How Will You Vote

[Lance Wiebe]

Some of you might find this CBC quiz helpful in determining who you agree with on the various issues. 

http://www.votebyissue.org/cbc/

It worked for me!

I knew I agreed with the Conservative platform.  My results were "agree with Harper on 11 issues, Martin of four issues, and Layton on three issues."

I never knew I would agree with Layton on anything..........or Martin for that matter!

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

I guess its time for me to bring out my vintage copy of the 1967 album by three guys called the "Brothers in Law". Good songs such as "Secords Walking Blues", Daisy my Dukabor Doll and of course their tour de force, "Vote for Me"....

We're Canadian politicians
in extremely good positions
and we'll tell you our ambitions
so that you can make a note....

For we're very well respected
and stridently connected
and we know we'll be elected
when you all get out and vote......

and of course they then go off on a little diatribe on each party. My favourite is,

Oh, the outlook will be sunny
in this land of milk and honey
when we print up lots of money
thats the Social Credit plan...

But in case it starts inflation
and it might effect the nation
well we'll print another billion
just as quickly as we can.......

EDIT: Whoops guess I can't, ...its packed....oh well I'll sing to myself.....

 

[FredDaHead]

Some of you might find this CBC quiz helpful in determining who you agree with on the various issues.  

http://www.votebyissue.org/cbc/

It worked for me!

Doesn't work for me at all. Now instead of having to choose between 4 parties, I get to choose between 3. (Well, if the quiz affected my decision, anyways) Somehow I managed to agree with the Grits, the Tories and the NDP on 9 issues... Never knew I'd agree as much with the left as with the right. Isn't that a bit contradictory though?

Meh, I'll use the political compass and vote for whoever's closest to me.

 

[Popurhedoff]

Conservative of course... there are many arguments about which party to vote for... But is comes down to this:

Would you prefer a Conservative pat on the arse? or take it Liberaly up the ***?  Here are a few items that have helped me come to my decision:

12 years of Liberal boondoggles

By Sun Staff

1993: CHOPPERS
Upon taking power in 1993, the Liberals killed a contract to replace the aging Sea King military helicopters, resulting in at least $500 million in cancellation penalties. The 40-year-old, accident-prone choppers are still flying.

1995: GUN REGISTRY
(1995-2005) Originally forecast to cost $2 million in 1995, the auditor general predicted in 2003 that actual costs would escalate to $1 billion by 2004-05. Other independent calculations have suggested the costs have actually ballooned to $2 billion.

1997: PEARSONLiberals paid $60 million ËÅ“ $45 million in direct out-of-pocket expenses plus $15 million for lawyers ËÅ“ to Pearson Airport Consortium in 1997 as compensation for cancelling the privatization of Terminals 1 and 2.

2000: FUEL REBATE
A botched $1.4-billion heating fuel rebate program doled out cash to the wrong Canadians. Then-finance minister, Paul Martin, announced the gift just before the 2000 federal election, but the auditor general later discovered that as little as 18% made its way to low-income Canadians. Some rebates went to dead people, prisoners and students who were living at home and didn't pay heating bills.

2000: HRDC
Calling accounting problems â žwidespread and serious,"° the auditor general revealed in 2000 that $1 billion was mismanaged in job-creation grants handled by Human Resources Development Canada, under minister Jane Stewart. A recreation of the paper trail later found only a few million was improperly disbursed.

2002: CHALLENGER JETS
The Liberal government spent $101 million on luxury Challenger jets deemed unnecessary by officials at the Department of National Defence. An auditor general's report said the purchase, rushed through on the last day of the fiscal year in 2002, broke purchasing rules.

2003: RADWANSKI
Inadequate oversight and spending controls allowed former privacy commissioner George Radwanski to rack up thousands of tax dollars in lavish lunches and luxury travel. Last year, the auditor general also found that Radwanski and executive staff were improperly cashing out vacation, overbilling for expenses and creating a hostile work environment.

2004: OUELLET
Ex-Chretien cabinet minister Andre Ouellet piled up a $2-million expense tab during his reign at Canada Post. He resigned after a damning audit criticized his hospitality expenses and how contracts were awarded under the sponsorship program, but claimed he was working on the â žhonour system."°

2005: DINGWALL
David Dingwall, another Chretien crony who landed a plum post as head of the Royal Canadian Mint, resigned his $277,000-a-year job after it was revealed he and his aides ran up more than $740,000 in expenses the previous year. Adding insult to injury, taxpayers are also on the hook for a severance package even though he voluntarily quit.

2005: ADSCAM
The auditor general revealed that up to $100 million of the $250-million sponsorship program went to Liberal-friendly advertising firms for little or no work in 2004. After a public inquiry, Justice John Gomeryâ Å¡s report exonerated Prime Minister Paul Martin but blamed Chretienâ Å¡s inner circle for an elaborate kickback scheme that saw the Liberal Party receive as much as $769,497 in backdoor donations. The program was established to boost the national profile in Quebec after the 1995 referendum on sovereignty.


Top 64 Reasons not to vote liberal:

1. Cancelling the Sea King replacement costing us 600 million only to buy similar helicopters in 2004
2. Sponsorship scandal
3. Gun Registry
4. HRDC boondoggle
5. Problems with Transition Job Funds program
6. Tainted blood
7. Radwanski Spending Affair
8. Pearson Airport
9. GST Flip Flop
10. Airbus Investigation
11. Voting against Red Book promise of independent Ethics Commissioner
12. Irving fishing lodge stays/travel on Irving jets for cabinet ministers
13. Martin traveling on private corporate jets as Finance Minister
14. Don Boudria's stay at Boulay owned chalet
15. Denis Coderre staying with Boulay
16. Alfonso Gagliano being appointed Ambassador to Denmark
17. Shawinigate
18. Claude Gauthier (PM's friend)'s Transelec getting CIDA grant that was questioned by the Auditor General and even CIDA.
19. Liberal fundraiser Pierre Corbeil charged with fraud by RCMP after he approached several Quebec companies seeking federal job training grants and asking for payments to Liberal Party, having gotten the names from senior Quebec Liberal Minister, Marcel Massé.
20. Michel Dupuy, Heritage Minister, lobbying the CRTC.
21. Tom Wappel refusing to help blind veteran
22. Gagliano's son benefiting from contracts from his father's department
23. Gagliano's former speechwriter, Michèle Tremblay was on a $5,000 a month retainer with the Canada Lands Company to provide speeches for the Minister. Former President John Grant let her go saying "we got nothing in return." Grant claimed that all Crown Corporations reporting to Mr. Gagliano were told to put Ms. Tremblay on a monthly retainer.
24. Iltis replacement
25. Purchase of new Challenger jets for the Prime Minister and cabinet
26. NATO Flying Training program contract
27. Liberal friends appointed as IRB judges being investigated by RCMP
There is plenty more reseasons but can't fit them all into one post
28. Hedy Fry's imaginary burning crosses
29. Maria Minna's improper municipal vote
30. Minna giving contracts to two former campaign staffers for public relations work for a conference that had already been held
31. Lawrence MacAulay and contracts directed to Holland College
32. Lawrence MacAulay and Tim Banks
33. Lawrence MacAulay hired his official agent, Everett Roche, for $70K, but Roche never did any work for it. (Oct 2002)
34. Art Eggleton and contracts to his ex-girlfriend
35. Copps' aide Boyer's spending habits
36. Collenette resigns for breach of ethical guidelines involving a letter he wrote to the Immigration and Refugee Board
37. APEC Inquiry
38. Andy Scott's 1998 resignation that came eight weeks too late, after a media circus wore him down for indiscreetly shooting his mouth off on an airplane.
39. Anti-American comments by Liberal MPs, officials, and the former Minister of Natural Resources.
40. Rock and the Apotex/Cipro affair
41. Rock giving Health Canada contract to car cleaning company.
42. Manley lobbying CIBC on behalf of Rod Bryden
43. Manley's fundraiser suggesting donors to his leadership write it off as a business expense.
44. Manley using his pre-budget consultations as Minister of Finance to solicit support for his leadership bid.
45. Coderre's relationship with Group Everest
46. Martin's fundraiser/employee of Finance Jim Palmer
47. Martin's "blind trust" and his relationship with CSL.
48. Gerry Byrne requesting fundraising money be sent to his home address, with no records kept.
49. Gerry Byrne pouring bulk of ACOA money into his own riding.
50. Virginia Fontaine Addictions Foundation
51. Prime Minister's former assistant, Denise Tremblay's huge travel expenses on Veterans Review and Appeal Board as Minister pleaded poverty to veterans' widows.
51. Prime Minister's former assistant, Denise Tremblay's huge travel expenses on Veterans Review and Appeal Board as Minister pleaded poverty to veterans' widows.
52. Chrétien appointing Hon. Roger Simmons (former Trudeau minister convicted of income tax evasion) as Consul-General in Seattle
53. Chrétien trying to bring hit-and-run driver Carignan back into caucus.
54. The RCMP is investigating possible fraud and bribery within Industry Canada, involving possible "overpayments" to recipients of federal business grants. The probe centres on the National Research Council, which hands out federal grants to small- and medium-sized businesses.
55. More than half a dozen bureaucrats have been "removed" from their jobs at a Human Resources Development Canada (HRDC) in Toronto following a police investigation into projects funded under one of the department's grants and contributions programs
56. Revenue Minister Elinor Caplan called in the RCMP and ordered a sweeping security review after four tax department computers were stolen containing confidential personal information on more than 120,000 Canadians.
57. More than $7 billion stashed in Foundations by Finance Minister Paul Martin with little or no accountability
58. Dhaliwal overseing Richmond-airport-Vancouver transit line while being owner of the airport limousine service
59. Tom Rosser, former Dhaliwal advisor lobbying Natural Resources department and minister on environmental issues only months after leaving government.
60. $5.3 million GG northern travel
61. GG budget doubles in 5 years
62. Robert Thibault giving a grant as ACOA minister to a wharf and boatyard where his brother-in-law has a monopoly.
63. Royal LePage contract, which the government was forced to cancel in the wake of serious concerns being raised.
64. Shutting down the Somalia Inquiry
__________________
Yep... they are Real Criminals...its our tax dollars they are stealing and wasting... OURS!    I am sure your all capable of making your own choice.

Cheers
Popurhedoff

 

[Michael OLeary]

OK, now for a balanced view, please cover in detail why the Conservatives weren't even a recognized party in the house when the Liberal majority took over.

Here's the view from Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_federal_election,_1993

The 1993 election was the greatest defeat for a major party in Canadian history.[20] The popular vote for the Progressive Conservatives fell from 43% to 16%, while their seat count fell from 169 to two. The Conservatives did receive over 2 million votes, almost as many as Reform and considerably more than the Bloc or NDP. However, this support was evenly spread across the country, and virtually nowhere was it concentrated enough to win seats. The two seats the Conservatives won were in Saint John, New Brunswick, where popular mayor Elsie Wayne was elected, and in Sherbrooke, Quebec, where the young and charismatic Jean Charest was reelected. Former Progressive Conservative MP Gilles Bernier was also re-elected as an independent candidate in the Beauce riding in Quebec. Kim Campbell lost her own seat in Vancouver. 147 PC candidates failed to win the 15% of the vote that qualified them for funding from Elections Canada, and the party as a whole was left deeply in debt. With only two seats, the party also failed to get official party status, which prevented them from receiving funding and restricted their role in the House of Commons.

I'm open to consideration of each party - but why would we want these guys back?

 

[Shec]

The candidate whom I judge to have the most entertainment value will win my vote this go around.    Not that I am cyncial or anything mind you, I just can't the lyrics of The Who's Won't Get Fooled Again out of my mind:

Meet the new boss
Same as the old boss

 

[redleafjumper]

Michael, something you are missing is that the Conservative Party of Canada is not the same party as the Progressive-Conservative Party that ceased to exist when its remnants divested itself of the "Red Tories" and merged with the Canadian Alliance, previously the Reform Party of Canada.  The Conservative Party is not a party of Red Tories, it is a party of fiscal conservatives with several different issues.  Note that former Red Tory Prime Ministers Kim "get their guns" Campbell and Joe "who?" Clark are not supporters of the Conservative Party.  The PC's were much more closely aligned with the Federal liberals than the Conservative party is.  The CPC and the defunct PC party are not the same people.

Regardless, as some have stated, trust will need to be earned.  I am 100% certain that I do not trust the liberals, and I am 90% certain that a Conservative government would be better for my riding in Western Canada than the Martin liberals ever have been.  I'd like to give Harper a shot at government, popurhedoff certainly has listed many reason that he should be given the opportunity to lead this country.

 

[Michael OLeary]

The point is not that it's the same party - but rather that Canadians have a history of tossing out governments and then being surprised by who's running the country the next day. One way or another, it's trading known for unknown and inexperienced.  The fate of a fickle public too ready to buy into every criticisim of the governement of the day (whichever party it may be) and cry for change without knowing what they actually want in a government to start with.

 

[redleafjumper]

Michael, you are quite correct.  It would be much to the benefit of all of us if individual members of the electorate took the time to learn about the issues and the parties supporting them before making a choice of merely replacing one government with another.  I like to think I am voting for something I can support rather than just wanting to chuck the other rascals out.

 

[Michael OLeary]

Yes, and hopefully one that has made a clear enough case to actually attract enough voters to make a difference.

 

[redleafjumper]

Yes, that's true.  It is up to the party to show why people should vote FOR them, not just why people should vote AGAINST the other bunch.  That will be the biggest challenge for the conservatives in this election.

 

[Joe Blow]

The point is not that it's the same party - but rather that Canadians have a history of tossing out governments and then being surprised by who's running the country the next day. One way or another, it's trading known for unknown and inexperienced.  The fate of a fickle public too ready to buy into every criticism of the government of the day (whichever party it may be) and cry for change without knowing what they actually want in a government to start with.

• Recently we had 12 years of Liberal government (with a brief punctuation by Joe Clark), then 10 years of PC government then 12 more of Liberal gov. which brings us to this election.
• Additionally, although I grant that lots of us may be especially willing to buy into criticisms of the government right now ...independent inquiry has shown that they used our taxes to fill the party's wallet and fund campaigns. (This is in addion to everything in Popurhedoff's inspired post above.) That's more significant than your run of the mill criticism.

Given these two points, I don't think it's accurate to characterize a yearning to toss the Libs as being fickle..

Every change of government is a calculated risk.  Is the devil we know bad enough that we will try what's behind curtain number two?  Well, for me the devil we know is pretty ugly ..and curtain number two is less opaque than it was ...I know a little more about what's behind there.  (for ex. last election the CPC didn't even have a party policy doc out yet ..this election they do)

I certainly agree however that we need to know what we are looking for and then vote FOR it ..rather than just "toss the bums" and wake up in bed with god knows who the next day.

But at the same time I have to ask myself; if no other party told me anything about themselves would I still vote for the people who I know are stealing from me?

 

[Infanteer]

Perhaps a Conservative minority would be the best thing for Canada (and even the Conservative Party itself)?   A minority would keep the Conservatives honest, ensuring that they focus on good government and not sticking us in the quagmire of social issues (which the opposition would defeat them on).   An opposition that brings down a Conservative government for simply running the country may get punished for doing so, as their threats of "boogey-man" don't hold water.

In essence, a minority would allow them to prove that they are an effective "government in waiting" while ensuring that if they start playing with fire, they can be pulled down and defeated.

 

[Joe Blow]

I think you're completely spot on there. 

My fear though, is that (..and maybe we're getting into 'strategic voting' here) if the Conservatives don't get a plurality that outnumbers the Libs and NDP combined those two may be able to hash something out, visit the GG and tell her they can make a go of it.

I agree Conservative minority that was allowed to govern would be a good thing for the party and for the country.  In addition to keeping them honest it would also show that we have a moderate alternative to the Libs ..thereby returning us to a more healthy democratic state.

But I fear that if we don't get a Conservative majority we will be faced with a Lib./NDP coalition.  Maybe a slight Conservative minority with independents holding the balance of power would work?? ..or a bare Conservative majority?

Anyway, the best way for the Conservatives to show moderation and demonstrate that they are a palatable alternative for Canadians is to have a majority and govern moderately.  Barring unforeseen surprises on the campaign trail, I feel comfortable giving them a shot at it.

 

[xFusilier]

The only way the Conservatives can hold a minority is with the Bloc Quebecois holding the balance of power in the house.  If at the conclusion of this general election the Conservatives hold more seats than either the Liberals and the NDP but less than the two combined you will see a Liberal/NDP coalition.  Combined with the Bloc's position on social issues, a Conservative, minority government is a very slim possiblity.

 

[couchcommander]

Well I'm far too lazy to compile a list of 64 reasons to vote Liberal (don't even for a moment think they don't exist), but here are some of my favourite (not in order of importance, in order of when they occured to me)...

1) Last 12 years of Liberal rule have been the most propserous times in Canadian history
2) Only g-8 nation to be running surplus
3) First time in Canadian history there have been 8 consecutive budget surpluses
4) Unemployment lower then it has been in 30 years
5) Interest rates lowest they have been in decades
6) Crime rate down to where it was in the 70's
7) Repeated stays at #1 in the Human Development Index, currently #5
8) Best government debt to GDP ratio in G-7
9) Total debt to GDP ratio more than  20% lower than when they first took power
10) Introduced largest tax cuts in Canadian history
11) One of very few countries to now have a sustainable pension plan (corrected after 1997, not projected sustainable for at least another 75 years)
12) a bunch of social measures... but I'm not sure you guys would like most of them (I think they're a good thing)...

Just off the top of my head.

IMO... *gasp* a former minister was impoperly registered when he *might* have lobbied the government........ when's the last time they ran a 40 billion dollar a year deficit or pushed interest rates up so high with poor fiscal management you couldn't pay your morgage? To me, at least it seems as though *serious* criticsms are fairly lacking.

To be fair, yes indeed they did tear whack loads of money out of health care, yes they did slash the defence budget. However, given the state we were in, I think it's obvious that this was necessary, and that given our CURRENT prosperity (when so much of the world is having such a hard time), that these measures have proven to be for the better in the long run. I would rather have a government that does what is right, not just what everyone wants (ie not cut GST to get votes when most respected economists in the country say it's not the best idea... and yes, of course, the Liberals have done things like this before, don't get me wrong...)

Now, with our economy back in order, we are seeing them putting the money back into these programs, but this time it's not with massive interest payments to some foreign country. Though very minor, we have already started to see our wait times beginning to fall (one must realize that the money to provide this was only started a few years ago under chretien, and really only truely financed in the last year under Martin... takes time to train doctors and build hospitals), and we are seeing the effects of money back into defence (C130-J's anyone?).

 

[redleafjumper]

Couchcommander, what exactly have the Liberals done that is of their own making and not the result of larger forces or the pressures of the opposition?  The perceptions about a stronger economy being the result of the activities of the Liberals are simply incorrect.  The country is benefitting from the US down turn due to the war. Economic benefits in this country are regionally based and disputable, certainly the Pine Beetle situation in British Columbia is a long term economic disaster, and again it has little to do with government and a lot to do with the weather (althought I believe that weather is a federal responsibility...).  As for social programmes, a lot of what the liberals have done I could care less about and other things such as their gun control regime and clear theft of taxpayer's money concern me a great deal.  See popurhedoff's list for more.  The reason it is hard to compile a satisfactory similiar list in favour of the Liberals is that there really isn't enough to compile one.

 

[a_majoor]

The person most responsible for Canada's stellar economic performance (especially since 2001) is......George W Bush.

Of course in any period of history, the driving force behind Canada's economy is the US administration. We are voting in the wrong election!

 

[RangerRay]

Deck Of Liberals:

http://anonalogue.blogspot.com/2005/12/deck-of-liberals.html

;D

 

[couchcommander]

I find it hard to find facts to show that the country has "benefitted" overall from the US downturn, considering 80% of our exports go there (feel free to disprove me). I think this can actually be shown in the fact that when he US took a real turn for the worst and hit a recession, our growth rate was severly affected (though, unlike in the US, we avoided recession, thanks to sound fiscal and monetary policies over the last number of years).

"Last 12 years of Liberal rule have been the most propserous times in Canadian history" - I find it hard to believe that this was just a coincidence

"Only g-8 nation to be running surplus" - Fat wasn't trimmed by itself

"First time in Canadian history there have been 8 consecutive budget surpluses" - See above, combined with prudent planning and spending within our means is no accident

"Unemployment lower then it has been in 30 years" - targetted tax breaks, pursuing emerging markets, favourable legislation for businesses to grow, help for some industries in need....

"Interest rates lowest they have been in decades" - lowering debt help control inflation, which contributes to rates staying low

"Crime rate down to where it was in the 70's" - more effective criminal justice system, w/ higher employment (no, not EFFECTIVE, even I still scoff at some of the things that happen, but better)

"Repeated stays at #1 in the Human Development Index, currently #5" - you would seriously contend this is just a "happening"?

" Best government debt to GDP ratio in G-7" - see number 1 and 2

"Introduced largest tax cuts in Canadian history" - Mulroney certainly didn't do it

"One of very few countries to now have a sustainable pension plan (corrected after 1997, not projected sustainable for at least another 75 years)" - as I said, Liberals took corrective action in the late 90's to address the problem of an unsustainable program, and were sucessful

And no, it's not hard, these are just the things that came to my mind at 3 am inbetween pr0n and reading new posts. As I said, far too lazy to do 64 (too much typing). A bunch of, what i consider to be, petty little things (yes, to me 50 million in the context of 200 billion is petty, especially when very little of it can actually be shown to have made it to liberal hands) doesn't warrant discounting the absolutely rock solid economic foudation they have build over the last decade, which is allowing them to now start to shape the country socially (yay).