News   Jul 12, 2024
199 Church Showcases Heritage Facade and Artwork at Street Level
 1.6K     0 
News   Jul 12, 2024
Six Points Plaza Redevelopment Advances With 36-Storey First Phase
 1.2K     1 
News   Jul 12, 2024
Trading Spaces: Can Real Estate Conversion Help Boost Housing Supply?
 465     0 

2015 Federal Election

The Harper Party was third place in polls even before the refugee issue.

NDP is hard to take seriously. Just vague, empty promises from them. They are more focused on Conservative voters.

The NDP is not NDP anymore. We saw that in the last provincial election too.
 
Sorry, what's vague about specific promises about child care or the federal minimum wage or repealing C-51? As opposed to setting forth large deficits for "infrastructure"?
 
I feel like people are too quick to count out Harper. The Conservatives are pros at retail politics. They'll find some BS wedge issue and bounce back.
 
I'm certainly not counting Harper out, but between the recession, the Syrian refugee crisis and Duffy trial, he's carrying most of the baggage during this election. The whole premise of his campaign is floundering too. Plan A was the economy, which he is clearly lacking credibility on right now. Plan B was security, where people in this country seem to be divided into two main groups...those that think that current measures are enough, or even too much, and those for who it just isn't that big of an issue. For both of these groups, campaigning on security measures isn't going to win him many votes outside of his base.

Mulcair is largely seen as the anti-harper and has little baggage that Harper can attack or turn into a wedge issue. One of the fortunate side-effects of Harper not being willing to talk to reporters about the details of his platform is that he has little ground to stand on when it comes to Mulcair and his lack of details.

Trudeau has little baggage other than being young and the unfortunate decision to support c-51. The attack on his age/inexperience has clearly failed, and Harper is unable to attack him from the c-51 angle. Despite that inexperience (and my desire to not vote for the Liberals based on their c-51 support) I'm finding that they have the most sensible policies on just about every issue during this campaign. Even the decision to borrow for infrastructure building is winning them support.
 
Newest seat projection by 308.com has the Liberal back in the lead for the first time in months. Conservatives have also inched back up, bringing this back to a 3-way tie.

Capture.JPG
 

Attachments

  • Capture.JPG
    Capture.JPG
    42.1 KB · Views: 275
ttk77 said:
Despite that inexperience (and my desire to not vote for the Liberals based on their c-51 support) I'm finding that they have the most sensible policies on just about every issue during this campaign. Even the decision to borrow for infrastructure building is winning them support.
Click to expand...

I've heard a lot of people say this, which tends to leave me confused. The Liberals are proposing changes to C-51, which will bring it more in line with past anti-terror legislation. Is this position really that off-putting to you that you would vote against the party that you say has the most sensible policies otherwise?

I get people are upset over C-51, but is the Liberal position on it really that bad that people are voting against them solely based on it? My thought was always that C-51's importance would disappear as more of the Liberal's platform came out, and the polls seem to be reflecting that.

Just wondering how firm your decision is, or if the sensible policies are enough to sway your support as E-day nears? I think people like you hold the key as to who will come out winning this election, so willing to shed some light on your opinion?
 
Tuscani01 said:
I've heard a lot of people say this, which tends to leave me confused. The Liberals are proposing changes to C-51, which will bring it more in line with past anti-terror legislation. Is this position really that off-putting to you that you would vote against the party that you say has the most sensible policies otherwise?

I get people are upset over C-51, but is the Liberal position on it really that bad that people are voting against them solely based on it? My thought was always that C-51's importance would disappear as more of the Liberal's platform came out, and the polls seem to be reflecting that.

Just wondering how firm your decision is, or if the sensible policies are enough to sway your support as E-day nears? I think people like you hold the key as to who will come out winning this election, so willing to shed some light on your opinion?
Click to expand...

They supported the original bill without much fuss and without any serious effort in trying to change it at the time, and I want to hear a detailed plan on what they intend to change. In my opinion there isn't much of anything in the bill worth saving. I am of course open to changing my vote if I hear the right words coming from Trudeau and the Liberal party, but the bill as they voted for it was such an egregious betrayal of Canadian values that I really need to hear some concrete details first, otherwise I'm not convinced that Trudeau isn't just a prettier, more charismatic version of Harper. It is this "egregious betrayal of Canadian values" that is currently overruling my willingness to vote for them, despite having better policies in other areas.
 
ttk77 said:
They supported the original bill without much fuss and without any serious effort in trying to change it at the time, and I want to hear a detailed plan on what they intend to change. In my opinion there isn't much of anything in the bill worth saving. I am of course open to changing my vote if I hear the right words coming from Trudeau and the Liberal party, but the bill as they voted for it was such an egregious betrayal of Canadian values that I really need to hear some concrete details first, otherwise I'm not convinced that Trudeau isn't just a prettier, more charismatic version of Harper. It is this "egregious betrayal of Canadian values" that is currently overruling my willingness to vote for them, despite having better policies in other areas.
Click to expand...

Im not sure where that idea comes from. The Liberals have been consistent since the issue came to light. Their position was made known long before the NDP took a position on the matter. They worked with the Green Party to push the amendments through with the bill.

The full text of the Liberal amendments can be found here:

https://www.liberal.ca/files/2015/03/C-51.pdf
(Its a long boring read, so I don't actually expect anyone to go through it)

The Green Party had its own list of 60 amendments (Also a long boring read) in addition to these which they tried to push through also. These amendments, combined (though some are similar to the Liberal amendments) would have effectively turned C-51 into a completely different piece of legislation.

The Conservatives did agree to a bunch of the amendments which the opposition called for, including eliminating the right for police to share information on/target protestors under C-51.

At the end of the day, the bill adds powers that are needed, but lack oversight. The Liberal plan involves changing the bill to add oversight, so we don't end up with runaway spy agencies working behind the government's back and calling their own shots.
 
Well I suppose it all depends on whether or not you think the powers are actually needed. Obviously I don't, oversight or not. Regardless of how they say they felt about the bill, they still gave their tacit approval to to those policies by voting for it. If they disagreed with the bill as it stood they should have voted against it and then indicated what they'd bring in instead if they got elected in the fall. It might not have changed the final outcome given the Conservative majority, but at least it wouldn't have left me and those like me with mixed messages on how the Liberals feel about those Canadian values I was talking about.

I appreciate the link. I'll give it a read-through.
 
C-51 was a a response to a handful of freak incidents perpetrated by individuals - acting alone - that took advantage in one instance of the fact that downtown Ottawa is not a fortress. Security on Parliament Hill was revealed to be dangerously thin in view of that kind of threat, but in no way was this related to CSIS's lacking powers. We did not require any kind of additional security legislation for this, except perhaps to introduce proper parliamentary oversight to the likes of CSIS and CSEC, which is certainly lacking.
 
Having legislation is one thing - putting sufficient safeguard and using it only as needed is another - it is the latter that wouldn't trust the Cons to do a proper job at whatsoever.

AoD
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top