Canada Election 2015

[ainvan]

Vote Splitting: How Mulcair And Trudeau May Be Handing Victory To Harper

Here is the list of the 28 ridings affected. There are technically 72 ridings where CPC is leading but NDP+LPC would be greater, but in most of them, the lead of the Conservative candidate would not be overcome by having a unique candidate (or coalition) between the other two (namely because not all NDP voters for instance would vote Liberals).

In these ridings, if the NDP and Liberals were to run a single candidate, they would likely win. 28 out of 338 isn't that much, but it does currently make the difference between Harper finishing first and third.



Too Close to Call

[DizzyEdge]

Originally Posted by ssiguy

What a lot of Conservative supporters don't understand is that the other 70% of Canadians are not adverse to a return to the classic PROGRESSIVE Conservative platforms.

Yup, 100%

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by O-tacular

Did you mean Dale Carnegie?

Thank you ladies and gentlemen - don't forget to try the veal!

[ainvan]

Expect Conservative and Liberal 'knife fight' in final 2 weeks of campaign

The Conservatives and Liberals may very well focus most of their firepower on each other with two weeks left in the campaign, all but ignoring the NDP, which continues to see its support dwindling.

"What [Justin] Trudeau's team is trying to do, what Trudeau is trying to do, is look at who they would deem is their prime competition, which is the prime minister," said Conservative strategist Jason Lietaer. "Likewise, you won't see the prime minister mentioning [Tom] Mulcair very much from now on until the end."

The Conservative and Liberal battleground is well known — the Greater Toronto Area and Lower Mainland of B.C., Lietaer said, and both parties "will be throwing everything they've got" into those two areas, trying to drive home their message to Canadians.

CBC

[MolsonExport]

Originally Posted by Migs

Forbes, one of the most highly respected & reputable business & financial news publication on earth ranked Canada #1 for business within the G20 nations, that is a fact. If you have issue with their findings, feel free to debate them.

via Imgflip Meme Maker

To which Maury replied:

You've seriously lost it. What the hell is the matter with you? This whole election is turning you & a couple others towards delerium.

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by Migs

Blame the CBC. The day following the biggest trade deal in Canadian history & they decide to title the story about the Niqab. Large majority of Canadians are against the Niqab & it's oppression of women, good on Mr Harper for siding with Canadian values where no woman should be forced to cover their face.

The TPP is shaping up to be yesterday's news (literally). Except for an apocalyptic piece in the G&M about it being the end of supply management, the consensus seems to be that it won't lead to any dramatic changes.

To be fair to Harper (hey, I try!), he didn't raise the niqab in the public service thing but was responding to Barton's question. That said, the sooner everything to do with niqabs disappears from our public discourse, the happier I will be.

I'd love to know how many public servants wear the niqab? How bizarre it would be if the answer were zero, which seems possible. Although I have seen the hijab and the Iranian coat thing worn by public servants.

[Migs]

Originally Posted by MolsonExport

via Imgflip Meme Maker

To which Maury replied:

Are you intentionally trying to be this dense? It is a fact that Forbes reported that Canada is ranked #1 to do business of all G20 nations. If you disagree with that claim, take it up with them.

[MolsonExport]

Originally Posted by Migs

Are you intentionally trying to be this dense? It is a fact that Forbes reported that Canada is ranked #1 to do business of all G20 nations. If you disagree with that claim, take it up with them.

get back to me when you can corroborate this "Ranking" with a more respectable source, e.g., Toronto Sun or Faux Nuse, or better yet, some random blogger.

Migs: the gift that keeps on giving.

[Migs]

Originally Posted by kwoldtimer

The TPP is shaping up to be yesterday's news (literally). Except for an apocalyptic piece in the G&M about it being the end of supply management, the consensus seems to be that it won't lead to any dramatic changes.

To be fair to Harper (hey, I try!), he didn't raise the niqab in the public service thing but was responding to Barton's question. That said, the sooner everything to do with niqabs disappears from our public discourse, the happier I will be.

I'd love to know how many public servants wear the niqab? How bizarre it would be if the answer were zero, which seems possible. Although I have seen the hijab and the Iranian coat thing worn by public servants.

Oh for sure the NDP & Liberals will try with all their might to forget about the TPP. Ain't gonna happen however, this is one of the biggest trade deals ever.

And as far as the Niqab, if there are no public servants who wear them, why would the question be asked?

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by ainvan

Conservative candidate touts therapies to turn gay youth straight

'Is it wrong for a homosexual to become a normal person?' Jagdish Grewal wrote in editorial



CBC

Has the Conservative party responded to this yet? I'm torn - on the one hand the poor man is displaying a serious level of ignorance and we know from the Hamilton candidate's Auschwitz episode that ignorance does not oblige a candidate to step down. On the other hand, obliging this guy to step down would send a valuable lesson to some communities about "Canadian values". I feel that this guy's candidacy is safe.

[Migs]

Originally Posted by MolsonExport

get back to me when you can corroborate this "Ranking" with a more respectable source, e.g., Toronto Sun or Faux Nuse, or better yet, some random blogger.

What do you have against Forbes or the IMF?

[Migs]

Originally Posted by kwoldtimer

Has the Conservative party responded to this yet? I'm torn - on the one hand the poor man is displaying a serious level of ignorance and we know from the Hamilton candidate's Auschwitz that ignorance should not oblige a candidate to step down. On the other hand, obliging this guy to step down would send a valuable lesson to some communities about "Canadian values". I feel that this guy's candidacy is safe.

So according to the left its ok for a Muslim woman to wear a Niqab during a citizenship ceremony because of her religious beliefs but it's not ok for a Sikh man to have an opinion about homosexuality which likely relates to his religious beliefs. Funny how that works.

[MolsonExport]

Originally Posted by Migs

Are you intentionally trying to be this dense? It is a fact that Forbes reported that Canada is ranked #1 to do business of all G20 nations. If you disagree with that claim, take it up with them.

My neighbor said that that Harper is the worst of the lot. It is a fact. If you disagree with that claim, take it up with him.

[kwoldtimer]

[QUOTE=Migs;7188650]Oh for sure the NDP & Liberals will try with all their might to forget about the TPP. Ain't gonna happen however, this is one of the biggest trade deals ever.

And as far as the Niqab, if there are no public servants who wear them, why would the question be asked?[/QUOTE]

Everybody knows that, but only a minority oppose the deal (I suspect) and, in any event the benefits, if any, are probably years away. It will be interesting to see if the NDP don't take a hit by staking out a negative position on TPP.

On the niqab thing, that was your sarcasm on display again, right? It was wasn't it?

[MolsonExport]

Originally Posted by Migs

So according to the left its ok for a Muslim woman to wear a Niqab during a citizenship ceremony because of her religious beliefs but it's not ok for a Sikh man to have an opinion about homosexuality which likely relates to his religious beliefs. Funny how that works.

worldseriesdreaming.com


I know, I know. It is really disingenuous of me to reply in this fashion.

[mousquet]

@Migs you're acting as a troll when you don't have to. Plz stop doing this and be friendly to us all, whatever one's political sensitivity may be. It basically doesn't matter so much, you must remember. I'm struggling hard to do that, myself, but I still do the best I can, cause I know it's fair in spite of myself and my anger.

[Migs]

Originally Posted by MolsonExport

My neighbor said that that Harper is the worst of the lot. It is a fact. If you disagree with that claim, take it up with him.

Is your neighbour a leading global business, economist, business/publisher who has millions of readers? If he is then your post might make some sense.

[rousseau]

"If it is a parent's right to set guidelines for their children in terms of their education, career and health, then why is it illegal for them to strengthen their natural heterosexuality?"

Christ, that is creepy. Can you imagine your father or mother doing anything even remotely connected to "strengthening your heterosexuality" when you were 12? What would that even entail? One shudders to contemplate the idea.

Detour on the way to getting to the point of my post: There is a consistent pattern in much right wing conservative rhetoric that basically boils down to this: "I know you are, but what am I?" During the Bush administration the right-wingers got their feelings hurt by all the satire lampooning what an absolute idiot that president and his mouth-breathing base were, and so they started lobbing insults back at "the left" (i.e. anyone to the left of the insane far-right). Newspaper comments sections (always depressing) are now over-run by sneering trolls reciting half-understood talking points in sarcastic denigration of the perceived stupidity of "the left," because "I'm not stupid, it's those commies who are stupid!"

Intellectually challenged, biases massaged and stoked into a fury by their right wing leaders, they have nothing of substance to say, and invariably ruin any conversation they participate in. Because they are too dumb to know how dumb they are (Migs being an obvious example on this forum).

• Video Link

The obverse of "I know you are, but what am I?" is the Shakespearean protesting too much. Is it not a commonplace now that right wing "family values" types who focus so intently on the sexual aspect of homosexuality, to the exclusion of all other aspects of romantic/coupling relationships, betray how tortured their own obsessions with sex are? Most human beings are obsessed with sex to varying degrees, but this lot are so bound by their religious restrictions that it's invariably only a matter of time before the news gets out that they were carrying on torrid affairs, soliciting in airport washrooms, getting erotic massages, etc.

I would fear for the children of anyone who said that he was going to "strengthen their heterosexuality." This is disturbing. The anti-gay crew are always banging on about how sex-obsessed gays are, but they lack the self-awareness needed to see that it is actually they who are inordinately obsessed with sex, and in such an unhealthy way.

Is their inner dialogue set on a repeating loop? "Must not think about cock, must not think about cock, must not think about cock..."

[Migs]

Originally Posted by mousquet

@Migs you're acting as a troll when you don't have to. Plz stop doing this and be friendly to us all, whatever one's political sensitivity may be. It basically doesn't matter so much, you must remember. I'm struggling hard to do that, myself, but I still do the best I can, cause I know it's fair in spite of myself and my anger.

Sorry but the Harper derangement syndrome around here is disturbing. Some are even bringing up false accusations about his marriage into the discussion. Truly disturbing. It's funny because they can say all these dafamatory things about Harper & Conservatives like myself & all it does is make them look bitter, angry, & self deficient. I'm not like them, I don't have to rely on govt to live my life. To each their own.

One thing is evident to most who read this thread, the left are a miserable bunch. Time to get ready for work! :$

[Xelebes]

You could also turn that around:

"We would never be that irresponsible with money. Those layabouts,scroungers and welfare moms, what improvidence and loose morals would cause them to leak so much money."

Of course, the ones clutching their pearls so are trying to ignore their own luxuries, their own extravagances, their own leaky faucets of money.

And turn it some more:

Those who loudly protest for the care of others, who screech about abandoning others. They are of course trying to ignore their own cold-heartedness, their own impasses when they decided against giving away to charity, or withheld their own taxes they owed in shady dealings.

It is a cause to pause and think.