How do I join a political party in Canada? - Page 3

notyoueither · March 5, 2004, 04:27

Quote:

Originally posted by Tingkai

Normally, there would be a boost in support immediately after a leader is selected, but the rules for the Conservative race will cause major divisions.

Under the Conservative rules, each riding gets a X-number of vote regardless of how many party members are in the riding. So 10 Conservative party members in Outremount, Quebec have the same voting power as 10,000 Conservative members in High River Alberta.

Next add in the fact that Stronach controls the Quebec riding associations.

How do you think western Conservatives will react when they see Quebec hijacking their party?

I think you are overemphasizing the influence of Quebec. If she wins, great. I don't think she will, but it will take a hell of a lot more than Quebec for her to win.

Oncle Boris · March 5, 2004, 04:27

Quote:

Originally posted by Asher
Huh?

I don't know, prairie, field, cow manure, etc. Use your imagination!

Quote:

Your sentence commented on his leadership ability, not his party's competence.

I would think a competent leader would have far less scandals and foreign affair screwups that Chretien has had.

Politician skills are amoral. Being able to create relations is the landmark of a leader. I don't think it's possible to rise from nothing and become... well, still nothing, but a successful nothing.

BTW, Chretien's scandals are not any worse than other politicians had before. It's the same thing over again.

notyoueither · March 5, 2004, 04:29

Yeah, right. That is some dreamland you live in.

Asher · March 5, 2004, 04:29

Quote:

Originally posted by Oncle Boris
I don't know, prairie, field, cow manure, etc. Use your imagination!

I was confused by you saying I didn't have a field...

Quote:

BTW, Chretien's scandals are not any worse than other politicians had before. It's the same thing over again.

Is that how you define "extreme competence"?

Oncle Boris · March 5, 2004, 04:33

Quote:

Originally posted by notyoueither
Yeah, right. That is some dreamland you live in.

Yeah NYE, show some pity over my 3.30 AM humour.

Quote:

I was confused by you saying I didn't have a field...

The point of my joke was to say your 'field' was 'agricultural', because you live in the prairies, and there are stereotypes and all. Got it?

Quote:

Is that how you define "extreme competence"?

Realpolitik competence, that is. That's what I meant.

notyoueither · March 5, 2004, 04:35

No, it's no worse when a government causes $100 million out of $250 million devoted to a program to be dirtectly diverted into the pockets of their party's machine by fraudulant methods. Yep, we see these things every 5 years or so, that is why Canadians aren't too fussed about it this time.

Now, do you want to rearrange the connection of your head to your shoulders and make contact with reality again? This is the WORST scandal that has ever touched a government of Canada. It has embroiled the civil service, and has even managed to taint the RCMP for chrisssakes. That is why Martin, although a shoe in for 1 or 2 majorities as recently as 6 weeks ago is running scared, and the Ontario caucus managed to 'leak' a tape of their recent meeting that makes it impossible for him to proceed with an early election.

notyoueither · March 5, 2004, 04:37

Quote:

Originally posted by Oncle Boris

Yeah NYE, show some pity over my 3.30 AM humour.

Oh. OK. Sorry. Nevermind. Carry on.

Oncle Boris · March 5, 2004, 04:40

I think the scale of other scandals is similar. PET appointing 300+ persons, Mulroney's copters, the DHRC, etc.

There are probably many others we didn't hear about because the transparency laws were different at the time.

Spiffor · March 5, 2004, 04:44

I just love to see insomniacs talking about Canadian politics

DinoDoc · March 5, 2004, 04:46

It's how they try to cure themselves.

Oncle Boris · March 5, 2004, 04:47

@ Spiffor and DinoDoc.

And going to sleep, too.

Spiffor · March 5, 2004, 04:47

And I guess you too, DD

notyoueither · March 5, 2004, 04:53

Quote:

Originally posted by DinoDoc
What happened? They seemed so untouchable.

They have spent and continue to intend to spend up to a total of $2 billion on a computer program to store information on who owns which guns where in Canada. That is a phenomenal amount of money for a computer system to track the gun ownership of 30 million Canadians. That raised eyebrows, but it wasn't the scandal. It was just an example of gross mismanagement.

The sponsorship scandal is what has lifted the lid off of Canadian politics. The government earmarked $250 million to sponsor events in Quebec (and elsewhere, supposedly) that would raise the profile of the federal government. In essence, it was to get the Canadian flag to fly at major events. What happened is that ad agencies connected to the Liberals fraudulently billed the GoC and Crown corporations for $100 million dollars which was all paid by short-circuiting normal practices of accountability and oversight.

In short, the Liberal Party of Canada helped itself to $100 million taxpayer dollars.

The current regime is not tied directly to the deed as of yet. The ex-PM and his henchmen were all supposed to be retired and happy. Thing is that the axe is being swung by the current boy, martin, who seems genuinely po'ed that this can has been tied to his wagon. A couple of ex-ministers who landed soft have been sacked already. There are people heading to court and criminal convictions, most likely. It will be very ammusing to watch and see if Chretien can avoid that fate. he seems in it up to his neck. He must rely on loyalty, so we shall see if he was such a good leader to have earned it.

molly bloom · March 5, 2004, 05:08

Quote:

Originally posted by Asher

So why didn't Nash and Turing? Babbage?

Are they not "true scientists"?

Are you suggesting that Alan Turing didn't have an interest in philosophy?

If so, you've lost the plot.

Ben Kenobi · March 5, 2004, 05:23

Quote:

Latest polls show the Liberals have 42% support across the country. The Conservatives, even with the publicity boost of their leadership "election" and the sponsorship corruption, are at 32%.

Dude.

36% and 28% respectively.

Big diff between 36% and 42%.

We're in minority government territory, while the Conservatives are already 3% higher than the Alliance polled last election, without a leader, and without hammering out policy.

Ben Kenobi · March 5, 2004, 05:26

Quote:

They'll re-form the Reform.

Quebec is irrelevant to the party, unless their numbers start picking up from 5%.

Although, they have improved 150%, the largest percentage climb in any province.

Tingkai · March 5, 2004, 06:42

Quote:

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
Dude.

36% and 28% respectively.

Big diff between 36% and 42%.

Dude, you're behind the times. Your numbers are from a 20 Feb poll.

An Ekos 28 Feb poll gives Libs 42%, Conservative 32%, NDP 15% and BQ 9%.
See:
http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/Con...=1077923413065

The Liberals are up to their usual old tricks and Martin is distancing himself from the scandal. He looked decisive with his firing of Pelletier.

The Liberals are rebounding and outpacing the Conservatives.

Tingkai · March 5, 2004, 09:24

And as for brainless Belinda vs Agathon, Agathon wins hands down. I mean Stronach dropped out of York University. Even I was able to complete a degree there.

Urban Ranger · March 5, 2004, 10:48

[threadjack]
I heard that a summer intern from York working at HSBC did a royal job to their computer systems. It was said that HSBC would never hire any York grads from then on.
[/threadjack]

Agathon · March 5, 2004, 11:14

Stronach is brainless. All you have to do to know that is listen to her talk. Both Martin and Layton would chew her up in a debate (but they would be be more subtle, since neither wants to pick on a girl).

Little girl gets given daddy's company and can run to him for advice when she wants.

Even if she was a good businessperson, that does not a good politician make. It's apples and oranges.

And it doesn't matter anyway, the Liberals will win. You Albertans make me laugh. You are irrelevant in Canadian politics. Ontario and Quebec run things and, you may not like it, but that's the way it is. The Liberals will win - I don't like them - but they will win, simply because there is no credible alternative. The NDP has a better chance of doing well in the election than the tories.

Molly is right about Turing BTW.

Agathon · March 5, 2004, 11:15

Quote:

Originally posted by Urban Ranger
[threadjack]
I heard that a summer intern from York working at HSBC did a royal job to their computer systems. It was said that HSBC would never hire any York grads from then on.
[/threadjack]

At U of T we sell T shirts that say, "Friends don't let Friends go to York".

It's a dump.

Tingkai · March 5, 2004, 13:08

Quote:

Originally posted by Agathon

At U of T we sell T shirts that say, "Friends don't let Friends go to York".

It's a dump.

Yeah, but it used to be so bad it was good. Much more interesting than a place like, say, Western or even U of T.

chequita guevara · March 5, 2004, 15:02

VOTE NDP!

Asher · March 5, 2004, 15:06

Quote:

Originally posted by molly bloom
Are you suggesting that Alan Turing didn't have an interest in philosophy?

If so, you've lost the plot.

Turing was notorious for separating himself from Philosophers, consistently insisting that he was a mathematician and that was all. Since then, philosophers have branded him as a philosopher...

Computing Machinery and Intelligence is cited a lot in modern philosophy, but he never considered himself a philosopher whatsoever.

It's another example of how scientists (and mathematicians) do not need "dedicated" philosophers, because it's something that anyone can do. It is a philosophy, afterall...

notyoueither · March 5, 2004, 15:15

Quote:

Originally posted by Agathon
And it doesn't matter anyway, the Liberals will win. You Albertans make me laugh. You are irrelevant in Canadian politics. Ontario and Quebec run things and, you may not like it, but that's the way it is. The Liberals will win - I don't like them - but they will win, simply because there is no credible alternative. The NDP has a better chance of doing well in the election than the tories.

You should have another hit of whatever you're taking. It must be good stuff.

Ben Kenobi · March 5, 2004, 15:16

Quote:

In a telling statistic, almost 40 per cent of those surveyed this week by EKOS said they were "so disturbed with ethics and accountability" issues raised by the scandal that they "simply won't vote for the Liberals" in the next election.

Conservatives at 32% is the highest they have polled since 92.

However:

Quote:

Looking across the country, the Liberals hold the lead in British Columbia, with 44 per cent support vs. 27 per cent for the Conservatives. But in Alberta, the Conservatives hold a strong lead, with 63 per cent support.

WTF?

I question those results for BC.

molly bloom · March 5, 2004, 15:17

Quote:

Originally posted by Asher

Turing was notorious for separating himself from Philosophers, consistently insisting that he was a mathematician and that was all. Since then, philosophers have branded him as a philosopher...

Computing Machinery and Intelligence is cited a lot in modern philosophy, but he never considered himself a philosopher whatsoever.

It's another example of how scientists (and mathematicians) do not need "dedicated" philosophers, because it's something that anyone can do. It is a philosophy, afterall...

All of which is irrelevant- the question is, did he have an interest in philosophy, not was he a philosopher-

http://www.turing.org.uk/philosophy/

to which the answer is, yes.

So, pick up the plot any time you like.

Ben Kenobi · March 5, 2004, 15:18

Quote:

The NDP has a better chance of doing well in the election than the tories.

Wanna bet on that?

Asher · March 5, 2004, 15:24

Quote:

Originally posted by molly bloom
All of which is irrelevant- the question is, did he have an interest in philosophy, not was he a philosopher-

http://www.turing.org.uk/philosophy/

to which the answer is, yes.

So, pick up the plot any time you like.

That page doesn't say anything about Turing's interest in philosophy.

molly bloom · March 5, 2004, 15:35

Quote:

Originally posted by Asher

That page doesn't say anything about Turing's interest in philosophy.

Oh.

Weren't the links working?

'His central contribution to science and PHILOSOPHY came through his treating the subject of SYMBOLIC LOGIC as a new branch of applied mathematics, giving it a physical and engineering content. Unwilling or unable to remain within any standard role or department of thought, Alan Turing continued a life full of incongruity. Though a shy, boyish, man, he had a pivotal role in world history through his role in Second World War cryptology. Though the founder of the dominant technology of the twentieth century, he variously impressed, charmed or disturbed people with his unworldly innocence and his dislike of moral or intellectual compromise.'

from one of them.