Upcoming Election

  • Thread starter Thread starter Bigevildoer
  • Start date Start date
B

Bigevildoer

Guest
Forum Sponsor
Everyone decide who to vote for yet?
Or is your vote going to be decided by "which is the lesser of all evils?"

Our system is great in theory, but when all parties lie their faces off in order to get our vote and then are completely unaccountable for their promises, things break down.

Watch the debate tonight? A question was asked, and answered in the flimsiest manner possible and then degraded to spouting off whatever the candidate wanted to on completely unrelated manners.

Personally, I'm an advocate for declining my ballot. This is NOT simply not going to vote, but registering your vote as Declined. Basically saying you're sick to death of all the crap these politicians feed us, and that none of them are worthy of your confidence.

In any other forum, preaching a principle and then re-neg'ing on it would be considered to be fraud.... politicians have defrauded the public for god knows how long... maybe a jail term on fraud of this epic proportion would be suitable.

I *REALLY* wonder what the parties would think if the Declined Vote would exceed any party's total count...

Just my thoughts...
 
The "declined" vote option is so whiney and wishy-washy! Take a stand and get involved.... you can change the world if you are involved. Declining your vote will not change anything IMHO. Nothing is perfect... you pick the best available alternative and work with it to shape it into something that is more to your liking. Also, if you are concerned about their lying, then hold them accountable! Get in their faces and tell them you are no longer willing to put up with this. If everyone does nothing then the system will stay as it is.
 
Last edited:
Bigevildoer said:
Watch the debate tonight? A question was asked, and answered in the flimsiest manner possible and then degraded to spouting off whatever the candidate wanted to on completely unrelated manners.
Click to expand...

Who needs a debate? The parties' philosophy is pretty easy to figure out, they all fit a well worn mould in the left-right spectrum. Their only purpose in debates is to duck and dodge any negative associations with the party.

The Conservatives believe in figuring out the big picture problems and letting individuals make the best they can of things for themselves. They have faith, either of the religious variety - that God will watch over people, and/or the economic variety - that financial wealth will trickle down.

The NDP worry about the little guy, even if that's at the expense of the greater economy. They seem to dismiss the downside by viewing business as inherently harmful, even purposely evil.

The Liberals try to cover the middle ground, lacking any strong defining character of their own like the other two.

The Greens are still new so it's a bit harder to know where they stand, but they seem to be somewhere in the left/centrist range.

So you just have to decide where you stand and vote accordingly. Forget the theatrics.
 
fastar1 said:
Who needs a debate? The parties' philosophy is pretty easy to figure out, they all fit a well worn mould in the left-right spectrum. Their only purpose in debates is to duck and dodge any negative associations with the party.

The Conservatives believe in figuring out the big picture problems and letting individuals make the best they can of things for themselves. They have faith, either of the religious variety - that God will watch over people, and/or the economic variety - that financial wealth will trickle down.

The NDP worry about the little guy, even if that's at the expense of the greater economy. They seem to dismiss the downside by viewing business as inherently harmful, even purposely evil.

The Liberals try to cover the middle ground, lacking any strong defining character of their own like the other two.

The Greens are still new so it's a bit harder to know where they stand, but they seem to be somewhere in the left/centrist range.

So you just have to decide where you stand and vote accordingly. Forget the theatrics.
Click to expand...


You've hit the nail on the head in describing the parties in one sentence each (quite brilliantly, actually!)... except I think the NDP is a bit more pragmatic than that. It might be more accurate to say the NDP are a little more biased toward spreading the wealth for the good of all society.
 
ike said:
You've hit the nail on the head in describing the parties in one sentence each (quite brilliantly, actually!)... except I think the NDP is a bit more pragmatic than that. It might be more accurate to say the NDP are a little more biased toward spreading the wealth for the good of all society.
Click to expand...

I am not sure if you met anyone who actually lived under socialism and in all tried examples they have failed miserably. "spreading the wealth" is an accurate statement, but it will be spread way too thin to the point that, it won't only affect the wealthy but will also stretch to the middle class and then everyone becomes poor.

MCguinty is a very bad liar, and Tim Hudak just rubs me the wrong way. at this point I suggest you go with the best position you can come up with and support whoever BUT please please please do not spoil your ballot or not vote, because that is the only WORST thing that can happen than electing the wrong person.
 
For the first time in a long time, I have no idea who to vote for.
McGuinty lies, nickels and dimes us to death, and is maiking desperate last-minute moves to buy votes.
Hudak attacks everything, offers nothing.
And Horwath is NDP and that just ain't gonna happen.
 
As a Torontonian, I am reluctant to vote the Conservatives. I read somewhere that they would consider downloading as a means of balancing the budget. While I am in favour of balancing the books, I don't think Toronto can handle much more downloading. The city already has a big deficit coming next year that they still haven't sorted out yet.
 
I am old enough to have lived under all three parties' rule.
And they all lied.

I actaully wasted an hour of my life watching the debate last night, and it was painful.
Why can't any of them just answer a straight question?

Not that they can be trusted to even attempt to do what they say anyways.

I've long thought that at the end of a politicians term, there should be some kind of accounting for their actions.
If they cannot demonstrate that they have at least made realistic efforts to acheive their campaign promises, they should face mandatory jail time.
 
I will not be voting because there is no point. Everyone votes based on what their candidate of choice "promises" to do or stands for, however the minute they are elected they forget about all the promises. In the end you might as well vote for the guy with the best suit cause it has the same effect.
 
one big issue for me is the megaquarry that a foreign company wants to put in north west of toronto that will effectively demolish prime farmland that provides the gta with a 1/4 of a staple food source (causing food prices to go up everywhere) and poison the water table in that area (water flows down hill, eventually that will get to lake ontario). all parties except the conservatives have stated where they stand on the matter and I fear the cons are pro quarry (and the raping of our resources by a foreign company).

looking at the websites you have no idea where the cons stand on any issue and have to download their platform which is still vague, what are they hiding? I also fear for the labour laws with conservatives in power (why is it that ontario has some of the worst labour laws in Canada? out west if you work past your scheduled shift you get overtime, you work past your 40 hours and you get over time).

the liberals need a house cleaning before I would ever vote for them, not just mcguinty, there's the lady that tried to make a needless law banning children under 14 on the back of motorcycles who was trying to make the law for the sake of making a law (i think our politicians should be looking over the laws and seeing which ones could be stricken from the books instead of making more needless laws).

The ndp look good on paper and i like their platform except their stance on nuclear power and federally on gun ownership... I'm too libertarian to vote for them.

Green seem to be extreemist NDP
 
Debates in this day and age of politics are pointless. It's just well-rehearsed lines and talking points, and no one actually answers any of the questions posed to them. It was particularly obvious with Hudak, who offered almost NO ideas of his own and simply attacked McGuinty and alternately waxed poetic about his immigrant parents. It was like he was borrowing a page from Rob Ford's campaign team - stay on point and repeat the same catchphrases over 'n over until it's effectively buried in the voter psyche. I'm no particular fan of McGuinty, but more than the other two he actually spoke in detail about the issues (whether he was being factual or not is another story).

I have no frickin' clue who to vote for, and that debate didn't help much.
 
CruisnGrrl said:
one big issue for me is the megaquarry that a foreign company wants to put in north west of toronto that will effectively demolish prime farmland that provides the gta with a 1/4 of a staple food source (causing food prices to go up everywhere) and poison the water table in that area (water flows down hill, eventually that will get to lake ontario). all parties except the conservatives have stated where they stand on the matter and I fear the cons are pro quarry (and the raping of our resources by a foreign company).
Click to expand...
I live in the area and there's a LOT of disinformation regarding quarries being sent out by groups which oppose them. One of the most vocal groups comprises home and land owners whose prime concern is the value of theior own properties, not the environment. At least two of the members are retired financiers who had previously worked directly in the aggregate business, financing quarries. One of them flies a helicopter to the city every week, rather than make the one hour drive. But she's an enviromentalist when it comes to the quarry.
"Foreign" ownership doesn't matter; the jobs will be local. A quarry can't be outsourced.
Quarries don't "poison" water tables; farms using pesticides and herbicides do far more damage. They do, however, divert water, which is an issue. So do horse farms and golf courses, but nobody complains about that because they're so "rural". The diversion for this particular quarry has been addressed in numerous public meetings.
The owners of that prime farm land are all too happy to sell their land, if not to the quarry, then to a developer or golf course or whatever else will give them enough money to retire. In the almost 20 years I have lived there, I have seen Brampton <shudder> creep steadily north, subdivision by subdivision.
Food prices are dictated far more by futures commodities than by local conditions. The idea that local is cheaper is misleading. Twenty bushels of tomatoes driven 200kms by truck uses more fuel per tomato than 20,000 bushels by train. But "buy local" makes city people feel like they're somehow children of the earth.
Aggregates, however, are affected by local conditions. Quarrying hundreds of miles from market has a direct effect on price and environment. Roads, housing, pharmaceuticals (they use aggregates) will all increase in price as the cost of bringing in raw materials increases.
It's an issue with a lot of pros and cons on both sides and the simplistic rhetoric like "the raping of our resources by a foreign company" being bandied about does nothing to resolve anything. There have been quarries in that area for over 200 years; Queen's Park is built from stone taken from there. They provide jobs, produce an important product, and stimulate the local economy. On the other hand, they affect water tables, increase truck traffic and are unsightly.
BTW, all three parties have formed governments in recent years and none of them have ever addressed the issue conclusively. That includes the former Liberal premier who lives around the corner and the fomer Conservative premier in the area.
 
I don't dispute that we need quarries, it's the scale, I used to live down the street from one north east of stouffville and had zero problems with it (other than they had one that they weren't using anymore and no one was allowed to go mudding in it but that's not a valid complaint). How does a golf course or a horse farm divert water? they're not digging down below the water table, I can see how they use water for operation but not divert it.
 
CruisnGrrl said:
the liberals need a house cleaning before I would ever vote for them, not just mcguinty, there's the lady that tried to make a needless law banning children under 14 on the back of motorcycles who was trying to make the law for the sake of making a law (i think our politicians should be looking over the laws and seeing which ones could be stricken from the books instead of making more needless laws).
Click to expand...

I agree. The Liberal government is so entrenched in this province and country, it may take years to rid the province of Liberal infestation. I think it's important to vote in a majority conservative government and clean house. BTW, the Liberal MPP that tried to ban <14 y/o's on the backs of motorcycles was Dr. Helena Jaczek. Time to say bye-bye!
 
promac said:
I agree. The Liberal government is so entrenched in this province and country, it may take years to rid the province of Liberal infestation. I think it's important to vote in a majority conservative government and clean house. BTW, the Liberal MPP that tried to ban <14 y/o's on the backs of motorcycles was Dr. Helena Jaczek. Time to say bye-bye!
Click to expand...

the conservatives are not any better from my point of view. they're exactly the same as the liberals, it's just where the money goes. After the cuts to health care, education and the selling off of any crown asset that was making money at a loss I don't believe they have our best interests at heart either, their financial trickle down philosophy doesn't work either.
 
CruisnGrrl said:
then there's the smart meters...
Click to expand...

How else are you going to pay for the 6.6 billion contract awarded to Samsung for solar and wind power generation? :rolleyes:

Don't forget about the E-health registry as well. Think of the equipment and facilities that could have been purchased for 2 billion dollars. Face it, the guy's a disaster.
 
CruisnGrrl said:
the conservatives are not any better from my point of view. they're exactly the same as the liberals, it's just where the money goes. After the cuts to health care, education and the selling off of any crown asset that was making money at a loss I don't believe they have our best interests at heart either, their financial trickle down philosophy doesn't work either.
Click to expand...

It's much better than spend, spend, spend, on nothing, nothing, nothing and then tax, tax, tax! Now that the money's been spent, what else can you do? There's no guarantee that Hudak will make the same mistakes as prior conservative governments. You have to keep trying.
 
The Liberals have spent money like there's no tomorrow. Besides they keep claiming that the Cons will create a police state, get in, and the start creating those stupid police state laws.

The NDP would spend it like there's no today, and think they can just print more, because that's what more means.

The Cons have another Joe who leader...

The Province has been running up a big debt since we became one of the have-nots. Something needs to be done about that. Promising to spend more and more money, just doesn't make sense to me under those conditions.
 
CruisnGrrl said:
I don't dispute that we need quarries, it's the scale, I used to live down the street from one north east of stouffville and had zero problems with it (other than they had one that they weren't using anymore and no one was allowed to go mudding in it but that's not a valid complaint). How does a golf course or a horse farm divert water? they're not digging down below the water table, I can see how they use water for operation but not divert it.
Click to expand...
They both use amounts of water disproportionate to their benefits and are both recreational. The diversion comes more from excessive use than actually physically diverting it (though some do with large scale wells) but the net effect is the same.
In the interests of transparency and disclosure, we have two horses. But don't play golf.
Forum Sponsor
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom