Page 3 of 5
Posted: Wed May 28, 2014 7:18 am
by JerCraigs
I think everyone should vote. Even voting for someone that won't win, or declining a ballot shows that you cared enough to show up and make that statement. If enough people do that maybe it can lead to change.
If (for example) Party A loses their riding by 2000 votes, and the Green party got 3000 votes, one would think that in the next election candidates might try and appeal to those voters. In theory...
Posted: Wed May 28, 2014 3:05 pm
by Tapsucker
I'm rather surprised that the only knock on my door has been from someone campaigning for our incumbent. I would have expected some effort from the others by now.
I'm also a little disappointed in our Green candidate. I am very comfortable with the party's platform, but our local candidate, while I don't know him, has had very little substance in his personal message. He is a career comedian, which I don't hold against him, but he mentions his gigs and success more than his vision for our riding and the province.
Posted: Thu May 29, 2014 9:15 am
by atomeyes
but that's why the Green party's still the Green party. they end up halfway between the NDP and the Rhinocerous party.
IF they ever took elections seriously and IF they only fielded quality candidates and IF they actually had media attention with a proper platform and taught that platform to their candidates: then they'd be a real party. and that's why i won't even vote for them out of protest. they're an AHL team barely trying to play against NHLers.
Posted: Thu May 29, 2014 1:24 pm
by toweringpine
atomeyes wrote:but that's why the Green party's still the Green party. they end up halfway between the NDP and the Rhinocerous party.
IF they ever took elections seriously and IF they only fielded quality candidates and IF they actually had media attention with a proper platform and taught that platform to their candidates: then they'd be a real party. and that's why i won't even vote for them out of protest. they're an AHL team barely trying to play against NHLers.
Sadly you are absolutely correct.
An associate of mine was approached by the Greens to run. This fellow has been unable to hold a job, can barely speak english and ended up being rejected as a candidate because he has some legal issues he is working on sorting out. They are so desperate to field someone in every riding that some canditates would have been rejected out of hand by any other party.
The Greens have great policies but are totally clueless how to run an election campaign. I think there are some outside forces that help to keep them down but after this many years of trying to be a legitimate party the big portion of the blame can only be laid at their own feet.
Posted: Thu May 29, 2014 4:16 pm
by Tapsucker
Hopefully this is not out of line for this forum, but since the Green party has been unable to get any media outlets to post or discuss their platform, here is there summary. might as well get word out somewhere...
In the next session of the legislature, your Green MPPs will demand that government:
1. Focus on your job by lowering payroll taxes for small businesses
2.Get you home faster by paying for the transit infrastructure we need
3.Invest in your home to help you save money by saving energy
4.Improve your children’s education by merging the public and separate school boards
5.Make good on our promises to address child poverty
6.Give young adults a chance to contribute to our world
7.Putting your food and water first by protecting farmland and water
8.Getting our fair share by making industry pay a fair price for our shared resources
9.Restore your confidence that our communities & natural heritage will not be damaged by development
Every demand is costed, and we show you where the money is coming from.
Posted: Thu May 29, 2014 5:51 pm
by Bytowner
toweringpine wrote:
The Greens have great policies but are totally clueless how to run an election campaign.
In fairness, Hudak and his merry men aren't exactly master campaigners either. Their ability to drive themselves into a brick wall given the best possible political scenario is simply astounding.
Posted: Thu May 29, 2014 7:20 pm
by toweringpine
Bytowner wrote:toweringpine wrote:
The Greens have great policies but are totally clueless how to run an election campaign.
In fairness, Hudak and his merry men aren't exactly master campaigners either. Their ability to drive themselves into a brick wall given the best possible political scenario is simply astounding.
Too true. However, the party has run plenty of well executed campaigns in the past, it is just the current batch of conservatives that seem so inept at connecting with the voters. People really seem to want to like Hudak and company but just can't.
Posted: Thu May 29, 2014 8:08 pm
by atomeyes
my PC candidate came to my door today. sad to see someone who knows they have no chance of winning.
but we talked for 20 min. in the end, she'll get my vote. she's the only candidate to knock on my door, she has a good background education-wise (lawyer), answered my questions and agreed with my points.
i talked to her about the LCBO/TBS stuff and she agreed. said that her party wanted to narrow their focus on the trail, but she has heard enough that she thinks it will all be post-election discussions if the PCs win.
so there ya go
Posted: Thu May 29, 2014 9:37 pm
by JerCraigs
atomeyes wrote:
i talked to her about the LCBO/TBS stuff and she agreed. said that her party wanted to narrow their focus on the trail, but she has heard enough that she thinks it will all be post-election discussions if the PCs win.
I really don't think the Beer store should be a major election issue. I care about it,and will likely write my MPP about it, but there are bigger fish to fry. That said, I think the underlying message here is that the party doesn't want to touch any real issues until after the election... I find that frustrating (and most of the big three do it) but it also means you have no idea what you are really getting voting for someone.
Posted: Fri May 30, 2014 9:38 am
by atomeyes
Some more interesting information:
http://www.cp24.com/news/2014-ontario-p ... -1.1844502
NDP's losing vote share, Liberals and PC are gaining those votes and Liberals are catching up.
but....
Liberal voters are less motivated to vote.
and Greens have 7%.
that 7% could be huge in a few ridings.
again, all the more reason to not vote Green (if one feels strongly about other candidates winning/losing)
Posted: Fri May 30, 2014 2:09 pm
by ercousin
868 voters doesn't seem like enough for these polls to be statistically valid.....
Posted: Fri May 30, 2014 3:15 pm
by Bytowner
ercousin wrote:868 voters doesn't seem like enough for these polls to be statistically valid.....
It is if it's random. That's not random, that's IR's online panel. They shouldn't be reporting a margin of error on it.
Posted: Fri May 30, 2014 4:58 pm
by Tapsucker
atomeyes wrote:Some more interesting information:
http://www.cp24.com/news/2014-ontario-p ... -1.1844502
NDP's losing vote share, Liberals and PC are gaining those votes and Liberals are catching up.
but....
Liberal voters are less motivated to vote.
and Greens have 7%.
that 7% could be huge in a few ridings.
again, all the more reason to not vote Green (if one feels strongly about other candidates winning/losing)
Strategic voting got us in this mess. I'd far prefer to vote for what I agree with, damn the consequences. Personally, I'm not ready to support the status quo of corruption and incompetence, but neither am I ready to support a return to the Harris years of blind ideology and incompetence, and the third leading option cannot demonstrate to me any way they would be different or offer and real innovation. I guess I'm left with that hypothetical 7%, but it's still better than not voting. We need to stop picking the lesser of evils and actually make a commitment..
Posted: Fri May 30, 2014 9:04 pm
by toweringpine
Tapsucker wrote:
Strategic voting got us in this mess. I'd far prefer to vote for what I agree with, damn the consequences. Personally, I'm not ready to support the status quo of corruption and incompetence, but neither am I ready to support a return to the Harris years of blind ideology and incompetence, and the third leading option cannot demonstrate to me any way they would be different or offer and real innovation. I guess I'm left with that hypothetical 7%, but it's still better than not voting. We need to stop picking the lesser of evils and actually make a commitment..
Exactly.
Posted: Sat May 31, 2014 8:09 am
by NRman
toweringpine wrote:Tapsucker wrote:
Strategic voting got us in this mess. I'd far prefer to vote for what I agree with, damn the consequences. Personally, I'm not ready to support the status quo of corruption and incompetence, but neither am I ready to support a return to the Harris years of blind ideology and incompetence, and the third leading option cannot demonstrate to me any way they would be different or offer and real innovation. I guess I'm left with that hypothetical 7%, but it's still better than not voting. We need to stop picking the lesser of evils and actually make a commitment..
Exactly.
+1