IT'S OUR TURN!!!! We go to the polls October 14...RESULTS #25

[Catty1]

Hmmm...maybe Canada should take over the US so you can have the benefits?



BTW - Gilles Duceppe, leader of the Bloc Quebecois (pronounce the c's like k's and you'll be close enough) leads a party that fields candidates in Quebec ONLY. Don't ask me how we got federal representation of one province...makes my head hurt!

STILL want our system?

[Catty1]

Ohhhhhh.....Canada.....I dunno....

K. 5 political parties.
The leaders' debates are coming up.
General rule is that each party must have one seat in Parliament.

Each one does. The Green Party has one that arrived just before the election was called...he wasn't elected, exactly - I think he traded with a Liberal candidate? But anyway, it was fair, and there we are.

SO

The major TV networks - Global, CBC, CTV and another one that eludes me - they decide that Elizabeth May, leader of the Green Party (see photos above) cannot participate in the leaders' debate. Three of the other leaders opposed it (what were THEY scared of? )

Excuse me. As I mentioned above, the Parti Quebecois has voters that are only in Quebec. Yet they form part of the Federal Government.

YET - The GREEN Party has candidates all over Canada, and had a great increase in numbers in the last election.

She's taking them to court! GO LIZ!

This is just SILLY - the old boys' club is alive and well.

[phesina]

I've only got the vaguest idea of how the Parliamentary system works, so this will be a good learning opportunity. Thanks, Candace!

Okay, now, so this time around there are five political parties and five candidates. So you can vote for one of the five? And whichever one (or whichever party?) gets the most votes wins, and that party's candidate becomes the Prime Minister?

So how often does the winner have an actual majority? Or how often do the votes split more or less evenly among all the candidates running? For example, say, candidate (1) got 21% of the votes, (2), (3), and (4) each got 20%, and candidate (5) got 19%... Candidate (1) becomes Prime Minister? How easy is it then for any particular side to get anything done?

And how many other candidates are running in the same election? Are they elected from various districts throughout each province, sort of like for our House of Representatives?

Stephen Harper looks ..the word that immediately came to mind was "undead," in that photograph of him. Or like a statue on which the eyes have no distinguishing features so they just look empty and flat space framed by their lids.

Pat

[sparks19]

WOOT harper LOL... he is the ONLY one who has actually lowered sales tax (even if only a little in ONtario.... 15% down to 14% and supposed to be another % in the next few years) like he said he would. I don't live there anymore but for me the OUTRAGEOUS sales tax was enough for me

the taxes are unreal.

What ever you do... don't let the Bloc in. Just let them seperate... WITHOUT access to our money.

[Grace]

Some of you seem to disapprove of Stephen Harper. I have no idea what he is as a leader - but he wins me over with one facet of his life. He loves cats. In fact, he and his wife have fostered cats - since he became PM. They even adopted one - an orange tabby named "Cheddar."

[Catty1]

Okay, Pat and everyone:

We have over 300 ridings in Canada. Ridings are like electoral districts.

Each party has (or hopes they have) candidates in each riding. Each of the leaders has their own riding as well.

We don't vote for the leaders (unless they are the candidate in our riding).

To avoid confusion:

There are 5 parties.

They have a candidate in each riding (except the Bloc), so each party has 300 candidates each, one in each riding. This means a candidate from each party is running in an individual riding - each riding has 5 candidates.

So, for example, if the Liberals have 200 of their candidates elected (if they win their ridings), then the Liberal leader becomes the Prime Minister of Canada, because his party won the most ridings.

Each of those ridings counts for a voting seat in Parliament.

Clear like mud?
************************************************** *********************
Speaking just for myself, Harper and the Mrs would be a powerful force in changing lives for pets in Canada.

However, Harper was a Reformer (US friends - extreme right) originally - and a bribe of 2% reduction in the GST is not enough to make me vote for him. It's the PROVINCIAL governments that lower provincial sales tax, not Ottawa.

He broke his own party's law - a federal government law - to have this election. If you want to see real control and evil from Mr Deadeyes, just give the Conservatives a majority.

On the BRIGHT side, Canadians got angry enough that they flooded the other leaders' websites with emails, and pestered the TV networks - and now Harper and Layton (NDP - Major left) have backed off and Elizabeth May will be in the televised leaders' debates! YAY CANADA!

We do have our non-apathetic moments.

[Catty1]

So why did Harper break the fixed-election law and call one now?

1. To avoid any fallout from the US Election that might hurt him or influence voter decision (the same in my books!)
2. To avoid flack before we had our 100th fatality in Afghanistan(I know, US friend, Iraq is hell and this doesn't begin to compare, even with the US having 10 times the population of Canada. Smaller country means the deaths feel like losing family...and somehow, when you can count the individual numbers, it makes it seem worse. Enough to scare Harper into an election).
3. Economic reports from the last quarter show Canada is a whisker away from a recession. Harper didn't want to get blamed for that.

Interesting that he called this "snap" election...and then it was found out that he has been doing election fundraising for the past three months. In my own town, the Conservative election signs were out the VERY NEXT DAY after the election was announced. Sorry, this is just a bit fishy...

Some blog posts from cbc.ca:

CANADIANS SHOULD NOT TRUST HARPER!!!!!

A majority government for Stephen Harper would be one of the most negative political events in Canadian history

Even without a majority, he has cut;
funding for minorities
funding for literacy
funding to students
volunteers
museums
arts and culture groups across the CANADA

his government even cut funding to women's groups and … actually went so far as to remove the federal mandate to advance equality for women

$300 million is a lot of money to waste to come to another Conservative minority. Couldn't he take that cash and improve the economic situations for THOUSANDS OF CANADIANS ??

HE IS AND WILL ALWAYS BE "THE GEORGE BUSH OF THE NORTH"

The government has accomplished nothing under Harper. Whenever these so-called conservatives talk about their accomplishments they always start with the GST cut......you know, the one where us ordinary folks save about 4 cents on a cup of coffee. Then there's the $100 a month child care benefit. Would be better to target that money toward the poorest families, but I guess that wouldn't buy them enough votes. Otherwise it's money well spent I'm sure.

Harper says he's tough on crime, but at the same time insists on being soft on guns. Yeah, he's tough. So tough that he condones the death penalty, unfair trials, and torture in foreign jails. And the economy? Like I say, he's eroded our fiscal capacity with all the bitter candies to the point that we've been flirting with deficits. Considering also their disrespect for parliament, the senate, committees, the charter of rights, and the independence of the judiciary, the multiple scandals, the broken promises on income trusts, fixed election dates and the Atlantic Accord, or extending the mission in Kandahar despite troop and equipment shortages, we can't afford having this party in power any longer. Let's not forget their joke of an environmetal policy where they would rather follow developing coutries rather than take the lead.

Canada deserves better than Harper.

[phesina]

Okay, from all I have heard about Harper, he is another Bush clone in the making and is VERY bad news. More later on him and his efforts to run (ruin?) Canada.

But first let's get on to the REALLY important issue:

How will animals (and in particular, cats) fare under his leadership?

First, I read this:

Some of you seem to disapprove of Stephen Harper. I have no idea what he is as a leader - but he wins me over with one facet of his life. He loves cats. In fact, he and his wife have fostered cats - since he became PM. They even adopted one - an orange tabby named "Cheddar."

Good on him!

Then this:

Speaking just for myself, Harper and the Mrs would be a powerful force in changing lives for pets in Canada.

In what respect would the Harpers be a powerful force in changing lives for pets in Canada.. for the better or the worse? Overall, I mean.

And..

Speaking of politicians and their feelings on cats, back to the ongoing fun-fest in the good ol' U S of A:

From NY Times columnist Paul Krugman's blog "The Conscience of a Liberal":
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/200...=5070&emc=eta1

Cats against Palin

'We already had Dogs Against Romney. Now we need Cats Against Palin:

'When asked to reveal something about Palin that no one knows, one woman offered, “She doesn’t care for cats very much,” and another chimed in, “Oh, yes, she’s afraid of my cat.”'

And yes, the attached Cheezburger picture IS part of the blog piece!