Skip to main content

View Diary: What's the matter with Canada? (37 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  The destruction of the beautiful forests and (8+ / 0-)

    praires in search of tar oil is a total abomination. The treatment of the First People who opposed this rape of the land is equally abominable.  This is what you get when you vote in conservatives.

    "George Washington: "The power under the Constitution will always be in the people.... and whenever it is executed contrary to their interest, or not agreeable to their wishes, their servants can, and undoubtedly will, be recalled." 1787

    by moose67 on Mon Apr 02, 2012 at 05:57:58 PM PDT

    •  And how exactly did Harper and the Conservatives (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      koNko, Chi

      get in power?

      They got the majority of votes! That's how you usually win elections and when you have power, you use it.

      Will they stay in power? Will Canadians vote them out or do they approve of what the government is doing?

      That's how democracy works. if you lose the argument, you lose the election.

      Progressives will win only when we convince a majority that they, too, are Progressive. And... It’s the Supreme Court, stupid!

      by auapplemac on Mon Apr 02, 2012 at 06:03:57 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I'm a Canadian and I sure as hell (12+ / 0-)

        did not vote for Harper.  You got Bush for 2 terms - did you vote for that?  You can vote but you don't always get what you voted for.  We have wing nuts up here too, also, whatever.

      •  They may have done it the Old-Fashioned way (5+ / 0-)

        Fraud.

        Here, here, here.

        And if they're anything like their American brethren, they probably lied about their policies in the run up to the election, running wild once they took up the reins of power.

        "No special skill, no standard attitude, no technology, and no organization - no matter how valuable - can safely replace thought itself."

        by xaxnar on Mon Apr 02, 2012 at 06:19:14 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Sorry to quibble, but... (7+ / 0-)

        Canada's first-past-the-post system can give you a majority government without actually winning a majority of the popular vote; we also had a redonkulously low voter turnout in the last contest.  So what happened is that Harper actually won 39.6% of the 61.1% of the electorate who bothered to show up.  In my books, that means he won 54% of the seats (166/308) by winning a little less than a quarter of all available votes.

        Whoever designed our electoral system -- yeah, I want some of what he was smoking.

        (Besides, Harper may not even have won by fair means -- see the current 'Robogate' scandal that's under investigation here.

        Mutability is our tragedy, but it is also our hope. The worst of times, like the best, are always passing away. -- Boethius*

        by seenaymah on Mon Apr 02, 2012 at 06:35:34 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  The first past the post system isn't perfect (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          xaxnar

          but we don't want to over-react by thinking proportional representation will solve everything.  Look at what has happened in Israel because of it.  You have the right-wing ultra Orthodox haredi leading Likud around by nose.  

          I wouldn't mind a run off system where the winner has to have a majority of the votes.  But for the sake of representing his/her constituents every MP or MLA has to be attached to a particular piece of dirt, imho.  That way, if a constituent has a problem with government the MP or MLA can't slough the problem off on someone else.  

          We must, indeed, all hang together, or assuredly we shall all hang separately. B. Franklin

          by Observerinvancouver on Mon Apr 02, 2012 at 10:39:03 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  If we voted by mail.... (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            xaxnar, Observerinvancouver

            ....the supposed "inconvenience" of a runoff would be minimal.

            It would also allow us to see what the two front runners were prepared to promise to get the votes of the also-rans.

            Another reason that ranked ballots and the like are a stupid error is that you have to use a computer to figure out who won. As if we could trust the Conservatives to do this after what they did last election with paper ballots.

            "Given the fact of servitude, the feudal relationship is the only tolerable one." (George Orwell)

            by sagesource on Mon Apr 02, 2012 at 11:50:17 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  OK, but it still seems that there's an opportunity (0+ / 0-)

          of the other parties to win if their message is strong enough and appeals to enough people.

          If the other parties are in disarray, isn't it up to the people to make changes.

          It's not like the other side hasn't ever won.

          Getting elected without an majority is the problem of having more than 2 parties.

          It can happen in the US system on rare occasions. It may not be perfect, so what's the answer?

          While we are Progressive/Liberals, we too can only win when the majority of voters agree with us. We (politicians as well as us) have to sell our message. If the public doesn't buy it.....

          Progressives will win only when we convince a majority that they, too, are Progressive. And... It’s the Supreme Court, stupid!

          by auapplemac on Mon Apr 02, 2012 at 11:10:18 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  They did not get the majority of votes. (5+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        xaxnar, koNko, dotsright, sagesource, stoneboat

        They got the support of 38% of the public.

        They got the majority of the seats.

        They may have stolen seats in Toronto with robocalls that redirected Liberal voters to the wrong polling stations.

        But in any case, just because you have a majority government in Canada does not mean you have anything close to majority support of the public.  In a five party system, it breaks differently.

        The Muslim said "I wished I had met Christ before I met the Christians" - Rev. Marvin Winins

        by captainlaser on Mon Apr 02, 2012 at 06:55:44 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  It's not just Toronto... (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          xaxnar

          ....Elections Canada has said they are investigating complaints in over 200 ridings now, over half the seats in play. Some of those seats were won by less than two dozen votes.

          "Given the fact of servitude, the feudal relationship is the only tolerable one." (George Orwell)

          by sagesource on Mon Apr 02, 2012 at 11:51:46 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  No, because the Canadian left is fractured (6+ / 0-)

        and let the conservatives slip in with 39% of the vote or so.

        Kind of like the left here on Daily Kos, lol.

        Sometimes . . . I feel . . . like a redneck with chopsticks . . . Dreaming of squirrel while I'm sucking down squid . . .

        by Pale Jenova on Mon Apr 02, 2012 at 07:11:45 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Well there's a question about that. (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        sagesource, xaxnar, stoneboat

        The head of Elections Canada (which oversees the vote) reported last week to Parliament and stated that his agency is investigating fraudulent voter suppression techniques that, if proved, may cause some results of the past election to be tossed.

        That ain't democracy.  It's cheating.

        People are not happy about this, no.  But there's really little the little people can do until the next election, three years away, or until there are byelections, if so required.

        If public opinion turns on these guys, though, majority or no majority they will have to pull back some.

        Even a majority government can only govern if it has the support of the majority of voters.  If that's gone, it's a different ball game.

    •  There was substantial First Nations cooperation... (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      xaxnar, koNko, TexMex

      ....for the initial phases of tar sands development. They needed the jobs, and most of the companies have a policy of preferential hiring of local First Nations people. The area was an economic basket case, with the only income earner, the fur trade, destroyed by the environmental movement. The same isn't true, though, for the First Nations whose approval would be needed to run a pipeline to the Pacific. Pipelines don't bring in jobs, only the risk of spills.

      "Given the fact of servitude, the feudal relationship is the only tolerable one." (George Orwell)

      by sagesource on Mon Apr 02, 2012 at 07:21:08 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  I defer to no one in my dislike of Stephen (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      xaxnar, highacidity

      Harper but he is not responsible for the tar sands.  They've been in development for decades.  

      And, believe me, we've been mistreating our First Nations since well before Confederation.

      OTOH, I still feel unbelievably blessed to be a Canadian (esp. one living in Vancouver).  Just not quite so proud as previously.

      We must, indeed, all hang together, or assuredly we shall all hang separately. B. Franklin

      by Observerinvancouver on Mon Apr 02, 2012 at 10:30:12 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site