And they're off...the election thread

Welcome to Wondercafe2!

A community where we discuss, share, and have some fun together. Join today and become a part of it!

Register Log in
I don't like aspects of ' socialism/communist' type of leadership...some aspects may look great on paper. there is concerns of how those 'provided for' can become essentially a commodity to access funding which serves the industrys 'ruling class' so to speak (which can be essentially capitalism for the ruling class only...or something like that)
 
I'm not sure how you're attracted to Christianity, then. Read Acts again to see what the early Christian community looked like. They held everything in common, sold their possessions for the betterment of the group, looked after all of the group equally well. Sounds like the penultimate socialism to me.
 
I'm a Believer in Christ, Jesus is the One and Only the Son of God, the Messiah who was to come into the world.

there is a key to your point

you wrote:"sold their possessions for the betterment of the group, looked after all of the group equally well. "

saying these things and doing them are two different things. unfortunately there is the human greed factors in this world, those in need can be put in a position where they become little more than a commodity to access govt funding and there is not actually equality and betterment and sometimes rather than equality and betterment it can seem more of a sustaining which would put a new outlook on the phrase 'its the least we could do'.....to access govt funds, serving the ruling class of a industry and the organizations assets. responsible stewardship is a issue too, quality should express the equality.
 
Last edited:
Latest poll.

http://m.huffpost.com/ca/entry/7991300

Interesting thing, and I read it somewhere else, correct me if I am wrong, is that there is no media blackout in the west, that's been lifted...so as the polls close in the east, people in the west will have an idea of who's winning so far, as it moves along? That might make BC an important "decider". And I think the race is between the NDP and the PC's here.
 
Kimmio said:
Latest poll.

http://m.huffpost.com/ca/entry/7991300

Interesting thing, and I read it somewhere else, correct me if I am wrong, is that there is no media blackout in the west, that's been lifted...so as the polls close in the east, people in the west will have an idea of who's winning so far, as it moves along? That might make BC an important "decider". And I think the race is between the NDP and the PC's here.
Click to expand...
Earlier you posted Cousin that most in BC (BCers?) thought that Mr. Trudeau had won the leaders' debate. Did that support for his debate performance fail to translate to support for the Liberals in the overall campaign?
 
Pr. Jae said:
Earlier you posted Cousin that most in BC (BCers?) thought that Mr. Trudeau had won the leaders' debate. Did that support for his debate performance fail to translate to support for the Liberals in the overall campaign?
Click to expand...

It seems so. Following the debates, I read several comments about Mulcair's goofy fake smile - and that Trudeau came off stronger than expected in his arguments, but that Mulcair came off, nonethless, as more "Prime Ministerial" than Trudeau. Maybe it's just because he's older and just looks more "statesman-like", I don't know. But I do know that Trudeau's position on a couple of things irks British Columbians who will not vote for him now no matter how well he debates in the media appearances, no matter what an otherwise decent guy he might seem to be. He blew it out here, when at one of his events here, said that he was voting for c51 so as not to make political hay - and seemed like he expected people to have sympathy for his need for political tactics instead of principles. He admitted in the debate maybe he was niave. Some will take that as an apology, some as him not being ready. Pardon the expression.

For me, Trudeau's youthful energy is refreshing, and he has proven that he can hold up in a debate, but I think Mulcair is wiser and more experienced and the better choice for a new leader. Plus, to liberals unsure, he used to be a liberal.

That said, it'll likely depend on how things are shaping up as the polling closes from east to west.
 
Last edited:
Are all politicians off-track when it comes to truth ... under the principle of retain your seat anyway you can?

Thus the axiom cover your muel! Did I miss translate? Is MU'L a soul a'light like a candle in the wind for both good and bad?

Good Lord ... dis sit on that bit and think ... did someone make a statue of that?
 
Luce NDs said:
Are all politicians off-track when it comes to truth ... under the principle of retain your seat anyway you can?

Thus the axiom cover your muel! Did I miss translate? Is MU'L a soul a'light like a candle in the wind for both good and bad?

Good Lord ... dis sit on that bit and think ... did someone make a statue of that?
Click to expand...

True. They all do that. Is it a choice of the lesser of three evils? The fourth, least of the evils (imo), has no chance of being PM.
 
Do you think there will be possibly be a left-sided coalition to form a new government? It's been bandied about, but I guess it's Trudeau who has been resistant. I may have posted about it already but apparently many young voters are open to it or would like to see it happen if needed, to have a new government. Older voters and party loyalists likely are more hesitant.
 
We are one of the few democracies in the developed world with no history of coalitions. I, for one, would love to see that change. The recent coalition in the UK proved it can work in a British parliamentary democracy so why not here?
 
It tends to be one of those things that develop organically. Because of the way that the left is split, if we do manage to come up with an alternative to Harper, I suspect that it will be a minority government who will be forced to work with another party. In a perfect world, I'd love an NDP-Green coalition.
 
BetteTheRed said:
It tends to be one of those things that develop organically. Because of the way that the left is split, if we do manage to come up with an alternative to Harper, I suspect that it will be a minority government who will be forced to work with another party. In a perfect world, I'd love an NDP-Green coalition.
Click to expand...

Based on the analysis I saw today based on four major polls done since the debate, an NDP-Green coalition wouldn't have enough votes. They'd need the Bloc, too, at bare minimum. And there's no way having the Bloc in government would fly with voters outside (or even inside based on how things have been going for the separatists) Quebec. The Conservatives and Liberals would likely combine to bring down a coalition that included the Bloc and then fight the next election on the NDP being unfit to defend Canadian federalism.

Now, if the Greens do better than expected, then maybe the scenario will be different but most likely an NDP-Liberal coalition will be the most stable scenario.
 
Is a coalition close to a gathering of thoughts?

We couldn't have that under biblical rule of knowledge being evil ... the pain of learning?

Ever meet an intelligent polity guise ... or is that cover for a man of brute desire ...satyr of a thing in attributes ... ducked or even dunkin' as a Celt f(rogue)! Near renegade as the thoughts float off in the opposing direction to the literary confinement ... aus oma, or a house in the mire like Casa Loma ... as oiled image? Painted with ester jinns ...
 
You did see that I'd said "in a perfect world", Mendalla, LOL. I cannot bear the Cons and that smarmy little pretty boy gets to me.
 
Mendalla said:
In my perfect world, the Greens would be a serious contender instead of just a possible, but unlikely, coalition partner.:cool:
Click to expand...
In my perfect world - the Greens would just be an environmental think tank. Where they move beyond their issue of being green is where I tend to disagree with them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top