Canada Election 2015

[SignalHillHiker]

Originally Posted by CanSpice

You're not electing the Communist either, but he shows up.

Same can be said for the Liberals and Greens. St. John's East used to be a Progressive Conservative stronghold. Since Harper, it's gone NDP - and always with more than 70% of the vote.

All other parties are below 15%. They don't have a chance until Harper is out as leader. But they show up.

[SignalHillHiker]

Originally Posted by JHikka

Candidates don't have any responsibility or requirement to show up, they're not technically representing you as a candidate; only seeking to do so as an elected official.

I disagree. They don't have a requirement, but they do have a responsibility.

[O-tacular]

Originally Posted by CanSpice

Ha, I just finished writing a post about our invisible Conservative candidate.

I'd love to see a Conservative supporter try to defend the invisibility policy. We're electing these people to represent us in the House of Commons and they can't even be arsed to show up in front of 50 of their constituents? 🞵🞵🞵🞵 that.

It's perfectly reasonable though for every single thing an MP says to be vetted by the PMO's ever increasing PR department. Why should they interact with their constituents anyways?

[O-tacular]

Originally Posted by JHikka

But you're not electing them, at least not in Newfoundland. It's a chicken and egg scenario...are they not getting elected because they don't show up or do they not show up because they aren't getting elected?

That argument holds no water since it is the same across the country even in safe Conservative ridings.

[CanSpice]

Originally Posted by JHikka

It's his personal choice as a candidate whether to show up or not. He feels that showing up will do his campaign well, whereas the Conservative does not. End of story. Candidates don't have any responsibility or requirement to show up, they're not technically representing you as a candidate; only seeking to do so as an elected official.

I disagree. They have a responsibility to show up for all-candidates meetings. They're essentially applying for a job to represent citizens, and part of that application involves answering questions and learning what the citizens have interests in. If you can't even be bothered to interact with the people you aim to represent, how do those people know what kind of a job you'd do interacting with them after you've been elected?

Sure, she doesn't stand a chance of being elected. That doesn't stop the Liberal or Green candidates from showing up. Not showing up shows what kind of character she has -- a disrespectful one. And it's largely a reflection of the disrespect the entire Conservative party has for Canada's citizens, especially since this sort of "no contact" order appears to be coming down from up high.

[O-tacular]

Originally Posted by JHikka

It's his personal choice as a candidate whether to show up or not. He feels that showing up will do his campaign well, whereas the Conservative does not. End of story. Candidates don't have any responsibility or requirement to show up, they're not technically representing you as a candidate; only seeking to do so as an elected official.

So coincidentally every single Conservative MP 'doesn't feel like' showing up to debates?

There's blind support and then there's handing over the 🞵🞵🞵 to the robber to mug you with. How can you say that you have no problem with your elected MP having no real voice in Parliament except what the PMO tells them to say? It's like the Stephen Harper party of trained seals. I know that there are party whips and that every party tries to control the message going into a tight election race but the Conservatives are the only ones muzzling their own MP's to this degree. What is it they have to hide?

[JHikka]

Originally Posted by CanSpice

I disagree. They have a responsibility to show up for all-candidates meetings.

Responsibility based on what?

Originally Posted by CanSpice

They're essentially applying for a job to represent citizens, and part of that application involves answering questions and learning what the citizens have interests in.

And just like a job interview if you want the job you should probably show up, but nobody forces anyone to go to a job interview.

Originally Posted by CanSpice

If you can't even be bothered to interact with the people you aim to represent, how do those people know what kind of a job you'd do interacting with them after you've been elected?

Who in their right mind would vote for someone who doesn't show up to a debate like that? Jack Harris is going to win this riding and this isn't about incumbent candidates. It's about a candidate in a riding that he has no chance of winning for a multitude of reasons.

Originally Posted by CanSpice

Sure, she doesn't stand a chance of being elected. That doesn't stop the Liberal or Green candidates from showing up. Not showing up shows what kind of character she has -- a disrespectful one.

And that's their choice to show up. They feel doing so helps them with their campaign. The Conservative doesn't and isn't showing up.

This isn't that difficult to understand. This guy isn't an MP, has never been elected, and represents nobody. He owes you nothing honestly. If he wanted to get elected then he would owe you a lot, however.

There's no election law, nothing on Elections Canada, that says that candidates absolutely have to show up or do certain things on their campaigns. They're free to do as they wish as long as they're legal under other rules and financial stipulations. This guy is probably going to sit at home, or maybe door knock, or maybe call people to get votes, but he feels he doesn't need to go to the debate. It's one decision in many on a campaign. If people go to him and say 'Hey you weren't at the debate' then that's his decision, and ultimately it's their choice whether or not to vote for him or not. If you're an elector the onus is on you to be knowledgable about your candidates and (hopefully) your candidates give you plenty of reasons to vote for you. This guy isn't and that's his choice as a candidate.

[CanSpice]

Originally Posted by JHikka

Who in their right mind would vote for someone who doesn't show up to a debate like that? Jack Harris is going to win this riding and this isn't about incumbent candidates. It's about a candidate in a riding that he has no chance of winning for a multitude of reasons.


And that's their choice to show up. They feel doing so helps them with their campaign. The Conservative doesn't and isn't showing up.

This isn't that difficult to understand. This guy isn't an MP, has never been elected, and represents nobody. He owes you nothing honestly. If he wanted to get elected then he would owe you a lot, however.

Explain Susan Truppe then. She's the incumbent.

Explain Joan Crockatt then. She's the incumbent.

It's not just cannon fodder candidates, it's incumbents too. Explain why they aren't showing up. Explain why they're wasting people's time.

[SignalHillHiker]

Then there's this, in your area, CanSpice.

http://www.burnabynow.com/opinion/blogs/...onservative-party-headquarters-1.2063283

[Migs]

Even the Chinese are copying the F-35. It must be junk.

[JHikka]

Originally Posted by CanSpice

Explain Susan Truppe then. She's the incumbent.

Explain Joan Crokatt then. She's the incumbent.

It's not just cannon fodder candidates, it's incumbents too. Explain why they aren't showing up. Explain why they're wasting people's time.

Because they don't feel the debates are worth their time. Debates aren't the end-all be-all. The Conservative Party decided not to do the consortium debates because they weren't worth the effort or time. If people don't like it then they won't vote for them, but I bet you they still will regardless of their attendance.

[O-tacular]

Originally Posted by JHikka

Responsibility based on what?


And just like a job interview if you want the job you should probably show up, but nobody forces anyone to go to a job interview.


Who in their right mind would vote for someone who doesn't show up to a debate like that? Jack Harris is going to win this riding and this isn't about incumbent candidates. It's about a candidate in a riding that he has no chance of winning for a multitude of reasons.


And that's their choice to show up. They feel doing so helps them with their campaign. The Conservative doesn't and isn't showing up.

This isn't that difficult to understand. This guy isn't an MP, has never been elected, and represents nobody. He owes you nothing honestly. If he wanted to get elected then he would owe you a lot, however.

There's no election law, nothing on Elections Canada, that says that candidates absolutely have to show up or do certain things on their campaigns. They're free to do as they wish as long as they're legal under other rules and financial stipulations. This guy is probably going to sit at home, or maybe door knock, or maybe call people to get votes, but he feels he doesn't need to go to the debate. It's one decision in many on a campaign. If people go to him and say 'Hey you weren't at the debate' then that's his decision, and ultimately it's their choice whether or not to vote for him or not. If you're an elector the onus is on you to be knowledgable about your candidates and (hopefully) your candidates give you plenty of reasons to vote for you. This guy isn't and that's his choice as a candidate.

I know you're smarter than that. How can every single Conservative candidate country wide not show up for all candidates debates? That's not only improbable it's impossible. This is a gag order from the PMO and you know it.

[O-tacular]

Originally Posted by SignalHillHiker

Then there's this, in your area, CanSpice.

http://www.burnabynow.com/opinion/blogs/...onservative-party-headquarters-1.2063283

Oh I enjoyed that. Like listening to a PR person from a multinational corporation trying to avoid the press talk in circles. It's robotic and downright creepy.

[O-tacular]

Originally Posted by JHikka

Because they don't feel the debates are worth their time. Debates aren't the end-all be-all. The Conservative Party decided not to do the consortium debates because they weren't worth the effort or time. If people don't like it then they won't vote for them, but I bet you they still will regardless of their attendance.

It's a sad day for democracy when this is considered okay behaviour. How insulting. How is debate not important? Is that not the basis of our entire system? We debate the merits of things then settle on a common solution. What you are advocating is exactly what Stephen Harper wants: a passive public that isn't engaged and never questions his actions. Everyone just needs to shut up and blindly accept everything Dear Leader tells us. Father knows best.

Just look at this soothing image and go to sleep...

[SignalHillHiker]

Debate is starting if anyone's that desperate for something to listen to.

http://www.cbc.ca/liveradio/popup/index.html?networkKey=cbc_radio_one&programKey=st_johns

EDIT:

- Green Party candidate supports the seal hunt. Love it!
- Communist candidate wants $20 minimum wage.
- NDP wants "Canada to catch up to Newfoundland" (LMAO) when it comes to post-secondary education costs, and to replace loans with grants as we did.
- Liberals want locals to consider their detailed, fully-costed plan.

CBC posed a question about Communist Party history based on Canadian history. "Only ever elected one MP, arrested for espionage". Didn't even research that an independent Newfoundland three times elected the People's Party. It wasn't fully communist, but it was completely dedicated to "leveling the classes". That was the platform. Boo CBC.

LOL NDP referring to Communist and Liberal respectively: "It's nice to be flanked by the TRUE left, as opposed to the centre-right pretending to be left of the NDP."

It's kind of surprising how strongly and openly the NDP/Communist candidates are agreeing with/supporting each other.

Communist candidate, though, and rightfully so if he's the real deal, is completely opposed to Newfoundland nationalism. So boo... next.

LMAO Liberal says that NDP is talking out both sides of its mouth by allowing the country to be broken up by a 50%+1 vote in Quebec; NDP mutters that applies to Newfoundland too.

[caltrane74]

Originally Posted by Migs

Even the Chinese are copying the F-35. It must be junk.

Guy, do you know how many spies China has in the US? That thing is probably an exact clone of the F-35. Probably won't cost $500 mil a jet though.


BTW: That Chinese plane looks more like the F-22 than the F-35.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c..._Joint_Services_Open_House_airshow_3.jpg

[Steveston]

Originally Posted by caltrane74

Guy, do you know how many spies China has in the US? That thing is probably an exact clone of the F-35. Probably won't cost $500 mil a jet though.


BTW: That Chinese plane looks more like the F-22 than the F-35.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c..._Joint_Services_Open_House_airshow_3.jpg

At least the Chinese version has the sense to use twin engines.

[SignalHillHiker]

So, moderator just mentioned Mulcair has said he'll let the provinces do their own thing when it comes to cap and trade.

Is that true? That gives me peace of mind re: no reversal of what little devolution we've achieved.

[Procrastinational]

Originally Posted by JHikka

http://communist-party.ca/seanburton

Sounds like a party that would do well if only this forum was voting.

I've never really bothered to look at the platforms of any of the fringe parties before, but I took a good read through this one, and I've got to say... It's pretty terrifying.

[Bcasey25raptor]

Originally Posted by Procrastinational

I've never really bothered to look at the platforms of any of the fringe parties before, but I took a good read through this one, and I've got to say... It's pretty terrifying.

I echo this statement, no thanks.