Election 2015

[The Unknown Poster]

 

@manny_ottawa: @pmharper "How can you identify voter fraud without being able to identify the voter" line stumped Justin. #macdebate

I heard a bit about this. Is the liberal position really that you shouldn't have to show ID to vote?

Yeah i don't know how anybody can object to having to produce id to vote. To call it racist or unfair is just being stupid or naive.

 

Makes you wonder what their plan is.  To round up bus loads of homeless people or others who wouldnt vote anyway, dont know the issues and dont have ID and drive them to the polls to vote "for the right party?"  Just silly.  Its the easiest thing to do, voting... something like 40 forms of ID are allowable.  If you want to vote, you can vote.  If you cant be bothered, you probably shouldnt be voting.  Donald Sutherland, the occasional Canadian, notwithstanding.

[sweep the leg]

I was very surprised at how well May did at the debate. I thought she was very articulate and had her facts down pretty tight. Trudeau also did better than I expected. He was a little too argumentative with Harper, but otherwise I thought he did well. His closing remarks were a little much, but certainly not as bad as TUP tries to make it sound.

 

Mulcair had the best line of the debate with his shot at Harper about having to ask "which one?" when talking about recessions under his watch. Getting Harper to admit he basically tells Conservative senators what to do was also a point in his favour. His fake smile for most of the debate was pretty weird though. He also sounded a little too rehearsed at times. Trudeau got him pretty good regarding his pandering to separatists.

 

Harper got smacked around a little at times, but certainly nothing that could be considered election changing. I thought he looked a little more animated than he has in previous elections. He engaged with the other leaders more, rather than like last time where he never took his eyes of the camera.

[voodoochylde]

The issue isn't that people are against having to provide ID in order to vote (whomever believes that is taking an incredibly simplistic view of things) .. it's that you are potentially disenfranchising 500k+ voters who could prove their ID but not their current address.  Typically, people falling into this group are students or people who have recently moved .. but also impacts the elderly living in long term care facilities and First Nations who live on reserves.  One method of verifying your address was the use of Voter ID Cards (those mail outs you get from Elections Canada at election time). In the last election, about 400k voters used the Voter ID Card as a method of corroborating their address - the Fair Elections Act eliminates its use.  The other issue is that it allows parties to game the system in ridings where there may be a tight race.  Party officials can challenge IDs, holding up / causing lines to back up and people simply leave without casting their vote.  

 

So why was this done?  Potential voter fraud.

 

There's no evidence of voter fraud and, as noted by the Supreme Court of Canada in 2012, the issue of voting irregularities wasn't one of fraud but of inconsistent training of and mistakes committed by elections officials.  They found that the people who voted were eligible and voted in good faith.  In fact, an EC compliance audit (completed before the SCC ruling) came to the same conclusion and recommended (among other things) that paperwork be simplified for elections officials dealing with people with ID issues, better training and more widespread use of the Voter ID Card.  Instead, the Fair Elections Act simply makes it harder for people a segment of the population to vote and does nothing to address the root cause of the problem.  

 

C-23 was a terrible bill and actually does more harm to our elections process than it does good. But this is what you get when you limit debate on legislation and rush things through the House.

[Mr Dee]

But this is what you get when you limit debate on legislation and rush things through the House.

Rushing, you say?

When it comes to the controversial practice of curtailing parliamentary debate, opposition parties say Conservatives have hit the century mark.

On Wednesday, 141 Tory MPs voted to pass a time allocation motion on Bill C-59, a 167-page, omnibus budget implementation bill that also contains unprecedented amendments to retroactively rewrite access to information laws.

Time allocation allows the government to limit the length of debate on a bill so that it can be passed at a quicker pace. Opponents of the practice deride it as anti-democratic.

Opposition MPs said it was the hundredth time Tories have played such a card since the start of Canada’s 41st Parliament in 2011.

The Huffington Post Canada | By Ryan Maloney

Posted: 06/10/2015

[kelownabomberfan]

I was very surprised at how well May did at the debate. I thought she was very articulate and had her facts down pretty tight. Trudeau also did better than I expected. He was a little too argumentative with Harper, but otherwise I thought he did well. His closing remarks were a little much, but certainly not as bad as TUP tries to make it sound.

 

Mulcair had the best line of the debate with his shot at Harper about having to ask "which one?" when talking about recessions under his watch. Getting Harper to admit he basically tells Conservative senators what to do was also a point in his favour. His fake smile for most of the debate was pretty weird though. He also sounded a little too rehearsed at times. Trudeau got him pretty good regarding his pandering to separatists.

 

Harper got smacked around a little at times, but certainly nothing that could be considered election changing. I thought he looked a little more animated than he has in previous elections. He engaged with the other leaders more, rather than like last time where he never took his eyes of the camera.

 

I had to hit the mute button whenever May was speaking as her voice just drives me crazy.  It also bugged me that she was constantly interrupting and chiming in when other people were speaking.  It was especially irksome given how irrelevant her party is.  I wished she hadn't even been invited.

[The Unknown Poster]

I stand by my assertions that Trudeau's closing remarks were absolutely dreadful.  Firstly by what he said "me, me, me, me, me" but mostly because of how he said it.  And I've seen stories talking about the debate that have said the same.  He was trying way too hard and was just creepy in his delivery.  He has a lot going for him, he should stop trying so hard and be more natural.

 

And I agree about May.  How is she even allowed at these things.  I wish the other parties just completely ignored her.  She's a miserable nut job.

[Atomic]

She might be a miserable nutjob but there are lots of miserable nutjobs in Canada and they deserve representation too.

[rebusrankin]

Its not that hard to produce proof of where you live. Having to produce valid ID and proof of residence is standard across western democracies.

[kelownabomberfan]

She might be a miserable nutjob but there are lots of miserable nutjobs in Canada and they deserve representation too.

 

And on that day in August, 2015, the miserable nutjob party was born...with a hearty "ah this sucks, why do we have to do it" to close the inaugural meeting.

[bustamente]

Really do we need 4 - 5 political parties in a country of 35,000 000. The message gets diluted then you get a debate like last night where nothing was really accomplished. When the media spends most of the day talking about what they were wearing and there posture and facial expressions then you know that this debate had no clear points put across. Also i think that the moderator did a poor job of controlling the debate at one point all four leaders were talking at the same time.

[Mark F]

Elizabeth May

 

• International Conservation Award from Friends of Nature, 1985
• Commemorative Medal for the 125th Anniversary of the Confederation of Canada, in recognition of significant contribution to compatriots, community and to Canada, 1992
• Elizabeth May Chair in Women’s Health and the Environment, Dalhousie University, 1998.^[16]
• Honorary Doctorate of Humane Letters (DHumL), Mount Saint Vincent University, 2000.
• Harkin Award from the Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society for her lifetime achievement in promoting the protection of Canada’s wilderness, 2002
• Best Activist Award, Coast Magazine, Best of Halifax Readers’ Poll, 2002
• Honorary Doctorate of Laws, University of New Brunswick, 2003.^[45]
• United Nations Global 500 award.^[46]
• Officer of the Order of Canada, 2005.
• Couchiching Award for Excellence in Public Policy, 2006
• Honorary Doctorate of Laws, Mount Allison University, 2007.^[47]
• Newsweek Magazine: One of World's Most Influential women, November 28, 2010^[48]
• Maclean's Parliamentarian of the Year, 2012 ^[49]
• Maclean's Hardest Working Parliamentarian of the Year, 2013^[27]
• Honorary Doctor of Divinity (D.D.), Atlantic School of Theology, 2015.^[50][51]

[Mark F]

Elizabeth May introducing Brian Mulroney, on his winning "greenest prime minister"

 

 

 

[Mark F]

Elizabeth May interview in Canadian Christianity.

 

"CC.com: You have been identified as a Christian politician. You go to church, you preach sermons, and so on."

 

 

http://canadianchristianity.com/tag/elizabeth-may/

[The Unknown Poster]

She's a fringe candidate pushing a fringe agenda. Should we have a economy party? And a military party. And a foreign affairs party. And an aboriginal affairs party.

[Noeller]

She's a fringe candidate pushing a fringe agenda. Should we have a economy party? And a military party. And a foreign affairs party. And an aboriginal affairs party.

Personally, I'd rather have too many parties, than too few, like the Americans...

[17to85]

Elizabeth May and the green party support homeopathy (aka quackery) and she thinks wifi is bad. How can you take someone seriously when these are positions they take?

[Atomic]

Quebecers shouldn't be allowed to have their own damn party!!  That's all I know!

 

I honestly don't know who to vote for.  I think the Cons have been in long enough, it's time to rein them in.  I would like to give the Liberals another chance... I voted for them until Paul Martin came in, and never since then.  But I really dislike Justin Trudeau.  Nice hair though.

[17to85]

Quebecers shouldn't be allowed to have their own damn party!!  That's all I know!

 

I honestly don't know who to vote for.  I think the Cons have been in long enough, it's time to rein them in.  I would like to give the Liberals another chance... I voted for them until Paul Martin came in, and never since then.  But I really dislike Justin Trudeau.  Nice hair though.

See this is a problem for me. the Conservatives have done some things that have irked me, but Trudeau is a tool and the Liberals selecting him as leader tells me they haven't come to grips with the idea that they aren't the diving rulers of our land. I will never ever vote NDP because I am just so opposed to their ideals. It's too much pie in the sky dreaming. 

[tacklewasher]

I miss the days of the Rhino party. They'd have my vote this time around for just the reasons above. I can't support any of the three leaders.

[Noeller]

Don't put so much stock in the leader.....if the Lib's have the best possible financial plan, and a lot people think so, then I think they're worth a shot, despite some of the stupid things Trudeau has said. I'm interested to see what they present in the coming weeks. Pretty sure I'm split between Harper's Evil and Trudeau's Dumb.....

[rebusrankin]

Curious what is it about the Liberals plan that is the best financially?

[kelownabomberfan]

Really do we need 4 - 5 political parties in a country of 35,000 000. The message gets diluted then you get a debate like last night where nothing was really accomplished. When the media spends most of the day talking about what they were wearing and there posture and facial expressions then you know that this debate had no clear points put across. Also i think that the moderator did a poor job of controlling the debate at one point all four leaders were talking at the same time.

 

I agree.  I kept waiting for him to jump in and tell May to shut her cake-hole, but he just sat there like a teamster and did nothing.

[The Unknown Poster]

The concern I hve over the liberals choosing Trudeau is that party leadership was going with sizzle over steak and thought the Canadian public could be fined by rockstar persona, good looks etc. like they thought he would look even more cool and hip next to Harper and his dad's name would attrCt voters.

And all that might be true but isn't it insulting? Substance should matter more. Yes the "best person for PM" carries a lot of weight with Canadians but still....

That's always been the problem with out system is

Do you vote for party or person? If you despise the national party but Love the local MP or vice versa how do you vote? I think a lot of Canadians treat it like US politics and vote for the Leader.

[17to85]

The concern I hve over the liberals choosing Trudeau is that party leadership was going with sizzle over steak and thought the Canadian public could be fined by rockstar persona, good looks etc. like they thought he would look even more cool and hip next to Harper and his dad's name would attrCt voters.

And all that might be true but isn't it insulting? Substance should matter more. Yes the "best person for PM" carries a lot of weight with Canadians but still....

That's always been the problem with out system is

Do you vote for party or person? If you despise the national party but Love the local MP or vice versa how do you vote? I think a lot of Canadians treat it like US politics and vote for the Leader.

And they totally forget that his daddies name is poison in a lot of the country. They thought Justin was personable enough to shake off the Conservative attacks, forgetting that the reason Dion and Ignatieff weren't able to wasn't their qualifications, both were smart dudes, but Dion was a wimp who couldn't play dirty enough, and Ignatieff had no hope of inspiring the public because every time he talked he sounded like a professor lecturing people. Voters don't want politicians who lecture them. Trudeau might have the personality but he completely lacks any substance. He was a star candidate because his family name is Liberal royalty and they mistakenly thought that was enough. It shows up out of touch the Liberal party is with Canadians. 

[iso_55]

I'd take Trudeau over Mulcair in a heartbeat. Mulcair is the devil.