Re: RE: Why would anybody support the Liberals?
And the Tories don't? Where were you in the 1980s?
Triple_R said:
And the Tories don't? Where were you in the 1980s?
Why would anybody support the Liberals?
- Thread starter Triple_R
- Start date
Bull
The most powerful wing is the wing that elects the greatest number of MPs. I suggest the most powerful wing would be the Ontario wing, followed by the Maritimes.
Dingwall had a contract with the federal government just like any federal employee. He was arguing that he was entitled to receive that remuneration that he was entitled to. It does not suggest that he was corrupt.
Keep trying though.
Québec Wing
The wing of the Liberal Party of Canada in the Province of Québec, having fewer Members of Parliament in the House of Commons than many other Provinces and areas, does not have a major degree of strength in the party.
One must keep in mind that, despite the out-of-context quotes of the Hon. Justice Gomery's first report cited by the Conservative Party of Canada, he exonerated the Rt. Hon. Paul Martin, and concluded that the problem was not one of the current caucus of the Government of Canada and, rather, was exclusive to the era of the Rt. Hon. Jean Chrétien.
The wing of the Liberal Party of Canada in the Province of Québec, having fewer Members of Parliament in the House of Commons than many other Provinces and areas, does not have a major degree of strength in the party.
One must keep in mind that, despite the out-of-context quotes of the Hon. Justice Gomery's first report cited by the Conservative Party of Canada, he exonerated the Rt. Hon. Paul Martin, and concluded that the problem was not one of the current caucus of the Government of Canada and, rather, was exclusive to the era of the Rt. Hon. Jean Chrétien.
I'm from Quebec city and support the Bloc Québecois. However, I voted for the NDP... (I voted during the Xmas holidays to vote in my home town...) My reasoning is that the Bloc is already strong enough in Quebec and that I might as well give my support to a true Canadian party that I also support.
I am hoping for a Conservative minority government with the NDP and the Bloc as strong opposition.
I hope the Liberals go down. Way down. If the price to pay for a good economy is corruption I am not interested.
I am hoping for a Conservative minority government with the NDP and the Bloc as strong opposition.
I hope the Liberals go down. Way down. If the price to pay for a good economy is corruption I am not interested.
Re: RE: Why would anybody support the Liberals?
I was getting high with my friends in the 80s, and then isn't now. Besides it isn't even the same party anymore, and it isn't dominated by the same geo-politics as it was.
It is time for the liberals to be taught a lesson. If they are truly the natural party of Canada, then they need to be reminded they are that because of Canadians, not because of them. They abused their power and made a whole province feel like their votes are worth a few contracts and some shady deals; a conduit for corruption. Screw em.
Lets also remember these Liberals are some 30 million in debt, so who knows what the culture of entitlement will bring us in the future....
Dexter Sinister said:
I was getting high with my friends in the 80s, and then isn't now. Besides it isn't even the same party anymore, and it isn't dominated by the same geo-politics as it was.
It is time for the liberals to be taught a lesson. If they are truly the natural party of Canada, then they need to be reminded they are that because of Canadians, not because of them. They abused their power and made a whole province feel like their votes are worth a few contracts and some shady deals; a conduit for corruption. Screw em.
Lets also remember these Liberals are some 30 million in debt, so who knows what the culture of entitlement will bring us in the future....
I posted this in another thread, so I'll just copy and paste it here since it appears to be more relevant.
My premise of voting has always been based on the theory that democracy concedes the role of politicians to be, the guardians of public interest. Has Paul Martin exhibited selflessly to Canadians that he is a guardian?
My premise of voting has always been based on the theory that democracy concedes the role of politicians to be, the guardians of public interest. Has Paul Martin exhibited selflessly to Canadians that he is a guardian?
#juan said:
I strongly disagree. The Prime Minister has much more power than that of 10 backbenchers, or even 2 cabinet ministers, combined. If the Prime Minister hails from Quebec, that gives the Quebec wing of his party substantial power.
Also, you have to keep in mind that during the Chretien years, the Liberals were the only non-seperatist party to win a significant number of seats in Quebec. The PCs, and the NDP, were both fairly non-factors.
Hence, the Liberals had much more invested in Quebec than any of the other truly national parties did, and Quebec had much more invested in the Liberals than they had with any of the other truly national parties. This strengthens the Quebec wing of the Liberal party substantially. It is a source for strength for the Liberals that sets them apart from the other national parties.
Beyond that, I would argue that Paul Martin was the heir apparent to Jean Chretien because, in part, he was much more fluent in French than most/all of his opposition at the time were. He's also much closer to Quebec than any of his opposition at the time were. I would say that it's safe to say that the Quebec wing of the Liberal Party wanted him over people like John Manley, Sheila Copps, and Brian Tobin.
The phrasing of Dingwall's statement was stupid, and politically foolish, and reflective of the mindset of the Liberals. I already admit that he was technically correct, but there were far better ways for him to make his point. The fact that he made his point the way he did is somewhat telling, in my view. You yourself put it much better than he did.