Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

Provincial Election Thread


JM_

CDC Votes!  

216 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

30 minutes ago, kingofsurrey said:

Think Steelhead (or Fisheries) this Election

We are all aware that steelhead in British Columbia are facing serious threats. The upcoming BC election provides us with a great opportunity to have our concerns heard. The Steelhead Society of British Columbia (SSBC) urges that all Society members and others who care about steelhead to take this opportunity to ask political party leaders and the candidates in their ridings some pointed questions. Then consider voting for those that give the answers that best support our steelhead. 

Here are some of the key questions:

Why is there no Provincial Ministry dedicated to Fisheries? 

Freshwater sportfishing in British Columbia contributes $957M to the economy of which steelhead account for approximately $239.25M. Yet both the money and the steelhead are lost in the provincial Ministry of Forest Lands, Natural Resource Operations... “Fisheries” is absent in the name of this ministry and seemingly in its mandate as well.


How is the provincial government going to support recovery of Interior steelhead populations?

The flagship of BC fish is the magnificent Thompson River steelhead. Anglers come from around the world to test themselves against these fish, the ultimate of their species. However, this world-famous icon is in major trouble, as the 2016-17 season produced approximately 350 spawners on the Thompson and 140 on the Chilcotin.

What do you think should be done? What are the historical spawning numbers?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, apollo said:

First and foremost, I want change and end to Clark era. 

 

I definitely side with Green, however I'm worried a vote for the Greens means Liberals win again. So I may end up voting NDP. 

Don't let the fear sway you, vote for who you want. It's the only way we'll ever get another viable option.

 

BC is like a battered woman who keeps going back and forth between two abusive partners. Stop the cycle!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, J.R. said:

Don't let the fear sway you, vote for who you want. It's the only way we'll ever get another viable option.

 

BC is like a battered woman who keeps going back and forth between two abusive partners. Stop the cycle!

You're probably right... Lets see how the next 2 weeks pan out. Hopefully the Greens start to generate more interest. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, clam linguine said:

What do you think should be done? What are the historical spawning numbers?

http://steelheadvoices.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/Thompson-Steelhead-Assembly-summary-2dec16.pdf

 

Part One: Our Club’s Steelhead Committee recommends a Steelhead Action Plan that:

 

1. implements a conservation fish culture to increase the abundance of steelhead to the routine management zone and maintains the genetic diversity of the steelhead. The experimental design must use tagging to provide better information on the timing and sources of mortality of the steelhead in the freshwater and ocean environments.

 

2. provides resources to implement a River Guardian Program with First Nations to assist the monitoring of fisheries in zones from the mouth of the Fraser to the outlet of Kamloops Lake.

 

3. determines the distribution and abundance of adult and juvenile steelhead and rainbow trout in the key watershed and identifies areas that juvenile steelhead production can be increased through restoration and enhancement.

 

4. improves in season stock monitoring and assessment program to provide improved information on the run timing and abundance to provide fisheries managers better information to reduce interception of steelhead through the application of time and area closures and selective fisheries.

 

5. develops watershed sustainability plans for the major tributaries to the supporting steelhead to ensure water quality, and watershed functioning that establishes clear objectives and thresholds for environmental flows involving all the stakeholders .

 

6. develop parallel plan for Chicotin Steelhead tailored to the watershed and Steelhead stocks it supports We will be actively engaging the federal and provincial governments for funding to support this plan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, kingofsurrey said:

Everyone has their own issues about what is important for them  in terms of voting.

 

Pretty arrogant of you to think you are the only one that values the correct issue. Is this really the message you want to send out. 

 

Voting is deeply personal.  

 

People should be encouraged to have diverse opinions.  That is what makes Canada great.

 

Most important thing of all is just that people do GO OUT and VOTE.  

Pretty arrogant of you to make humongous assumptions about my positions after I've made an extremely uncontroversial statement that people vote for dumb reasons... They do. It's really not controversial. If you were to institute a system where people had to prove their competency to vote, WHICH I AM NOT IN FAVOUR OF... that would be highly illegal and immoral in my opinion... for the sake of making the point though, if you had a competency test where people had to prove their engagement with political affairs and their knowledge of policy issues, party platforms, foreign affairs, and the like. Probably less than 5%, probably less than 2% really, of people would pass that test. The reality is that people vote based on PROPAGANDA. That's it. That's why you can have an ENTIRE U.S. election, from primary to presidential election, where you have no clue about the specifics of any presidential candidate's proposed policies, you half the time don't even believe they'd follow through on the general idea they claim to support, and yet they still get votes.

 

Why do they get votes, because of the highly irresponsible thing you stated, "Most important thing is just that people do GO OUT and VOTE".... That's what politicians of major parties tell you to do. Just because you have a voice, doesn't mean you should use it. It's the truth. Not everyone is qualified to talk about astrophysics or any nuclear-related fields in science. Not everyone can talk about Quantum Physics. Just because you have a voice, and you have a right to speak, doesn't mean you should go around acting like you know something about something you have no clue about. This is politics. 99% of people are stupid with regards to politics. Politicians are stupid. All they do is look pretty and lie, Christy Clark doesn't do anything for 90% of B.C. If you don't live in Vancouver, she doesn't even come visit EVER. She doesn't work from the capital of Victoria, people in Victoria hate her with a passion. She'll get votes, well her party will get votes. Because people will create some twisted logic about how they can't vote for the NDP, because stupid propaganda reason X or Y, can't vote Green party because they think it's a wasted vote. Can't vote conservative, because conservatives are bigots, (it's a fact, I read it on the internet). This will be the reasoning behind people's votes, you can read some of this nonsense in this thread. What a pathetic way to waste your vote. I mean people are entitled to do that, but how pathetic.

 

If you hold politicians to such a low standard, guess what, they conform to that pathetic standard. If everyone who wasn't satisfied didn't vote, you might get one screwed up election. But politicians, or those not in politics who see the opportunity, will look over and say, "Look how many people didn't vote... clearly Politicians weren't inspiring much confidence in people, there is a market of people here to be won over, if I can just create a strong platform, and show some leadership qualities and ability to get things done." Instead of the opposite.. "Haha, look at the sheep, all you have to do is make up some BS lies and they all come up and vote and fuel the system."

 

And people wonder why politics has devolved into the absolute cancer it is now... Corruption and a combination of arrogance and intellectual laziness on the part of voting population. You should have some integrity with your vote. Politicians should have to meet SOME sort of standard to get your vote, not just well lesser of X evils yada yada BS. Have some self-worth. Your vote is your seal of approval, if you give it to someone and you don't know much about them, well you are an idiot. You're endorsing someone you have no idea about. People who do this are PART OF THE PROBLEM.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its remarkable this poll is identical to one done by the polling companies.  The NDP and Liberals are virtually tied with the Greens in solid third.  Exactly like the major polls.   All this for free while those companies spend thousands to get the same result.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/19/2017 at 9:15 PM, Aircool said:

Pretty arrogant of you to make humongous assumptions about my positions after I've made an extremely uncontroversial statement that people vote for dumb reasons... They do. It's really not controversial. If you were to institute a system where people had to prove their competency to vote, WHICH I AM NOT IN FAVOUR OF... that would be highly illegal and immoral in my opinion... for the sake of making the point though, if you had a competency test where people had to prove their engagement with political affairs and their knowledge of policy issues, party platforms, foreign affairs, and the like. Probably less than 5%, probably less than 2% really, of people would pass that test. The reality is that people vote based on PROPAGANDA. That's it. That's why you can have an ENTIRE U.S. election, from primary to presidential election, where you have no clue about the specifics of any presidential candidate's proposed policies, you half the time don't even believe they'd follow through on the general idea they claim to support, and yet they still get votes.

 

There are so many different issues in an election.  

 

I tend to consider  a couple of issues that  are my main concern and i vote for the party that supports my position on these.  

Pretty simplistic i know but heh, thats my approach.

 

Right now my main concern in BC  is  destruction of the environment and  destruction of  public education.     I will vote accordingly. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, kingofsurrey said:

There are so many different issues in an election.  

 

I tend to consider  a couple of issues that  are my main concern and i vote for the party that supports my position on these.  

Pretty simplistic i know but heh, thats my approach.

 

Right now my main concern in BC  is  destruction of the environment and  destruction of  public education.     I will vote accordingly. 

Yes and this isn't a bad approach. So how are you going to evaluate the policies of the parties in these regards? What do you think the solution is that results in the improvement of Public Education? Which parties are campaigning on these platforms? How do you know their ideas are good? There are a lot of questions that need to be answered in order to claim to have made an informed vote. As long as you have enough of a picture, then you are placing value on your vote. That's good, I approve of placing value on your vote. Do you really think most people do that? Are you really going to go to the lengths to get properly educated on everyone's platforms and research the validity of their plans? Are you going to consider the very real tradeoffs that might have to be made to fulfill the issues you are concerned about. Do you care? This is a complex issue, and most people's votes boil down to a sound-byte. Not any sort of world view that is formed via research and considered thinking.

 

I'm not saying that everyone has to be held to that standard, but the value of a vote nowadays is extremely cheap, and they mean little. How many votes you get is more a byproduct of your marketing/campaigning in a brand recognition sense. Not a product of the solidity of your platform. The best policy for a politician that is campaigning is to take the popular positions within their target demographics publicly. Integrity isn't rewarded. Being honest about your beliefs and your ideas for success and what your priorities are, doesn't get you bonus points. Why? Because votes are cheap now. It's that simple. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Like I said in my previous post - the folks spreading the BC Liberal line are just plain embarrassing themselves. 

 

http://theprovince.com/opinion/columnists/mike-smyth-in-response-to-ndps-deceit-liberal-minister-spouts-alternative-facts

 

Finance Minister Mike de Jong said the NDP 'commitment' to freeze B.C. Hydro rates and ICBC premiums for four years will cost a combined $3.2 billion. But the NDP has not committed to these things. Gerry Kahrmann / PNG

B.C. voters need to get full and accurate information before they cast their ballots on May 9, says the Liberals’ Mike de Jong.

“Before they can make an informed choice, they need to know the facts,” the Liberal finance minister said at a heavily hyped presentation on the NDP’s “deceitful” election platform.

I agree with him.

And that’s why I was disgusted to then watch de Jong criticize billions of dollars worth of spending promises that the NDP has not made in this election campaign.

He said the NDP “commitment” to freeze B.C. Hydro rates and ICBC premiums for four years will cost a combined $3.2 billion.

The NDP has not committed to these things, so I asked de Jong why he included them in his presentation.

“In the absence of information suggesting what their rates will be, they said they’re going to freeze the rates,” he sputtered.

Not for four years, they haven’t. Anybody who thinks any government will freeze Hydro and ICBC rates for four years needs to have their head examined.

Here’s what the NDP has promised: a two-year freeze on Hydro rates, which just shot up 3.5 per cent on April 1.

On ICBC, the NDP has promised not to implement a 42-per-cent “worst case scenario” rate hike contained in an ICBC premium analysis.

The NDP said they would conduct a post-election “review” of ICBC rates with the goal of keeping premiums low, which is the same position as the Liberals.

The NDP has certainly not proposed a four-year freeze of ICBC or Hydro rates, but de Jong alleged it anyway, predicting it will drive the budget into the ditch.

De Jong also said the NDP has promised to eliminate Medical Services Plan premiums, alleging an NDP government might jack up the sales tax or personal income taxes or corporate taxes to pay for the lost revenue.

But the Liberals have also promised to eliminate MSP, so I asked de Jong how he would pay for his own promise.

“We haven’t said,” he replied. “Our objective is to eliminate MSP premiums. We don’t anticipate any further reductions unless the economy were to grow.”

This is what de Jong said in his own budget backgrounder just two months ago: “As B.C. moves toward elimination of MSP premiums, the province will consult with British Columbians to determine the timing and structure of the change. This work continues and details will be announced over the coming year.”

Yet de Jong told me Wednesday that his own plan to eliminate MSP is not an “unequivocal promise.”

Here’s the important distinction: The NDP has promised to eliminate MSP within four years. They promised to appoint an independent “MSP Elimination Panel” to advise on how to fund health care after the MSP is gone.

The Liberals are fully within their rights to question where the money will come from to pay for this pricey promise. But to refuse to explain where they will get the money themselves to fund their own MSP-elimination “objective” is a total joke.

As I said in an earlier column, voters should be wary of the NDP’s promise to deliver so many expensive new programs and initiatives and still balance the budget. Take it with a grain of salt, if not the whole shaker, I said.

But for the Liberals to attack over $3 billion worth of “commitments” the NDP simply hasn’t made is just a bunch of alternative-facts garbage.

msmyth@postmedia.com

twitter.com/MikeSmythNews

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Aircool said:

Yes and this isn't a bad approach. So how are you going to evaluate the policies of the parties in these regards? What do you think the solution is that results in the improvement of Public Education? Which parties are campaigning on these platforms? How do you know their ideas are good? There are a lot of questions that need to be answered in order to claim to have made an informed vote. As long as you have enough of a picture, then you are placing value on your vote. That's good, I approve of placing value on your vote. Do you really think most people do that? Are you really going to go to the lengths to get properly educated on everyone's platforms and research the validity of their plans? Are you going to consider the very real tradeoffs that might have to be made to fulfill the issues you are concerned about. Do you care? This is a complex issue, and most people's votes boil down to a sound-byte. Not any sort of world view that is formed via research and considered thinking.

 

I'm not saying that everyone has to be held to that standard, but the value of a vote nowadays is extremely cheap, and they mean little. How many votes you get is more a byproduct of your marketing/campaigning in a brand recognition sense. Not a product of the solidity of your platform. The best policy for a politician that is campaigning is to take the popular positions within their target demographics publicly. Integrity isn't rewarded. Being honest about your beliefs and your ideas for success and what your priorities are, doesn't get you bonus points. Why? Because votes are cheap now. It's that simple. 

 

 

I get your points about tradeoff.

 

If i vote for a party that supports my core 2 issues...  there  may be a trade off on other issues...

 

I see your point.

 

For me , i just concentrate on what really matters to me the most.   For me i  think Quality Public Education is what i want to see as it has the power to transform our society and can in the long term create wealth....  I also really care about the environment because i think we are not doing enough to protect it.  We are on the verge of wiping out species here in BC and diversity when destroyed can not be re-created....

 

I read as much as i can on a daily basis about these issues... I try to see where the parties stand and give my vote to the party that i think can affect change  / improvement. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, kingofsurrey said:

I get your points about tradeoff.

 

If i vote for a party that supports my core 2 issues...  there  may be a trade off on other issues...

 

I see your point.

 

For me , i just concentrate on what really matters to me the most.   For me i  think Quality Public Education is what i want to see as it has the power to transform our society and can in the long term create wealth....  I also really care about the environment because i think we are not doing enough to protect it.  We are on the verge of wiping out species here in BC and diversity when destroyed can not be re-created....

 

I read as much as i can on a daily basis about these issues... I try to see where the parties stand and give my vote to the party that i think can affect change  / improvement. 

Well, I can't argue with any of that. That's your position, it's not unreasonable, you are entitled to it, and it seems like you value your vote. I think there might be better positions, but you choose to prioritize what you choose, so fine. I just don't think the average voter does what you do. Which is really the key issue with politics in my opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Aircool said:

Well, I can't argue with any of that. That's your position, it's not unreasonable, you are entitled to it, and it seems like you value your vote. I think there might be better positions, but you choose to prioritize what you choose, so fine. I just don't think the average voter does what you do. Which is really the key issue with politics in my opinion.

Yes, from what i see of young people now, it scares me.

 

Most young people i see don't seem to really read alot or try to research issues in our province.......

Too much time on social media -  video games etc.....

 

Not sure where our society will be long term if citizens don't spend the time gathering information about our provinces needs...

 

BC is such a great province.  Sure hope we can make it an even better place for all the citizens.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...