Canadian Federal Election 2015

[russoft]

Though I live in the U.S., I am a Canadian citizen and am interested in seeing the Canadian economy thrive. I'm also concerned about the lack of some basic civil liberties.

 

In the past, I've voted for the Conservative Party of Canada (CPC) on the basis that they were for the free market (more so than other parties) and promised to scrap the long gun registry.  They followed through on the latter promise, which was important to me as a gun owner.

 

Since last election, the CPC has shown itself to be rather neo-con. They seem to be running on hawkish foreign policy, increased prison sentences, and increased domestic security.  The last on the list comes in the form of C-51, the Anti-terrorism Act of 2015. They've also introduced a law allowing the government to terminate the citizenship of anyone they deem to be a terrorist (C-24). I don't like ANY of this!

 

The New Democrat Party (NDP) is essentially the Socialist party of Canada. They immediately begin with class warfare rhetoric and my eyes glaze over. Mulcair, their leader, believes that Canada should ensure that farmers and duck hunters can keep their guns. Translation: He wants to ban my "assault rifle" and pistols. They are against Alberta's oil and gas industry. Wanting to scrap pipelines which are vital to economic growth. Support cap-and-trade. I can't stand these guys!

 

The Liberal party of Canada sort of falls in the middle. They support lower taxes for the middle class, poor, and small businesses, while increasing taxes on the rich and corporations. They oppose some pipelines while supporting others. Their leader is so weak and flip flops and "hems and haws" so much, I don't really know what this party actually stands for. They were the party that originally introduced our gun registries. I don't trust them.

 

No one seems concerned about Canada's "human rights" tribunal which are effectively censorship on speech deemed offensive. Christians and white males are overwhelmingly the victims of these tribunals. They're dragged in front of these tribunals by radical imams or gay/lesbians. Our country does not protect freedom of speech. We have a State broadcaster (CBC) that is very leftist. The CTRC (Canadian telecommunications regulation commission) picks winners and losers in terms of which channels get included in basic cable, which is ridiculous. They've discriminated against right wing news agencies. Self defense is harshly punished. There are countless stories of people being charged with offenses for simply defending themselves within their own home. This seems to be an anti-gun campaign as it's frequently gun owners who find themselves being charged. The RCMP is out of control. They stormed into private residences to "secure" them during a natural disaster. They confiscated firearms and damaged property. They reclassified firearms independently and without consultation. I almost had a rifle of mine confiscated without compensation. To the credit of the CPC, they've addressed these concerns with the RCMP and the lack of self defense laws, but time will tell if the legislation is effective.

 

I know as anarchists, most people here don't believe in voting. But I'd rather vote for the least terrible option. I really don't see how spoiling my ballot or voting libertarian is going to help steer my country towards greater freedom. I'm pulled more towards voting CPC at this point both because of their economic policy (which is less socialist) and because they've ensured I don't have my guns confiscated. I don't like their authoritarian angle, but it doesn't really affect me. I don't do drugs, I'm not a terrorist, and I'm not a violent criminal.

 

I'd love to hear the thoughts of fellow freedom-loving Canadians! Maybe I've overlooked some aspects of the other parties. Maybe C-51 is the end of Canada as we know it. Maybe it's exaggeration. Give me some feedback!

[Magnetic Synthesizer]

I have some trouble gauging the seriousness of things like C-51 in terms of how much abuse there will be due to my lack of experience. Its criminal.

 

Do you think the NPD is going to terminate C-51 and C-24?

It seems to me that the conservatives spend as much as leftists but without any benefit.

I don't know how relevant the minimum wage thing is but I'd shy away form the main parties as much as possible, it's the anti-totalitarian startegy I put forward.

I don't know. I liked the information availability on the green party website. I think the L, PC and NPD websites are inacceptable. Actually, they all are innaceptabble by my standards.

 

The libertarian party is dubious apparently:

I only have 3 or 4 of the main parties in my riding. Probably completely useless. My original plan was to vote for the best party regardless (to discourage strategic defeatist voting), but there is no good party so that went down the void.

 

Perhaps someone can clear up which party is the most efficient and realistic. Right now I would vote (if I could) based on liberties or not vote at all XD

[KevinLonkero]

Sadly this election is becoming a clear choice for which aspect of your life would you prefer government to micromanage or stifle. 

 

NDP: block western economic development, undermine remnants of the free market, institute new government run child care to indoctrinate and abuse the little ones early, sabotage the electoral system without the input of the citizenry

 

Liberals: punish personal economic success, funnel money to special interest groups in the name of diversity

 

Conservatives: enshrine religious dogma into law, institute expanded surveillance state, blow shit up

[Magnetic Synthesizer]

AAAAAARGGGGHH!

 

I'm gonna create my own, who's gonna tell me how useless that is? come on, I think it's realistic. If it's honest and all with no PR spin. Atleast to spread some ideas, now if they find root in minds is an ungauged problem.#when the time comes

 

-suddenly the silent are going to vote for Libertanism (well I'm not libertarian but see eye-to-eye for other reasons)

-some people are gonna wake up

-Gonna slow down expansion of the state.

[AccuTron]

... the green party website. ...

Translation:  

A party which wholesale supports Climate Fraud, easily the biggest and most obvious crime in all history, which in addition to the rape of science itself, is massive voter manipulation for green candidates.  

 

Easy to do, because the green adherents are so morally pure that clear thinking and honesty are not permitted, even attacked, probably with a hard, smug look (speaking from ample experience), perhaps in between cheers for free speech.  

 

I actually respect scumbag soon-to-be-carbon-billionaire Gore and his Goldman-Sachs cronies incrementally more than greenies, because behind his fraud, he honestly knows what he is dishonestly doing.  

 

A mind-bogglingly huge and successful worldwide crime, far better than what any James Bond villain thought of, I give him credit for vision.  He just lies his butt off and the greenies eat it up (while feeling sooooo special).  Who's really the worst criminal?

 

Notice that the US "Democratic" Party ran this vote-getting criminal for Prez, and notice that Obama calls whistleblowers and real scientists "flat earth society."  His own call for legacy is climate change, his chosen legacy is the biggest crime ever, horribly hurting real science.  Kerry instructed the State Department as a whole that climate change was their number one priority.  Let that sink in.

 

Any leftist political element in Canada must also follow this line.  Anyone who tries to break ranks by using honesty is slandered and slaughtered; rational discussion is forbidden.  Been going on for years already.

 

 

My metaphor:  A large hippie bus, representing genuinely good concerns about earth and social causes, is all a-gaga with bright colors and tambourines.  Really pleased with themselves, they are a herd of limbic systems on turbocharge.  Satan himself also enters the bus, with proper slogans and beads, maybe even a guitar.  Nobody notices.

[Magnetic Synthesizer]

Can you point me to some of the smoking guns of your fraud? I like the mathematical ones. I wish I was an expert in the field, but I aimed for other paths.

Now imagine you do a rain test and find that there are climate engineering susbtances... now that's a whole new level. I can already see how they could spin this.

Frame the problems created by climate engineering as those of warming eventually, optionally.

[russoft]

You bring up the climate. I think one major pull of the left is their seeming concern for the environment. While I do tend to think there is some truth to anthropogenic climate change (a position I was very resistant to), I don't toe the line in terms of the solution. The left would have you believe that the solution is higher taxes and/or bigger government. I naturally disagree. I don't disagree with the science as much as I disagree with the "interpretation" or "spin" given to it by politicians and the media.

 

Frankly, if the left would stop being so hostile towards capitalism (under the veil of "fairness" or the environment) and embrace the free market, I'd feel more compelled to support them.

 

Unfortunately, no political party seems to run on a platform of "we promise we'll leave you alone"

[AccuTron]

Someone:

 

There is NO, that's ZERO, truth to anthropogenic climate warming.  ALL of it traces to fraud and grotesque incompetence.  ANY source that claims otherwise is making money or power or is just an idiot, and there are many.  Follow my links back and forth within these forums for a basic outline.  IT IS NOT THE TOTALITY OF INFO.  Take at least one hour, two would be better, to sift thru the links I have.  Search climate fraud and you can take as many weeks as you want and still not see all the info.

 

climate fraud updates - General Messages - Freedomain Radio Message Board

 

You will see excerpts from internal documents of the IPCC itself that they can't find anything, no human influence, just normal weather variation.

You will see...or you can just look it up...that sea level has been rising for 20 thousand years, and CO2 has been rising for 18 thousand years, well before power plants!!  

And that Gore is on his way to being a carbon billionaire...not in my limited links, but just search "carbon billionaire" and you'll see he's with a shady outfit with people from Goldman Sachs.  You will see that Gore's own inconvenient graph has temperature LEADING CO2 five times, which he doesn't think you'll check.  What corrupt parties gave him a Nobel for that?  

 

You will see another NASA graph showing other atmospheric gasses track lockstep with temp and CO2, but Gore didn't mention that either.  It goes on and on...you'll see a letter from a REAL scientist Dr. Chase (look up his work online, good luck even pronouncing the titles of his research papers), who describes the "discoverer" of global warming's work as "scandal" and "not science."  Yes, there was a discoverer!  Did you think thermometers were all going up?  NOPE, never true.  

 

Some dipshit incompetent, Dr. Michael Mann, ran raw data thru an algorithm, and not having a clue, made a program that artificially makes data get larger over the 20th century.  Took two years and a FOIA request to get him to turn over his data...and IT WAS FALSIFIED BY +0.6C.  Probably because he published some BS claiming 0.5C...which his algorithm TOTALLY MADE UP.  Two more years, another FOIA to get him to reveal his algorithm, shown in 2006 US Congress Wegman Report (in my links) with test data to ALWAYS create from nothing a claimed temp increase.  Mann still has drooling fans on Facebook, yet he's been known as a fraud for over ten years!!!  But who controls the media?  The result is completely undeniable, so the bad guys slander Wegman, a real statistician, so that nobody will actually look.  And it works.

 

Creep Obama calls anyone who points out the truth as "flat earth society."  Democrats are raking in HUGE votes from this.   Gore is getting his first billion dollars, from carbon trading and investing in carbon projects, and he's just one of many.  

 

You will see NASA's Hansen use illegal math and illegal physics on PAGE ONE of his 1980 paper about climate and CO2...his own boss, a Dr. Thiron, calls Hansen "an embarrassment to NASA" that should have been "kept on a shorter leash."  Search "Hansen fraud" and see what you get.

 

It's endless, and don't stop until you get the full scope, or you will backslide.  Even magazines such as Science News and National Geographic are taken over by replaced editors who will print  lies, or  so stupid as to not know.  

 

This sounds fanciful, like I'm claiming bigfoot, doesn't it?  That's how it works:  it IS so vast, that most people...including myself before I researched...just brush off the TRUTH as "flat earth society."  This is insidious, and easily a trillion dollar scam, if not quadrillion, and people, and there are obviously lots of them, will go to extremes to assure such crime.

[russoft]

Someone:

 

There is NO, that's ZERO, truth to anthropogenic climate warming.  ALL of it traces to fraud and grotesque incompetence.  ANY source that claims otherwise is making money or power or is just an idiot, and there are many.  Follow my links back and forth within these forums for a basic outline.  IT IS NOT THE TOTALITY OF INFO.  Take at least one hour, two would be better, to sift thru the links I have.  Search climate fraud and you can take as many weeks as you want and still not see all the info.

 

<CLIPPED>

 

This sounds fanciful, like I'm claiming bigfoot, doesn't it?  That's how it works:  it IS so vast, that most people...including myself before I researched...just brush off the TRUTH as "flat earth society."  This is insidious, and easily a trillion dollar scam, if not quadrillion, and people, and there are obviously lots of them, will go to extremes to assure such crime.

 

I'll look into this! I've spent so much time trying to figure out the truth with respect to climate change, but I eventually realized I didn't want to waste my spare time tracking down all the information. I eventually came to the conclusion that the truth must be "somewhere in the middle". I figured, if climate change is real, and as bad as people say, then we're screwed anyway. I decided that I should trust that climate scientists knew what they were talking about. After all, I generally trust professionals in other fields, so why not climatologists.

 

I've never really liked that conclusion, but any proof against climate change seems to be quickly and efficiently debunked, so I figured it was time to give up on "climate change denial".

 

Anyway, thanks for the info!

[Donnadogsoth]

I'm a freedom-loving Canadian who will vote Conservative barring act of God, but the biggest issue for me is infrastructure, including the NAWAPA project and nuclear power.  Pipelines are nice as a stop-gap, but that isn't preparing us for the medium-term future, nor helping increase our economic connectivity to the world via a World Land Bridge.  Nor are the Conservatives appearing to be preparing to do much about ISIS or the threat of fifth-column Islamic imperialism, instead distracted by financial scandal and antipathy towards Russia's interest in not being encircled by pawns of the British empire.  The Conservative encroachments on civil liberties are dubious, meriting closer scrutiny, though standing tough on terrorism is welcome.  Any party that talks positively about multiculturalism, gun confiscation, green anything, or human rights tribunals is not welcome to my vote.  Any party that supports self-defense, nuclear power, space exploration, and immigration reduction is.

[jughead]

Fellow Canadian here. I doubt I'll ever vote again. I used to vote conservative, even so far as being a card carrying member at one time, on the rationale that they were the lesser of the evils available, for the reasons stated by others in this thread. I no longer see it this way. Even if it were true that they were the lesser evil (which is very much debatable) the likelihood that my one vote will have any impact on the outcome of the election is practically zero, while the act of voting itself lends legitimacy to and implicit approval of the state. Even the libertarian party itself does not have a truly principled position on things like taxation and government spending, they just feel that the current levels are higher than what they would prefer.

 

So long story short, any imagined/possible benefit from voting for the least evil candidate is more than offset by the harm of providing sanction to the evil of the state.

[Donnadogsoth]

Spoil your ballot.  If you don't vote you lose your right to oppose the system.  The system as is, is what is, and by spoiling your ballot you force what is to register your disapproval, thereby buying yourself credibility should a truly bad government come to power.  If you didn't vote then you did nothing to stop them.  It costs you nothing, and is a principled stance.