The Wild Rose Alliance has not defeated the Alberta Conservatives in the slightest.
I dont see how 'Will of the People' comes into this at all...
Liberal ideology in a nutshell.
Libertarian special needs editing in a nutshell.
The west was the birthplace of Reform. If you just shrug your shoulders at Wildrose and say they aren't important because they haven't won yet, that's like saying the Bloc isn't important because Duceppe isn't PM.
Edit: Special Lesson for Gnome -- The Bloc Quebecois is a very important element to Canadian politics.
Loklar on
0
Options
AegisFear My DanceOvershot Toronto, Landed in OttawaRegistered Userregular
edited March 2011
Northern Ontario's liable to secede from Ontario before Alberta is from Canada.
The Wild Rose Alliance has not defeated the Alberta Conservatives in the slightest.
I dont see how 'Will of the People' comes into this at all...
Liberal ideology in a nutshell.
Libertarian special needs editing in a nutshell.
The west was the birthplace of Reform. If you just shrug your shoulders at Wildrose and say they aren't important because they haven't won yet, that's like saying the Bloc isn't important because Duceppe isn't PM.
Edit: Special Lesson for Gnome -- The Bloc Quebecois is a very important element to Canadian politics.
Of the two polls that were run (Nov then Dec), the Wildrose is already losing steam because the economy is starting to pick up again, which was the entire reason they became popular in the first place.
Anecdotal: I actually spoke to someone who went so far as to sign up for the Wildrose mailer, who quickly cancelled once it became clear just what they were outside of being Not Conservative.
I would reply more to your point regarding the Bloc and the Wildrose comparability, but you deleted the original post where you brought up the Wildrose in the first place.
So I guess your debating tactics now involve heavily editing other peoples posts and deleting your own. Real fucking winner you are.
The Wild Rose Alliance has not defeated the Alberta Conservatives in the slightest.
I dont see how 'Will of the People' comes into this at all...
Liberal ideology in a nutshell.
Libertarian special needs editing in a nutshell.
The west was the birthplace of Reform. If you just shrug your shoulders at Wildrose and say they aren't important because they haven't won yet, that's like saying the Bloc isn't important because Duceppe isn't PM.
Edit: Special Lesson for Gnome -- The Bloc Quebecois is a very important element to Canadian politics.
Of the two polls that were run (Nov then Dec), the Wildrose is already losing steam because the economy is starting to pick up again, which was the entire reason they became popular in the first place.
Anecdotal: I actually spoke to someone who went so far as to sign up for the Wildrose mailer, who quickly cancelled once it became clear just what they were outside of being Not Conservative.
I would reply more to your point regarding the Bloc and the Wildrose comparability, but you deleted the original post where you brought up the Wildrose in the first place.
So I guess your debating tactics now involve heavily editing other peoples posts and deleting your own. Real fucking winner you are.
The Wild Rose Alliance has not defeated the Alberta Conservatives in the slightest.
I dont see how 'Will of the People' comes into this at all...
Liberal ideology in a nutshell.
Libertarian special needs editing in a nutshell.
The west was the birthplace of Reform. If you just shrug your shoulders at Wildrose and say they aren't important because they haven't won yet, that's like saying the Bloc isn't important because Duceppe isn't PM.
Edit: Special Lesson for Gnome -- The Bloc Quebecois is a very important element to Canadian politics.
No, it's not like that at all, because the Wildrose Alliance party has only ever won a single seatonce in a provincial election, whereas the BQ have repeatedly won and held up to 50 seats in multiple federal elections, not to mention has a provincial counterpart that frequently governs the province.
I mean, Jesus Christ, the analogy between Albertan independence and Quebecois independence is so terri-bad. One of them speaks a different language. One of them was added to the nation via invasion. One of them has firmly established political parties that advocate varying degrees of sovereignty. One of them has been considering sovereignty for decades. One of them them has spawned a militant, terrorist independence movement. One of them isn't just considering independence out of jealousy at other provinces.
I have about as good a case for sovereignty as Alberta does. Jesus Christ man, and then for you to couple this idiocy by patronizing Gnome-Interruptus too. What the fuck?
The Wild Rose Alliance has not defeated the Alberta Conservatives in the slightest.
I dont see how 'Will of the People' comes into this at all...
Liberal ideology in a nutshell.
Libertarian special needs editing in a nutshell.
The west was the birthplace of Reform. If you just shrug your shoulders at Wildrose and say they aren't important because they haven't won yet, that's like saying the Bloc isn't important because Duceppe isn't PM.
Edit: Special Lesson for Gnome -- The Bloc Quebecois is a very important element to Canadian politics.
Of the two polls that were run (Nov then Dec), the Wildrose is already losing steam because the economy is starting to pick up again, which was the entire reason they became popular in the first place.
Anecdotal: I actually spoke to someone who went so far as to sign up for the Wildrose mailer, who quickly cancelled once it became clear just what they were outside of being Not Conservative.
I would reply more to your point regarding the Bloc and the Wildrose comparability, but you deleted the original post where you brought up the Wildrose in the first place.
So I guess your debating tactics now involve heavily editing other peoples posts and deleting your own. Real fucking winner you are.
Enjoy your internet fame?
I'm real happy you know a guy in Alberta.
Hey I know a guy in alberta too! oh wait.....
The problem with the wildrose is that they make Stephen Harper and the federal Cons look like communist sympathizers. They are craaazy right wing.
In fact, I know plenty of people in Alberta, because I live here!
I only know the one person who has admitted to wanting anything to do with the Wildrose though, and like I said, they bailed on that.
EDIT: Loklar may still have a bruised ego regarding when myself and a number of other posters in this thread had to set him straight on how taxes dont drive businesses bankrupt because it is income not revenue that is taxed.
The Wild Rose Alliance has not defeated the Alberta Conservatives in the slightest.
I dont see how 'Will of the People' comes into this at all...
Liberal ideology in a nutshell.
Libertarian special needs editing in a nutshell.
The west was the birthplace of Reform. If you just shrug your shoulders at Wildrose and say they aren't important because they haven't won yet, that's like saying the Bloc isn't important because Duceppe isn't PM.
Edit: Special Lesson for Gnome -- The Bloc Quebecois is a very important element to Canadian politics.
No, it's not like that at all, because the Wildrose Alliance party has only ever won a single seatonce in a provincial election, whereas the BQ have repeatedly won and held up to 50 seats in multiple federal elections, not to mention has a provincial counterpart that frequently governs the province.
I mean, Jesus Christ, the analogy between Albertan independence and Quebecois independence is so terri-bad. One of them speaks a different language. One of them was added to the nation via invasion. One of them has firmly established political parties that advocate varying degrees of sovereignty. One of them has been considering sovereignty for decades. One of them them has spawned a militant, terrorist independence movement. One of them isn't just considering independence out of jealousy at other provinces.
I have about as good a case for sovereignty as Alberta does. Jesus Christ man, and then for you to couple this idiocy by patronizing Gnome-Interruptus too. What the fuck?
If most of the country spoke french, the Bloc would've been exactly like Reform. Asking for more rights for their provinceS.
Even if Wildrose dies, it will still have an effect on Albertan provincial politics. Because it'll scare the ruling PC's into straying to far to the centre. Just like Jack Layton has had an affect on multiple federal budgets. Some of which have past.
And the fact that 2 protest parties have taken root there (1 that formed the national government over the past 5 years) means that they mean business. And means the centre better veer right.
If most of the country spoke french, the Bloc would've been exactly like Reform. Asking for more rights for their provinceS.
Ah, so you're ignorant of both the Bloc's policies and ideological background, and of our nation's demographics and linguistic policies. Well, I'm glad that's not stopping you from being vocal about your options on the Bloc's policies given Canada's francophone population distribution!
I haven't heard rumblings about Alberta sovereignty in a loooong time. Sometimes I think we were just trying to troll the rest of the country with that one.
Do the Wild Rose actually support Alberta Sovereignty? I browsed their website quickly but I couldn't find anything about it.
No...
No, Wild Rose isn't an Alberta Soverignest party. I assumed you knew that. They are an ultra-debt averse, super Ralph Klein party, that is mad at any deficit spending.
If most of the country spoke french, the Bloc would've been exactly like Reform. Asking for more rights for their provinceS.
And if pigs could fly, we'd probably have delicious baconwings.
Because
a) Western Canada was not settled with people from another country.
b) Western Canada was not invaded.
c) The Reform party did not support Western sovereignty, but instead sought a reform of Canadian politics into what they felt would be a more equitable distribution of power and respect.
d) The Bloc never merged with the NDP.
e) MOST OF THE COUNTRY DOESN'T SPEAK FRENCH.
"Hey, if only the Palestinians were Jewish, then there'd be no conflict!"
C is Fundamentally what the bloc is. Considering it's been 16 years since their last attempt referendum. It's not like the 2 billion the Bloc asked for in the budget was for sovergnty.
If most of the country spoke french, the Bloc would've been exactly like Reform. Asking for more rights for their provinceS.
And if pigs could fly, we'd probably have delicious baconwings.
Because
a) Western Canada was not settled with people from another country.
b) Western Canada was not invaded.
c) The Reform party did not support Western sovereignty, but instead sought a reform of Canadian politics into what they felt would be a more equitable distribution of power and respect.
d) The Bloc never merged with the NDP.
e) MOST OF THE COUNTRY DOESN'T SPEAK FRENCH.
"Hey, if only the Palestinians were Jewish, then there'd be no conflict!"
If most of the country spoke french, the Bloc would've been exactly like Reform. Asking for more rights for their provinceS.
And if pigs could fly, we'd probably have delicious baconwings.
Because
a) Western Canada was not settled with people from another country.
b) Western Canada was not invaded.
c) The Reform party did not support Western sovereignty, but instead sought a reform of Canadian politics into what they felt would be a more equitable distribution of power and respect.
d) The Bloc never merged with the NDP.
e) MOST OF THE COUNTRY DOESN'T SPEAK FRENCH.
"Hey, if only the Palestinians were Jewish, then there'd be no conflict!"
C is Fundamentally what the bloc is. Considering it's been 16 years since their last attempt referendum. It's not like the 2 billion the Bloc asked for in the budget was for sovergnty.
First of all, no. Western Canada was not invaded. Western Canada's main demographic does not primarily originate from a fundamentally different cultural group. The Reform party NEVER supported sovereignty, whereas the Bloc Quebecois began purely to support sovereignty. It's been INFINITY years since Western Canada's last referendum on sovereignty. 16 years is nothing in the long timeline of history, given that it's been some fifty years since the last Tibetan uprising. The Bloc would not support a system wherein each province would get equal say as in the Reform Party's idealized Senate system, because that would be fundamentally opposed to their goals, so no. No no no no no no no no. A fucking million times no, coming from a person who's neither Reform nor Bloc and has only been in the damn country for 23 years, no, you are about as far away from correct as possible when you say that there's only one major difference between the Bloc and the Reform party.
Second of all, MOST OF THE COUNTRY STILL DOESN'T SPEAK FRENCH. There's a really fucking fundamental cultural distinction between Anglo-Saxon and Cosmopolitaine. One of them is a Germanic cultural group; the other is Latin. One of them is primarily Roman-Catholic; the other is Protestant. One of them violently overthrew their monarchy; the other still has theirs. One of them is sexually liberated; one of them is sexually repressed. One of them is highly logical and deterministc; the other one is highly artistic and absurdist. These are cultural distinctions that are fundamentally rooted within these two societies through centuries of divergent development and for you to say that all of those differences basically disappeared over the past 16 years is completely and entirely preposterous.
I can only imagine Saggio is awake in bed right now with a terrible burning deep in his heart and absolutely no idea why.
Second - there are going to be new leaders as a direct result of this election. Theoretically, you could see the last of Harper, Ignatieff and Layton. Harper may resign as party leader if he is unable to secure a majority and party insiders judge that he's the boat anchor preventing that from happening. Ignatieff is guaranteed one election as leader by the Liberal party's constitution. After that, there's going to be a leadership review if he isn't PM, and he'll probably be gone. Layton has health issues and, if he's planning to retire from the leadership on that basis, the time to do so is right after an election so the party can organize behind the new leader before the next election.
Have there not also been rumblings about Duceppe going back to the PQ?
I honestly don't know, I'm not very familiar with the Bloc, the PQ and the interaction between the two.
For the Conservatives, Liberals and NDP, the federal party is the big thing while provincial wings have less prestige. For the PQ/Bloc, that relation is reversed. The Bloc is definitively seen as the farm team. Bloc MP with more ambition like Maka Kotto have left for the PQ.
Duceppe can stay leader as long as he wants. He simply have no internal competition. Ironically the party is even more centralised arround Duceppe than the Cons are arround Harper.
Marois have nothing to worry about for now, unless she somehow manage to loose the next election. Duceppe is too comfortable in his current position to make the jump to the PQ.
There's going to be a Quebec provincial election soon. Either this autumn or next spring. If Marois fails to win a majority government, it's likely that she will be ousted and Duceppe will make an attempt for the leadership.
Of course, if the Bloc gets more than 54 seats in this election and the PQ forms government in the next provincial election, shit will get real very quickly. A third referendum wouldn't be outside the realm of possibility, especially given some of Ms. Marois' past statements on the matter.
Last Québec election was held Dec 8, 2008 and Charest still have a (slim) majority. As much as i'd like it to be sooner, I dont see the next election being held before the very end of 2012 or even 2013.
And no, they're wont be a 3rd referendum unless the PQ is suicidal. They're is no appetite for that right now and Marois is intelligent enough to recognise that.
Jean on
"You won't destroy us, You won't destroy our democracy. We are a small but proud nation. No one can bomb us to silence. No one can scare us from being Norway. This evening and tonight, we'll take care of each other. That's what we do best when attacked'' - Jens Stoltenberg
If most of the country spoke french, the Bloc would've been exactly like Reform. Asking for more rights for their provinceS.
And if pigs could fly, we'd probably have delicious baconwings.
Because
a) Western Canada was not settled with people from another country.
b) Western Canada was not invaded.
c) The Reform party did not support Western sovereignty, but instead sought a reform of Canadian politics into what they felt would be a more equitable distribution of power and respect.
d) The Bloc never merged with the NDP.
e) MOST OF THE COUNTRY DOESN'T SPEAK FRENCH.
"Hey, if only the Palestinians were Jewish, then there'd be no conflict!"
Right. I forgot. Preston Manning was First Nations. Not what we're talking about and not helping, dude.
Well, if you're going to point form a list of "facts" it helps if they're accurate, dude.
And yes, Reform and the Bloc are certainly not the same. But the whole invasion thing, I often wonder, as a guy with a history degree what the statue of limitations for that kind of thing is supposed to be. Are we going to still be harking back to that in another 250 years?
Well, if you're going to point form a list of "facts" it helps if they're accurate, dude.
It's Loklar and it's grade 9 history. I'm trying not to be too overwhelming here.
My understanding of history is that this sort of shit can last centuries, implicitly. A lot of these grand historical events, while perhaps not specifically referenced, seem to burrow themselves into a society's memory, imbuing its cultural and arts with a very unique flavour. I liken it to the relationship between the human body and (most of) its cells; your cells might only live for hours, but you last for decades and are relatively unchanged, because each cell greatly influences the nature of the cell after it. Even as individuals die, their existences created a societal memory that outlives them and influences that which comes after. It's what you study in history class; it's what you read in novels; it's what you hear in music; it's what you feel when you walk down the street. And major historical events don't just rise up out of nowhere and dissipate into the aether; there are build-ups and trickle-downs, all the tiny events the lead up to that big one and all the rippling repercussions afterward.
I mean, I think I could draw a pretty strong relationship to modern-day Chinese belligerence and antipathy for Western political interference from the Opium Wars of the 19th century.
Thank god. Quebec wanting to secede is the dumbest idea in Canada, and that's saying something.They already get a stupid amount of special privileges, up to and including flouting our constitution with their fucking language laws and huge bribes from the federal parties for support. What could they possibly have to gain from leaving the giant cash cow that is the rest of Canada and having to actually support their own economy?
And before someone from Quebec says "waaaa but no one from the rest of the country looks out for our interests so we have to demand all this special treatment", I don't give a flying fuck. No one looks out for BC's interests, either. or for Saskatchewan. Deal with it. Fucking Quebec.
Regarding hippofant's point C and especially Loklar's insightful observation that if everyone in Canada spoke French then Québec sovereignists [strike]would speak English to piss them off[/strike] would stand up for all of Canada:
I don't think you guys realize that there are Francophone populations outside of Québec. This includes population with distinct histories and who were oppressed by the English and Canadians. The Atlantic provinces used to be the French colony of Acadia, which was also conquered by the British, who then proceeded to deport three-quarters of the population from their homes to random locations throughout the Colonies, splitting up their families, burning their homes and confiscating their land in the process. The Metis population in Manitoba are descended of mixed Native-French parentage, and are French-speaking to this day. Their 19th-century leader and the founder of the province of Manitoba, Louis Riel, was crushed by Canadian military force, captured, tried in an Ontario kangaroo court as a traitor against Canada and hanged.
Today, one-quarter of Canadians list French as their native language and there are Francophone populations from the East Coast to the Rockies and from the US border to the Arctic Circle. IF the Bloc wanted to stand up for provinceS rights or even for pan-Canadian Francophone rights today, they could easily do so and find support outside of their province. In fact, a lot of issues they fight for today they could progress on or achieve a lot more easily if they just changed their argument to "provinces" instead of "Québec". They do not do so. Why? I'll let Loklar come up with a ridiculous and twisted answer for that.
Richy on
0
Options
JeanHeartbroken papa bearGatineau, QuébecRegistered Userregular
"You won't destroy us, You won't destroy our democracy. We are a small but proud nation. No one can bomb us to silence. No one can scare us from being Norway. This evening and tonight, we'll take care of each other. That's what we do best when attacked'' - Jens Stoltenberg
I don't think you guys realize that there are Francophone populations outside of Québec.
I am fully aware of that. I'm in no way arguing for Quebec's sovereignty: I believe that it's fundamentally an example of "grass is always greener, things used to be better in the good old days, I can always do things better" thinking. I use Quebec's distinct primary language as the prime exemplar of a historically-grounded cultural difference between it and the rest of Canada, which Loklar believes can somehow be magically hand-waved away so as to equivocate Alberta and Quebec.
I'm not in any way talking about First Nations or Metis or whoever the fuck else. I'm just highlighting that Quebec v. Canada is an extremely different game than Alberta v. Canada, and anybody (Loklar) who doesn't realise that is patently out of their minds. If you guys wanna talk about everybody else who are "special", fine, but I don't particularly see the relevance other than to retread my Canadian history classes all over again.
I wish the Acadians would make up their mind, they're impossible to talk to. A seamless blend of the two languages, and word salad to everyone who isn't an Acadian.
I wish the Acadians would make up their mind, they're impossible to talk to. A seamless blend of the two languages, and word salad to everyone who isn't an Acadian.
So here's something I've been wondering about. The Conservatives are dominating the west and the BQ pretty much have Quebec. But, from what I understand (which, admittedly, is not much), other than sovereignty, the BQ and NDP seem to agree on a lot of points and the the west doesn't have problems with the NDP on the provincial level. To me, it seems like the NDP should be performing a lot better than they have/are, especially with the Liberal vote tanking in those areas.
~2/3rds of the nation live in Ontario and Quebec. BC and Alberta have most of the rest, after that you're in the low single digits of % of population.
Nothing in Canadian regional politics makes sense unless you keep that in mind.
I mean for fuck's sake, 1 in 6 people in Canada live in the GTA, probably higher if you count the number of undocumented residents. The Toronto Metro Area has more people living in it then Saskatchewan, nova scotia, new brunswick, newfoundland and the territories.
So here's something I've been wondering about. The Conservatives are dominating the west and the BQ pretty much have Quebec. But, from what I understand (which, admittedly, is not much), other than sovereignty, the BQ and NDP seem to agree on a lot of points and the the west doesn't have problems with the NDP on the provincial level. To me, it seems like the NDP should be performing a lot better than they have/are, especially with the Liberal vote tanking in those areas.
The NDP runs second in just about every riding West of Ontario which they don't win in, with a couple of notable exceptions. In Quebec, the NDP has begun to overtake both the Conservatives and the Liberals in francophone areas of the province, but because of the way national polls are conducted this is usually masked by the influence of Montreal, where the Liberals are very strong.
It will be interesting to see how this campaign unfolds.
saggio on
3DS: 0232-9436-6893
0
Options
JeanHeartbroken papa bearGatineau, QuébecRegistered Userregular
edited March 2011
In Quebec, the NDP has begun to overtake both the Conservatives and the Liberals in francophone areas of the province, but because of the way national polls are conducted this is usually masked by the influence of Montreal, where the Liberals are very strong.
Tough I have difficulty believing the Liberals are really that low but thes numbers are definitively... ugly for them.
Jean on
"You won't destroy us, You won't destroy our democracy. We are a small but proud nation. No one can bomb us to silence. No one can scare us from being Norway. This evening and tonight, we'll take care of each other. That's what we do best when attacked'' - Jens Stoltenberg
I personally have been calling up MPs that have a chance of defeating the Conservatives of any party affiliation and telling them in no uncertain terms they should call Harper & Cons' bluff and campaign with one of their policies being that they are coalition friendly, show Canadians a positive message by saying they are willing to cooperate with each [other for] the good of Canadians, unlike the Conservatives who put us in this election by disregarding our democratic institutions. Big mistake for Ignatieff to rule out a coalition, it plays right into the Conservative's hands. I disagree that how being open about support for a coalition would be greeted nationally across the ridings being contested as being dictated by the fanatical and willfully ignorant Conservative supporters - those people are just going to believe the Con spin that the other parties have a hidden agenda to "undemocraticly" form a coalition anyways. The other parties really should just turn that spin on its head and remind Canadians coalitions are democratic, that our country was founded with a Coalition, and not only that, we aren't going to be secret about it but rather openly supportive of being cooperative for the betterment of all Canadians. You know how empowering that would be for the voter turn out, you know, the other 66%-75% that don't vote Conservative to know they are free to ABC - Anything But Conservative. At some point, we need to see a leader(s) that definitely call the Conservatives on their BS propaganda and then offer a positive solution. Canadians love the positive side of thing, just give them hope, you can see what that did south of the border for Americans when Obama convincingly campaigned on a message of hope. We can do better than that.
Not to mention, at this point, if they told the Canadian people that a coalition would be more stable than a Conservative minority, and that it would mean probably not having another election for a while, they'd probably win over a lot of people.
I don't agree with the public's negative reaction to elections, but I recognize that it exists.
Not to mention, at this point, if they told the Canadian people that a coalition would be more stable than a Conservative minority, and that it would mean probably not having another election for a while, they'd probably win over a lot of people.
I don't agree with the public's negative reaction to elections, but I recognize that it exists.
Ah, yes. This is probably so true. I wish it weren't, as that's such a simple tactic, but I believe you're right. Gah!
(Not that I believe a coalition would not be more stable, but that it would be a major reason for winning over a lot of people "against" the Cons.)
Posts
The west was the birthplace of Reform. If you just shrug your shoulders at Wildrose and say they aren't important because they haven't won yet, that's like saying the Bloc isn't important because Duceppe isn't PM.
Edit: Special Lesson for Gnome -- The Bloc Quebecois is a very important element to Canadian politics.
Currently DMing: None
Characters
[5e] Dural Melairkyn - AC 18 | HP 40 | Melee +5/1d8+3 | Spell +4/DC 12
Of the two polls that were run (Nov then Dec), the Wildrose is already losing steam because the economy is starting to pick up again, which was the entire reason they became popular in the first place.
Anecdotal: I actually spoke to someone who went so far as to sign up for the Wildrose mailer, who quickly cancelled once it became clear just what they were outside of being Not Conservative.
I would reply more to your point regarding the Bloc and the Wildrose comparability, but you deleted the original post where you brought up the Wildrose in the first place.
So I guess your debating tactics now involve heavily editing other peoples posts and deleting your own. Real fucking winner you are.
MWO: Adamski
Enjoy your internet fame?
I'm real happy you know a guy in Alberta.
No, it's not like that at all, because the Wildrose Alliance party has only ever won a single seatonce in a provincial election, whereas the BQ have repeatedly won and held up to 50 seats in multiple federal elections, not to mention has a provincial counterpart that frequently governs the province.
I mean, Jesus Christ, the analogy between Albertan independence and Quebecois independence is so terri-bad. One of them speaks a different language. One of them was added to the nation via invasion. One of them has firmly established political parties that advocate varying degrees of sovereignty. One of them has been considering sovereignty for decades. One of them them has spawned a militant, terrorist independence movement. One of them isn't just considering independence out of jealousy at other provinces.
I have about as good a case for sovereignty as Alberta does. Jesus Christ man, and then for you to couple this idiocy by patronizing Gnome-Interruptus too. What the fuck?
Hey I know a guy in alberta too! oh wait.....
The problem with the wildrose is that they make Stephen Harper and the federal Cons look like communist sympathizers. They are craaazy right wing.
I only know the one person who has admitted to wanting anything to do with the Wildrose though, and like I said, they bailed on that.
EDIT: Loklar may still have a bruised ego regarding when myself and a number of other posters in this thread had to set him straight on how taxes dont drive businesses bankrupt because it is income not revenue that is taxed.
MWO: Adamski
If most of the country spoke french, the Bloc would've been exactly like Reform. Asking for more rights for their provinceS.
Even if Wildrose dies, it will still have an effect on Albertan provincial politics. Because it'll scare the ruling PC's into straying to far to the centre. Just like Jack Layton has had an affect on multiple federal budgets. Some of which have past.
And the fact that 2 protest parties have taken root there (1 that formed the national government over the past 5 years) means that they mean business. And means the centre better veer right.
Ah, so you're ignorant of both the Bloc's policies and ideological background, and of our nation's demographics and linguistic policies. Well, I'm glad that's not stopping you from being vocal about your options on the Bloc's policies given Canada's francophone population distribution!
The funny is they believed us.
I never finish anyth
No...
No, Wild Rose isn't an Alberta Soverignest party. I assumed you knew that. They are an ultra-debt averse, super Ralph Klein party, that is mad at any deficit spending.
And if pigs could fly, we'd probably have delicious baconwings.
Because
a) Western Canada was not settled with people from another country.
b) Western Canada was not invaded.
c) The Reform party did not support Western sovereignty, but instead sought a reform of Canadian politics into what they felt would be a more equitable distribution of power and respect.
d) The Bloc never merged with the NDP.
e) MOST OF THE COUNTRY DOESN'T SPEAK FRENCH.
"Hey, if only the Palestinians were Jewish, then there'd be no conflict!"
These folks might not agree with that.
Just saying.
One free Baconator*
[tiny]*Baconator must be claimed in-person in Saskatchewan.[/tiny]
Right. I forgot. Preston Manning was First Nations. Not what we're talking about and not helping, dude.
First of all, no. Western Canada was not invaded. Western Canada's main demographic does not primarily originate from a fundamentally different cultural group. The Reform party NEVER supported sovereignty, whereas the Bloc Quebecois began purely to support sovereignty. It's been INFINITY years since Western Canada's last referendum on sovereignty. 16 years is nothing in the long timeline of history, given that it's been some fifty years since the last Tibetan uprising. The Bloc would not support a system wherein each province would get equal say as in the Reform Party's idealized Senate system, because that would be fundamentally opposed to their goals, so no. No no no no no no no no. A fucking million times no, coming from a person who's neither Reform nor Bloc and has only been in the damn country for 23 years, no, you are about as far away from correct as possible when you say that there's only one major difference between the Bloc and the Reform party.
Second of all, MOST OF THE COUNTRY STILL DOESN'T SPEAK FRENCH. There's a really fucking fundamental cultural distinction between Anglo-Saxon and Cosmopolitaine. One of them is a Germanic cultural group; the other is Latin. One of them is primarily Roman-Catholic; the other is Protestant. One of them violently overthrew their monarchy; the other still has theirs. One of them is sexually liberated; one of them is sexually repressed. One of them is highly logical and deterministc; the other one is highly artistic and absurdist. These are cultural distinctions that are fundamentally rooted within these two societies through centuries of divergent development and for you to say that all of those differences basically disappeared over the past 16 years is completely and entirely preposterous.
I can only imagine Saggio is awake in bed right now with a terrible burning deep in his heart and absolutely no idea why.
For the Conservatives, Liberals and NDP, the federal party is the big thing while provincial wings have less prestige. For the PQ/Bloc, that relation is reversed. The Bloc is definitively seen as the farm team. Bloc MP with more ambition like Maka Kotto have left for the PQ.
Duceppe can stay leader as long as he wants. He simply have no internal competition. Ironically the party is even more centralised arround Duceppe than the Cons are arround Harper.
Marois have nothing to worry about for now, unless she somehow manage to loose the next election. Duceppe is too comfortable in his current position to make the jump to the PQ.
Last Québec election was held Dec 8, 2008 and Charest still have a (slim) majority. As much as i'd like it to be sooner, I dont see the next election being held before the very end of 2012 or even 2013.
And no, they're wont be a 3rd referendum unless the PQ is suicidal. They're is no appetite for that right now and Marois is intelligent enough to recognise that.
Well, if you're going to point form a list of "facts" it helps if they're accurate, dude.
And yes, Reform and the Bloc are certainly not the same. But the whole invasion thing, I often wonder, as a guy with a history degree what the statue of limitations for that kind of thing is supposed to be. Are we going to still be harking back to that in another 250 years?
It's Loklar and it's grade 9 history. I'm trying not to be too overwhelming here.
My understanding of history is that this sort of shit can last centuries, implicitly. A lot of these grand historical events, while perhaps not specifically referenced, seem to burrow themselves into a society's memory, imbuing its cultural and arts with a very unique flavour. I liken it to the relationship between the human body and (most of) its cells; your cells might only live for hours, but you last for decades and are relatively unchanged, because each cell greatly influences the nature of the cell after it. Even as individuals die, their existences created a societal memory that outlives them and influences that which comes after. It's what you study in history class; it's what you read in novels; it's what you hear in music; it's what you feel when you walk down the street. And major historical events don't just rise up out of nowhere and dissipate into the aether; there are build-ups and trickle-downs, all the tiny events the lead up to that big one and all the rippling repercussions afterward.
I mean, I think I could draw a pretty strong relationship to modern-day Chinese belligerence and antipathy for Western political interference from the Opium Wars of the 19th century.
:^:
And before someone from Quebec says "waaaa but no one from the rest of the country looks out for our interests so we have to demand all this special treatment", I don't give a flying fuck. No one looks out for BC's interests, either. or for Saskatchewan. Deal with it. Fucking Quebec.
I don't think you guys realize that there are Francophone populations outside of Québec. This includes population with distinct histories and who were oppressed by the English and Canadians. The Atlantic provinces used to be the French colony of Acadia, which was also conquered by the British, who then proceeded to deport three-quarters of the population from their homes to random locations throughout the Colonies, splitting up their families, burning their homes and confiscating their land in the process. The Metis population in Manitoba are descended of mixed Native-French parentage, and are French-speaking to this day. Their 19th-century leader and the founder of the province of Manitoba, Louis Riel, was crushed by Canadian military force, captured, tried in an Ontario kangaroo court as a traitor against Canada and hanged.
Today, one-quarter of Canadians list French as their native language and there are Francophone populations from the East Coast to the Rockies and from the US border to the Arctic Circle. IF the Bloc wanted to stand up for provinceS rights or even for pan-Canadian Francophone rights today, they could easily do so and find support outside of their province. In fact, a lot of issues they fight for today they could progress on or achieve a lot more easily if they just changed their argument to "provinces" instead of "Québec". They do not do so. Why? I'll let Loklar come up with a ridiculous and twisted answer for that.
I am fully aware of that. I'm in no way arguing for Quebec's sovereignty: I believe that it's fundamentally an example of "grass is always greener, things used to be better in the good old days, I can always do things better" thinking. I use Quebec's distinct primary language as the prime exemplar of a historically-grounded cultural difference between it and the rest of Canada, which Loklar believes can somehow be magically hand-waved away so as to equivocate Alberta and Quebec.
I'm not in any way talking about First Nations or Metis or whoever the fuck else. I'm just highlighting that Quebec v. Canada is an extremely different game than Alberta v. Canada, and anybody (Loklar) who doesn't realise that is patently out of their minds. If you guys wanna talk about everybody else who are "special", fine, but I don't particularly see the relevance other than to retread my Canadian history classes all over again.
Radio Radio 4 life, bitches.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tFSkCxNw_ew
Cause fate has a hilarious sense of irony.
I never finish anyth
~2/3rds of the nation live in Ontario and Quebec. BC and Alberta have most of the rest, after that you're in the low single digits of % of population.
Nothing in Canadian regional politics makes sense unless you keep that in mind.
I mean for fuck's sake, 1 in 6 people in Canada live in the GTA, probably higher if you count the number of undocumented residents. The Toronto Metro Area has more people living in it then Saskatchewan, nova scotia, new brunswick, newfoundland and the territories.
The NDP runs second in just about every riding West of Ontario which they don't win in, with a couple of notable exceptions. In Quebec, the NDP has begun to overtake both the Conservatives and the Liberals in francophone areas of the province, but because of the way national polls are conducted this is usually masked by the influence of Montreal, where the Liberals are very strong.
It will be interesting to see how this campaign unfolds.
Speaking of that...
Liberals in 4th place in Québec
Tough I have difficulty believing the Liberals are really that low but thes numbers are definitively... ugly for them.
I personally have been calling up MPs that have a chance of defeating the Conservatives of any party affiliation and telling them in no uncertain terms they should call Harper & Cons' bluff and campaign with one of their policies being that they are coalition friendly, show Canadians a positive message by saying they are willing to cooperate with each [other for] the good of Canadians, unlike the Conservatives who put us in this election by disregarding our democratic institutions. Big mistake for Ignatieff to rule out a coalition, it plays right into the Conservative's hands. I disagree that how being open about support for a coalition would be greeted nationally across the ridings being contested as being dictated by the fanatical and willfully ignorant Conservative supporters - those people are just going to believe the Con spin that the other parties have a hidden agenda to "undemocraticly" form a coalition anyways. The other parties really should just turn that spin on its head and remind Canadians coalitions are democratic, that our country was founded with a Coalition, and not only that, we aren't going to be secret about it but rather openly supportive of being cooperative for the betterment of all Canadians. You know how empowering that would be for the voter turn out, you know, the other 66%-75% that don't vote Conservative to know they are free to ABC - Anything But Conservative. At some point, we need to see a leader(s) that definitely call the Conservatives on their BS propaganda and then offer a positive solution. Canadians love the positive side of thing, just give them hope, you can see what that did south of the border for Americans when Obama convincingly campaigned on a message of hope. We can do better than that.
I don't agree with the public's negative reaction to elections, but I recognize that it exists.
Ah, yes. This is probably so true. I wish it weren't, as that's such a simple tactic, but I believe you're right. Gah!
(Not that I believe a coalition would not be more stable, but that it would be a major reason for winning over a lot of people "against" the Cons.)