OT: Canadian Federal Election

EvilGenius4ABetterTomorro · #1 June 29th, 2004, 10:02 PM

Hi, I was just wondering about a recent quote from the leader of the "Bloc" about how he was going to put issues regarding Quebec first. Isn't that kind of selfish? I know Senators down here look out for their own states but jeesh! Are there importand issues in Quebec that need to be addressed above other national matters? I was just reading about that "Bloc" leader guy. A ex militant Marxist? Oh great! Don't be adding any hammer and sickle to that red maple leaf!

TerranC · #2 June 29th, 2004, 10:27 PM

Hi, I was just wondering about a recent quote from the leader of the "Bloc" about how he was going to put issues regarding Quebec first. Isn't that kind of selfish?

Yup.

Are there importand issues in Quebec that need to be addressed above other national matters?

Not really IMHO, they just need a bunch of money for lots of things just like every other province, but the bloc argues that since a majority of Quebecers speak French (and have, in turn a "distinct" society), that Quebec should be special and get better treatment by the federal government than other provinces.

I was just reading about that "Bloc" leader guy. A ex militant Marxist? Oh great! Don't be adding any hammer and sickle to that red maple leaf!

Don't worry; should he get his way, you won't be seeing a People's Republic of Canada; instead, you'll be seeing a People's Republic of Quebec.

[ June 29, 2004, 21:28: Message edited by: TerranC ]

EvilGenius4ABetterTomorro · #3 June 29th, 2004, 10:47 PM

Thanks, just wanted to get an opinion on that. I do care what happens in Canada. I go there quite a bit and would hate to see anything interfere with their standard of living or happiness...or the continued construction of underground shopping malls.

Vancouver has a "Skytrain" underground; hey who knew!

Grandpa Kim · #4 June 30th, 2004, 03:38 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Renegade 13:
How would you distribute the seats around the country??

Simple:

1. Have all candidates run at large. So 5000 candidates up for 310 slots. Top 310 win those slots... and represent no one part of the country more than another.

2. Candidates (again at large) must produce a verifiable petition with 100,000 names on it to gain a seat. If you can get 1,000,000 names, you gain 10 seats... and 10 votes in the house!

The beauty of the Last one is you represent those 100,000 citizens wholeheartedly! No disgruntled voters who voted for the other guy!

These ideas are not new by a long shot, but as this election has proven, the electorate hates change. They prefer the bad old ways to taking a chance. These electoral ideas are just way too big a change.

BlackRose · #5 June 30th, 2004, 03:46 AM

Well only 60% of the elegible voters voted, OR there were more people who DID NOT vote than voted for the Liberals.

[ June 30, 2004, 02:46: Message edited by: BlackRose ]

Renegade 13 · #6 June 30th, 2004, 04:18 AM

Well, if this minority gov't doesn't Last long (which it probably won't...) next time I should be able to vote! As long as the election is after April 27, 2005, I'll be giving the Conservatives one more vote.

Suicide Junkie · #7 June 30th, 2004, 04:27 AM

I failed to see any convincing reason to vote for liberal, conservative or even NDP.

What in particular do you see in them?