Canada General Discussion (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 19, 2024, 04:27:15 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  International General Discussion (Moderators: afleitch, Hash)
  Canada General Discussion (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Canada General Discussion  (Read 257812 times)
BlueDog Bimble
Rookie
**
Posts: 23
Canada


« on: July 05, 2012, 02:49:14 AM »

The problem is that Harper doesn't like appointing new people. He'll shuffle existing ministers around but with the exceptions of Bernier and Chong all the attrition was through voluntary or involuntary retirement. I'm sure Cannon and Verner would still be in Cabinet had they won. Flaherty probably goes for one last term, Fantino will be 73 and might retire, Toews might get his judgeship.

IMO:

MacKay: Move laterally. He had become a creature of his department even pre-procurement FUBARing and like Bernier, too easily seduced by the shinies in anything remotely international. Maybe House Leader, he'd sure as hell be better than Van Loan.

Fantino: Backbench, abolish that useless post held by Sevigny (another star turned uber-dud).

Alexander: In Oda's job. Ideally in MOD but that would never happen.

Ablonczy: She's been with Harper forever and never promoted. Dunno why.

Ambrose/Finley/Leitch/Raitt: Earned Green Cards but no vacancies.

Rajotte: Too many Albertans, though ideally he'd replace Clement or Paradis.

Bernier: Out of the penalty box, somewhere domestic.


Dark horse: Ryan Leef, Yukon. Maybe a vacant PS post to start?

IMO Del Maestro and Poilievre are our Rat Pack... more like Brat Pack. Tongue




I like Clement.

I know little about Canadian Politics. One question, is the Liberal Party socially and fiscally liberal, or is it one of those "liberal" parties which aren't really fiscally right wing, like they would have been at the start of the 20th century.

In Alberta, the Party is more fiscally Liberal than nationally. Thats why I voted for the Albertan Liberals in the Province, and the Conservatives nationally.
Logged
BlueDog Bimble
Rookie
**
Posts: 23
Canada


« Reply #1 on: July 05, 2012, 03:09:40 AM »

Well, links between most provincial Liberal parties and the federal one were severed years ago, too.

I never actually knew that. Was that due to the NEP?
Logged
BlueDog Bimble
Rookie
**
Posts: 23
Canada


« Reply #2 on: July 05, 2012, 04:34:13 AM »

Well, links between most provincial Liberal parties and the federal one were severed years ago, too.

I never actually knew that. Was that due to the NEP?

Only the 4 Atlantic ones are still linked. As the Alberta breaked out in 1976, probably because NEP. Quebec was in 1964, probably due to the Quebec then-raising nationalism.

Interesting.
Logged
BlueDog Bimble
Rookie
**
Posts: 23
Canada


« Reply #3 on: July 05, 2012, 10:56:11 AM »

Im not too sure I understand. The Alberta Liberals are to the left of most provincial Liberal parties, and probably to the left of the national one as well. Why would you vote for them if you're a federal Tory? Especially when you have a Red Tory like Redford to vote for?

I'm mainly talking about back in the early 2000's when they were more fiscally conservative. I voted for them because I thought the Tories had been in too long, and also I thought Ralph Klein was an idiot. I voted PC in 2008, but switched to the Wildrose Party, as I thought it was time for change in government, and the PC's hadn't balanced the budget. My voting record's kind of dodgy,

2001: Liberal
2004: Liberal
2008: PC
2012: Wildrose
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.028 seconds with 10 queries.