While I'm actually kind of a fan of the Provincial NDP in Saskatchewan (The Sask. Party's done all right these days though, so it's not a huge deal), I really don't feel that the Federal NDP is near to the same party and wouldn't feel as comfortable voting Federal NDP as I do Provincial NDP.
The Federal NDP shouldn't be confused with the Provincial NDP... and I know you know that. I'm just saying it to make sure others take note. Saskatchewan was pretty much always NDP provincially within the last reasonable number of years. However, it's pretty much always Conservative when it comes to Federal politics. There's been a few Liberal ridings (and good old Ralph always wins his seat), there doesn't appear to be a transfer between Provincially supporting NDP and Federally supporting NDP.
Well apparently the guy on the bike jumped on the car and tried to fight him or something.
I dunno its hard to place judgment on the whole thing without knowing the full details. If someone jumped on the hood of my car and tried to fight me I might try to shake them off too.
You'd try to shake them off by speeding into the wrong lane and essentially try and kill them by bashing them into things at the side of the road? Really? REALLY?
Besides, the cyclist didn't jump onto his car according to any witness report.
From what I hear, Bryant initially hit the cyclist with his car. "Discussion" ensued and then he tried to drive away (hit and run). The cyclist held on to the side of his car to try and keep him from getting away. Bryant accelerated, swerved into the opposite lane and tried to slam the cyclist into things at the side of the road.
I hope they hang him.
I see the event from a completely different point of view.
#1 Fact: Sheppard (Cyclist) was in the back of a police cruiser barely an hour before this event takes place due to a domestic disturbance. Apparently Sheppard had abit of a drinking problem.
Monday night’s incident began in the early evening, when Mr. Sheppard was kicked out of his former girlfriend’s apartment on George Street, in the Dundas Street East and Sherbourne Street area. Neighbour Annette Wabie said Mr. Sheppard was “drunk as a clunk,” though a police source said he’d only had a few drinks.
Whether alcohol actually played a role in the Bryant Bike Tragedy on Monday, is not yet clear.
We're learning more about the cyclist that died Monday night following the alleged altercation between himself and former Attorney General Michael Bryant.
33-year-old Darcy Allan Sheppard was a father of four, a bike courier, and an amateur stand-up comic, but friends and family say he had struggled with substance abuse, among other issues, since he was a kid.
Reports suggest that after eight days of sobriety, he may have succumbed to his addiction just an hour before the incident on Bloor Street Monday night.
Sheppard was thought to have been drinking when he was confronted by police less than an hour before he died.
The conflicting stories are between Toronto Police and Darcy Allan Sheppard's former roommate.
The old roommate says Sheppard showed up outside her George Street apartment where Sheppard used to live with her and his girlfriend.
She says he had relapsed and was drunk, and that police on patrol confronted him and ordered him to leave.
She says officers sent Sheppard on his way despite her telling them he was drunk and couldn't ride his bike home.
According to her story officers would not let Sheppard back upstairs.
Police give an entirely different account of the story, saying a woman inside the apartment made a call to police.
Police say, the woman on the phone said Sheppard's girlfriend had told Sheppard to leave several times.
Police say that's when they showed up and asked Sheppard to leave. While Sheppard might have been drunk, police aren't commenting on the issue until toxicology reports come back.
Darcy Allan Sheppard, 33, was wanted by local police for 61 outstanding criminal warrants, many relating to cheque fraud.
"He was fraudulently passing cheques during a brief period in 2002," Edmonton city police Staff Sgt. Bill Allen told Sun Media yesterday, adding many of the cases occurred at Money Mart locations in the city.
Allen said Sheppard was released on bail in 2003, but never showed up for a scheduled court appearance.
After his disappearance, Edmonton city police issued a warning to the public that Sheppard had a history of violence.
Yesterday, Toronto police said Sheppard had been arrested Monday about 9 p.m. for fighting at his girlfriend's apartment.
Sheppard later got into a fight with a homeless man outside the building, and at one point was sitting in the back of a police cruiser. He was then released without charge.
Later that night, he got into some sort of altercation with Michael Bryant, who was driving a black Saab convertible with a female passenger, which ended in a minor collision on a downtown Toronto street at about 9:45 p.
m.
So here is what I personally think happened:
Sheppard, still drunk, released by cops (this type of shit happens ALL THE TIME in downtown Toronto, ESPECIALLY the area the cyclist was picked up in. Sheppard leaves in a rage.
Minor accident happens with Bryant (it's not clear whose fault it was, but my money is that it was the Sheppard's fault).
Bryant was with his wife in a top down convertable. Sheppard started banging on Bryant's car damaging it (this was reported in several papers). Bryant freaks out fearing for his safety and that of his wife from the raging drunkard and tries to drive away. Sheppard in a drunken rage refuses to let go of the car and then bad shit goes down leaving cyclist dead.
You have to remember the man was with his wife, had no protection in his car, and had a guy that was very possibly roaring drunk damaging Bryant's car (damagign car AFTER the accident -- Sheppard was hitting Bryant's car in a rage), and then getting all up close and personal at Bryant's side door.
This again is a guy with more than 60 charges against him.
I'm not saying Bryant acted appropriately but I do think there is definatley some room for "reasonable doubt" once this comes to a jury. Sounds to me more like self defence rather than anything.
I live in downtown Toronto myself and I've seen altercations involving people with addiction issues ... I had an altercation MYSELF very similar to Bryant although I wasn't in a car. I can tell you 100 percent that if I'm with my wife and a crazy addict person starts getting all up in my face, I'd probaly try to get away too especially if I was in a car. Alot of the crackheads and addicts in the core just don't give a shit and WILL hurt you if you don't protect yourself.
*shrug*
Saying that this is a situation of a "poor" cyclist that got cruely run over by Bryant is totally overlooking some of the facts of the situation.
When I posted that it hadn't come out yet that Sheppard may have been drunk. So yeah. I'm sure it'll be used to get Bryant off though.
And who cares if he had 60 charges against him in alberta? They were for non-violent offences and thus totally irelevant here.
Proto on
and her knees up on the glove compartment
took out her barrettes and her hair spilled out like rootbeer
Another thing to consider is that even here in Manitoba, the NDP rely pretty heavily on the urban vote for their seats. They have a strong base in the north as well, but rural voters are quite socially conservative (lots of Mennonites and such) and vote accordingly.
Fuck every one of you lazy entitled assholes. Get the fuck off the couch and vote. It takes half an hour. There's no excuse.
See, I agree with you in principle; people should vote. But I also see where other folks are coming from; I don't think it's a question of "I'm too busy to vote" so much as it's a desire to see our political parties do something other than wave their dicks around. Maybe if they spent less time trying to cut each other's throats, someone could get something done.
Iron Weasel on
Currently Playing:
The Division, Warframe (XB1)
GT: Tanith 6227
Fuck every one of you lazy entitled assholes. Get the fuck off the couch and vote. It takes half an hour. There's no excuse.
I'm pretty sure it's the people we're voting for who are lazy entitled assholes. But I'll vote. If only because it takes me even less than half an hour.
I wish I was in university again. Waterloo's Liberal MP was an awesome MP that I'd go out of my way to vote for, even if I didn't support the Liberals.
I'm not saying Bryant acted appropriately but I do think there is definatley some room for "reasonable doubt" once this comes to a jury. Sounds to me more like self defence rather than anything.
I don't get it, what part of this was self-defence? The part where Bryant tried to inflict "bad shit" upon the guy on the bike with his car, or the part where he drove away after running the dude over?
I think you'd be pretty hard pressed to convince a court that deliberately causing bodily harm to a person with a fucking motorized vehicle constitutes a reasonable form of self defense. You can't just kill someone in self-defense and then run away.
If someone's holding onto your car, you are obliged to stop the car. If you're involved in a collision, you are obliged to remain at the scene. You are not the star of your own action movie.
I'm sure the chain of events will be portrayed something like this:
Drunk cyclist and mild mannered motorist collide.
Cyclist verbally and then physically starts to assault motorist
In self defence motorist attempts to flee
Cyclist jumps onto convertible and continues to assault motorist
Cyclist falls off and is struck by rear wheels of car
Motorist continues to flee for own safety uncertain of cyclist's condition
Now, by no means am I an apologist for Mr. Bryant, I think fleeing the scene of an accident under any circumstances is unacceptable. There were witnesses, there are people who will help you, don't be a douche.
But in this case I'm sure his defence will suggest that the cyclist was the instigator and Mr. Bryant was simply protecting himself, and fleeing the scene, although wrong, was part of that protection as he was unaware the cyclist was incapacitated by the accident.
I'm not saying Bryant acted appropriately but I do think there is definatley some room for "reasonable doubt" once this comes to a jury. Sounds to me more like self defence rather than anything.
What. This isn't fucking Mad Max. Even in the classic gun-nut mugging fantasy, you can't just kill someone in self-defense and then run away.
I think you'd be pretty hard pressed to convince a court that deliberately causing bodily harm to a person with a fucking motorized vehicle qualifies as self defense in the first place.
If someone's holding onto your car, you are obliged to stop the car. If you're involved in a collision, you are obliged to remain at the scene. You are not the star of your own action movie.
Driving a couple metres away then calling 911 hardly counts as "fleeing the scene".
Also it remains to be proven if Bryant had reasonable grounds to believe his safety and the safety of his wife might be in jeopardy. None of us really know what exactly happened or how it went down.
I'm not saying that Bryant is innocent. But I'm sure not certain that he's guilty of anything either. All I'm really trying to say is that before jumping all over Bryant's throat, consider that there is very likely another side to this story, and Sheppard's actions may have played a large role in how things went down. Perhaps even to the point of Bryant's attempting to drive away being justified.
I'd probaly have done the same thing as Bryant in that situation if I had a raging drunk screaming in my face and banging on my car, particularly if my wife was with me and I thought the guy might attack.
It will be interesting to see how this plays out in the courts, and I think Phisti is correct on Bryan's defence.
Fuck every one of you lazy entitled assholes. Get the fuck off the couch and vote. It takes half an hour. There's no excuse.
See, I agree with you in principle; people should vote. But I also see where other folks are coming from; I don't think it's a question of "I'm too busy to vote" so much as it's a desire to see our political parties do something other than wave their dicks around. Maybe if they spent less time trying to cut each other's throats, someone could get something done.
Not participating at all and waiving your sole opportunity to directly influence the makeup of the legislative house is pretty much the worst way to express your discontent. Why would any politician bother representing someone who doesn't vote?
Fuck every one of you lazy entitled assholes. Get the fuck off the couch and vote. It takes half an hour. There's no excuse.
See, I agree with you in principle; people should vote. But I also see where other folks are coming from; I don't think it's a question of "I'm too busy to vote" so much as it's a desire to see our political parties do something other than wave their dicks around. Maybe if they spent less time trying to cut each other's throats, someone could get something done.
Not participating at all and waiving your sole opportunity to directly influence the makeup of the legislative house is pretty much the worst way to express your discontent. Why would any politician bother representing someone who doesn't vote?
MPs don't represent their constituents, they represent their parties. In an ideal world they might listen to the people every once in a while, but as it stands now, most MPs are $157,000 seat fillers who always vote the way their whip tells them to, regardless of how they or their constituents actually feel about the issue. Why bother voting for someone who stops giving a crap about you 30 seconds after the election's over?
So what your saying is, the system is broken. Very well. What are you doing to try and fix it? Oh yeah, jack fucking shit.
If your MP is being an asshat, keep them well informed of this fact. Or vote for someone else. Or volunteer for an independent. Or join a party and agitate for the policies you want implemented. Or run for office yourself. People who don't participate in the process contribute just as much to this problem as do the stereotypical party-line-toeing backbanchers.
Voter apathy is going to kill democracy. I have no sympathy at all for your attitude.
So what your saying is, the system is broken. Very well. What are you doing to try and fix it? Oh yeah, jack fucking shit.
If your MP is being an asshat, keep them well informed of this fact. Or vote for someone else. Or volunteer for an independent. Or join a party and agitate for the policies you want implemented. Or run for office yourself. People who don't participate in the process contribute just as much to this problem as do the stereotypical party-line-toeing backbanchers.
Voter apathy is going to kill democracy. I have no sympathy at all for your attitude.
Voter apathy isn't going to kill democracy. MP sycophancy killed it 30 years ago. In the over 20,000 votes cast on the 103 issues voted on in the last session, there were a grand total of 86 votes that deviated from their party's majority. 17 by the Tories, 51 by the Liberals, 17 by the NDP and 1 by the BQ. MPs are so scared of being kicked out of their parties that they all toe the line damn near 100% of the time. I don't know what that is, but it's not democracy.
Also, I'm in the process of attempting to start a new federal party because I'm sick of crap like that, but thanks for assuming I'm lazy.
So what your saying is, the system is broken. Very well. What are you doing to try and fix it? Oh yeah, jack fucking shit.
CorporateGoon, let's start the Canadian revolution together.
I'm working on it, but it's hard to get people interested.
It's been a long time since the NATO block has had a good revolution. Let's shake things up!
Apparently they celebrate Guy Fawkes Day in a few places in Canada, so maybe we can get those folks on board. Do you know where we can get a shitload of gunpowder for cheap?
Voter apathy isn't going to kill democracy. MP sycophancy killed it 30 years ago. In the over 20,000 votes cast on the 103 issues voted on in the last session, there were a grand total of 86 votes that deviated from their party's majority. 17 by the Tories, 51 by the Liberals, 17 by the NDP and 1 by the BQ. MPs are so scared of being kicked out of their parties that they all toe the line damn near 100% of the time. I don't know what that is, but it's not democracy.
Parties emerge in every representative democracy. That's how it works. You can either work within that state of affairs or you can waste your time trying to change the system itself. But if you're not going to vote, don't try to tell me that this is somehow helping.
(also direct democracy is a fucking terrible disaster see: California)
Voter apathy isn't going to kill democracy. MP sycophancy killed it 30 years ago. In the over 20,000 votes cast on the 103 issues voted on in the last session, there were a grand total of 86 votes that deviated from their party's majority. 17 by the Tories, 51 by the Liberals, 17 by the NDP and 1 by the BQ. MPs are so scared of being kicked out of their parties that they all toe the line damn near 100% of the time. I don't know what that is, but it's not democracy.
Parties emerge in every representative democracy. That's how it works. You can either work within that state of affairs or you can waste your time trying to change the nature of the system itself. But if you're not going to vote, don't try to tell me that this is somehow helping.
(also direct democracy is a fucking terrible disaster see: California)
No one's talking about direct democracy. Parties serve their purpose, but the kind of brutal discipline that's been enforced for the last few decades has removed all meaning from the votes. Why even bother having 308 MPs if their votes are all based on the will of four men? I'm not sure how the votes go in the UK, but a couple months ago there were all kinds of Labour MPs openly calling for Gordon Brown's resignation, and they didn't get tossed out. We never see that sort of thing here anymore because everyone's afraid of losing their place in the party and its associated perks, and that's why our minority parliaments haven't worked: The Tories can't court individual MPs, they have to go after whole parties.
If they'd bring back the ballot refusal thing or a "none of the above" option, I'd do that, but going out and voting for someone who's guaranteed to lose or who will serve the party before the people is not something I and 40% of Canadians want to do.
Voter apathy isn't going to kill democracy. MP sycophancy killed it 30 years ago. In the over 20,000 votes cast on the 103 issues voted on in the last session, there were a grand total of 86 votes that deviated from their party's majority. 17 by the Tories, 51 by the Liberals, 17 by the NDP and 1 by the BQ. MPs are so scared of being kicked out of their parties that they all toe the line damn near 100% of the time. I don't know what that is, but it's not democracy.
Parties emerge in every representative democracy. That's how it works. You can either work within that state of affairs or you can waste your time trying to change the nature of the system itself. But if you're not going to vote, don't try to tell me that this is somehow helping.
(also direct democracy is a fucking terrible disaster see: California)
No one's talking about direct democracy. Parties serve their purpose, but the kind of brutal discipline that's been enforced for the last few decades has removed all meaning from the votes. Why even bother having 308 MPs if their votes are all based on the will of four men? I'm not sure how the votes go in the UK, but a couple months ago there were all kinds of Labour MPs openly calling for Gordon Brown's resignation, and they didn't get tossed out. We never see that sort of thing here anymore because everyone's afraid of losing their place in the party and its associated perks, and that's why our minority parliaments haven't worked: The Tories can't court individual MPs, they have to go after whole parties.
If they'd bring back the ballot refusal thing or a "none of the above" option, I'd do that, but going out and voting for someone who's guaranteed to lose or who will serve the party before the people is not something I and 40% of Canadians want to do.
The alternative is if MPs arent representative of their constituents anyways, change the system to proportional representation where it isnt broken down to ridings and is instead a direct %based system.
In my opinion the man can't govern worth shit, but he sure is shrewd when it comes to making the other parties look stupid.
the home reno tax credit will be reintroduced regardless of who forms the government post-election
besides the tories have been using public funds to advertise an unimplemented, unpassed tax credit all summer long, which is unethical as fuck
It's disgusting. I didn't even know this tax credit didn't exist yet till I saw the News a few days ago. I was like "WTF, they've been advertising that it exists for months now. That's fucking horrible!".
Voter apathy isn't going to kill democracy. MP sycophancy killed it 30 years ago. In the over 20,000 votes cast on the 103 issues voted on in the last session, there were a grand total of 86 votes that deviated from their party's majority. 17 by the Tories, 51 by the Liberals, 17 by the NDP and 1 by the BQ. MPs are so scared of being kicked out of their parties that they all toe the line damn near 100% of the time. I don't know what that is, but it's not democracy.
Parties emerge in every representative democracy. That's how it works. You can either work within that state of affairs or you can waste your time trying to change the nature of the system itself. But if you're not going to vote, don't try to tell me that this is somehow helping.
(also direct democracy is a fucking terrible disaster see: California)
No one's talking about direct democracy. Parties serve their purpose, but the kind of brutal discipline that's been enforced for the last few decades has removed all meaning from the votes. Why even bother having 308 MPs if their votes are all based on the will of four men? I'm not sure how the votes go in the UK, but a couple months ago there were all kinds of Labour MPs openly calling for Gordon Brown's resignation, and they didn't get tossed out. We never see that sort of thing here anymore because everyone's afraid of losing their place in the party and its associated perks, and that's why our minority parliaments haven't worked: The Tories can't court individual MPs, they have to go after whole parties.
If they'd bring back the ballot refusal thing or a "none of the above" option, I'd do that, but going out and voting for someone who's guaranteed to lose or who will serve the party before the people is not something I and 40% of Canadians want to do.
The alternative is if MPs arent representative of their constituents anyways, change the system to proportional representation where it isnt broken down to ridings and is instead a direct %based system.
Well apparently the guy on the bike jumped on the car and tried to fight him or something.
I dunno its hard to place judgment on the whole thing without knowing the full details. If someone jumped on the hood of my car and tried to fight me I might try to shake them off too.
You'd try to shake them off by speeding into the wrong lane and essentially try and kill them by bashing them into things at the side of the road? Really? REALLY?
Besides, the cyclist didn't jump onto his car according to any witness report.
From what I hear, Bryant initially hit the cyclist with his car. "Discussion" ensued and then he tried to drive away (hit and run). The cyclist held on to the side of his car to try and keep him from getting away. Bryant accelerated, swerved into the opposite lane and tried to slam the cyclist into things at the side of the road.
I hope they hang him.
I see the event from a completely different point of view.
#1 Fact: Sheppard (Cyclist) was in the back of a police cruiser barely an hour before this event takes place due to a domestic disturbance. Apparently Sheppard had abit of a drinking problem.
Monday night’s incident began in the early evening, when Mr. Sheppard was kicked out of his former girlfriend’s apartment on George Street, in the Dundas Street East and Sherbourne Street area. Neighbour Annette Wabie said Mr. Sheppard was “drunk as a clunk,” though a police source said he’d only had a few drinks.
Whether alcohol actually played a role in the Bryant Bike Tragedy on Monday, is not yet clear.
We're learning more about the cyclist that died Monday night following the alleged altercation between himself and former Attorney General Michael Bryant.
33-year-old Darcy Allan Sheppard was a father of four, a bike courier, and an amateur stand-up comic, but friends and family say he had struggled with substance abuse, among other issues, since he was a kid.
Reports suggest that after eight days of sobriety, he may have succumbed to his addiction just an hour before the incident on Bloor Street Monday night.
Sheppard was thought to have been drinking when he was confronted by police less than an hour before he died.
The conflicting stories are between Toronto Police and Darcy Allan Sheppard's former roommate.
The old roommate says Sheppard showed up outside her George Street apartment where Sheppard used to live with her and his girlfriend.
She says he had relapsed and was drunk, and that police on patrol confronted him and ordered him to leave.
She says officers sent Sheppard on his way despite her telling them he was drunk and couldn't ride his bike home.
According to her story officers would not let Sheppard back upstairs.
Police give an entirely different account of the story, saying a woman inside the apartment made a call to police.
Police say, the woman on the phone said Sheppard's girlfriend had told Sheppard to leave several times.
Police say that's when they showed up and asked Sheppard to leave. While Sheppard might have been drunk, police aren't commenting on the issue until toxicology reports come back.
Darcy Allan Sheppard, 33, was wanted by local police for 61 outstanding criminal warrants, many relating to cheque fraud.
"He was fraudulently passing cheques during a brief period in 2002," Edmonton city police Staff Sgt. Bill Allen told Sun Media yesterday, adding many of the cases occurred at Money Mart locations in the city.
Allen said Sheppard was released on bail in 2003, but never showed up for a scheduled court appearance.
After his disappearance, Edmonton city police issued a warning to the public that Sheppard had a history of violence.
Yesterday, Toronto police said Sheppard had been arrested Monday about 9 p.m. for fighting at his girlfriend's apartment.
Sheppard later got into a fight with a homeless man outside the building, and at one point was sitting in the back of a police cruiser. He was then released without charge.
Later that night, he got into some sort of altercation with Michael Bryant, who was driving a black Saab convertible with a female passenger, which ended in a minor collision on a downtown Toronto street at about 9:45 p.
m.
So here is what I personally think happened:
Sheppard, still drunk, released by cops (this type of shit happens ALL THE TIME in downtown Toronto, ESPECIALLY the area the cyclist was picked up in. Sheppard leaves in a rage.
Minor accident happens with Bryant (it's not clear whose fault it was, but my money is that it was the Sheppard's fault).
Bryant was with his wife in a top down convertable. Sheppard started banging on Bryant's car damaging it (this was reported in several papers). Bryant freaks out fearing for his safety and that of his wife from the raging drunkard and tries to drive away. Sheppard in a drunken rage refuses to let go of the car and then bad shit goes down leaving cyclist dead.
You have to remember the man was with his wife, had no protection in his car, and had a guy that was very possibly roaring drunk damaging Bryant's car (damagign car AFTER the accident -- Sheppard was hitting Bryant's car in a rage), and then getting all up close and personal at Bryant's side door.
This again is a guy with more than 60 charges against him.
I'm not saying Bryant acted appropriately but I do think there is definatley some room for "reasonable doubt" once this comes to a jury. Sounds to me more like self defence rather than anything.
I live in downtown Toronto myself and I've seen altercations involving people with addiction issues ... I had an altercation MYSELF very similar to Bryant although I wasn't in a car. I can tell you 100 percent that if I'm with my wife and a crazy addict person starts getting all up in my face, I'd probaly try to get away too especially if I was in a car. Alot of the crackheads and addicts in the core just don't give a shit and WILL hurt you if you don't protect yourself.
*shrug*
Saying that this is a situation of a "poor" cyclist that got cruely run over by Bryant is totally overlooking some of the facts of the situation.
Aye, the more information coming out about this, the less cut-and-dry it's looking.
Voter apathy isn't going to kill democracy. MP sycophancy killed it 30 years ago. In the over 20,000 votes cast on the 103 issues voted on in the last session, there were a grand total of 86 votes that deviated from their party's majority. 17 by the Tories, 51 by the Liberals, 17 by the NDP and 1 by the BQ. MPs are so scared of being kicked out of their parties that they all toe the line damn near 100% of the time. I don't know what that is, but it's not democracy.
Parties emerge in every representative democracy. That's how it works. You can either work within that state of affairs or you can waste your time trying to change the nature of the system itself. But if you're not going to vote, don't try to tell me that this is somehow helping.
(also direct democracy is a fucking terrible disaster see: California)
No one's talking about direct democracy. Parties serve their purpose, but the kind of brutal discipline that's been enforced for the last few decades has removed all meaning from the votes. Why even bother having 308 MPs if their votes are all based on the will of four men? I'm not sure how the votes go in the UK, but a couple months ago there were all kinds of Labour MPs openly calling for Gordon Brown's resignation, and they didn't get tossed out. We never see that sort of thing here anymore because everyone's afraid of losing their place in the party and its associated perks, and that's why our minority parliaments haven't worked: The Tories can't court individual MPs, they have to go after whole parties.
If they'd bring back the ballot refusal thing or a "none of the above" option, I'd do that, but going out and voting for someone who's guaranteed to lose or who will serve the party before the people is not something I and 40% of Canadians want to do.
The alternative is if MPs arent representative of their constituents anyways, change the system to proportional representation where it isnt broken down to ridings and is instead a direct %based system.
I'm certainly in favour of some kind of electoral reform, but I don't know that proportional representation is the way to go.
@Azio: But they don't count WHY the ballot was spoiled, and that's what matters.
They don't count why you didn't vote either. Spoiling your ballot at least says you care enough to show your face at a polling station. Not voting at all is, well, you didn't show up so clearly you don't give a shit who wins or what they do in office.
In my opinion the man can't govern worth shit, but he sure is shrewd when it comes to making the other parties look stupid.
the home reno tax credit will be reintroduced regardless of who forms the government post-election
besides the tories have been using public funds to advertise an unimplemented, unpassed tax credit all summer long, which is unethical as fuck
It's disgusting. I didn't even know this tax credit didn't exist yet till I saw the News a few days ago. I was like "WTF, they've been advertising that it exists for months now. That's fucking horrible!".
Each of the commercials say the credit is pending Parliament approval (or whatever wording) along the bottom in smaller font (though not as small as the font that car commericals use for the legals of their offers). Still, I do not disagree with the two of you.
Voter apathy isn't going to kill democracy. MP sycophancy killed it 30 years ago. In the over 20,000 votes cast on the 103 issues voted on in the last session, there were a grand total of 86 votes that deviated from their party's majority. 17 by the Tories, 51 by the Liberals, 17 by the NDP and 1 by the BQ. MPs are so scared of being kicked out of their parties that they all toe the line damn near 100% of the time. I don't know what that is, but it's not democracy.
Parties emerge in every representative democracy. That's how it works. You can either work within that state of affairs or you can waste your time trying to change the nature of the system itself. But if you're not going to vote, don't try to tell me that this is somehow helping.
(also direct democracy is a fucking terrible disaster see: California)
No one's talking about direct democracy. Parties serve their purpose, but the kind of brutal discipline that's been enforced for the last few decades has removed all meaning from the votes. Why even bother having 308 MPs if their votes are all based on the will of four men? I'm not sure how the votes go in the UK, but a couple months ago there were all kinds of Labour MPs openly calling for Gordon Brown's resignation, and they didn't get tossed out. We never see that sort of thing here anymore because everyone's afraid of losing their place in the party and its associated perks, and that's why our minority parliaments haven't worked: The Tories can't court individual MPs, they have to go after whole parties.
If they'd bring back the ballot refusal thing or a "none of the above" option, I'd do that, but going out and voting for someone who's guaranteed to lose or who will serve the party before the people is not something I and 40% of Canadians want to do.
The alternative is if MPs arent representative of their constituents anyways, change the system to proportional representation where it isnt broken down to ridings and is instead a direct %based system.
And who gets to choose which MPs get those seats?
The parties choose their own MPs. This pretty much accepts that the party whip has final say for votes, so you account for that from the outset.
The only reason this is significantly better than first past the post, is that every single vote that anyone casts anywhere counts equally. It no longer matters how your neighbor votes, it only matters how you vote.
It also makes smaller parties more viable, especially with the way the current vote=cash$ system is setup in Canada.
In my opinion the man can't govern worth shit, but he sure is shrewd when it comes to making the other parties look stupid.
the home reno tax credit will be reintroduced regardless of who forms the government post-election
besides the tories have been using public funds to advertise an unimplemented, unpassed tax credit all summer long, which is unethical as fuck
It's disgusting. I didn't even know this tax credit didn't exist yet till I saw the News a few days ago. I was like "WTF, they've been advertising that it exists for months now. That's fucking horrible!".
Each of the commercials say the credit is pending Parliament approval (or whatever wording) along the bottom in smaller font (though not as small as the font that car commericals use for the legals of their offers). Still, I do not disagree with the two of you.
Yes, how dare they advertise and increase awareness of something before it comes out.... I bet they spoil all the best parts of the bill in the preview too just like the movies do.
Voter apathy isn't going to kill democracy. MP sycophancy killed it 30 years ago. In the over 20,000 votes cast on the 103 issues voted on in the last session, there were a grand total of 86 votes that deviated from their party's majority. 17 by the Tories, 51 by the Liberals, 17 by the NDP and 1 by the BQ. MPs are so scared of being kicked out of their parties that they all toe the line damn near 100% of the time. I don't know what that is, but it's not democracy.
Parties emerge in every representative democracy. That's how it works. You can either work within that state of affairs or you can waste your time trying to change the nature of the system itself. But if you're not going to vote, don't try to tell me that this is somehow helping.
(also direct democracy is a fucking terrible disaster see: California)
No one's talking about direct democracy. Parties serve their purpose, but the kind of brutal discipline that's been enforced for the last few decades has removed all meaning from the votes. Why even bother having 308 MPs if their votes are all based on the will of four men? I'm not sure how the votes go in the UK, but a couple months ago there were all kinds of Labour MPs openly calling for Gordon Brown's resignation, and they didn't get tossed out. We never see that sort of thing here anymore because everyone's afraid of losing their place in the party and its associated perks, and that's why our minority parliaments haven't worked: The Tories can't court individual MPs, they have to go after whole parties.
If they'd bring back the ballot refusal thing or a "none of the above" option, I'd do that, but going out and voting for someone who's guaranteed to lose or who will serve the party before the people is not something I and 40% of Canadians want to do.
The alternative is if MPs arent representative of their constituents anyways, change the system to proportional representation where it isnt broken down to ridings and is instead a direct %based system.
And who gets to choose which MPs get those seats?
The parties choose their own MPs. This pretty much accepts that the party whip has final say for votes, so you account for that from the outset.
The only reason this is significantly better than first past the post, is that every single vote that anyone casts anywhere counts equally. It no longer matters how your neighbor votes, it only matters how you vote.
It also makes smaller parties more viable, especially with the way the current vote=cash$ system is setup in Canada.
So it doesn't even solve the problem were talking about. In fact, it makes it worse.
Your seat in Parliment would now come solely from your party. MPs are now completely beholden to their Party.
Voter apathy isn't going to kill democracy. MP sycophancy killed it 30 years ago. In the over 20,000 votes cast on the 103 issues voted on in the last session, there were a grand total of 86 votes that deviated from their party's majority. 17 by the Tories, 51 by the Liberals, 17 by the NDP and 1 by the BQ. MPs are so scared of being kicked out of their parties that they all toe the line damn near 100% of the time. I don't know what that is, but it's not democracy.
Parties emerge in every representative democracy. That's how it works. You can either work within that state of affairs or you can waste your time trying to change the nature of the system itself. But if you're not going to vote, don't try to tell me that this is somehow helping.
(also direct democracy is a fucking terrible disaster see: California)
No one's talking about direct democracy. Parties serve their purpose, but the kind of brutal discipline that's been enforced for the last few decades has removed all meaning from the votes. Why even bother having 308 MPs if their votes are all based on the will of four men? I'm not sure how the votes go in the UK, but a couple months ago there were all kinds of Labour MPs openly calling for Gordon Brown's resignation, and they didn't get tossed out. We never see that sort of thing here anymore because everyone's afraid of losing their place in the party and its associated perks, and that's why our minority parliaments haven't worked: The Tories can't court individual MPs, they have to go after whole parties.
If they'd bring back the ballot refusal thing or a "none of the above" option, I'd do that, but going out and voting for someone who's guaranteed to lose or who will serve the party before the people is not something I and 40% of Canadians want to do.
The alternative is if MPs arent representative of their constituents anyways, change the system to proportional representation where it isnt broken down to ridings and is instead a direct %based system.
And who gets to choose which MPs get those seats?
The parties choose their own MPs. This pretty much accepts that the party whip has final say for votes, so you account for that from the outset.
The only reason this is significantly better than first past the post, is that every single vote that anyone casts anywhere counts equally. It no longer matters how your neighbor votes, it only matters how you vote.
It also makes smaller parties more viable, especially with the way the current vote=cash$ system is setup in Canada.
It also reduces the effectiveness of regional parties, since they'd have to compete nationally for the popular vote instead of just catering to one particular region.
In my opinion the man can't govern worth shit, but he sure is shrewd when it comes to making the other parties look stupid.
the home reno tax credit will be reintroduced regardless of who forms the government post-election
besides the tories have been using public funds to advertise an unimplemented, unpassed tax credit all summer long, which is unethical as fuck
It's disgusting. I didn't even know this tax credit didn't exist yet till I saw the News a few days ago. I was like "WTF, they've been advertising that it exists for months now. That's fucking horrible!".
Each of the commercials say the credit is pending Parliament approval (or whatever wording) along the bottom in smaller font (though not as small as the font that car commericals use for the legals of their offers). Still, I do not disagree with the two of you.
Yes, how dare they advertise and increase awareness of something before it comes out.... I bet they spoil all the best parts of the bill in the preview too just like the movies do.
Indeed, how dare they use public funds to promote the hell out of their entire election strategy.
If you're the sitting fucking government, you're held to different standards then the opposition. Those standards include only putting up advertising for government programs that have got the approval of the parliament, especially for minority governments. That the Tories are whoring out their election platform on the public dollar shows that they have no standards in this regard.
In my opinion the man can't govern worth shit, but he sure is shrewd when it comes to making the other parties look stupid.
the home reno tax credit will be reintroduced regardless of who forms the government post-election
besides the tories have been using public funds to advertise an unimplemented, unpassed tax credit all summer long, which is unethical as fuck
It's disgusting. I didn't even know this tax credit didn't exist yet till I saw the News a few days ago. I was like "WTF, they've been advertising that it exists for months now. That's fucking horrible!".
Each of the commercials say the credit is pending Parliament approval (or whatever wording) along the bottom in smaller font (though not as small as the font that car commericals use for the legals of their offers). Still, I do not disagree with the two of you.
Yes, how dare they advertise and increase awareness of something before it comes out.... I bet they spoil all the best parts of the bill in the preview too just like the movies do.
Indeed, how dare they use public funds to promote the hell out of their entire election strategy.
If you're the sitting fucking government, you're held to different standards then the opposition. Those standards include only putting up advertising for government programs that have got the approval of the parliament, especially for minority governments. That the Tories are whoring out their election platform on the public dollar shows that they have no standards in this regard.
How do we define public dollar here? Considering all the political parties (excepting the Tories) rely heavily or exclusively on public funding to do anything, and even then many of them are in debt.
I mean, obviously if it was a misappropriation of funds, I'm sure the Liberals would be all over it like stink on shit to try and make the sponsorship scandal seem less exclusive to corruption in their party.
So what your saying is, the system is broken. Very well. What are you doing to try and fix it? Oh yeah, jack fucking shit.
CorporateGoon, let's start the Canadian revolution together.
I'm working on it, but it's hard to get people interested.
It's been a long time since the NATO block has had a good revolution. Let's shake things up!
Apparently they celebrate Guy Fawkes Day in a few places in Canada, so maybe we can get those folks on board. Do you know where we can get a shitload of gunpowder for cheap?
Guy Fawkes day is a celebration of the failure of that particular revolution . . . and Guy Fawkes subsequent drawing and quartering.
In my opinion the man can't govern worth shit, but he sure is shrewd when it comes to making the other parties look stupid.
the home reno tax credit will be reintroduced regardless of who forms the government post-election
besides the tories have been using public funds to advertise an unimplemented, unpassed tax credit all summer long, which is unethical as fuck
It's disgusting. I didn't even know this tax credit didn't exist yet till I saw the News a few days ago. I was like "WTF, they've been advertising that it exists for months now. That's fucking horrible!".
Each of the commercials say the credit is pending Parliament approval (or whatever wording) along the bottom in smaller font (though not as small as the font that car commericals use for the legals of their offers). Still, I do not disagree with the two of you.
Yes, how dare they advertise and increase awareness of something before it comes out.... I bet they spoil all the best parts of the bill in the preview too just like the movies do.
Indeed, how dare they use public funds to promote the hell out of their entire election strategy.
If you're the sitting fucking government, you're held to different standards then the opposition. Those standards include only putting up advertising for government programs that have got the approval of the parliament, especially for minority governments. That the Tories are whoring out their election platform on the public dollar shows that they have no standards in this regard.
How do we define public dollar here? Considering all the political parties (excepting the Tories) rely heavily or exclusively on public funding to do anything, and even then many of them are in debt.
I mean, obviously if it was a misappropriation of funds, I'm sure the Liberals would be all over it like stink on shit to try and make the sponsorship scandal seem less exclusive to corruption in their party.
I think it's pretty clear that most everyone is upset that they're using non-partisan funding to pay for the advertising. It's not like the CPC reached into their coffers to pay for this advertising, they used a government agency that the other parties don't have access to.
In my opinion the man can't govern worth shit, but he sure is shrewd when it comes to making the other parties look stupid.
the home reno tax credit will be reintroduced regardless of who forms the government post-election
besides the tories have been using public funds to advertise an unimplemented, unpassed tax credit all summer long, which is unethical as fuck
It's disgusting. I didn't even know this tax credit didn't exist yet till I saw the News a few days ago. I was like "WTF, they've been advertising that it exists for months now. That's fucking horrible!".
Each of the commercials say the credit is pending Parliament approval (or whatever wording) along the bottom in smaller font (though not as small as the font that car commericals use for the legals of their offers). Still, I do not disagree with the two of you.
Yes, how dare they advertise and increase awareness of something before it comes out.... I bet they spoil all the best parts of the bill in the preview too just like the movies do.
It's actually "How dare they use public dollars to advertise a part of their election platform they want to pass as if it already exists".
Posts
The Federal NDP shouldn't be confused with the Provincial NDP... and I know you know that. I'm just saying it to make sure others take note. Saskatchewan was pretty much always NDP provincially within the last reasonable number of years. However, it's pretty much always Conservative when it comes to Federal politics. There's been a few Liberal ridings (and good old Ralph always wins his seat), there doesn't appear to be a transfer between Provincially supporting NDP and Federally supporting NDP.
When I posted that it hadn't come out yet that Sheppard may have been drunk. So yeah. I'm sure it'll be used to get Bryant off though.
And who cares if he had 60 charges against him in alberta? They were for non-violent offences and thus totally irelevant here.
took out her barrettes and her hair spilled out like rootbeer
besides the tories have been using public funds to advertise an unimplemented, unpassed tax credit all summer long, which is unethical as fuck
Fuck every one of you lazy entitled assholes. Get the fuck off the couch and vote. It takes half an hour. There's no excuse.
See, I agree with you in principle; people should vote. But I also see where other folks are coming from; I don't think it's a question of "I'm too busy to vote" so much as it's a desire to see our political parties do something other than wave their dicks around. Maybe if they spent less time trying to cut each other's throats, someone could get something done.
The Division, Warframe (XB1)
GT: Tanith 6227
I'm pretty sure it's the people we're voting for who are lazy entitled assholes. But I'll vote. If only because it takes me even less than half an hour.
I wish I was in university again. Waterloo's Liberal MP was an awesome MP that I'd go out of my way to vote for, even if I didn't support the Liberals.
I think you'd be pretty hard pressed to convince a court that deliberately causing bodily harm to a person with a fucking motorized vehicle constitutes a reasonable form of self defense. You can't just kill someone in self-defense and then run away.
If someone's holding onto your car, you are obliged to stop the car. If you're involved in a collision, you are obliged to remain at the scene. You are not the star of your own action movie.
Drunk cyclist and mild mannered motorist collide.
Cyclist verbally and then physically starts to assault motorist
In self defence motorist attempts to flee
Cyclist jumps onto convertible and continues to assault motorist
Cyclist falls off and is struck by rear wheels of car
Motorist continues to flee for own safety uncertain of cyclist's condition
Now, by no means am I an apologist for Mr. Bryant, I think fleeing the scene of an accident under any circumstances is unacceptable. There were witnesses, there are people who will help you, don't be a douche.
But in this case I'm sure his defence will suggest that the cyclist was the instigator and Mr. Bryant was simply protecting himself, and fleeing the scene, although wrong, was part of that protection as he was unaware the cyclist was incapacitated by the accident.
Driving a couple metres away then calling 911 hardly counts as "fleeing the scene".
Also it remains to be proven if Bryant had reasonable grounds to believe his safety and the safety of his wife might be in jeopardy. None of us really know what exactly happened or how it went down.
I'm not saying that Bryant is innocent. But I'm sure not certain that he's guilty of anything either. All I'm really trying to say is that before jumping all over Bryant's throat, consider that there is very likely another side to this story, and Sheppard's actions may have played a large role in how things went down. Perhaps even to the point of Bryant's attempting to drive away being justified.
I'd probaly have done the same thing as Bryant in that situation if I had a raging drunk screaming in my face and banging on my car, particularly if my wife was with me and I thought the guy might attack.
It will be interesting to see how this plays out in the courts, and I think Phisti is correct on Bryan's defence.
MPs don't represent their constituents, they represent their parties. In an ideal world they might listen to the people every once in a while, but as it stands now, most MPs are $157,000 seat fillers who always vote the way their whip tells them to, regardless of how they or their constituents actually feel about the issue. Why bother voting for someone who stops giving a crap about you 30 seconds after the election's over?
If your MP is being an asshat, keep them well informed of this fact. Or vote for someone else. Or volunteer for an independent. Or join a party and agitate for the policies you want implemented. Or run for office yourself. People who don't participate in the process contribute just as much to this problem as do the stereotypical party-line-toeing backbanchers.
Voter apathy is going to kill democracy. I have no sympathy at all for your attitude.
Voter apathy isn't going to kill democracy. MP sycophancy killed it 30 years ago. In the over 20,000 votes cast on the 103 issues voted on in the last session, there were a grand total of 86 votes that deviated from their party's majority. 17 by the Tories, 51 by the Liberals, 17 by the NDP and 1 by the BQ. MPs are so scared of being kicked out of their parties that they all toe the line damn near 100% of the time. I don't know what that is, but it's not democracy.
Also, I'm in the process of attempting to start a new federal party because I'm sick of crap like that, but thanks for assuming I'm lazy.
CorporateGoon, let's start the Canadian revolution together.
I'm working on it, but it's hard to get people interested.
It's been a long time since the NATO block has had a good revolution. Let's shake things up!
Apparently they celebrate Guy Fawkes Day in a few places in Canada, so maybe we can get those folks on board. Do you know where we can get a shitload of gunpowder for cheap?
(also direct democracy is a fucking terrible disaster see: California)
No one's talking about direct democracy. Parties serve their purpose, but the kind of brutal discipline that's been enforced for the last few decades has removed all meaning from the votes. Why even bother having 308 MPs if their votes are all based on the will of four men? I'm not sure how the votes go in the UK, but a couple months ago there were all kinds of Labour MPs openly calling for Gordon Brown's resignation, and they didn't get tossed out. We never see that sort of thing here anymore because everyone's afraid of losing their place in the party and its associated perks, and that's why our minority parliaments haven't worked: The Tories can't court individual MPs, they have to go after whole parties.
If they'd bring back the ballot refusal thing or a "none of the above" option, I'd do that, but going out and voting for someone who's guaranteed to lose or who will serve the party before the people is not something I and 40% of Canadians want to do.
The alternative is if MPs arent representative of their constituents anyways, change the system to proportional representation where it isnt broken down to ridings and is instead a direct %based system.
MWO: Adamski
It's disgusting. I didn't even know this tax credit didn't exist yet till I saw the News a few days ago. I was like "WTF, they've been advertising that it exists for months now. That's fucking horrible!".
And who gets to choose which MPs get those seats?
Aye, the more information coming out about this, the less cut-and-dry it's looking.
I'm certainly in favour of some kind of electoral reform, but I don't know that proportional representation is the way to go.
@Azio: But they don't count WHY the ballot was spoiled, and that's what matters.
Each of the commercials say the credit is pending Parliament approval (or whatever wording) along the bottom in smaller font (though not as small as the font that car commericals use for the legals of their offers). Still, I do not disagree with the two of you.
The parties choose their own MPs. This pretty much accepts that the party whip has final say for votes, so you account for that from the outset.
The only reason this is significantly better than first past the post, is that every single vote that anyone casts anywhere counts equally. It no longer matters how your neighbor votes, it only matters how you vote.
It also makes smaller parties more viable, especially with the way the current vote=cash$ system is setup in Canada.
MWO: Adamski
Yes, how dare they advertise and increase awareness of something before it comes out.... I bet they spoil all the best parts of the bill in the preview too just like the movies do.
MWO: Adamski
So it doesn't even solve the problem were talking about. In fact, it makes it worse.
Your seat in Parliment would now come solely from your party. MPs are now completely beholden to their Party.
It also reduces the effectiveness of regional parties, since they'd have to compete nationally for the popular vote instead of just catering to one particular region.
Indeed, how dare they use public funds to promote the hell out of their entire election strategy.
If you're the sitting fucking government, you're held to different standards then the opposition. Those standards include only putting up advertising for government programs that have got the approval of the parliament, especially for minority governments. That the Tories are whoring out their election platform on the public dollar shows that they have no standards in this regard.
How do we define public dollar here? Considering all the political parties (excepting the Tories) rely heavily or exclusively on public funding to do anything, and even then many of them are in debt.
I mean, obviously if it was a misappropriation of funds, I'm sure the Liberals would be all over it like stink on shit to try and make the sponsorship scandal seem less exclusive to corruption in their party.
MWO: Adamski
I think it's pretty clear that most everyone is upset that they're using non-partisan funding to pay for the advertising. It's not like the CPC reached into their coffers to pay for this advertising, they used a government agency that the other parties don't have access to.
It's actually "How dare they use public dollars to advertise a part of their election platform they want to pass as if it already exists".