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

8 hours ago, debluvscanucks said:

I didn't say she's been the brilliant mastermind behind the whole operation...you keep projecting weird sentiments....   See how that works?  :)

My point is no one's had a gun to her head and to make it seem like she's just a whimsical tag along or without input as a strong willed woman full of ego seems laughable and naive to me.

 

Anyhow...I do respect your opinion, JR.  I just don't, for a second, believe that CC is merely a puppet...I believe she was cut out for the job.  I believe she is calculating and has been used to schmooze and is good at it.     And she still is so full of herself that she doesn't know when to give the gig up.
 

Just stop acting like we've 'cut the head of the snake'. We haven't. The snake is just fine. The snake is what we should be worried about. 

 

The liberal party isn't the 'victim' here either. Voters need to remember not to let the party off so easily even more than her. 

 

Yes, she's a low life that used the position she was given by the party, with her political skills, to further the liberal agenda and do the bidding of her corporate donors. Nobody is painting her as a saint. That was her job.

 

She's still not the problem. She's a symptom of the problem. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, kingofsurrey said:

It would be great to see an actual Liberal BC Political Party established in BC. 

I actually agree with this. I think a party that sits somewhere between the NDP and the current Liberal party would give those of us who found voting for either distasteful, (and the Greens, wasteful) another option.

 

The Libs could go back to calling themselves Conservatives, because that's what they are. (Or So-Creds, if they find that more palatable)

 

There does seem to be a bit of confrontation brewing for the new coalition, though. First Justin Trudeau reminded us all that a provincial government does not have the power to unilaterally cancel a federal project (The Trans Mountain twinning) and now Rachel Notley (who used to work with Horgan and the BC NDP once upon a time) has re-iterated that stance.

 

If one of Weaver's conditions was the cancellation of this project, Horgan may have a battle on his hands. He may have a battle even if it wasn't a condition from the Greens.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/31/2017 at 0:08 AM, Mattrek said:

 

Yeah that last part is specifically what Clark DIDN'T do. It's not because she's a woman, it's because she was bought by corporations and had vile policies that only helped her rich backers. BC has more money then ever before and yet we also have more people needing food banks, more homelessness, less affordable housing and an education system where the courts had to intervene and say "enough!" She ran the province into the ground.

 

Yes

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Ryan Strome said:

And when B.C is in massive defecit will you admit you were wrong?

It may also hinge partly on the fact that real estate and development are a shaky foundation and will have an impact as they're slowly addressed and speculators and foreign investors look elsewhere to avoid taxation.  Although there are loopholes (farmland is exempt from the foreign buyers tax), as things slow down we can attribute some of this as part of the problem, not a solution.   There's a reason things have gone unchecked...because $$.  So, in really addressing issues of housing affordability, etc., it will have an impact.  But blame those who got us here in the first place, not the ones left in the aftermath.

 

It's not like there's an instant cut off.....some of what happens down the road will be due to what's happened in the past.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, J.R. said:

Just stop acting like we've 'cut the head of the snake'. We haven't. The snake is just fine. The snake is what we should be worried about. 

 

The liberal party isn't the 'victim' here either. Voters need to remember not to let the party off so easily even more than her. 

 

Yes, she's a low life that used the position she was given by the party, with her political skills, to further the liberal agenda and do the bidding of her corporate donors. Nobody is painting her as a saint. That was her job.

 

She's still not the problem. She's a symptom of the problem. 

She's part of the problem.  

 

I don't distinguish between her and the party.  I also don't call her a symptom of it, she's one of the bacteria that's infecting us.  Not sure why you feel we shouldn't place responsibility on her?  

 

She's part of the problem.  And, as the figurehead, putting some focus on her seems reasonable to me.

 

The headless snake can slither under a deck anytime now.   Not sure why you feel yours is the only "opinion" that is valid or credible.  We all have our interests/ideas and don't have to be experts.  We just have to be voters with concerns, and dumbing it down is sometimes required just to get back to some basics.  Like actually caring about those in the province you represent.  Let's start there.  

 

I won't stand toe to toe with you because politics IS complex.  But I know a snake in the grass when I see one...and I don't care who's property she's on when she strikes.  Just want her gone.   

 

I do get your point, but I also don't feel that any of these feelings some of us have are misdirected.  Christy is an adult, capable of making her own decisions and, as part of that, also worthy of praise and or criticism by way of that.   Again, I don't see anyone holding a gun to her head....but I do see her smug arrogance as she knows she IS propped up by a party behind her.  Sadly for her, she will take the brunt of it now...and I'm perfectly ok with that.  Not sure why you're not?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And, I might add that:

 

Quote

Just stop acting like...

Your perception of how "I act" is just that.  And, honestly, I act how I wanna.  It's been that way for some time now, and I'm ok with it.  But thanks for the guidance.  In all your edumacation, please learn that telling people how to act isn't YOUR job.  

 

After hearing that, coupled with: Christy is just the smiling face of the party who did what she was told to by them.

 

I have to wonder if you aren't of the old school thinking that women just do what they're told.  Newsflash:  they don't.  And that's a pretty solid part of this tug of war...in that you seem to feel that Christy can just be "told" what to do.  

 

But, this is steering off track now.  I just want to point out that by talking down to others who aren't as "informed" as they should be, etc. it's ok to allow people to have an opinion.  It's at the very core of democracy...so that everyone's views count.  From the brilliant know it alls to the rest of us.

 

 

Quote

The liberal party isn't the 'victim' here either. Voters need to remember not to let the party off so easily even more than her. 

No one said they are?  So it's you twisting ideas around here.  I tie Christy in to her party...I'm sure it's supposed to work that way.  For some reason you want to separate the two.  In addressing the leader, that is intended with a trickle down message to the party.  A bit of a no brainer.

 

 

I think we've both worn out our ideas and we can agree to disagree.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, debluvscanucks said:

She's part of the problem.  

 

I don't distinguish between her and the party.  I also don't call her a symptom of it, she's one of the bacteria that's infecting us.  Not sure why you feel we shouldn't place responsibility on her?  

 

She's part of the problem.  And, as the figurehead, putting some focus on her seems reasonable to me.

 

The headless snake can slither under a deck anytime now.   Not sure why you feel yours is the only "opinion" that is valid or credible.  We all have our interests/ideas and don't have to be experts.  We just have to be voters with concerns, and dumbing it down is sometimes required just to get back to some basics.  Like actually caring about those in the province you represent.  Let's start there.  

 

I won't stand toe to toe with you because politics IS complex.  But I know a snake in the grass when I see one...and I don't care who's property she's on when she strikes.  Just want her gone.   

 

I do get your point, but I also don't feel that any of these feelings some of us have are misdirected.  Christy is an adult, capable of making her own decisions and, as part of that, also worthy of praise and or criticism by way of that.   Again, I don't see anyone holding a gun to her head....but I do see her smug arrogance as she knows she IS propped up by a party behind her.  Sadly for her, she will take the brunt of it now...and I'm perfectly ok with that.  Not sure why you're not?

Because they'll simply replace her with someone else and carry on, business as usual. Just as they did with Campbell when he became reviled and replaced him with 'New & Improved!' Christy. And BC voters fell for it hook line and sinker for 4 more years! Yay re-branding! Yet the party stayed exactly the same. Hell, you could argue they actually got worse knowing how easy it was to re-brand and dupe voters. They nearly did it again this election!

 

Individually they certainly are complicit in the problem but they themselves are not the problem. That doesn't divest them of responsibility in the role they've played in furthering that 'problem' but acknowledges the real root of it.

 

Voters need to stop electing corrupt parties who place people like Christy in the position of power she had to do the things she did. Stop falling for the scam. Stop being scared of voting beyond the two party system! Proportional voting can't come soon enough. Gordie willing voters aren't persuaded away from it by people with a vested interest in keeping the status quo.

 

It's not that I'm clamoring for people to ignore Christy's role in things, I'm clamoring for people to stop ignoring the Liberals role.

 

13 minutes ago, debluvscanucks said:

And, I might add that:

 

Your perception of how "I act" is just that.  And, honestly, I act how I wanna.  It's been that way for some time now, and I'm ok with it.  But thanks for the guidance.  In all your edumacation, please learn that telling people how to act isn't YOUR job.  

 

After hearing that, coupled with: Christy is just the smiling face of the party who did what she was told to by them.

 

I have to wonder if you aren't of the old school thinking that women just do what they're told.  Newsflash:  they don't.  And that's a pretty solid part of this tug of war...in that you seem to feel that Christy can just be "told" what to do.  

 

But, this is steering off track now.  I just want to point out that by talking down to others who aren't as "informed" as they should be, etc. it's ok to allow people to have an opinion.  It's at the very core of democracy...so that everyone's views count.  From the brilliant know it alls to the rest of us.   I think we've both worn out our ideas and we can agree to disagree.

 

 

 

Now you're completely reaching. Off track indeed.

 

I feel the same way as her predecessor Campbell. You going to tell me it's because they're both Caucasian next?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Ryan Strome said:

And when B.C is in massive defecit will you admit you were wrong?

 

No, because conservatives don't understand how the global economy works. Also do you mean deficit or debt? Debt doesn't need to be paid off ever, you may personally have a problem with that and that's fair, but global monetary health of a country is determined by a debt to GDP ratio. As long as that ratio is handleable you can go into more debt without economic reprisals. That's the way it is. Having a deficit doesn't matter either as long as the debt to GDP ratio is manageable. The right just doesn't understand this at all and brings up the "I don't want to leave this debt burden on my children and future generations", which while admirable doesn't have a place in the reality of how the world works.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, J.R. said:

Isn't that already the case? :lol:

 

46 minutes ago, Mattrek said:

 

No, because conservatives don't understand how the global economy works. Also do you mean deficit or debt? Debt doesn't need to be paid off ever, you may personally have a problem with that and that's fair, but global monetary health of a country is determined by a debt to GDP ratio. As long as that ratio is handleable you can go into more debt without economic reprisals. That's the way it is. Having a deficit doesn't matter either as long as the debt to GDP ratio is manageable. The right just doesn't understand this at all and brings up the "I don't want to leave this debt burden on my children and future generations", which while admirable doesn't have a place in the reality of how the world works.

I said deficit and meant defecit. And yes debt is a problem, look at the cuts the Chretien government had to make after decades of neglect from Trudeau and Mulroney. Maybe before your time but commonly referred to as the Canadian debt crisis. So yes debt is a issue, the far left never seen to understand that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Ryan Strome said:

 

I said deficit and meant defecit. And yes debt is a problem, look at the cuts the Chretien government had to make after decades of neglect from Trudeau and Mulroney. Maybe before your time but commonly referred to as the Canadian debt crisis. So yes debt is a issue, the far left never seen to understand that.

You didn't really answer my question there :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Lancaster said:

Killing the Kinder Morgan will incidentally destroy the Alberta NDP.  Talk about Blue on Blue attack.... or in this case, Orange on Orange.  

I'm starting to think the Alberta NDP is a lot closer to the BC Liberals, than the NDP.  Pick a card, any card, the magician still controls the deck. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Ghostsof1915 said:

I'm starting to think the Alberta NDP is a lot closer to the BC Liberals, than the NDP.  Pick a card, any card, the magician still controls the deck. 

I'd say closer to the federal liberals economically anyway. I'm a tech guy so I think oil and gas tech can be done very safety if companies are forced to by regulation with teeth, but the issue is so politicized now I don't think we're capable of having a truly balanced discussion about it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, S'all Good Man said:

I'd say closer to the federal liberals economically anyway. I'm a tech guy so I think oil and gas tech can be done very safety if companies are forced to by regulation with teeth, but the issue is so politicized now I don't think we're capable of having a truly balanced discussion about it. 

But does the Provincial or Federal Governments in Canada even both enforcing the regulations and punishing violations.......  

Regulations with no enforcement is not really very helpful. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Mattrek said:

 

No, because conservatives don't understand how the global economy works. Also do you mean deficit or debt? Debt doesn't need to be paid off ever, you may personally have a problem with that and that's fair, but global monetary health of a country is determined by a debt to GDP ratio. As long as that ratio is handleable you can go into more debt without economic reprisals. That's the way it is. Having a deficit doesn't matter either as long as the debt to GDP ratio is manageable. The right just doesn't understand this at all and brings up the "I don't want to leave this debt burden on my children and future generations", which while admirable doesn't have a place in the reality of how the world works.

If you're going into debt to fund something that will help the economy in the future (such as a bridge, or a skytrain line, or Site C) then that argument is completely valid.

 

If you're running deficits just to maintain social programs, then your just borrowing to supply the current generation with services at the expense of future generations.

 

So it depends on what and why your running a deficit, not just how manageable it is, nor it's total size relative to the economy, though those things do enter into how lenders view you, and thus the cost of the borrowing.

 

Borrowing is actually really awesome if you have inflation (see record low interest rates, easy credit, appeals for foreign investment and immigration, and every other trick in the book to create inflation in Canada, and even better tricks like "Quantitative Easing" in other countries, in a desperate effort to stimulate inflation").

 

Right now saving is kind of pointless since there's almost nothing you can invest in that has anything resembling a decent return, and even safe havens are risky these days.

 

Thus, if the new government wants to run up the debt to expand skytrain to Langley, or to build a brand new hospital, or something that lasts, then that's great!

 

If they are doing it to give their friends in the public sector better pay and even more perks, that's not in the long term interest, but is less problematic RIGHT NOW.

 

Unfortunately, the odds of deflation, especially locally, especially with someone of the policies (higher taxes on carbon and housing for example), and the downgrading of debt (Alberta's NDP government just got downgraded, and ours did too last time they were in power) could mean that the situation could reverse, and then things could really sting.

 

Which is why deficit budgets should almost always be avoided, and not brushed off because "that's how the world works". Because it only works until it doesn't. See Greece, France, Spain, Iceland, etc. If you want a deflation example, see Japan.

 

Of course, almost nobody, on either side of the fence, actually understands any of this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, S'all Good Man said:

I'd say closer to the federal liberals economically anyway. I'm a tech guy so I think oil and gas tech can be done very safety if companies are forced to by regulation with teeth, but the issue is so politicized now I don't think we're capable of having a truly balanced discussion about it. 

Oil and gas is chock a block full of card carrying union blue collar workers. I would say the Alberta NDP is closer to the classical NDP.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, ronthecivil said:

Oil and gas is chock a block full of card carrying union blue collar workers. I would say the Alberta NDP is closer to the classical NDP.

And they're pushing oil harder than the last decade of PCs did :lol:

 

Can you imagine right now, the right is having to defend and support Notley in her push to get the pipeline to tidewater.  even more so can you imagine if she actually gets ground broken on the Transmountain expansion AND Keystone XL?  Seriously...what a mind f*** that would be.

 

Could you imagine Kenney/Jean trying to fight her next election.

 

What is your platform?  

 

"Well, we are going to repeal everything she's done"

 

"But what did she do?  She increased funding for schools, health, housing and is creating and improving vital infrastructure that has been ignored since Klein left office and she  got two pipelines built/started"

 

"Well...ya...but...she....CARBON TAX!!!!"

 

:P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Ghostsof1915 said:

I'm starting to think the Alberta NDP is a lot closer to the BC Liberals, than the NDP.  Pick a card, any card, the magician still controls the deck. 

BC NDP turning on their Alberta brothers and sisters. Progressives eventually will do this.   Its great!  Check out Evergreen college where the loony progressive teachers are being devoured by their student progeny.

 

http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/266862/evergreen-state-college-poster-school-academic-rot-jack-kerwick

 

Each one of them is more righteous and special than the next one.

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...