I posted the link to their platform..
Provincial politics
- Thread starter Schneller
- Start date
I posted the link to their platform..
wonderings
Well-known member
Not really sure what Mike Harris has to do in an election a decade later. I have voted for all 3 parties at different times. I am not sure which way I will be leaning this election, but I know it will not be voting Liberal simply for the huge amounts of tax dollars wasted and the debt we are in. They have been in office for a long time, to long to be blaming things on the last party in power.
Not so much Mike Harris, but rather what the PC stands for ... Back then they liked cuts, nowadays they do as well as you have heard from TH. In my opinion there's nothing wrong with cutting fat off, but there are things I simply will not agree with and in my opinion should not be touched because they are essential to me and perhaps other people. I just don't trust them when they say their proposed cuts will not affect funding to things important to me (because they have done it before). The same way I don't trust the Liberals when they say the mistakes they have made will not repeat ....
kwtoxman
Well-known member
I find ON voters have been facilitating and enabling reckless party actions, self-serving party behaviour and poor governance. So ON is now getting party behaviour they have voted for and rewarded. One sees poor party behaviour all over Canada and provincially and federally, but I find ON to be one of the worst.
The liberals for all of their many transgressions, broken promises, huge deficits, and boondoggles still ended up being rewarded with office for three terms. And the liberals have a good chance and continuing in office with this next election shortly.
In the last 10 or so years there has been little accountability for party transgressions from ON voters. And unlike many people here who recommend voting for the party that best represents what you want, I believe that primarily a party should be held responsible for its actions and record (for a good record, but especially for a bad record). Otherwise, voters are simply allowing parties to ignore their promises and platform used to get into office and enabling bad behaviour and extremely poor governance. And then one can't trust or expect any party to do the right things.
Ontario's debt has doubled to around $300 billion with the provincial liberal party in office over the last 10 years, and many voters don't care enough to make a change. So the liberal budget platform is a drunken party of continued delusion. And they may well get rewarded for continuing ignoring basic fiscal governance.
Parties aren't stupid, they'll do whatever they can to get into office and survive.... and the message ON voters have been giving is that a Party's record and accountability in office is not very important.
I have following AB politics for the last few years and I find AB voters drive much more accountability to their government. I wish more jurisdictions did that.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/alberta-health-minister-fires-ahs-board-1.1344863
The liberals for all of their many transgressions, broken promises, huge deficits, and boondoggles still ended up being rewarded with office for three terms. And the liberals have a good chance and continuing in office with this next election shortly.
In the last 10 or so years there has been little accountability for party transgressions from ON voters. And unlike many people here who recommend voting for the party that best represents what you want, I believe that primarily a party should be held responsible for its actions and record (for a good record, but especially for a bad record). Otherwise, voters are simply allowing parties to ignore their promises and platform used to get into office and enabling bad behaviour and extremely poor governance. And then one can't trust or expect any party to do the right things.
Ontario's debt has doubled to around $300 billion with the provincial liberal party in office over the last 10 years, and many voters don't care enough to make a change. So the liberal budget platform is a drunken party of continued delusion. And they may well get rewarded for continuing ignoring basic fiscal governance.
Parties aren't stupid, they'll do whatever they can to get into office and survive.... and the message ON voters have been giving is that a Party's record and accountability in office is not very important.
I have following AB politics for the last few years and I find AB voters drive much more accountability to their government. I wish more jurisdictions did that.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/alberta-health-minister-fires-ahs-board-1.1344863
Last edited:
I tend to agree. It started with McGuinty's first election win, when he was saying that he would provide a ton more services when he was also saying that the deficit was huge, then continued with re-elections after lying about 'no new taxes' and so many other things, that the PremierLiar website seems to have finally given up counting them and closed up shop. Failures of accountability. Failures of governance. Failures of a fiscal nature. Time and time again the voting public said, "No biggie. Take a Mulligan." and put them right back in office. This last time they 'punished' them, by only giving them a minority.
But blame also falls on the Opposition, for failing to capitalize on the situation. Did you know that the religious school funding issue was raised by McGuinty's father, long before it ever came out of Tory's mouth? Someone, somewhere, must have heard McGuinty speak on that prior to the election Tory lost. Now Hudak decides he has to sound like a Tea Party wingnut. Hell, I lean conservative and I can't vote for the guy. He'd cut things that I think Government is responsible to provide to the bone; namely education and health care. Rationalization of costs is one thing. Tossing out a number like 100,00 jobs, without any sort of supporting documentation, is irresponsible.
And I've made my opinion on the NDP well known. I do, however, wish that Horwath was a PC.
eljay
Well-known member
I wish voters would stop voting for parties. Do you even know the name of the guy you vote for? Elections are made at a constituent level. The easiest way to break the current cycle is for voters to ignore parties. Look only at the available names on the ballot. Pike the best one.
If you really want to shake things up, apply the following parameter set:
1. Incumbents do not get elected
2. Opponents to the incumbent who have previously held elected positions (at any level) do not get elected
This guarantees a zero governing experience factor, ie the person who you elect has never screwed up before. This also sends the message that no matter how good or bad they do, they are not getting reelected. They have two choices: go hard to corruption to get as much loot as they can (and we can hope they get caught and end up dead or in jail, or vice versa) or they just do the right thing so they can stick that on their resume for later. Also saves millions in pension costs, kills the notion of the career politician etc.
If you want to further stick it to them:
3. Must have had a "real" job at some point in the past, ie been an employee of a company. This guarantees they actually know what it feels like to pay taxes.
Just imagine if everyone voted like this. It would really mess things up for these losers.
Unfortunately, people adhere to parties like they adhere to sports teams, and can't seem to change their colors. So complain they will. Solution submitted, solution rejected.
If you really want to shake things up, apply the following parameter set:
1. Incumbents do not get elected
2. Opponents to the incumbent who have previously held elected positions (at any level) do not get elected
This guarantees a zero governing experience factor, ie the person who you elect has never screwed up before. This also sends the message that no matter how good or bad they do, they are not getting reelected. They have two choices: go hard to corruption to get as much loot as they can (and we can hope they get caught and end up dead or in jail, or vice versa) or they just do the right thing so they can stick that on their resume for later. Also saves millions in pension costs, kills the notion of the career politician etc.
If you want to further stick it to them:
3. Must have had a "real" job at some point in the past, ie been an employee of a company. This guarantees they actually know what it feels like to pay taxes.
Just imagine if everyone voted like this. It would really mess things up for these losers.
Unfortunately, people adhere to parties like they adhere to sports teams, and can't seem to change their colors. So complain they will. Solution submitted, solution rejected.
kwtoxman
Well-known member
I agree with you on the opposition. What a joke. Hudak would have been turfed so fast after his first go-round last election if he were out west. He had his chance already. Now the PCs are hamstrung again with his far right vision and it is obviously hurting them. At the very least, a smart party leader would soft play their more hard core political philosophies and ideas until in office. Then they can run amok like McGuinty did and not need to worry near as much about re-electibility.
Things are so whacked now in ON politics I don't trust any party to be accountable to their platform or even their record until the voting public starts to to demand that. So, until things are straightened out I believe that foremost in an election should be an accountability assessment of the governing party. Did they do what they promised (even if I didn't agree with it) and did they govern responsibly and prudently, especially with finances? One has to start somewhere and holding accountability of the governing party is the way imo. Protest vote them out. Otherwise one can never trust what any part says in any election or any platform as they can say anything to get elected and then back out and/or change later.
After I see a ruling party being responsible and accountable to their election platform, I'll pick the party with the platform I agree with. Get the party's to act in good faith before one picks a governing philosophy. Otherwise, it's just fruit from the poisonous tree. You'll never be able to trust them to do what they say.
That way, I'd vote out the disaster liberals and would take either of the two parties happily (even though I have significant issues with both platforms). Consider that an accountability vote as I said. After that, no ruling party should get continuing majority votes in subsequent elections unless they are not only accountable and responsible, but also have a platform that the majority of voters agree with.
Last edited:
Great theory, but it doesn't work in practise. Anyone who fails to tow the party line is summarily executed (removed from caucus). Think how hard it would be to run as an independent, when your former party is also fielding a candidate in your riding. This isn't theory; it has happened time and again. Ask Peter Shurman how he was thrown under the bus for refusing to take a bullet for the leader.
I scanned their platform previously and saw nothing bizarre about it. I need someone to point out specifically what is so whacked about them for me (other than the fact they have no experience).
Last edited:
eljay
Well-known member
But if everyone practiced this, even the party leader doesn't stand a chance in the next election. If everyone practiced this, every party would be completely wiped out in 2 election cycles. They just could not exist. For example, if there are 100 seats and a party has 70, then they are guaranteed a MAXIMUM of 30 in the next election. Everyone sitting is guaranteed to never get elected again.
I don't imagine voters are going to ever change their colors. But just imagine if they did...
I just want to say one more thing for lols: Everyone keep pennies on you leading up the election. If some pol approaches you, just throw pennies at them and tell them if they pick them up right here right now and polish your shoes while they are down there, you "might" vote for them. I did that to Olivia Chow last election when she confronted me at a bus stop. The next week she saw me she crossed the street.
Show these idiots their place in this world.
I don't imagine voters are going to ever change their colors. But just imagine if they did...
I just want to say one more thing for lols: Everyone keep pennies on you leading up the election. If some pol approaches you, just throw pennies at them and tell them if they pick them up right here right now and polish your shoes while they are down there, you "might" vote for them. I did that to Olivia Chow last election when she confronted me at a bus stop. The next week she saw me she crossed the street.
Show these idiots their place in this world.
eljay
Well-known member
Sure I'll rip it apart.
1. OK but no one ever does that. Small business are cute BTW. We talk lots about them but somehow always **** them. Everyone will sell hemp bracelets on etsy (NDP tried this strategy in BC back in the early 90s... results were hilar).
2. There goes number 1...
3. Do you prefer this to number 2?
4. Number 1 is definitely not gonna happen, education will attempt to set a new lower lowest common denominator
5. Maybe this is more important than number 3. Or is it? And just children? Free AYCE buffet (organic and vegan of course, menus appropriately chosen each day by Dear Leader (or advisors)) EVERY DAY for EVERY ONE!
6. Ummm...
7. Sweet, finally someones gonna do something... talk... action... children, bunnies, etc.
8. Fair... Making... Pay.... marxists, thugs. Politics of envy, etc. Big business bad!!! Too much profit!!! I want to wipe out your pensions and RSPs!!!! You ********, saving, investing. SCREW YOU!!!
9. And no condo will ever ruin my view and people in Stouffville will get to walk to work! To a small business. What happened to number 2 anyway? I hope the train factory isn't in Ontario... at least the iron comes from Newfoundland.
and a few lines down....
We promise!!!! It's all free!!!! It'll be paid for by the ******** that don't vote for us or live near the subway.
1. OK but no one ever does that. Small business are cute BTW. We talk lots about them but somehow always **** them. Everyone will sell hemp bracelets on etsy (NDP tried this strategy in BC back in the early 90s... results were hilar).
2. There goes number 1...
3. Do you prefer this to number 2?
4. Number 1 is definitely not gonna happen, education will attempt to set a new lower lowest common denominator
5. Maybe this is more important than number 3. Or is it? And just children? Free AYCE buffet (organic and vegan of course, menus appropriately chosen each day by Dear Leader (or advisors)) EVERY DAY for EVERY ONE!
6. Ummm...
7. Sweet, finally someones gonna do something... talk... action... children, bunnies, etc.
8. Fair... Making... Pay.... marxists, thugs. Politics of envy, etc. Big business bad!!! Too much profit!!! I want to wipe out your pensions and RSPs!!!! You ********, saving, investing. SCREW YOU!!!
9. And no condo will ever ruin my view and people in Stouffville will get to walk to work! To a small business. What happened to number 2 anyway? I hope the train factory isn't in Ontario... at least the iron comes from Newfoundland.
and a few lines down....
We promise!!!! It's all free!!!! It'll be paid for by the ******** that don't vote for us or live near the subway.
Last edited:
I guess I wasn't looking at it with the same sarcasm glasses you have. No, there's nothing in their platform that you are talking about (ex: they don't claim anything is free).
If you want a sarcasm-proof platform, here it is:
1- We will raise taxes enough that you will feel it.
2- We will use the money to catch up on our debt and infrastructure obligations, but not enough that you will notice.
3- We will reduce our dependence on corporations for jobs, and cars for travel. And like any dependent, people will complain about withdrawal symptoms.
4- We will make mistakes along the way because we're human, and get crucified for it.
5- We will be blamed for the consequences of the last administration's blunders, and the next administration will be praised for the results of our hard work.
6- People will vote for us only if they personally benefit, then blame us for making laws that restrict their personal choices.
7- The global economy will sway out of our control like a drunken sailor and we will get all the blame.
8- People will lie, distort, and mock everything we do (see quote above) while accusing us of lying, distorting, and mocking the truth.
9- People will complain about the lack of choice in political parties and then vote down Proportional Representation.
10- Everyone can go suck a big goose egg.
Last edited:
You can accomplish the same by just religiously voting out people who lie, do a bad job, criminally waste money, etc.. You'll never manage to separate local candidates from the party. Just don't reward parties that treat you like a low grade moron.
Re the Green party platform http://www.gpo.ca/sites/gpo.ca/files/gpo_platform_2014_web.pdf
1. Fine.
2. And you think transit is actually going to reduce traffic? I will grant that there are certain public-transit projects that really are needed (subway system expansion!) but expecting those to actually reduce commute times is wishful thinking. If there is better transit it will let people commute in from further away, that's what has always happened and always will.
3. Fine. The problem is that the average person does not think. If the house is a little warmer than I want and it's cooler outside than in, all my windows are open while my neighbor's air conditioning is running (and mine isn't). Major changes to building code and zoning bylaws are really what's needed here.
4. GOOD LUCK. While I agree with the premise (there is no logic in having two redundant school systems and religion should not have any part of the public school system - the right way to get religion out of it is to eliminate the ONE religion that is supported and thus support NONE of them equally) the problem is that this is so entrenched that I don't see any reasonable way to achieve it.
5. How?
6. How? And this isn't already the case?
7 and 9 I will address together. OK. Sounds good. No more expansion of urban areas so that they won't intrude any further into farmland or green space. Yet people continue to come in to this province. With no urban expansion there is only one way to go - UP! And presumably this also means no more gravel pits (a common rural issue - and I don't dispute that some of the proposed gravel pits have been in some pretty dumb places). What do you propose to build all those apartment buildings out of? Concrete? You know, the stuff that's made from limestone, crushed rock, etc.? - oh snap.
8. Aaaah, the truth comes out. Tax the heck out of industry and drive more of it away so that all those people you are putting in those tall apartment buildings that you can't make from concrete because you can't get the rock (gravel) out of the ground, don't have anywhere to work. Then maybe all those people will stop coming to this province so we won't need all those apartments so we don't need to extract gravel to make the concrete to build them, and we won't need more transit, either!
Loosey-goosey, not well thought out. Sounds nice to the common man at first reading, though.
1. Fine.
2. And you think transit is actually going to reduce traffic? I will grant that there are certain public-transit projects that really are needed (subway system expansion!) but expecting those to actually reduce commute times is wishful thinking. If there is better transit it will let people commute in from further away, that's what has always happened and always will.
3. Fine. The problem is that the average person does not think. If the house is a little warmer than I want and it's cooler outside than in, all my windows are open while my neighbor's air conditioning is running (and mine isn't). Major changes to building code and zoning bylaws are really what's needed here.
4. GOOD LUCK. While I agree with the premise (there is no logic in having two redundant school systems and religion should not have any part of the public school system - the right way to get religion out of it is to eliminate the ONE religion that is supported and thus support NONE of them equally) the problem is that this is so entrenched that I don't see any reasonable way to achieve it.
5. How?
6. How? And this isn't already the case?
7 and 9 I will address together. OK. Sounds good. No more expansion of urban areas so that they won't intrude any further into farmland or green space. Yet people continue to come in to this province. With no urban expansion there is only one way to go - UP! And presumably this also means no more gravel pits (a common rural issue - and I don't dispute that some of the proposed gravel pits have been in some pretty dumb places). What do you propose to build all those apartment buildings out of? Concrete? You know, the stuff that's made from limestone, crushed rock, etc.? - oh snap.
8. Aaaah, the truth comes out. Tax the heck out of industry and drive more of it away so that all those people you are putting in those tall apartment buildings that you can't make from concrete because you can't get the rock (gravel) out of the ground, don't have anywhere to work. Then maybe all those people will stop coming to this province so we won't need all those apartments so we don't need to extract gravel to make the concrete to build them, and we won't need more transit, either!
Loosey-goosey, not well thought out. Sounds nice to the common man at first reading, though.
Audiometric
Active member
In the words of the immortal Joe Strummer "I say don't vote just make trouble"
http://youtu.be/rMH9H6h5fYQ?t=5m01s
Looks like a none of the above again this election
http://youtu.be/rMH9H6h5fYQ?t=5m01s
Looks like a none of the above again this election
GPO leader is on TVO now for anyone who's interested.
Do the candidates get any compensation on a per vote basis?
