posted by Overheard at Western at 10:18 AM
That's a horrible reason to vote for a party.
People like this should be banned from voting
i think i want to kill myself... no wait..i want to kill this person! gah!!
Okay so maybe I missed the boat on this one, but what the hell does upwardly mobile mean?!
It means you're moving up. Here, probably moving up economically, socially, etc. Maybe she's studying business or some other soul-sucking subject.
In that case they might as well vote NDP and start re-investing into the communities that raised them. NDP...a positive choice.
haha good one 3:57!Oh, you were serious.
The Dark Lord Harper and his evil lackies will soon form an Bush-asskissing government that will ban our civil liberties and destroy democratic government! Oh noes!!!11!!
WOW. Regardless of who you vote for, we are in serious trouble if this is how much thought goes into it....
It continues to astound me that Bush got elected...TWICE...and Harper's leading in the polls, by a fair amount. Honestly, what the hell is wrong with people.
Muffin! Perhaps you didn't notice, but Martin is defeating himself by his incompetence and corruption. Can anyone who is voting Liberal here show me how such a criminally inclined party can be so just? Or for that matter, can anyone prove that Harper is evil? If not, please do us all a favour and sleep in on voting day!
I can't say I like the CPC, but the Liberals have become complacent and corrupt. They need to get the boot for a few years to clean up their act.Anyone here who doesn't like the Conservatives should vote NDP or Green based on principle (what I plan to do). Stategic voting is stupid... the Conservatives WILL get into power on the 23rd, voting Liberal won't stop them and only means you're whoring your vote out to a kleptocratic party.
That kind of talking is what got the Americans into trouble. While we 'boot out' the Liberals to teach them a lesson Harper's conservatives will be let loose on our social services. There aren't many options either way, but after having living in the US for 5 years I have really come to value the things that the Liberals and NDP are about. Voting for change just for the sake of change is irresponsible...why not vote based upon your feelings about a party's policies?
^ Because voting solely for policies is just as irresponsible as voting just for the sake of change. I agree the looking at policies is important, but so is looking at a party's track record. The fact is, the federal Liberals have become complacent, if not full-out corrupt. They stole millions of dollars worth of our money... what will it take before voters decide enough is enough (well, based on the most recent polls, it would seem the electorate has finally decided they have had enough).As for the Conservatives butchering what's left of the welfare state... I wouldn't worry about it. Public opinion will keep them in line. Harper knows if he fucks up this government, then voters will instantly switch back to the Liberals for another decade. He won't be making any dramatic, sweeping cuts or changes this time around.Seriously, if you hate the Conservatives, vote NDP or Green. Both of those parties are solid, left-of-centre, socially progressive parties. This isn't a two party system - there actually are alternatives to voting either CPC or Liberal. Most students hate the Conservatives, which is good... don't vote for them. But voting Liberal is like saying "hey, I'm still down with the campaign-promise-breaking and sure, go ahead - steal some more of my money, please."
Don't vote Green they want to raise taxes on Alcohol, so don't encourage them.
Who ever votes Conservative is a dummy. Harper is a right-wing creep--just remember, part of the conservative party is comprised of former ALLIANCE members! He may be promoting an air of change, but I'm convinced he's a wolf in sheep's clothing. Say good bye to all of our civil liberites if he gets in. Also, don't forget the bloody havoc Mr. Mulroney and Mr. Harris wreaked before the Liberals tooks things over (cuts, cuts, cuts).
Wow 12:45/6, we should get you a job at the Globe and Mail stat! That arguement blew me away with its amazing diction (that means "choice of words" by the way) and expressions. I presume that one who votes Liberal isn't a "dummy" because they have the foresight to look past the money they stole from us, how they screwed over seniors this last fall and Martin's wishes to tear apart the Charter. Apparently Alliance members are somehow Nazis according to your expert opinion, although I'd be interested to see how you would argue that one and defend the liable you are very close to commiting. By the way, if by "civil liberties" you intend to ignore the Harper plan to add a right to property in the Charter in favour of wanting to continue your wild bar-hopping adventures, I'm sure that Western's best will be able continue to do their world renound given that we have 10 premiers who would be able to "bar" such a change.Finally, you bemoan "cuts, cuts, cuts" because I assume you know everything about the world from your little love nest in London? I guess daddy's money flows freely, so why not the government's? I suppose I cannot begin to teach you about the merits of saving, and restraint so I won't. Speakinf of restraint, it IS Monday, so maybe keep it to 10 beers a the bar tonight!
In reference to the comment above: Mulroney lead the nation through some extremely difficult times, and left office with one of the highest approval ratings in history - it was only Kim Campbell's blundering that led to the Liberal victory. And as for Mike Harris, the reason he had to make cuts was to compensate for the outrageous defecits run by the Rae government. The restructuring was impossible to avoid, and many of the changes were, undeniably, for the better. The only reason everyone has such a negative view of Harris is that he was such a poor leader and had an extremely combative personality. Had the changes been implemented properly, and Harris not gone out of his way to piss of the unions - teachers, nurses, etc - everyone would be praising him right now.Harper and the Conservatives shouldn't be judged based on what someone else did more than a decade ago, they should be judged based on their current platform. If you examine their proposed policies you'll see very few cuts. Sure some spending will be shifted - they have different priorities than the Liberals - but they won't make cuts just for the sake of making them.Finally, I have trouble understanding all of Harper = Bush analogies. Sure the CPC is the most right wing party in Canada, but a lot of people would argue their views are still left of both the Republicans and the Democrats. I think a lot of people have just been brainwashed to believe anything even moderately right wing is evil. If your values are truly leftist then that's fine - go ahead and support the NDP - but dont just throw out generalities like 'He's a right wing creep' and 'He'll steal our civil liberties' without supporting your arguement with something specific that he's done or proposed.That's my two cents.. regardless, make sure you get out and vote no matter who you support.
^ Agreed. The "evil Conservative boogeyman" thing gets a little old.I don't like Harper and won't be voting CPC, but some people seem to think the Conservative party is the incarnation of pure evil.
1:33. You're pathetic. Your ad hominem (make sure to take the time to look this up, alright?) argument is as bad as mine.Your first mistake was assuming that I'm another one of those rich little Western undergrads whose father (or mother) pays for everything. Actually, my father makes just about as much money as someone who works full time at McDonald's (i.e. he nor my mother have never been in a position to support financially me in any way; I had to support myself through undergrad and grad school)-- so please DO NOT shove your haughty bullshit down my throat.Your second mistake was assuming that I drink and go to bars frequently. Nice one. Actually, I found this hilarious. I'm actually straight-edge, twirp. Do you know what this means? You Western Law students actually make me laugh...
Now kids, get along....There are morons who support every party. Stupidity isn't politcally biased.Really, there are 2 questions everyone should ask before voting:1. Which party's platform best reflects my views?This means you should actually READ the platform, rather than relying on generalities (i.e. "The conservatives will cut everything")2. Can I trust these people to do what they say?This requires that you actually look at the record, rather than just saying, for example: "The Liberals have been corrupt".Reasonable people can disagree on these issues and calling Conservatives "right wing creeps" or Liberals "lying socialist musheads" (for example) doesn't get us anywhere.The point isn't WHO you vote for, but how much thought goes into your vote.
Well said, 4:18. :-D
2:32pm: I would hope that an actual law student would know that it's spelled "libel", not "liable".
The 'Haper = Bush' argument actually DOES have some merit to it and there's documented proof:http://rabble.ca/redirect.php3?ID=6947 http://www.walrusmagazine.com/article.pl?sid=05/05/09/2119243
Oh Dear God No!!!!!You mean we might elect a leader that actually wants to GET ALONG with the country responsible for 85% of our trade? SHOCKING!!!!!I'm not saying we shouldn't disagree with the U.S. on principle where appropriate, but the "anti-americanism for it's own sake" trend in Canadian politics is getting tiresome.PSboth of the sources you've cited are known for their unapologetic left-wing bias.....there's nothing wrong with that, but i question their objectivity.
In regards to the post made at 8:19: Both of those stories have amazingly over the top left wing biases. None the less their content deserves to be commented on. After reading the transcript of Harper's speech it seems to me that he was simply tailoring his address to his audience. He did make a few poor jokes, but after that he simply gave a history lesson...I don't recall him expressing an opinion at all. The second story about Flanagan, even if you can see through the obvious left bias, does make a guy stop and think.
just a thought: many people i have talked to are going to do the whole strategic voting thing, and so vote for the liberals even though they'd rather vote NDP, because they see voting for the NDP being a "waste" of their vote, but actually each vote brings funding to the party, so it wouldn't be a waste! so support the party who's platform you agree with!!!
10:15 : great point.It's especially true in this election: since neither the liberals nor the NDP will form a majority this time around (they're at 27 % and 16%, respectively), why not choose the left-leaning party that isn't tainted by scandal? I'm not left wing, but i don't understand why some people on the center-left don't back the party that matches their principles.Strategic voting is a classic self-fufilling prophecy. It wouldn't be necessary if everyone simply voted based on issues.
Get off the internet. . .destroy the right wing
Just food for thought.....If Mike Harris' justification for cuts was the Rae governments deficit, how come when he got booted out it turns out his creative bookeeping left Ontario several billion in debt? So he made cuts and STILL managed to lose money.......Don't fool yourselves people, BOTH parties are just as corrupt, the only difference is how much MEDIA coverage it gets. If you don't vote liberal simply for one stupid scandal and one idiotic leader who will eventually get booted out just like Cretien, you really are stupid. The Conservatives WILL/HAVE done worst, and like always, they will muck up everything and we'll need to spend the next decade cleaning up their mess once again...
so true! Harper's plans won't be able to have sustenance long term.
We have to strike down the evil, baby-eating Conservative nazis! If the sinister Lord Harper gets into power, he'll destroy society and bring about a 1000 year reign of darkness!!!
Unless Harper somehow manages to win a majority gov't (let's pray he doesn't), the NDP are going to be the ones holding the power. In a minority gov't it's the smaller parties that will get things done, as their votes are needed to press any change. People keep bitching that a vote for the NDP or the Green Party are wasteful votes, but we live in a democratic system where everyone's opinions should be heard. Isn't then a minority gov't a more effective way to represent everyone? Instead of one opinion base heard over and over on different subjects we're able to see things from several points of view. Just thought I'd rant a bit about how retarded a low number of parties is in a 'free thinking,' 'free' country.
If most people are corrupt by nature in varying degrees, and some people make up our government, are there people in the government representing most people? *People interested in medicine skip to the last line*Refering to the last question, do only the liberals and conservatives have corrupt people?Referring to the last two questions, if people aren't caught should they be assumed to be corrupt?In reference to the first question, should a person swing their vote based on a corrupt group of individuals' action in government party?Are all governments corrupt?Is a country a fluid system? Therefore, for every positive change, there is a negative change in response, and thus you can not have quick and easy change in the positive direction in every respect? Do messes, or negative characteristics take time to clean up?Which party can and has experience in leading the country? Which party has the most?Which party will be most likely able to advance the country in terms of international value, recognition and at the same time develop the nation internally?Which party is injecting $250million into the health care system to increase 1000 medical student seats?
actually, the green party is right of centre fiscally.-a guelph student
Post a Comment
People say stupid and hilarious things at UWO all the time. We're here to make sure it haunts them forever.
View my complete profile