Who do you think should be elected as next PM?
- Thread starter smitty295
- Start date
smitty295 said:
How much can NDP gain? 2, 3 seats? If that. Looks like you guys are heading for a Conservative government.
Out of choosing the lesser evils I'd rather choose the one I don't know.
Liberals: Cretin&co...and it's lovely scandles
PC's: Mulruney, reform/alliance...and it's lovely scandles
NDP:...don't know yet. Have to vote them in to see how things tick eh?
I honestly agree that it will be a minority government but the COnsevitives will definatly be at the top of the minority followed by maybe Layton or Paul Martin if he doesnt step down by the end of this scandel.
By the way what do you guys think will Paul Martin resign because of this?
By the way what do you guys think will Paul Martin resign because of this?
I wouldn't resign from a position if I had to clean up someone elses mess. I would resign if I was implicated in co-operating or taking part of the mess though.
smitty295 said:
no, even i dont think he's as innocent as he want to look, i think we better wait the full evidence. to know who's responsible for what. Paul Martin maybe knowed the existence of all this, but he may not have a participation in all that...
well i honestly belive that Martin has a part in it but not as much as Jean Cretien did since he was the head at that time. I think Paul Martin was just a conspiar he was just one of the little guys in the scandel.
I think not said:
I dunno.
I think they(NDP) will gain a few in BC and probably gain a couple is Sask. I would not be surprised if they picked up a couple in Ontario. I am not sure about Manitoba though, need to ask the Rev about that province. Libs will be lucky to have 1 or 2 still in Quebec. The Bloc should sweep there. I am not sure about the maratimes either. The North usually always goes Liberal but then there is only 3 seats.
In alberta though the tories can only gain 2 tops as thats all thats left. But Annie is pretty popular and usually squeaks in. Kilgours riding will more than likley go blue.
It will be interesting though. I do admit a June vote would benefit the Tories more than a January vote. But then June is summer so it could very well depend on how many people feel like voting. Plus Harper has not really gained as much as he thought either, if you buy the polls.
Depending on a lot of factors? 6-10 more seats isn't unreasonable, mostly in ridings where the NDP are head to head with Conservatives and the Liberals have been splitting the left-leaning vote.
Pie in the sky? Best serious estimate has, again depending on a lot of factors, the NDP getting 50 to 80 seats.
Insane longshot? NDP minority government with just over 100 seats.
Really goofy? NDP majority and Jack paying me hard cash to sit in the PMO to drink Two Rivers and chain smoke Marlboros while Pat Carney dances naked for me.8O
Either way (of the first two), a Conservative government is a bit of a joke at that point. It will be a minority, likely a very slim one, with two left-leaning parties (the NDP and BQ) holding the balance of power. Harper honestly has more influence as the official opposition with a rightleaning Liberal minority.
no1important said:
I honestly do not see major differences in implementing politics, no1. In 1980, Greece elected a socialist government (which by many at the time considered as far left as you can get in those days), their plans were great, on paper, social programs, getting our of NATO, yada yada yada. It all boils down to manipulating the programs to suit their real intentions. It's all propaganda. History is repleat with similar situations, only the people make a difference. But in Canada you believe in good government, I think you should rely more on what people can do to better their lives than waiting for politicians to keep promises.
I don't mind Layton getting Paul Martin by the short-and-curleys over the corporate tax issues.
Those that make/have the most money have it all stashed offshore to begin with and hardly have to pay taxes either. It's not going to break them to pay their fair share.
Middle-lower class that don't have offshore accounts are paying for our social services funded through tax money already. If the rich added in their two cents worth, we'd have better functioning services and something really worth bragging about.
All we have to do is somehow elect a gov't that will spend that tax money the way we likes it.
Those that make/have the most money have it all stashed offshore to begin with and hardly have to pay taxes either. It's not going to break them to pay their fair share.
Middle-lower class that don't have offshore accounts are paying for our social services funded through tax money already. If the rich added in their two cents worth, we'd have better functioning services and something really worth bragging about.
All we have to do is somehow elect a gov't that will spend that tax money the way we likes it.
Jo, when that day comes and you find a government that actually gives a flying f*ck about its citizens, I assure you, you will be a model for the rest of the world to follow.
Well therein lies the challange, that's what we're ALL trying to do. The trick is to get the wealthy to contribute the same percentage that average people do. It's not rocket science, the hard part is, is trying to get people in positions of responsibility that will not use the system or take advantage of positions of power.
I've heard that "Absolute power corrupts absolutley" but there's got to be some people with a certain integrity that can be better than that.
The part that sucks though that with the history mankind has had so far we haven't many examples of that type of "good" system that lasts longer than a generation.
I've heard that "Absolute power corrupts absolutley" but there's got to be some people with a certain integrity that can be better than that.
The part that sucks though that with the history mankind has had so far we haven't many examples of that type of "good" system that lasts longer than a generation.
The wealthy will never contribute to anybody except themselves, and when on occassion they do so (charity etc..), they do it for tax breaks and marketing purposes (although I admit there are exceptions).
When I was a young man (maybe not that far back :lol: ), I was an idealist and believed in this socialism crap, the fact of the matter is, socialism unless it is a worldwide system, fails, because it is simply forced to adhere to the dominating system at hand, capitalism (or whatever else you want to call it).
So it's my opinion that everyone needs to fend for themselves to a certain extent and have the government "oversee" if you will regulations, laws, basic services etc...
The government cannot give you all that an individual hopes for, it is simply not economically possible.
When I was a young man (maybe not that far back :lol: ), I was an idealist and believed in this socialism crap, the fact of the matter is, socialism unless it is a worldwide system, fails, because it is simply forced to adhere to the dominating system at hand, capitalism (or whatever else you want to call it).
So it's my opinion that everyone needs to fend for themselves to a certain extent and have the government "oversee" if you will regulations, laws, basic services etc...
The government cannot give you all that an individual hopes for, it is simply not economically possible.
RE: Who do you think shou
I don't think you understand democratic socialism very well, I think not.
I don't think you understand democratic socialism very well, I think not.