Federal election thread -- August 4, 2015

722 posts / 0 new
Last post
Rev Pesky

little eiffel wrote:

APTN News Twitter feed is reporting that the Conservatives booted an unnamed riding association director for racist comments against FN people. Who got turfed and what exactly did she say?

According to iPolitics.ca this was Sue MacDonell, a board member of the Bay of Quinte Conservative riding association. Here's a link to their site. They have screen grabs of MacDonell's facebook page. Pretty digusting.

Another Con bites the dust

 

little eiffel

Excellent. Thank you.

mark_alfred

-

quizzical

'A Conservative riding association director in Ontario who posted online comments describing “Indians” as “self-loathing” and the Cree woman recently crowned Mrs. Universe as a “monster” was punted Tuesday from her position after the party became aware of her social media diatribes.

Sue MacDonell was on the board of directors for the newly formed Bay of Quinte Conservative riding association. She was also an active volunteer for Bay of Quinte Conservative candidate Jodie Jenkins’ campaign...'

http://aptn.ca/news/2015/09/08/conservative-director-booted-from-riding-...

 

Brachina

 Holy shit, will there be any Tories left to contest this election by October 20th?

Aristotleded24

Brachina wrote:
Holy shit, will there be any Tories left to contest this election by October 20th?

I thought it was piss they got in trouble for. Are you aware of one of the Tory candidates doing something the rest of us haven't yeard of yet?

sherpa-finn

Nah. I am in one of the 11 ridings in Quebec in which the Conservatives have yet to nominate a candidate. But I am keeping a close eye on our plumber.

quizzical

hey does anyone know why Trudeau's wife is not  on the campaign trail with him?

i'm betting it's because they're trying to get the love story readers vote.

i know so many 20 something women wanting to vote for him. they don't even know eough about politics to understand they can't vote for "him". they're going into the polling booth to  look for his name. i don't even bother explaining they won't find it.

terrytowel

quizzical wrote:

hey does anyone know why Trudeau's wife is not  on the campaign trail with him?

Maybe it is because she has three children under the age of 8 (the youngest just a year old) and doesn't want to be away from them. She is the primary care giver.

quizzical

they have 3 children. not she has 3 children.

i would ask why then is he running for Prime Minister if his children are so young and he is all about making his wife a single parent??

Pondering

quizzical wrote:

they have 3 children. not she has 3 children.

i would ask why then is he running for Prime Minister if his children are so young and he is all about making his wife a single parent??

He isn't making her a single parent. Lots of people with children travel for work at times. The campaign will be over in six weeks and he still had time to spend with them at home in Ottawa. Sophie just isn't traveling with him or attending all his campaign events. Presumably his oldest Xavier and Ella-Grace are starting the school-year. Nice optics when Sophie can be with him but she isn't running for public office.

mark_alfred

quizzical wrote:

hey does anyone know why Trudeau's wife is not  on the campaign trail with him?

i'm betting it's because they're trying to get the love story readers vote.

i know so many 20 something women wanting to vote for him. they don't even know eough about politics to understand they can't vote for "him". they're going into the polling booth to  look for his name. i don't even bother explaining they won't find it.

Reminds me of when the Beatles first came to America, and they wanted to keep Lennon's marriage a secret.

quizzical

the majority of 20 somethings i know and like him didn't even know he's married and the few who did, well what can ya say....fantasies are everything.

pondering i was referring to tt's use of "primary caregiver". not a phrase used too often in a equal parent relationship. or for a relationship where the parents are still together.

and the better optics are when she's not there. imv. he's being used to target a specific demographic you can tell be his commercials.

bekayne

Maybe his Mom's experience from 1974 played a part.

http://www.biographi.ca/en/bio/trudeau_pierre_elliott_22E.html

“My rebellion,” Margaret Trudeau would write in 1979, “started in 1974.” The day after the election in which she had campaigned so well, “something” in her “broke”: “I felt I had been used,” she explained. Despite her reluctance, Trudeau and his political advisers had thrust her to the forefront of the campaign even though she was emotionally fragile after childbirth. 

quizzical

are you saying Justin has the same shabby relationship with Sophie his dad had with his mom?

bekayne

No, he might be trying to avoid exploiting his wife.

Pondering

Wow. I hope more NDP supporters are talking the same way you are quizzical. My daugher is 26. They have opinions right now but tend to pay more attention in the last 3 weeks and do research in the last couple of days on the web. They are ABC voters who will go either way depending on the riding they are in though most lean NDP their support is soft. They see the NDP as a centrist party which is no surprise as that is exactly what the NDP has been trying to convince everyone they have become. They see little difference between the NDP and the Liberals.

I think most people who take the trouble to go and vote are making up their minds based on more than thinking someone is a heartthrob. That includes 20 year olds. Those who want to think of him as single so they can daydream of marrying him probably couldn't even find a polling station.

Trudeau is not hiding Sophie or his children. He took the ice-bucket challenge with them. Anyone crushing on him would do a web search and discover his family. Sophie has given interviews.

You totally sound like a Harperite suggesting there is something wrong with his marriage or that he is trying to hide his wife so young women will fantasize about him. What a putdown of women.

The NDP is seeming more and more whiney. If and when the NDP loses the election you will blame it on ignorant voters, Trudeau's appearance, the mainstream media, anything other than examining the party's performance.

Instead of standing up for social justice and defending progressive principles and positions the NDP decided that those things interfere with getting elected. The executive decided to move the party as far to the center as need be to get elected. Having done so the NDP still wants to be the defacto party of social justice that cares about the little guy, the voice of the people.

For my daughter's generation the biggest social issue is the environment and climate change. It is a litmus test. You cannot be progressive and support the oil sands or any pipelines.

For that reason what they see is two fairly centrist establishment political parties with one, the NDP, slightly to the "left" but not all that different so not an automatic "no brainer" vote. They will examine the platforms and listen to the leaders then decide.

Aristotleded24

Pondering wrote:
Instead of standing up for social justice and defending progressive principles and positions the NDP decided that those things interfere with getting elected. The executive decided to move the party as far to the center as need be to get elected. Having done so the NDP still wants to be the defacto party of social justice that cares about the little guy, the voice of the people.

You mean the way the NDP rolled over for Harper and voted in favour of C-51? Whoops, I got the wrong party there.

Pondering wrote:
For my daughter's generation the biggest social issue is the environment and climate change. It is a litmus test. You cannot be progressive and support the oil sands or any pipelines.

You claim that you cannot be progressive and support pipelines, yet how do you square that with Trudeau's support of a pipleine that is internaionally notorious as a threat to climate change and has been singled out as one that will make or break whether or not climate change spirals out of control?

NorthReport

And the only way the NDP will ever see power.

 

  Norman Spector retweetedAlthia Raj ‏@althiaraj  16m16 minutes ago

.@ThomasMulcair tells @petermansbridge he hopes for a majority government. Interview on @CBCTheNational airs tonight. #elxn42

2 retweets0 favoritesReplyRetweet 2Favorite More

 

NorthReport

Who does Spector think he's kidding!

Everyone knows our current GG will do Harper's bidding!

Norman Spector ‏@nspector4  Sep 8

Norman Spector retweeted Emmett Macfarlane

Some coalitions pass the test of legitimacy, others don't; GG decides.

Norman Spector added,

Emmett Macfarlane @EmmMacfarlanenot, they are basically attempting to suggest they do not enjoy *constitutional* legitimacy. And they need to be called out on this crap. 0 retweets0 favorites ReplyRetweet Favorite More

 

terrytowel

quizzical wrote:

pondering i was referring to tt's use of "primary caregiver". not a phrase used too often in a equal parent relationship. or for a relationship where the parents are still together.

Thank you for pointing that out, my mistake to use that phrase.

Pondering

Aristotleded24 wrote:
You mean the way the NDP rolled over for Harper and voted in favour of C-51? Whoops, I got the wrong party there.

One progressive action doesn't make a party The Official Party of Social Justice, 10 progressive actions doesn't make a party The Official Party of Social Justice.

We don't have a social justice party in Canada anymore. We have two centrist parties. The Liberals and the NDP who have some policy differences some of which lean right and some of which lean left.

The NDP set out to convince Canadians that they are a centrist party and they succeeded. It's why Mulcair was chosen as leader of the party.

Aristotleded24 wrote:
You claim that you cannot be progressive and support pipelines, yet how do you square that with Trudeau's support of a pipleine that is internaionally notorious as a threat to climate change and has been singled out as one that will make or break whether or not climate change spirals out of control?

Keystone is the oldest mega pipeline and it goes to the states so it became the poster child of pipelines from the oil sands on the global stage. Energy East is a "johnny come lately" pipeline that wouldn't have even been considered a few years back. That doesn't make Energy East a good pipeline especially as it would carry 1/3 more oil than Keystone. You want to argue that EE is a good pipeline go right ahead but the young people I know aren't buying EE as a progressive pipeline. Climate change is THE social justice issue for my daughter and her generation. You cannot be The Progressive Party and support the oil sands or any other pipelines. The Liberals stand on pipelines is no better than the NDP's so they can't claim that crown either.

Neither the Liberals nor the NDP are The Official Party of Social Justice. Both have some progressive policies but both are still centrist parties. We haven't seen the platforms yet but my bet is that overall they will both contain some progressive measures and some not so progressive measures. The NDP platform may be even slightly more progressive but not so much so that they are the only choice, they will be sure to have a centrist economic platform.

Mulcair's argument against deficits is that they leave a burden of future generations. That is a totally right-wing argument against government investment. The Liberals are making the left-wing argument that some programs are an investment that pay for themselves over time therefore worthwhile even if it means going into deficit. Liberals are making the argument that a deficit in education is more harmful to a country's future than an economic deficit. A deficit in clean energy leaves a burden on future generations.

I am not claiming that the Liberal party is more progressive than the NDP. The Liberals are a centrist party. Trudeau did not claim to be on the left of the NDP during his interview even when Mansbridge tried to get him to say it.

The Liberals have always been called "center-left" for having a few moderately progressive planks on a centrist economic platform. That is all the NDP has now, a few moderately progressive planks on a centrist economic platform. The young people I know don't see much difference between the NDP and the Liberals. History is immaterial to them. Climate change is by far the biggest challenge facing humanity and the younger someone is the more of a threat it is to their future. This pipeline versus that pipeline is splitting hairs. Oil sands development has to wind down if not halt entirely.

Trudeau made a good point in the interview. Wealthy people own a lot of small businesses. A flat tax reduction with no strings attached will not necessarily trickle down to the employees of those businesses or generate more hiring or more investment. They could just pocket it.

I am not claiming that the Liberals have a more progressive platfrom than the NDP. I am saying it is six of one a half dozen of the other, white eggs and brown eggs.

 

JKR

NorthReport wrote:

And the only way the NDP will ever see power.

 

  Norman Spector retweetedAlthia Raj ‏@althiaraj  16m16 minutes ago

.@ThomasMulcair tells @petermansbridge he hopes for a majority government. Interview on @CBCTheNational airs tonight. #elxn42

2 retweets0 favoritesReplyRetweet 2Favorite More

 

Harper is saying that the party that wins the most seats is the one that should form government. He is also saying that he will resign if the Conservatives don't win the most seats. 

Aristotleded24

JKR wrote:
Harper is saying that the party that wins the most seats is the one that should form government. He is also saying that he will resign if the Conservatives don't win the most seats.

And anyone who remembers Harper's coalition power-play from 2004 knows that he is lying through is teeth. The distinction that the incumbent Prime Minister has the right to meet the House first will not be a mere formality, and from everything we've seen about Harper and the way he operates, it's fair to conclude that he will try and retain power any way he can on October 20.

The only way Harper is removed from office is to ensure that the Liberals and Conservatives do not have a majority of seats between their parties.

6079_Smith_W

http://www.thestarphoenix.com/health/tories+show+candidates+forum+saskat...

This no-show is actually pretty weird, because Randy Donauer has served two terms on city council, so presumably he intends to have a political future in this town, speaks to people and will have to look them in the eye after this offensive miscarriage of democracy is over:

https://www.saskatoon.ca/city-hall/mayor-city-councillors/city-councillo...

Harper must really be enforcing the muzzle if career politicians are ordered to hide in the closet.

 

JKR

Aristotleded24 wrote:

JKR wrote:
Harper is saying that the party that wins the most seats is the one that should form government. He is also saying that he will resign if the Conservatives don't win the most seats.

And anyone who remembers Harper's coalition power-play from 2004 knows that he is lying through is teeth. The distinction that the incumbent Prime Minister has the right to meet the House first will not be a mere formality, and from everything we've seen about Harper and the way he operates, it's fair to conclude that he will try and retain power any way he can on October 20.

The only way Harper is removed from office is to ensure that the Liberals and Conservatives do not have a majority of seats between their parties.

Hanging on to power after losing the election could cause longer term damage to the Conservative's standing with the public. Hanging on to power despite losing after stating repeatedly they would never do so could lead to the Conservative party's decimation in the next election. I doubt Harper would allow that to happen on his watch. He wouldn't want that to blemish his legacy. Like him or not, Harper's primary concern seems to be the long-term viability of the Conservative Party.

Also, with the economy moving into a period of weakness, Harper may not be opposed to another party taking the blame for a made-in-Canada economic downturn.

Aristotleded24

JKR wrote:
. Like him or not, Harper's primary concern seems to be the long-term viability of the Conservative Party.

Actually, Harper's primary concern is keeping Harper in power at any cost. He does not care what it costs him in popularity, and his control over the Conservatives is so great that they do not dare speak against him. He has surrounded himself with loyal lapdogs and purged anyone from party ranks who dares question him.

Remember the display of state power during the G20 in Toronto, even over objections by then-mayor David Miller about hosting the event in that city. Do you really think that he would not hesitate to use whatever tools he has at his disposal to maintain power?

He's not merely trying to manipulate the system as all politicians do, he's trying to crush it and focribly bend it to serve him, and the only difference between Harper and other brutal dictators is the tools Harper has at his disposal. People like him don't give up.

JKR

Aristotleded24 wrote:

JKR wrote:
. Like him or not, Harper's primary concern seems to be the long-term viability of the Conservative Party.

Actually, Harper's primary concern is keeping Harper in power at any cost. He does not care what it costs him in popularity, and his control over the Conservatives is so great that they do not dare speak against him. He has surrounded himself with loyal lapdogs and purged anyone from party ranks who dares question him.

Remember the display of state power during the G20 in Toronto, even over objections by then-mayor David Miller about hosting the event in that city. Do you really think that he would not hesitate to use whatever tools he has at his disposal to maintain power?

He's not merely trying to manipulate the system as all politicians do, he's trying to crush it and focribly bend it to serve him, and the only difference between Harper and other brutal dictators is the tools Harper has at his disposal. People like him don't give up.

I think Harper would act differently if holding on to power was his only concern. I think he would never have raised the retirement age to 67; He wouldn't have supported income-splitting; He wouldn't be supporting Israeli right-wing Zionism so staunchly; He wouldn't be supporting sending Canadian troops to places like Iraq and Syria; He wouldn't have cut corporate taxes; He would have negotiated with the provinces and reached some kind of deal on the Senate; and He would have appointed well liked people to the Senate.

quizzical

if Stephan Harper believes, like many of his religious followers believe he does, then he is appointed by god to be where he is. there's no other ruler before him and he would not meet with his unequals before god - the Premiers.

...he is also finishing god's work in the middle east. his own holy war.

...the rapture is going to happen soon and the holy war shows it.

Michael Moriarity Michael Moriarity's picture

quizzical wrote:

if Stephan Harper believes, like many of his religious followers believe he does, then he is appointed by god to be where he is. there's no other ruler before him and he would not meet with his unequals before god - the Premiers.

...he is also finishing god's work in the middle east. his own holy war.

...the rapture is going to happen soon and the holy war shows it.

There is little doubt that many of Harper's supporters believe this, but I seriously wonder whether he does. Bob Altmeyer's book "The Authoritarians" shows that social dominators like Harper are rarely religious, but they are willing to pretend they are in order to manipulate their followers. From page 166:

 (High RWAs are authoritarian followers, who are almost all religious.)

Bob Altmeyer wrote:

Religion.

High RWAs, we know, strongly tend to be religious fundamentalists. Social dominators do not. In fact, like most people in my samples, most dominators only go to church for marrying and burying. This would be “Three strikes and ye’re out” as far as the religiously ethnocentric high RWAs are concerned except for one thing. Dominators can easily pretend to be religious, saying the right words and claiming a deep personal belief and, as we saw in chapter 3, gullible right-wing authoritarians will go out on almost any limb, walk almost any plank to believe them.

So some non-religious dominators, as part of the act, do go to church regularly,for manipulative reasons. This amounts to lying, but I hope you don’t think social dominators would never, ever, ever, tell a lie.

The whole book is free, and well worth reading.

quizzical

Quote:
This Conservative candidate's company got $400K in government contracts since launching his campaign

In 2013, Pamic was invited by the Conservatives to testify at the Standing Committee on Transport, Infrastructure and Communities for a study on "how competition can make infrastructure dollars go further."

"I find it rather disgusting that my tax dollars go into projects that I cannot bid on for no other reason than my employees choose to be union-free," Pamic said.

Pamic forgot to tell the committee he's managed to make $2.8 million dollars off the federal government since 2010 anyway.

http://www.pressprogress.ca/this_conservative_candidates_company_got_400...

 

 

mark_alfred

Michael Moriarity wrote:

There is little doubt that many of Harper's supporters believe this, but I seriously wonder whether he does. Bob Altmeyer's book "The Authoritarians" shows that social dominators like Harper are rarely religious, but they are willing to pretend they are in order to manipulate their followers.

The whole book is free, and well worth reading.

Thanks.  Looks interesting.

NorthReport

C51....Trudeau   Frown

C51....Trudeau   Frown

C51....Trudeau   Frown 

Rev Pesky

mark_alfred wrote:

Justin Trudeau wrote:
A large percentage of small businesses are actually just ways for wealthier Canadians to save on their taxes. We want to reward the people who are actually creating jobs, and contributing in concrete ways. So there’s a little tweaking to do around that.

Apparently Trudeau himself has been using this scheme to scam on his taxes:  http://ottawacitizen.com/news/politics/trudeau-among-wealthy-canadians-h...

You might want to think your statement through. Unless you have clear and direct information that Justin Trudeau has 'scammed' on his taxes you could be opening yourself up to some trouble. I read the story and I didn't see anything that suggested Trudeau was doing any scamming. Using a business to run a single employee setup, such as Trudeau's speaking business, is often times necessary, not just a  choice to avoid taxes. In fact you can't avoid taxes with that type of a business because all the income just becomes your income. You can deduct expenses, but belileve me, you need all your paperwork and the list of things you can deduct is minimal. In addition to that, many who would use him as a speaker would not want to write a personal cheque. Creates problems for them as well. So setting up a company to handle that business would be more or less a necessity.

Setting up a company to handle an estate is also very common. When my parents passed away, we didn't, but all of the estate was cash in the bank. Had their been any property it would been much more complicated, so I don't see the problem with a company for that purpose.

If you want to argue taxation, well, that's another kettle of fish. My personal opinion is that taxes should be levied at a flat rate, and there should be no, I repeat no, corporate tax. How's that for a progressive idea? Probably an issue for another thread.

mark_alfred

Yeah, fair enough.  I'll change my post to better quote the article.

mark_alfred

Justin Trudeau wrote:
A large percentage of small businesses are actually just ways for wealthier Canadians to save on their taxes. We want to reward the people who are actually creating jobs, and contributing in concrete ways. So there’s a little tweaking to do around that.

Liberal leader Justin Trudeau can draw on personal experience when he claims that a large share of small businesses are used by wealthy people to avoid paying taxes.

bekayne
mark_alfred

-

Rev Pesky

From the posted article:

Quote:
Are we to tremble at warnings of $10-billion Liberal deficits, from the party that added $150-billion to the national debt?

I think this is the Conservatives weakest point. One of the staples of their platform over the years has been economic management. They no longer have that (if they ever did). Now their only argument is "well, it would have been worse with the other guys!". That's not an argument that's going to win over a lot of voters.

terrytowel

For those who watch E.R. or Grey's Anatomy...

*CLEAR*

The Conservatives getting out the paddles to try and resuscitate their faltering campaign. They have ordered emergency surgery, and is revamping the campaign from top to bottom. The biggest news today Harper has hired Australian campaign whiz Lynton Crosby to take over.

Crosby is known as the Wizard from Oz, and is considered one of the world’s top political strategists. He helped David Cameron retain the prime minister’s office in Britain, and just last month engineered victory in Sri Lanka’s election.

Can Crosby turn things around? Some call him the Karl Rove of Australian politics. That he is the master of the dark arts of politics. The ability to use wedge politics even better than Stephen Harper!

http://www.macleans.ca/politics/ottawa/for-campaign-magic-harper-turns-t...

 

Jacob Two-Two

Not such a smart move, I think. Political cunning doesn't always translate over cultures. A "wizard" in Australia can be a total dud in Canada, even if the cultures appear to be superficially similar, because political strategy (especially for Cons) often involves creating wedges out of small cultural nuances that might be hard for outsiders to understand.

On the other hand, the Cons are so out of touch with the general public in Canada, that someone from Australia probably couldn't be much worse.

adma

The trouble with Crosby's macro approach here is how it's being undermined by the ridicule and meme-ification of the micro (rogue candidates, rogue supporters, etc).  He made Pauline Hanson redundant in Oz, but over here the Pauline Hanson types have already weakened the Conservative structure from within like woodworm.

Charles

Best take on the election so far...and the takes on 'ol Justin Zoolander are surprisingly spot on...

http://www.vice.com/en_ca/read/we-asked-vices-global-offices-to-talk-abo...

 

Pondering
Pondering

Interesting....

   The Agenda with Steve Paikin

Mulcair https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hlUkBb-yXeE

On Mulcair calling Toronto the most important city in Canada I don't think anyone in Quebec or Montreal would take offence because it is self-evident. The days of Montreal and Toronto as economic rivals are long gone.

Trudeau https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y7rOPSHKXVs

Harper https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RHpXEdKkRrI

Very Far Away

Pondering wrote:

Best election ad of all so far.

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2015/09/11/ndp-ad-stephen-harper-ad-perform...

 

 

I wasn't expecting something like this from NDP. It's hilarious.

Ciabatta2

Great line on the hair.  Well done.

 

Doug Woodard

Harper's message control backfiring this time:

http://www.cbc.ca/1.3223579

 

Aristotleded24

[url=http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/fiscal-year-ottawa-surplus-1.3226969]Gov... in surplus, according to Department of Finance:[/url]

Quote:
The federal government posted a surplus of $1.9 billion for the 2014-2015 fiscal year, according to final numbers from Ottawa released today.

The Department of Finance said the figure is a reversal of a $5.2 billion-deficit posted for the previous fiscal year.

In its recent budget, Ottawa was forecasting a deficit of $2 billion for 2014-2015. The surplus brings an end to a six-year streak of deficits, which began in the fiscal year that ended in April 2009.

The excess financial wiggle room inched Canada's debt-to-gross domestic product ratio down to 31 per cent for the year, from 32.3 per cent the year before.

Certainly good news for Harper. It seemed as though he was being battered, but I suspect he took the gamble of a long election so that he could draw fire early on, and now with the budget (apparently) in black, he can put all the problems behind him, and use this to ride momentum to re-election on the basis of "sound fiscal management."

Stockholm

The news of the surplus is also paradoxically god news for the NDP and bad news for the Liberals. When the headline is that Canada was already in surplus last year - Trudeau's ironclad promise to run deficits every year until 2019 sudden;y looks foolish...on the other hand if Canada is projected to have surpluses for the next few years, it makes it easier for the NDP to make the case for keeping the budget balanced and also pay for their promises.

Pages