmozzle. 5 is plenty.
But not all of Canada's parties are represented. Only those with representation in the House of Commons are allowed to participate in the Canadian leadership debates. So that excludes the Communist Party, the Marijuana Party, the Libertarian Party of Canada, the Democratic Advancement Party of Canada, the Marxist-Leninist Party of Canada, the Animal Alliance Environment Voters Party of Canada, the Christian Heritage Party of Canada, the Canadian Action Party, Alliance of the North .... and the list goes on! The Green Party can only participate if they did win a seat (they've had all of 1 seat for a awhile now, which is why we've seen them in the debates in more recent years, but they weren't eligible before then. Did they win a seat in the last election? If not, they won't be in the next debates. I can't remember if they won anything or not). So okay, Canada includes more parties, but still only the major ones. We just have 2 - 3 more major parties than the US... which is definitely good. But it's not like we allow for fair representation of what are considered the fringe parties, just like the US Green and Libertarian parties, Communists, etc are considered fringe in the US.
but you can't have 12 people on stage during a debate. if you do, you run into the US primary schmozzle. 5 is plenty.
What about when the Green Party doesn't win a seat? Still all good? I feel like they should get rid of this holding a seat caveat with straight up popular votes in the previous election. Get over, say, 3%, and they belong in the next debates (none of this 15% support nonsense that the US does).
Post edited by PJ_Soul on
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
But not all of Canada's parties are represented. Only those with representation in the House of Commons are allowed to participate in the Canadian leadership debates. So that excludes the Communist Party, the Marijuana Party, the Libertarian Party of Canada, the Democratic Advancement Party of Canada, the Marxist-Leninist Party of Canada, the Animal Alliance Environment Voters Party of Canada, the Christian Heritage Party of Canada, the Canadian Action Party, Alliance of the North .... and the list goes on! The Green Party can only participate if they did win a seat (they've had all of 1 seat for a awhile now, which is why we've seen them in the debates in more recent years, but they weren't eligible before then. Did they win a seat in the last election? If not, they won't be in the next debates. I can't remember if they won anything or not). So okay, Canada includes more parties, but still only the major ones. We just have 2 - 3 more major parties than the US... which is definitely good. But it's not like we allow for fair representation of what are considered the fringe parties, just like the US Green and Libertarian parties, Communists, etc are considered fringe in the US.
but you can't have 12 people on stage during a debate. if you do, you run into the US primary schmozzle. 5 is plenty.
What about when the Green Party doesn't win a seat? Still all good? I feel like they should get rid of this holding a seat caveat with straight up popular votes in the previous election. Get over, say, 3%, and they belong in the next debates (none of this 15% nonsense that the US does).
Comments
"Life Is What Happens To You When Your Busy Making Other Plans" John Lennon
So you want the Status Quo...Im glad for you, Im glad that you support the present status quo of liars and corruptness that takes place. These are the clowns you want? A PM who campaigned on running more deficits, thats leadership, pile more debt on future generations as our social programs get eroded and are starved of the money they deserve because our politicians dating back decades can not/will not live with in their/our means as a country...and the great part of these politicians who can't add, they eventually leave office with generous pension/severance while making somewhere around 4 times the average Canadian, and they leave the mess behind, us holding more debt, no these current clowns are selfish and greedy, well at least i know where O' Leary stands ... sounds like he'd fit in with the rest of the greed and corruption.
"Life Is What Happens To You When Your Busy Making Other Plans" John Lennon
"Life Is What Happens To You When Your Busy Making Other Plans" John Lennon
I have no clue why you are suddenly talking about me wanting and supporting the status quo. I never said anything about that. Don't read between the lines - you're not good at it. You refuse to hold politicians to any specific level of expectation? Well, that's pretty weird.
Is often been said municipal politics are the least corrupt, why is that...I think because they live in the community full time, not nearly as easy to hide from the electorate, many in municipal politics come from all walks of life, at least in my community they are, they are accountable...we have good services, no service cut back, a debt management plan, no infrastructure deficit and money put a side for future infrastructure projects...not sure many of these so called quality federal and provincial politicians can say the same...actually I know they can't. when where running 30 billion dollar deficits annually...
"Life Is What Happens To You When Your Busy Making Other Plans" John Lennon
I'm not sure who you are actually talking about. Are you claiming that there isn't a single politician in Canada's government who is competent? If so, I guess they are doing a pretty good job then, considering, lol.
I have often said that I don't trust politicians as far as I can throw them, but you seem to be under some other impression (I think because I am capable of objective thoughts). I just wanted to remind you of where I stand. Not where you think I do, it looks like.
www.headstonesband.com
www.headstonesband.com
www.headstonesband.com
www.headstonesband.com
It's fucking politics, they have staffers that constantly brief them and educate them, not to mention talking points...and the O'Leary should be the perfect candidate...he's built multiple companies successfully...lol
"Life Is What Happens To You When Your Busy Making Other Plans" John Lennon
"Life Is What Happens To You When Your Busy Making Other Plans" John Lennon
"Life Is What Happens To You When Your Busy Making Other Plans" John Lennon
www.headstonesband.com
The other thing some of you might add is that someone like Stein doesn't have the experience in government someone like Hillary has. To that I say, quite sincerely, so what? The president does not work every aspect of government any more than a CEO works every aspect of a corporations. Someone like Stein would be able to cover the areas she is inexperienced in with a strong cabinet and good advisors. She is smart. She would learn what she needs to know in areas in which she is weak and would find good advisors for those areas. Clinton is not going to do that. She doesn't show as strong concern for the environment as for big business. Guess which one is going to get priority? Guess which one is going to ruin your land base the quickest?
So if experience means status quo including war, wealth vs poor and a ruined planet, vote for Hillary. If you want a crack at a more equitable world with a healthier environment and a greater chance for peace, vote for Stein.
"Life Is What Happens To You When Your Busy Making Other Plans" John Lennon
Stein is a great candidate. It's unfortunate that the US election process doesn't give any official time to anyone outside of the establishment. There is no question that needs to change. In the past, Canada has included all 5 parties in the official debates. One of them even being a nonsensical party that only has the interests of Quebec in its platform.
We all know the only reason Clinton is getting elected is that it's too risky to split the left vote and let Trump win. That's it. That's all.
Do you think that, if Stein had been given the same benefits as the R and D candidates, she would have had a legitimate chance? Even in Canada, our Green Party got about 3-4% of the vote. Because splitting the vote and handing the government to the right is a very real concern for many on the left.
www.headstonesband.com
www.headstonesband.com
www.headstonesband.com