babble home
rabble.ca - news for the rest of us
today's active topics


  
FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » current events   » canadian politics   » It's official - October 14th federal election called

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: It's official - October 14th federal election called
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 07 September 2008 05:24 AM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The story.
From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
johnbon
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8313

posted 07 September 2008 05:41 AM      Profile for johnbon   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Should be interesting. Four major parties (Liberal, Green, Conservative and NDP) all with their own distinct vision. Let's hope that they spend more time promoting their vision and less time attacking each other.

That should engage Canadians to get involved/interested in the campaign.


From: Toronto | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
soul_scanner
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 15461

posted 07 September 2008 05:47 AM      Profile for soul_scanner     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by johnbon:
Should be interesting. Four major parties (Liberal, Green, Conservative and NDP) all with their own distinct vision. Let's hope that they spend more time promoting their vision and less time attacking each other.

That should engage Canadians to get involved/interested in the campaign.


Correction, it's 5 (Liberal, Green, Conservative, Bloc and NDP)

The Bloc is what could prevent a Tory majority. Harper is going after their vote in rural Quebec, campaigning on a "Strong Quebec" (unusual for a federal party). Never thought I'd consider voting for them, but my local candidate is very strong on environmental issues. Talk about the lesser of two evils.


From: Quebec | Registered: Sep 2008  |  IP: Logged
Bookish Agrarian
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7538

posted 07 September 2008 05:50 AM      Profile for Bookish Agrarian   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I have a suggestion to save money in the future. Can the Governor General (the office not the individual) Today has proven once and for all that no one can force a government to obey the laws it creates. The GG office is irrelevant, lets can it and stand on our own.
From: Home of this year's IPM | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged
miles
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7209

posted 07 September 2008 05:51 AM      Profile for miles     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
For a good 15 years their was a "divided right" that allowed the crappy scummy libs to sweep to power. Now the media is trying to show a "divided left" will this allow the crappy scummy cons to sweep to power.

Unfort I think that the weak libs who will lose seats across Canada coupled with a divided left and a stronger NDP will lead to a slim majority by the Cons.

Only Jack and the NDP can stop this blue wave.
Dion is useless, Duceppe is stuck in the past. Only Jack can help save Canada

My prediction. Cons keep government. Jack and NDP is official opposition.


From: vaughan | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged
Frustrated Mess
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8312

posted 07 September 2008 06:10 AM      Profile for Frustrated Mess   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I can guarantee you all of one thing: this election will be about nothing that matters. Climate change, energy, the economy, health care ... all of these things will be held to marginal roles while the media focuses like a laser beam on the trivial and the entirely intangible and Dion's poor English skills. And people will vote, once more, to cut off their noses to spite their face.
From: doom without the gloom | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
soul_scanner
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 15461

posted 07 September 2008 06:25 AM      Profile for soul_scanner     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Frustrated Mess:
I can guarantee you all of one thing: this election will be about nothing that matters. Climate change, energy, the economy, health care ... all of these things will be held to marginal roles while the media focuses like a laser beam on the trivial and the entirely intangible and Dion's poor English skills. And people will vote, once more, to cut off their noses to spite their face.

I don't know about that. Dion has worked on his English. He now talks slowly and deliberately, although he still sounds nervous. He looks determined to sell the green shift, and the Tories seem anxious to make this an issue as well.


From: Quebec | Registered: Sep 2008  |  IP: Logged
janfromthebruce
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14090

posted 07 September 2008 07:54 AM      Profile for janfromthebruce     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Bookish Agrarian:
I have a suggestion to save money in the future. Can the Governor General (the office not the individual) Today has proven once and for all that no one can force a government to obey the laws it creates. The GG office is irrelevant, lets can it and stand on our own.

I agree with Agrarian - cut the fake colonial ties.


From: cow country | Registered: Apr 2007  |  IP: Logged
remind
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6289

posted 07 September 2008 08:15 AM      Profile for remind     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by johnbon:
Should be interesting. Four major parties (Liberal, Green, Conservative and NDP) all with their own distinct vision. Let's hope that they spend more time promoting their vision and less time attacking each other.

That should engage Canadians to get involved/interested in the campaign.


I agree it should be interesting, however, I must disagree with a couple of other points. And note the inherent propaganda in others.

There are indeed 4 major parties, the Green Party is just not one of them. And trying to build a conceptual framework that they are, is without a foundation of actuality. Having Blair Wilson adopt Green colours does make them a major party. They have yet to elect even a single MP. I am not saying that maybe someday they won't be, though I doubt it, I am saying that, today, this not the case.

Moreover, the Libs and the GP, do not have separate visions, they have the same vision. Soul_scanner even told us so, in another thread, if we already did not know that.

As for your attacking comment, I have found it is usually said by those who are going to attack, but yet do not want others to. Note, I am not saying that you mean this, just pointing out that that is what most often happens.

I would ask, actually, what you mean when you use the word "attack"? What do/would you see as an attack, as opposed to a discrediting of where a party/person says they are, and what they are doing, when they actually are not there, and not doing?

Moreover, I think Harper and the CPC need to be attacked for what they have done to Canadians, and our government. As well, as the Liberals for not conducting themselves as a real Opposition, allowing these things to been done to Canadians, for selfish self-centered, partisan reasons.

Having said that, beyond addressing the above, I would like to see clear statements on what they are going to do and what their vision of Canada is.


From: "watching the tide roll away" | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
inkameep
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3357

posted 07 September 2008 08:24 AM      Profile for inkameep     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Frustrated Mess:
Climate change, energy, the economy, health care ... all of these things will be held to marginal roles

Don't forget the marginalization of Afghanistan.

From: Vancouver | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
jas
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 9529

posted 07 September 2008 08:36 AM      Profile for jas     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by remind:
There are indeed 4 major parties, the Green Party is just not one of them.

Thank you, remind. Yes, an adopted MP does not a major party make.

Does anyone really think this election will chang; much? I'm not one to closely follow electoral politics, but my uninformed, casual opinion/prediction is: slim majority for Cons with seats gained from an ever-fading Liberal party; NDP holds onto what its got, more or less, Greens 0-2 seats (2 being extremely optimistic); Bloc I have no idea.


From: the world we want | Registered: Jun 2005  |  IP: Logged
johnbon
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8313

posted 07 September 2008 10:35 AM      Profile for johnbon   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by jas:

Thank you, remind. Yes, an adopted MP does not a major party make.


True enough, an adopted MP does not a major party make. But with the environment being a major concern, the Greens will carry a lot of influence. Like when the Liberals used to steal NDP policies, repackage them and sell them as their own.


From: Toronto | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
johnbon
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8313

posted 07 September 2008 10:45 AM      Profile for johnbon   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by remind:

I would ask, actually, what you mean when you use the word "attack"? What do/would you see as an attack, as opposed to a discrediting of where a party/person says they are, and what they are doing, when they actually are not there, and not doing?


Perhaps attack was too strong a word. There is nothing wrong with being critical or pointing out the shortcomings in your opponents' platform. However, when it's nothing but criticism, the voters get turned off. They want to also know what a party stands for. And they want specifics - not just generalizations.

For this I partly blame the media. The press loves confrontation and are quick to use sound bites of the various leaders taking jabs at each other.


From: Toronto | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
adma
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11856

posted 07 September 2008 11:22 AM      Profile for adma     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The Peggy Nash signs are already happening outside of my door...
From: toronto | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged
montrealer
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 15427

posted 07 September 2008 11:26 AM      Profile for montrealer     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by soul_scanner:

The Bloc is what could prevent a Tory majority. Harper is going after their vote in rural Quebec, campaigning on a "Strong Quebec" (unusual for a federal party). Never thought I'd consider voting for them, but my local candidate is very strong on environmental issues. Talk about the lesser of two evils.




Indeed. Monsieur Duceppe has been on the airwaves today enccouraging 'even federalists' to vote Bloc to keep out the evil Harpies. Just when you think things cannot become more absurd. And he may even have some success.

However. There are many many more Quebecers who are concerned about keeping out the Bloc than there are who are concerned about keeping out the CPC. And Quebec has a long history of heavy negative tactical voting. Now, with the liberals evidently continuing their prolonged demise, and with the 'tories' (and in some cases even the 'dippers') having clearly established themselves as the second party in most parts of Quebec, the anti-Bloc vote is now going to quite quickly coalesce behind the con candidates (or the ndp candidates in a handful of ridings). So we will see a rapid lock-step realignment en bloc of our ongoing stalemate. The only people who will be happy are the ndp candidates (who are actually serious players in as many as five ridings), who in addition to benefiting from the anti-bloc vote and the anti-con vote will also gain from the always strong anti-liberal vote. (So far at least there is no such thing as an anti-ndp vote or an anti-green vote in Quebec ... that will probably take another couple of frustrated election campaigns to develop.)

And yes the CPC campaign slogan "Le Quebec Prend des Forces" is certainly surprising for anyone who knows the French language. The official interpretation is 'Quebec is getting stronger' but a more accurate translation would be 'Quebec is taking power(s)'. No wonder Bloc-voters are being won over. And the Bloc slogan 'Present!' is equally effective in rallying the troops at the same time as being equally incomprehensible to your average anglophone. Curioser and curioser.


From: montreal | Registered: Aug 2008  |  IP: Logged
nussy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8180

posted 07 September 2008 11:44 AM      Profile for nussy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Who is running for the Liberals in Outremont against Mulcair?
From: Toronto | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
montrealer
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 15427

posted 07 September 2008 11:47 AM      Profile for montrealer     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by nussy:
Who is running for the Liberals in Outremont against Mulcair?

The Liberals haven't been able to find anyone yet. They are also missing candidates in LaSalle-Emard (which Paul Martin is vacating) and in Brossard and Jeanne Le-Ber (both of which they lost narrowly last time) as well as in many other ridings.


From: montreal | Registered: Aug 2008  |  IP: Logged
Doug
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 44

posted 07 September 2008 11:52 AM      Profile for Doug   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
This kid knows what to do.


From: Toronto, Canada | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
MCunningBC
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14903

posted 07 September 2008 12:05 PM      Profile for MCunningBC        Edit/Delete Post
The initial CBC online story was a disappointing lapse into the old CBC habit of trying to do whatever they can to help the Liberals. The degree of prominence given to Harper vs Dion on the carbon tax, the relative degree of prominence given to Duceppe and May, and the very limited attention to Layton are all part of a CBC package we saw in the last election, and the one before that.

It's a carefully managed assist to the Buzz Hargrove et al "vote strategic" thing.

By contrast, the CTV story was much more in line with what should be in such a story. As a social democrat it pains me to say it, but the privately owned CTV, at least on this day and on this story, was doing a better and more responsible job that the Crown owned (Liberal operated?) CBC.

As I said in another thread, here in Vancouver we had a particulalry egregious case of this kind of BS in the 2006 election. One of their radio reporters, Vic Adopia, claimed to have found a woman named Roslyn Hart in the Burnaby Douglas riding. The official story line was that Roslyn came from a family with "great lefty credentials", and that she herself had worked on oh so many Svend Robinson campaigns. But alas, ... Roslyn has been thinking mighty hard these past couple of years, and now she's come to her conclusion. She must go with the Liberals to stop Harper! She's just being realistic, don't you know!

Of course, no one from the Burnaby Douglas NDP was ever spoken to and asked if they knew any such person.

All I can say is, if you're in a riding like Burnaby Douglas that the Liberals have their eye on, watch out for this kind of Liberal propaganda, really, misdirection material, coming straight from your favourite public broadcaster.


From: BC | Registered: Jan 2008  |  IP: Logged
V. Jara
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 9193

posted 07 September 2008 12:29 PM      Profile for V. Jara     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
CBC might smell like Fiberals, especially Rick Mercer and Don Newman , but Radio Canada has the most glowing biography of Layton up on their site right now and the NDP is fielding CBC candidates right and left- so keep your eyes on the prize MCBC!
From: - | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged
MCunningBC
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14903

posted 07 September 2008 02:00 PM      Profile for MCunningBC        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by V. Jara:
CBC might smell like Fiberals, especially Rick Mercer and Don Newman , but Radio Canada has the most glowing biography of Layton up on their site right now and the NDP is fielding CBC candidates right and left- so keep your eyes on the prize MCBC!


Fair enough. But memories of truly rotten episodes do die hard, and I emphasize that the Adopia/Hart episode in 2006 was from CBC Radio. Also, I was referring to their main online story today:

Vote set for Oct. 14: Harper expects tight, tough election

It's not near as bad as the 2006 episode, but it sill gives Jack Layton less play than either Dion or even Elizabeth May.

As for great headlines, ... try the CNN take on Harper's gambit:

Canadian PM employs loophole in potential power grab


From: BC | Registered: Jan 2008  |  IP: Logged
Boom Boom
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7791

posted 07 September 2008 02:01 PM      Profile for Boom Boom     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
CBC Newsworld and CTV Newsnet both started their coverage this morning with their heavy hitters all on board - CBC's Peter Mansbridge, Don Newman, and Keith Boag; and CTV's Lloyd Robertson, Craig Oliver, and Jane Taber. Despite their best talent, it was still a snoozefest, and I don't think it'll get any better unless there's a vital issue to get hold of the viewer's attention span. One would think Layton's determination to cut subsidies to Exxon and to corporations that move jobs overseas would be enough to get everyone engaged, but the pundits seem to think the #1 issue is leadership. If they continue down that path, the electorate will simply press the snooze button and go back to sleep.
From: Make the rich pay! | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
remind
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6289

posted 07 September 2008 02:13 PM      Profile for remind     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by MCunningBC:
It's not near as bad as the 2006 episode, but it sill gives Jack Layton less play than either Dion or even Elizabeth May.
I wonder if they are going to ask EMay and Dion, what they think about their giving less time to an actual major party, the NDP, and thereby impacting democracy unfairly?

From: "watching the tide roll away" | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
Bookish Agrarian
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7538

posted 07 September 2008 02:18 PM      Profile for Bookish Agrarian   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I'll hold my breath waiting, but can you give me a poke when I turn purple and start to look like this fellow
From: Home of this year's IPM | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged
Boom Boom
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7791

posted 07 September 2008 02:52 PM      Profile for Boom Boom     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by remind:
I wonder if they are going to ask EMay and Dion, what they think about their giving less time to an actual major party, the NDP, and thereby impacting democracy unfairly?

I agree it is frustrating that the NDP (and the BQ) get less coverage than the two major parties that actually are in contention to govern this country. The Greens get coverage and they don't even have an MP elected to their party. One of the pundits this morning (I forget who it was, there were so many of them but I think it was Craig Oliver) tried to hide a smirk when another pundit talked about Layton wanting to be Prime Minister.

ETA: actually, I think he was trying to hide a guffaw, not a smirk.

[ 07 September 2008: Message edited by: Boom Boom ]


From: Make the rich pay! | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
remind
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6289

posted 07 September 2008 04:13 PM      Profile for remind     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Boom Boom:
I agree it is frustrating that the NDP (and the BQ) get less coverage
In the other thread you were agreeing with another, about poor EMay and the GP's suffering from a democratic deficit because Layton would not respond to inappropriate questions concerning the GP's getting into the leaders debate, but here you down grade your democratic deficit outrage, to it is "frustrating" that corporate and national media is basically ignoring, when not using propaganda against, a major party in Canada, and against the millions of their supporters.

quote:
than the two major parties that actually are in contention to govern this country.
Interesting that you put this in, considering that the Liberal party is in big trouble. I know it must be difficult for Liberal Party supporters, who have grown so comfortable with the Liberals they are afraid to throw them out, no matter how useless they are.

It is like a comfortable worn out pair of shoes, that are doing your feet no damn good, and causing you other problems, but you continue to wear them, out of habit and "comfort' like a safety blanket, though you are indeed ijuring yourself.

quote:
The Greens get coverage and they don't even have an MP elected to their party.
And yet, they, and others here, such as yourself, have the gall to expect the NDP to do something about their alleged vicitimization.

It seems to me that some Liberal Green supporters here want the GP in the debate so they can tag team, the other candidates, thereby giving themselves another unfair advantage, as the anti-democratic corporate mouths they are.

quote:
One of the pundits this morning... tried to hide a smirk when another pundit talked about Layton wanting to be Prime Minister.
You speak of this proudly, and give it a smirk of your own, as if it was something special, and not an ugly example of media persons pandering to the corporations destroying this country and indeed the world, boom boom.

The Liberals and their media pawns smirked when the "Reform", was making, and remaking, parties, after the Progressive Conservatives turned to dust, because of corruption, greed, and blatent self interest. They smirked at Harper for wanting to be PM.

Apparently thinking they, themselves, were above said misfortune, and that they would be the natural governing party forever, in Canada, the Liberal Party, kept on smirking and started to venture down the same path, as the PC's had. Learning nothing, and not caring about Canadians, but still smirking.

And look who is governing now, "Reform".

In fact, almost the same Reform people that the Liberals and their hacks used to smirk at. And now we see that they have still not learned, and still do not care, by their continued smirks, and perhaps never will learn, until it is too late, that Canadians can, will and have, stopped voting for a founding party, in fact actually, thee founding party.


From: "watching the tide roll away" | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
500_Apples
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12684

posted 07 September 2008 06:57 PM      Profile for 500_Apples   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
My perspective on the historical significance of this election, as copied from an email I wrote:

As far as I can tell there won't be much difference between this parliament and the next, and I don't think the governance of Canada would change substantially in the short-term if the Conservatives went from 124 to 134 seats (or even 114), or something of that sort.

I think the key impact of this election will be how it positions the following election. The two big fundamental changes I see taking place are in the Quebec political arena, and in the status of the Green and Liberal parties. The bloc has been on a one way ticket to oblivion, steadily and consistently except for the 2004 blip, since 1993 (declines in 1997, 2000, 2006, and probably in 2008). Right now Quebec has 75 of Canada's 308 seats which is the balance of power in the current configuration. The Bloc Quebecois has some 40 seats and the other 35 seats are not in play due to opposition to the bloc. The most important change I see happening this time is the withering away of the bloc to maybe 15-20 seats, following which they're close to disbanding and nearly all of the 75 seats, perhaps 60, will go into play. How the parties do in this election will determine their position of strength in the next election. As evidence for this, I note that Canadians will be voting on October 14th. This will be just before Julie Couillard publishes her tell-all memoire of her former relationship with ex-conservative superstar Industry Minister Maxime Bernier. I think Harper is calling this election to go from 10 to 25 seats in Quebec, in order to go for a sweep next time around.

What I think would be "nice" is that the Bloc has proven, in my view, an obstacle to positive change in Canada, restricting the number of seats in play and giving a "free" base to the governing parties.

The other change which I think will take place is some incremental progress for the Green Party. I predict almost no transfer of seats in English Canada, but where the nibbling takes place will have some influence.
1) The Green party will either remain a protest vote or move into the mainstream.
2) The NDP may position itself to replace the Liberals as the dominant alternative to the CPC, which seems inevitable in light of Dion's weaknesses.

I think how the outcome of the Green party will be the other important event to Canadian political history and how Canada develops in the next 30-40 years. The Green party's growth could come at the expense of the conservatives, due to the history of protest voting in the west and the more pressing environmental concerns there, as well as the unpopularity of the Liberals and the NDP from which the conservatives now get a default vote. Alternatively, if Canadians don't bother to read the platforms, Green party growth could come at the expense of the NDP due to the Green party's misnomer of a name, which I think may be why the Liberal party backs them. I think the definition of the Green party will be very important here.

I agree that in the short-term we'll just see more of the agenda to turn Canada into United States North being implemented. I'm not too worried as I think that trend would be quasi-permanent in the current political configuration (a united right and everything else split along regional and demographic lines).


From: Montreal, Quebec | Registered: Jun 2006  |  IP: Logged
500_Apples
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12684

posted 07 September 2008 07:14 PM      Profile for 500_Apples   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by remind:
You speak of this proudly, and give it a smirk of your own, as if it was something special, and not an ugly example of media persons pandering to the corporations destroying this country and indeed the world, boom boom.

The Liberals and their media pawns smirked when the "Reform", was making, and remaking, parties, after the Progressive Conservatives turned to dust, because of corruption, greed, and blatent self interest. They smirked at Harper for wanting to be PM.

Apparently thinking they, themselves, were above said misfortune, and that they would be the natural governing party forever, in Canada, the Liberal Party, kept on smirking and started to venture down the same path, as the PC's had. Learning nothing, and not caring about Canadians, but still smirking.

And look who is governing now, "Reform".

In fact, almost the same Reform people that the Liberals and their hacks used to smirk at. And now we see that they have still not learned, and still do not care, by their continued smirks, and perhaps never will learn, until it is too late, that Canadians can, will and have, stopped voting for a founding party, in fact actually, thee founding party.


I agree.

Liberals used to brag that 52% of Ontario progressive conservative supporters would rather vote Liberal than Reform, it was the most famous Canadian political poll of the 1990s.

When the CPC merger was announce it was hovering around 23-24% in the polls, and the liberals were way higher. I think there was one poll where Paul Martin was winning a hypothetical matchup with Mike Harris, 50-28, and people were using that to galvanize support for Harris.

There used to be 8 or 9 liberal voters for every NDP voters. Now there are 3 liberal voters for every 2 NDP voters. Parity for the NDP is almost there and the Liberals need to wake up if they want to survive.


From: Montreal, Quebec | Registered: Jun 2006  |  IP: Logged
adma
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11856

posted 07 September 2008 07:59 PM      Profile for adma     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Scanning the 416 today...

Peggy Nash already hitting the ground running with signage; a few Kennedys.

Next, headed east, a few Minnas along Kingston Rd; one for Tom Wappel's replacement in Scarborough SW; quite a few along Warden for 2006 Tory retread Roxanne James in Scarborough Centre (and a mere corner cluster for John Cannis); a few Tory signs in Etobicoke North, no Liberal; both Tory and Liberal in Etobicoke Centre; a few Iggys + Patrick Boyer putting up/adjusting his own sign in Etobicoke Lakeshore.

Most pathetic of all: one Judy Sgro sign in York West--a 2004-model sign with an extraordinarily crude taping-up of all evidence of "Team Martin". Why they even bothered to recycle old signage thusly, I'll never know.


From: toronto | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged
MCunningBC
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14903

posted 07 September 2008 08:36 PM      Profile for MCunningBC        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Boom Boom:
I agree it is frustrating that the NDP (and the BQ) get less coverage than the two major parties that actually are in contention to govern this country. The Greens get coverage and they don't even have an MP elected to their party.

If they want to give the NDP less coverage than the Grits and Tories, that's rational. Giving them less coverage than the Bloc is hard to justify, given the NDP 17% national popular vote and the Bloc's less than 10%. Giving the NDP less than the Greens is outside the acceptable range of blarney and BS. It's an obvious scam, and intentional misdirection of the voters.

I am not so much concerned even about coverage amounts, in a quantitative sense, as I am about the outright Liberal party scripts being used as story boards for make believe news items, such as happened in the 2006 election. If only one could get some CBC staffer to state publicly what goes on there.


From: BC | Registered: Jan 2008  |  IP: Logged
remind
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6289

posted 07 September 2008 09:24 PM      Profile for remind     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The CTV actually had very good coverage tonight on the National of Layton, of both earlier today and in Calgary tonight, in Harper's riding, where he started the NDP campaign.
From: "watching the tide roll away" | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
Malcolm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5168

posted 07 September 2008 10:14 PM      Profile for Malcolm   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by MCunningBC:
The initial CBC online story was a disappointing lapse into the old CBC habit of trying to do whatever they can to help the Liberals.

The panel on Sunday Morning included a representative of the Liberal Party - and only the Liberal Party - along with two unaligned academics.


From: Regina, SK | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
Malcolm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5168

posted 07 September 2008 10:16 PM      Profile for Malcolm   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Boom Boom:

I agree it is frustrating that the NDP (and the BQ) get less coverage than the two major parties that actually are in contention to govern this country.



There is no evidence that the Liberals are incontention to run the country.


From: Regina, SK | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
MCunningBC
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14903

posted 07 September 2008 11:52 PM      Profile for MCunningBC        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Malcolm French, APR:

The panel on Sunday Morning included a representative of the Liberal Party - and only the Liberal Party - along with two unaligned academics.



Do you mean the AM radio panel? Yes, I kind of half heard that out of one ear, and I had the impression that the lineup was as you've described.

We have even larger problems in BC with many academic and quasi academics in the environmental movement (READ: well-financed ENGOs that pay salaries comparable to business) who are supporting the Liberals' carbon policies, both Premier Gordon M. Campbell's and Stephane Dion's. They claim to be totally impartial, yet at least one of them, Prof Marc Jaccard of SFU, has written op-ed piece for the CanWest Vancovuer Sun labelling NDP Leader Carole James as "dishonest" (Yes, that exact word) for opposing the provincial carbon tax.

Even after that article Jaccard maintains he's being non-partisan, just speaking his mind. His company, M K Jaccard and Assoc has a $120,000 contract with Premier Campbell's "climate change action team". David Suzuki makes the same "I am completely non-political" whenever he finishes denouncing Layton and/or James.

The carbon tax movement even extends to the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives and their Vancouver economist Marc Lee. You can check out Marc's denunciations of the NDP on the "Progressive Economics Forum", where you will also find posts from Buzz Hargrove's economist, Jim Stanford. Coincidence? Why not!


The Progressive Economics Forum

[ 07 September 2008: Message edited by: MCunningBC ]


From: BC | Registered: Jan 2008  |  IP: Logged
montrealer
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 15427

posted 08 September 2008 09:48 AM      Profile for montrealer     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by nussy:
Who is running for the Liberals in Outremont against Mulcair?

According to this morning's Le Journal de Montreal, the Liberals have finally found someone to run against Thomas Mulcair in Outremont. The comedian Sebastien Dhavernas has been selected/appointed? as the candidate here.

In the interview in Le Journal de Montreal Mr Dhavernas is quoted as saying that the 'censorship of cinema' was the final straw leading him to enter the political arena.

Mr. Dhavernas also said with respect to Mr Mulcair that one should not divide the vote as that might lead to a majority Conservative government.

(The CPC ran a distant fourth in the last three elections in this riding).


From: montreal | Registered: Aug 2008  |  IP: Logged
remind
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6289

posted 08 September 2008 10:51 AM      Profile for remind     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by montrealer:
...Mr. Dhavernas also said with respect to Mr Mulcair that one should not divide the vote as that might lead to a majority Conservative government.

(The CPC ran a distant fourth in the last three elections in this riding).


Yes, I believe we are going to see a lot of that "splitting vote" nonsense on the part of the Lib Greens. That they are even going to do it in ridings where no such thing is possible is hilarious, and can be easily rebutted or even ridiculed for the nonsensical ploy it is.

What makes it even funnier is that they are saying such, while conjoining with the Green Party, thereby indicating the GP is firmly theirs, and are the actual vote splitters.


From: "watching the tide roll away" | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
montrealer
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 15427

posted 08 September 2008 03:12 PM      Profile for montrealer     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by remind:
Yes, I believe we are going to see a lot of that "splitting vote" nonsense on the part of the Lib Greens. That they are even going to do it in ridings where no such thing is possible is hilarious, and can be easily rebutted or even ridiculed for the nonsensical ploy it is.

What makes it even funnier is that they are saying such, while conjoining with the Green Party, thereby indicating the GP is firmly theirs, and are the actual vote splitters.


Your observation about the green liberal conjunction is quite thought-provoking.
Team Dion clearly must believe that Green Party support is NOT coming primarily from the liberals.


From: montreal | Registered: Aug 2008  |  IP: Logged
ocsi
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13760

posted 09 September 2008 11:19 AM      Profile for ocsi     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by montrealer:

According to this morning's Le Journal de Montreal, the Liberals have finally found someone to run against Thomas Mulcair in Outremont. The comedian Sebastien Dhavernas has been selected/appointed? as the candidate here.

In the interview in Le Journal de Montreal Mr Dhavernas is quoted as saying that the 'censorship of cinema' was the final straw leading him to enter the political arena.

Mr. Dhavernas also said with respect to Mr Mulcair that one should not divide the vote as that might lead to a majority Conservative government.

(The CPC ran a distant fourth in the last three elections in this riding).


And here's the dirt on Dhavernas.


From: somewhere over the rainbow | Registered: Jan 2007  |  IP: Logged
Doug
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 44

posted 09 September 2008 12:15 PM      Profile for Doug   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by montrealer:

Your observation about the green liberal conjunction is quite thought-provoking.
Team Dion clearly must believe that Green Party support is NOT coming primarily from the liberals.

I believe they're making the not unreasonable assumption that Green support in the cities will come mainly from the NDP and in rural areas from the Conservatives (or Bloc) which helps them.


From: Toronto, Canada | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Boom Boom
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7791

posted 10 September 2008 10:43 AM      Profile for Boom Boom     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I watched Danny Williams speak on TV during my lunch hour here, and he was positively scathing towards Harper!

Harper dangerous even with another minority government: Williams

excerpt:

"A majority government for Stephen Harper would be one of the most negative political events in Canadian history," Williams warned.

"Even without a majority, he has cut funding for minorities, cut funding for literacy, cut funding to students, volunteers, museums and arts and culture groups right across the country [and] his government cut funding to women's groups and actually went so far as to remove the federal mandate to advance equality for women," Williams told an audience at a St. John's Board of Trade luncheon.

"This all happened under a minority government. What in heaven's name will happen if he gets a majority?"


From: Make the rich pay! | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
Sean in Ottawa
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4173

posted 10 September 2008 01:13 PM      Profile for Sean in Ottawa     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by montrealer:

According to this morning's Le Journal de Montreal, the Liberals have finally found someone to run against Thomas Mulcair in Outremont. The comedian Sebastien Dhavernas has been selected/appointed? as the candidate here.

In the interview in Le Journal de Montreal Mr Dhavernas is quoted as saying that the 'censorship of cinema' was the final straw leading him to enter the political arena.

Mr. Dhavernas also said with respect to Mr Mulcair that one should not divide the vote as that might lead to a majority Conservative government.

(The CPC ran a distant fourth in the last three elections in this riding).


The key word here is comedian


From: Ottawa | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

   Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca