EPTCanadian Politics Mega-thread - Page 40
| Forum Index > General Forum |
Although this thread does not function under the same strict guidelines as the USPMT, it is still a general practice on TL to provide a source with an explanation on why it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion. Failure to do so will result in a mod action. | ||
|
OtherWorld
France17333 Posts
| ||
|
Antyee
Hungary1011 Posts
On February 01 2017 02:10 OtherWorld wrote: Well, funny, a white man with a clear history of radicalization kills Muslims and we don't hear the comments usually applied to Muslim terrorists. We don't hear anyone saying we should preventively jail far-right extremists, or that we should throw them out. We don't criminalize non-Muslims who aren't explicitely showing how very sad they are of having lost 6 of their fellow citizens. The Internet is mostly silent, just like the supposedly "corrupt to the PC crowd" medias. Where are you now, ayatollahs of the "Muslims are barbarians" stance ? Try reddit. It's full of it. | ||
|
OtherWorld
France17333 Posts
I'm unfamiliar with reddit, but the most "extreme" comment I found over three threads of r/worldnews was this. This was the only comment of this kind. + Show Spoiler + So: Dylann Roof - radicalized white racist entered a place of worship and killed innocents. Found evidence of him in specific online communities. Alexandre Bissonnette - radicalized white racist who entered a place of worship and killed innocents. Found evidence of him in specific online communities. Somebody better be taking a serious fucking look at this. Enough has to be enough. However, yes, it's full of comments mocking alt-righters for being trigerred into thinking the terrorists were Muslims, or full of comments saying the medias were irresponsible to release the names. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States24314 Posts
On February 01 2017 02:36 OtherWorld wrote: I'm unfamiliar with reddit, but the most "extreme" comment I found over three threads of r/worldnews was this. This was the only comment of this kind. + Show Spoiler + So: Dylann Roof - radicalized white racist entered a place of worship and killed innocents. Found evidence of him in specific online communities. Alexandre Bissonnette - radicalized white racist who entered a place of worship and killed innocents. Found evidence of him in specific online communities. Somebody better be taking a serious fucking look at this. Enough has to be enough. However, yes, it's full of comments mocking alt-righters for being trigerred into thinking the terrorists were Muslims, or full of comments saying the medias were irresponsible to release the names. White mass murderers are always "lone wolves". It never has anything to do with the people they listen to or the things they repeat. Say "Allahu Akbar" before you try to kill people and suddenly you're tied to every terrorist group, doesn't matter if their on opposing sides. But say you want to start a race war/genocide/or that everything is the fault of Muslims beforehand, and you came up with that on your own. | ||
|
TheDwf
France19747 Posts
On February 01 2017 02:10 OtherWorld wrote: Well, funny, a white man with a clear history of radicalization kills Muslims and we don't hear the comments usually applied to Muslim terrorists. We don't hear anyone saying we should preventively jail far-right extremists, or that we should throw them out. We don't criminalize non-Muslims who aren't explicitely showing how very sad they are of having lost 6 of their fellow citizens. The Internet is mostly silent, just like the supposedly "corrupt to the PC crowd" medias. Where are you now, ayatollahs of the "Muslims are barbarians" stance ? On February 01 2017 07:41 GreenHorizons wrote: White mass murderers are always "lone wolves". It never has anything to do with the people they listen to or the things they repeat. Say "Allahu Akbar" before you try to kill people and suddenly you're tied to every terrorist group, doesn't matter if their on opposing sides. But say you want to start a race war/genocide/or that everything is the fault of Muslims beforehand, and you came up with that on your own. Here is the notice used in mainstream medias to determine how to call the perpetrator: link | ||
|
Kevin_Sorbo
Canada3217 Posts
Having to explain for the rest of your life that you are not ''the racist one'' will be rough. | ||
|
Blisse
Canada3710 Posts
Trudeau abandons pledge on electoral reform Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is abandoning his long-held promise to change the way Canadians vote in federal elections — an about-face his opposition rivals angrily characterized Wednesday as a cynical betrayal of trust. In a mandate letter for newly appointed Democratic Institutions Minister Karina Gould, Trudeau makes it clear that electoral reform — once top of mind for the Liberal government — is no longer on the agenda. “Changing the electoral system will not be in your mandate,” the prime minister writes in the letter, released Wednesday. A variety of consultations across the country have shown that Canadians are not clamouring for a change in the way they choose their federal government, the letter continues. It also rules out the possibility of a national referendum. “A clear preference for a new electoral system, let alone a consensus, has not emerged,” Trudeau writes. “Furthermore, without a clear preference or a clear question, a referendum would not be in Canada’s interest.” Booooooo I'm not even sure how much I care about this or what I'm angry about but it sounds bad | ||
|
Fprime
Canada64 Posts
This is the worst news to come out of the government since C-51. | ||
|
WolfintheSheep
Canada14127 Posts
A referendum with 4-5 options will not get any clear majority and would be a giant waste of money. I would've liked an electoral reform, but it was obvious that we would not get a clear decision on what it would be, whether it was from the government or from the voting population. | ||
|
LightSpectra
United States3135 Posts
| ||
|
WolfintheSheep
Canada14127 Posts
On February 10 2017 05:19 LightSpectra wrote: Do the Liberals hate the NDP more than they hate Conservatives? If not, isn't a representational ballot in their best interests? Not really. Strictly proportional elections would, more than likely, lead to a near-constant Liberal minority government. Not exactly ideal in most circumstances, and of course the preference for the Liberals is to still get majority power. So they would really want a somewhat representational but weighted election system that pulls seats from Conservatives (and Bloc), but doesn't give too much to NDP or Greens. But, of course, deliberately changing the election system to benefit your party alone is also political suicide. | ||
|
LightSpectra
United States3135 Posts
| ||
|
WolfintheSheep
Canada14127 Posts
On February 10 2017 23:26 LightSpectra wrote: I'm not Canadian, I'm just observing, but my thought was that the center-left/left (Libs, NDP, Green) probably lose a lot of seats because their vote is split, whereas the Conservatives are united. So one would think that it would be in the best interest of the Libs to switch to something like instant-runoff, since they're going to lose less to the NDP/Greens due to not being the #1, than to the Conservatives due to the vote being split. Sort of, but the other issue is that the Liberals still enjoy quite a few majority governments despite not having majority in popular votes, as seen here. In general Conservatives would see less seats and would probably have a weak minority government when they do win, but the same would be true of the Liberals. | ||
|
JimmyJRaynor
Canada17791 Posts
i don't want just 2 static parties for 100 years like the US does. Canada needs a labour party and the NDP does a good job of fulfilling that need. The Liberals will never be a true labour party. | ||
|
Dark_Chill
Canada3353 Posts
| ||
|
Krikkitone
United States1451 Posts
On February 11 2017 01:11 JimmyJRaynor wrote: the Green Party is a non-factor. i think 3 parties is ideal. i don't want just 2 static parties for 100 years like the US does. Canada needs a labour party and the NDP does a good job of fulfilling that need. The Liberals will never be a true labour party. To be fair, the US doesn't have 2 static Parties.... Wilson (D) was elected on keeping us out of the outside world's problems so was Trump (R) 100 years later There are positions that move back and forth. A wide variety of parties would have benefits... but honestly the 2 parties in the US are vast coalitions made up of multiple unorganized "parties" that will switch from side to side if their needs aren't being met. And while the electoral system probably could be better, there wouldn't be a clear way to get support (the referendum question) | ||
|
LightSpectra
United States3135 Posts
On February 15 2017 03:50 Krikkitone wrote: To be fair, the US doesn't have 2 static Parties.... Wilson (D) was elected on keeping us out of the outside world's problems so was Trump (R) 100 years later There are positions that move back and forth. A wide variety of parties would have benefits... but honestly the 2 parties in the US are vast coalitions made up of multiple unorganized "parties" that will switch from side to side if their needs aren't being met. And while the electoral system probably could be better, there wouldn't be a clear way to get support (the referendum question) I couldn't disagree more with this really. I think it's completely off. While it's true that the ideologies of the D and R parties have shifted over the past 150 years, at each individual election they are usually pretty static and coherent on economic, social, and foreign policies. Also I really don't think it's true either that there are sub-parties that frequently shift sides, actually in fact what has been happening is that a lot of "dissenter" factions (like the pro-life Democrats or the log cabin Republicans) mostly just die out and then their politicians get replaced by mainliners. I've been researching a lot about partisan politics lately, I've been trying to find out why it's the case that: a] many democratic countries have a huge amount of viable parties to vote for (e.g. Ireland, Israel, Austria, Switzerland, Mexico, Italy), and the bigger parties are usually forced into coalitions; b] many countries are essentially bipartisan but the 'third parties' still have some influence in the legislature (e.g. Germany, U.K. until the collapse of the LibDems, Canada, France). (And then you have the USA, which uniquely is a hardened bipartisan system where everybody outside of the D and R are nonexistent at the federal level.) The most obvious answer is what kind of ballots are used, whether first-past-the-post or ranked voting. It seems like the countries in category [a] usually have proportional representation, whereas [b] have "first-past-the-post" elections. I don't think there's any doubt that being in [a] is healthier for democracy since you don't have to vote for an inferior candidate/party because the one you think is best is polling badly, and you fear 'wasting' your vote. Unfortunately getting from [b] to [a] is impossible without some kind of revolution, since there's no way the ruling parties are going to give up their power in favor of smaller parties--although earlier I was suggesting it might be in the Canadian Liberal Party's best interest to do so, considering the left are fractured between the Libs/NDP and the right are united. | ||
|
JimmyJRaynor
Canada17791 Posts
 for a while Harper was forced to run the country off of opinion polls the way Chretien did because he had such a feeble minority government. so that was cool. i wish the NDP would focus on their original core common founding pillars rather than dying on a hill for free sex change operations and gender neutral bathrooms.. In general, i prefer Canada's parties to focus more on the economy than they do now. | ||
|
Fprime
Canada64 Posts
On February 16 2017 00:25 JimmyJRaynor wrote: i like how Canada's federal parties work right now. we have the right wing PCs, the left wing NDP and the center party that won't hesitate to run the country off of opinion polls.. the liberals The PC (Progressive Conservative) party is long dead. It died with Joe Clark, and it died for a gas tax that was fiscally sensible. The Conservative Party of Canada is the rebranded Reform Party of Preston Manning, with a more appealing look and colour (green is a terrible colour for a conservative party). There's nothing "progressive" about the CPC. | ||
Falling
Canada11603 Posts
| ||
| ||
