Curious as to why there’s no political discussion on htmf this time around?
Is no one interested? Harper seems to be gaining ground and pot will stay illegal, gays may lose rights, and now truck drivers may tell judges how to do their jobs in his latest announcement (minumum sentences).
They only lost this riding by 1,000 votes, and every redneck from Fort St. James to Charlotte city is slobbering to vote for them and save a penny GST on a candy bar… the local Liberal filled the front page of our local rag talking about nothing but native issues.
I voted NDP last time, and I’ll probably be doing the same again this go 'round. I can’t remember why I voted for them before, but I don’t see any reason to change.
I probably typify your average non-involved, non-informed voter.
I’m not entirely sure I will vote this time around. There’s no way I would vote Liberal, and I’m not jumping up and down at the thought of voting Concervative. The NDP haven’t really given me any reason to vote for them either. So I’m not sure where that leaves me. Add all that to the fact that traditionally it really doesn’t matter where BC votes, and I’m leaning towards a semi-educated decision not to vote at all.
Mike
I fear the outcome of harper winning. I would rather canada distance itself from the US than cosy up to them. I would also rather a government that values well paying jobs rather than “creating jobs” by making this country friendlier to the walmarts of the world. Things are going fairly well right now and I think a government lead by Harper will ruin the momentum we have.
Im with Jesus on that… can I get an amen…
Amen to what Jesus said.
One strange thing about this election is how quiet the Liberals have been. What are they doing, waiting for a fourth quarter comeback??
The only ads I’ve seen are Conservative ads and the Liberals are basically throwing in the towel here by running a virtual nobody (not to mention he’s a bit of a knob).
Eso, the reason you voted NDP last time might have been the same reason I did: because Nathan worked hard, showed sincerity, actually listened to people on the street instead of just shaking their hands, and just simply earned your respect.
I’m of the mind that, despite the sponsorship scandal, I prefer the Liberals to the Alliance-in-disguise but seeing as how they are conceding the riding, it’s Nathan for sure.
And that sincerity and listening to people sure shone through when Cullen voted in favour of spending $70 million more taxpayers dollars on the gun registry to prevent an election contrary to his own beliefs and those of most of his constituents. Yet six months later he supported a non-confidence motion to force an election anyway. What a waste of millions. No Integrity at all, nice guy but no integrity. You say he earned respect?? Shaking hands doesn’t do it for me. I’m voting Conservative.
My post was noting why I (and Eso may have) voted for him IN THE LAST ELECTION, Fingahz, so your criticisms of his performance since are irrelevant to the post.
As for this time, I’m leaning Nathan’s way because the option of the ultra-right wing Conservatives is far too unpalatable. They have no social conscience and are virtually all white fundamentalists.
Has Nathan made mistakes? Has he flip-flopped a couple of times? Of course. You see, there’s this thing called an open mind; it allows you to listen to other people and then, having learned something new, change your mind. Try it some time.
I notice how Alliance supporters always harp on the gun registry. Talk about your one-trick ponies. Get over it. Point made. It’s sooo Republican.
Get your countries straight. No Republican party in Canada my friend.
Is that right?? I’m wondering what has created this impression with you. Very strong statement…back it up.
Actually my criticisms of his performance ae relevant. If we were tallking about the last election as the topic of this post you would be right but we are not. In case you forgot there is an election coming up and Cullens performance AFTER he was elected has made all the difference, not that he shook hands and kissed babies before being elected originally.
I’m not a flip-floppy kind of person like yourself or even Nathan Cullen for that matter. I feel strongly about my issues and that has nothing to do with an open mind. Change my mind to appease you?? Not likely…I have to be true to myself and what I feel is important.
Because the Conservative party has so much more integrity than everyone else out there? Were you in a coma when Mulroney was in power?
To me, Mr. Harper seems like a nice guy who could get my vote. In the media, he comes off honest and hardworking. However, my memory isn’t so short as to forget that the party he leads isn’t the regular right of center party that it should be. Too many elements of the alliance/reform are present with their old-right-wing-too-close-to -US-republicans ideas to sway my vote that way. The remaining choice is difficult. The liberals need to be taught a lesson and the NDP guy in my riding has very little chance even though I met him before the campaign and he will probably get my vote.
I respect your values fingahz. I understand your concerns about fiscal things. But ask yourself for whom the country would get better if the conservatives were in power. I personnally don’t want to live in a country where the gap between the rich and the rest of us is widening. I am not sure if Mr. Harper can make sure of this not happening. Mr. Martin can’t do it either and his party is more socially centered than the PC. I honestly would like to see the NDP in power for a couple of mandates. I know some people think it would be like the apocalypse but can they really be worst than the others?
The big problem for me is the Bloc. I watch a lot of french canadian news and I am so disappointed that a lot of quebecers will vote for the bloc because they think that they are the only “good” representative in Ottawa. What a smokescreen! The Bloc doesn’t even advertise it’s idea of sovereignty because they know that would scare some voters. But in the backrooms, they are always working on “The Cause”. Grrrr!
Well, I think PoolBoy has made a very good and interesting point. Now Fingahz you come back and say no Republicans in Canada , well if every one is crazy enough to vote for Harper “The Bush Puppet” you will change that statement real fast. He will have Bush greasing those bolts on his neck within two months and he will play right into every Republicans pocket. So give your head a shake before you vote Fingahz.
Give my head a shake?? C’mon…don’t insult me. I have my values and you have yours. Vote for who you want. I know that I will.
There was a reason that all but, I believe, 3 ridings in Western Canada elected Reform candidates about 3 elections ago. The West had long been alienated by Ottawa and I’m still waiting for a change. I feel that if Preston Manning was still the leader that he would have already been Prime Minister.
What about Mulroney?? What about Diefenbaker?? What about Tupper?? What do they have to do with the 2006 election?? Nothing at all.
If we were voting for nice guys Nathan Cullen would get my vote hands down. He is a nice, likebale guy. I still have to follow my heart though and that means Mike Scott
For all of you who insist on comparing Harper’s Conservative’s to Bush’s Republican’s here is a letter from Stephen Harper to The Washington Times in December.
[quote]The Washington Times
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
December 11, 2005
Stephen Harper, for the record
Patrick Basham of the Cato Institute calls me "pro-free trade,
pro-Iraq war, anti-Kyoto, and socially conservative" (“Gift from
Canada?” Commentary, Dec. 2). While I certainly consider myself to be
a friend of the United States, I am afraid this greatly oversimplifies
my positions.
For the record: While, unlike the current Liberal government, I
have always supported free trade, there is a deep concern in Canada
about the commitment of the current U.S. administration and Congress
to free trade. The United States is withholding some $5 billion in
duties held from Canadian softwood lumber producers, despite the fact
that a NAFTA panel has ruled that these duties are illegal.
In a recent speech, I stated that Canada must determine “the
willingness of the United States to strengthen the dispute resolution
mechanism and to subordinate domestic political pressures to a shared
system of rules” and that “if this is not a direction in which the
United States wishes to go, then Canada will have to make other
long-term choices in its economic infrastructure,” including expanded
trade relationships with Asian countries such as India, Japan, and
China.
On Iraq, while I support the removal of Saddam Hussein and applaud
the efforts to establish democracy and freedom in Iraq, I would not
commit Canadian troops to that country. I must admit great
disappointment at the failure to substantiate pre-war intelligence
information regarding Iraq’s possession of weapons of mass
destruction.
While I think that the Kyoto Treaty is deeply flawed, I support
developing a plan, in coordination with the United States and other
countries, to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by developing new
technologies and energy conservation.
And while I have promised a free vote in Canada’s parliament to
reconsider the recent change of law to allow same-sex marriages in
Canada, and will vote myself for a return to the traditional
definition of marriage, I have said any changes must protect the
existing status of same-sex couples who have been legally married. As
well, a new Conservative government will not initiate or support any
effort to pass legislation restricting abortion in Canada.
Despite my differences on many issues with some American
conservative politicians, I look forward to a cooperative,
constructive relationship with the United States as our principal
trading partner and ally under a new Conservative government.
HON. STEPHEN HARPER
House of Commons
Ottawa[/quote]
Now tell me where the problem is??
Ah, yes, Fingahz. While you may not ever change your mind, it seems your pal, Stephen Harper does. Why, it was in the spring of 2003 . . . (doing the Wayne’s World flashback; waving hands, “doodle-oot, doodle-oot, doodle-oot”) when Harper’s party put forward a motion to support the war in Iraq and said there is no doubt that the U.S. intelligence on WMDs was true. He also said, “we are lucky to have the U.S. as our neighbor” and they are “our biggest asset in a dangerous world.”
(I’m sorry but I am not as Internet-literate as most, so cannot give links to sites that contain these stories/quotes on Harper but just Google his name and ‘war in Iraq’ and you’ll find them)
Yes, it was ass-kissing of the highest order! Oh, but now it’s election time and Harper wants to change his tune because most Canadians don’t want a U.S. ass-kisser for PM.
Nice try, Stephen. Smart Canadians remember and know very well what you really are.
Ya know, I voted for Nathan last time around because I think he genuinely has a lot of integrity and hands down is probably the best person (as a human being) running. But it’s that age old Canadian question of “do you vote for the person or the party?” And in federal politics we as a nation historically vote party.
The NDP is only worried about childcare and University tuition, two things that don’t mean anything to me as a voter. The Liberals BC agenda is all about “spirit bears” and First Nations (important certainly to enviro’s and Natives respectfully, but, once again, it doesn’t really do me any good.) The Conservatives meanwhile are speaking stongly on the Ridley Terminals issue, making commitments on the Coast Guard and Canadian Forces and at least willing to look at the issue of tax burden (although I agree a penny off GST isn’t going to do much.)
I really like that letter from Harper, it gives a different view of him. The old view is something the Liberals worked hard to construct to make us fear this party, a tactic that speaks to their dishonesty and a tactic that is clearly failing. I had a chance to meet Harper recently and I was blown away by what a polite, well-spoken perosn he was. Even though I wasn’t thinking about voting Conservative I’ve changed my mind and will vote for Mike Scott. Harper is clearly the best leader for the country even if he has a few right wing nuts in his party. The Liberals and the NDP have got a few wackos themselves, so why not? I don’t think those sorts of people really make a difference in the grand scheme of things. I think Nathan is in deep trouble and will probably lose unless Scott says something incredibly stupid in the next couple of weeks (always a possibility…)
[quote=“poolboy”]Ah, yes, Fingahz. While you may not ever change your mind, it seems your pal, Stephen Harper does. Why, it was in the spring of 2003 . . . (doing the Wayne’s World flashback; waving hands, “doodle-oot, doodle-oot, doodle-oot”) when Harper’s party put forward a motion to support the war in Iraq and said there is no doubt that the U.S. intelligence on WMDs was true. He also said, “we are lucky to have the U.S. as our neighbor” and they are “our biggest asset in a dangerous world.”
(I’m sorry but I am not as Internet-literate as most, so cannot give links to sites that contain these stories/quotes on Harper but just Google his name and ‘war in Iraq’ and you’ll find them)
Yes, it was ass-kissing of the highest order! Oh, but now it’s election time and Harper wants to change his tune because most Canadians don’t want a U.S. ass-kisser for PM.
Nice try, Stephen. Smart Canadians remember and know very well what you really are.[/quote]
Well poolboy, you got me …not quite. Everyone was fooled into believing that Saddam was hiding weapons of mass destruction. Alot of people said things then based on bad information. You can’t fault Harper for that. Have you watched Fahrenheit 9/11?? The US was blatantly telling lies and trying to fool everyone. I am glad that Chretien had the balls to stay out of Iraq. Looks good on him now
Are you calling yourself smart or me dumb?? 
By the way…I don’t think he’ll get that message. You might want to try e-mailing him.
Svend Robinson?? NDP should not have let him back in. No integrity.
[quote=“herbie_popnecker”]Curious as to why there’s no political discussion on htmf this time around?
Is no one interested? Harper seems to be gaining ground and pot will stay illegal, gays may lose rights, and now truck drivers may tell judges how to do their jobs in his latest announcement (minumum sentences).
They only lost this riding by 1,000 votes, and every redneck from Fort St. James to Charlotte city is slobbering to vote for them and save a penny GST on a candy bar… the local Liberal filled the front page of our local rag talking about nothing but native issues.[/quote]
See what you started??
Hey, man, don’t lump “everyone” in with you, Bush and Harper!
Well if some of you fun seekers cannot see that Harper for one is just reading lies just about everytime he makes somekind of pitstop, then he sure does have your numbers. Mike Scott , has lied right from the starting gate with his Re-Elect Mike Scott sign, he quiet due to not being able to take the pressure of being known as a crooked man from a crooked family. Now he wants to slither into the house once more with Harper and the Contortionist Party, I call them by that name because of the false promises and how they twist things around to make you really look silly. Kind of like Bush did to so many stupid Americans.
[quote=“poolboy”]
Hey, man, don’t lump “everyone” in with you, Bush and Harper![/quote]
Oh…it was just the three of us?? My mistake. Boy do I feel dumb. I guess that CNN and the rest of the world media not to mention the British, Italians, Australians and the general public were part of the plan to pull the wool over everyones eyes, pardon me, Bush’s, Harper’s and my eyes. Boy you’re smart. Oh yeah…you already mentioned that you’re one of the “smart Canadians”. Must feel good.
What do you know about Mike Scott and his family…Im interested.
I’m a little uncertain about the Re-elect sign. He has been elected twice before so if he was elected again would he not be re-elected??? Yet I could see how someone who does not pay attention to politics at all may be confused as to who the incumbent is. Those people though, I don’t think would vote anyways. Probably not fair to pass that judgement though