Other Resources My Cup of Joe » The Great Canadian Election 2006 Rss Feed  
Moderators: k9car363, the bear, DerekL, alicefoeller Reply
 
 
of 2
 
 
2006-01-24 2:54 AM
in reply to: #330099

Subject: ...
This user's post has been ignored.


2006-01-24 7:05 AM
in reply to: #329737

Expert
620
500100
Guelph, Ontario
Subject: RE: The Great Canadian Election 2006
well the results are in.. we now have a minority conservative government in Canada.. not sure whats in store for us, but we shall see soon enough.
2006-01-24 8:02 AM
in reply to: #329737

Master
1320
1000100100100
Chilliwack, BC
Subject: RE: The Great Canadian Election 2006
Hopefully we do not have to go to the polls for 4 more years.
But, why does a party that gets 6 percent of the popular vote get like 50 seats?
and a party that gets 25-30 get 29? hmmmmm
2006-01-24 8:19 AM
in reply to: #329737

Regular
85
252525
Kelowna
Subject: RE: The Great Canadian Election 2006

psssst.  Crazypop:  It's the Great Canadian Conspiracy!

The incumbent in my riding lost by 110 votes (0.2%).  There's gonna be a recount...

2006-01-24 8:59 AM
in reply to: #329737

Champion
4902
20002000500100100100100
Ottawa, Ontario
Subject: The Great Canadian Election 2006

A Conservative minority government!!!  Merde!  There goes the economy.  I wonder how many of his campaign promises Harper will reneg on?  Unless he does keep to his promises, I can see another election happening within the next two years.  A vote of non-confidence is only one mistake away ....

2006-01-24 9:11 AM
in reply to: #330534

Expert
760
5001001002525
Mt. Morris, IL
Subject: RE: The Great Canadian Election 2006
Machiavelo - 2006-01-24 7:59 AM

A Conservative minority government!!!  Merde!  There goes the economy. 

 Yeah, they might not let all the farmers grow marijuana to sell to all the people living in Denver. 



2006-01-24 9:18 AM
in reply to: #330534

Expert
666
5001002525
St. Thomas, ON
Subject: RE: The Great Canadian Election 2006
Machiavelo - 2006-01-24 9:59 AM

A Conservative minority government!!!  Merde!  There goes the economy. 

[sarcasm] Oh yeah, cuz lord knows the last 12 years have been awesome.[/sarcasm]. I actually think a minority conservative government is a good idea. I have not been impressed with the social agenda of the Liberal party, to be honest, and I think that the Con's having a minority will force some progress. I'm not impressed by Harper in general, but he's been given the opportunity, and I'm interested to see what he makes of it.

Some electoral reform would be nice. Personally, I think that a party that runs only in one province should not be allowed to run in the national election (of course, I'm not a separatist either.). Note, I said run, not win! I like the idea of proportional representation based on %age of popular vote, but I have no idea how that would ever work logistically. It's one of those "sounds good" ideas.

2006-01-24 9:52 AM
in reply to: #329737

Master
1210
1000100100
Saskatchewan
Subject: RE: The Great Canadian Election 2006

From yesterday's paper:

Jan. 23 is the unhappiest day of 2006

CALGARY -- Political sniping has got you sad?

Rainy days (perhaps not in January) and Mondays always get you down?

On this day, those aren't the only possible explanations for a case of the blues.

Today's federal election falls on a day that's been designated as most depressing on this year's calendar, but a University of Calgary graduate student thinks she has a cure.

Recent findings by a health psychologist in Wales found that Jan. 23 is the unhappiest day of 2006.

Cliff Arnall, a health psychologist at Cardiff University, used a mathematical formula to calculate the most depressing day, factoring in weather, debt, resolutions, personal motivation and the January doldrums.

His formula is as follows: 1/8W+(D-d) 3/8xTQ divided by MxNA, where W is the weather, D is personal debt, and d is the amount of money a person will receive next payday. T is elapsed time since Christmas, and Q is the length of time since a person abandoned a New Year's resolution. M is a measure of motivation levels, while NA is the necessary action required to make one's life better.

<<...then the article goes onto talk about "mind over matter" to stave off depression>>

2006-01-24 10:22 AM
in reply to: #329737

Veteran
245
10010025
Cole Harbour, NS
Subject: RE: The Great Canadian Election 2006
A question for the Caunuckle heads here. Can the elecetd government appoint someone from the oppostion into the Caucus. I.E. could a duly elected liberal be the Minister of Defence in a conservative minority? I understand the partisan politics aspect but if possible wouldn't it be a good gesture, especially in a minority Government. Just giving the opposition some of the minor portfolios would be a nice olive branch. Just thinkin' out loud.
2006-01-24 10:30 AM
in reply to: #330599

Giver
18427
5000500050002000100010010010010025
Subject: RE: The Great Canadian Election 2006

I don't know about the Canadian system, but that was exactly what George W. Bush said he would do in his first election here in the states, along the lines of his "uniter not divider" campaign rhetoric. 

 

Carl Sohn - 2006-01-24 11:22 AM A question for the Caunuckle heads here. Can the elecetd government appoint someone from the oppostion into the Caucus. I.E. could a duly elected liberal be the Minister of Defence in a conservative minority? I understand the partisan politics aspect but if possible wouldn't it be a good gesture, especially in a minority Government. Just giving the opposition some of the minor portfolios would be a nice olive branch. Just thinkin' out loud.

2006-01-24 12:07 PM
in reply to: #329737

Regular
88
252525
Kitchener, Ontario
Subject: RE: The Great Canadian Election 2006

Basic Canadian Government lesson.....

In order to hold a majority in our house, a party needs 155 seats out of 308.  The CON got 124; Liberals 103; BQ (The separatist party in Quebec) 51; the NDP 29 and Other 1.  So, in order for the CON party to last, they need the assistance of 31 other lost souls.  With paty lines being pretty hard and fast, it is likely that MAJOR dealing will occur.

Although not laid out in any formal manner, the acceptance of another politcal party member into the cabinet would be a no-no.  Due to regional voting for a candidae and not the actual leader, the ramifications would be huge for the individual, not to mention that standing that one holds in their own party would go down the tubes.  For example, during the same sex marriage debate, the ruling Liberals ousted a cabinet member for voicing HER OWN opinion and not the parties stance....  To cross the floor to sit as a minister responsible, you would have to drop your party first.

Anyway, my bet is another election within 1 year.  The budget will probably bring them down.



2006-01-24 12:39 PM
in reply to: #330705

Veteran
245
10010025
Cole Harbour, NS
Subject: RE: The Great Canadian Election 2006
I understand fully the partisan stuff, but don't you think appointing members of the opposition as ministers would make the debate more.....the word escapes me. Interesting is one of them, but I think more functional, accountable. I know it will never happen, but what if. It would be an interesting idea. I have come to like this Minister of Defence and it would be nice to keep him. Oh well, lets see who signs my next pay cheque.
2006-01-24 1:38 PM
in reply to: #330550

Pro
4578
20002000500252525
Vancouver, BC
Subject: RE: The Great Canadian Election 2006
Rennick - 2006-01-24 7:18 AM

I like the idea of proportional representation based on %age of popular vote, but I have no idea how that would ever work logistically. It's one of those "sounds good" ideas.



I haven't read the rest of the responses, but this can work. It's called STV single transferable vote and they do use the system in other countries. We voted on switching to that system in the last BC election (last year?). Even though a majority 57% vs. 42% voted to switch to STV, it didn't pass because a 60% minimium was needed. There also had to be a Yes vote in at least 60% of the 79 electoral districts and it was yes in 77 districts. I think that's pretty strong support for STV. You can check out the results at http://www.elections.bc.ca/elections/ge2005/refresults.htm

You can read more about STV at
http://www.citizensassembly.bc.ca/public

Jen
2006-01-24 3:04 PM
in reply to: #330789

Expert
666
5001002525
St. Thomas, ON
Subject: RE: The Great Canadian Election 2006

Thanks Jen. I didn't realize that one of the provinces had actually already tried to implement something like this. Thanks for the links.

I was reading that voter turnout was higher this election than last, and that more 18-24 year-olds showed up to vote! Voter turnout still sucks (I don't understand why people don't vote), but at least it improved.

2006-01-24 5:37 PM
in reply to: #329737

Master
1462
10001001001001002525
Michigan
Subject: RE: The Great Canadian Election 2006
Blah blah blah Canada. Just kiddin, we love our little bro.
2006-01-24 6:02 PM
in reply to: #330977

Pro
4578
20002000500252525
Vancouver, BC
Subject: RE: The Great Canadian Election 2006
Canada is female!


2006-01-24 6:05 PM
in reply to: #330977

Regular
68
2525
Victoria,BC
Subject: RE: The Great Canadian Election 2006
smokeater1833 - 2006-01-24 3:37 PM

Blah blah blah Canada. Just kiddin, we love our little bro.


I love replying to these comments, I'm reminded of a e-mail that i got years....it goes something like this


"We're on Bigger, We're on top, If we're in prison you'd ( meaning the USA )be our b#@!H "

HA HA .... all i good fun
New Thread
Other Resources My Cup of Joe » The Great Canadian Election 2006 Rss Feed  
 
 
of 2