Voting

[perfecho]

https://www.taxpayer.com/media/CoverStory24-27WEB.pdf

This link gives a good, quick map of debt and the PM's...wished I had seen this before the election. It shows that really, the only ones concerned with future generations were Martin and Chretien....obviously Mulroney wasn't...

Harper lowered GST, personal tax and corp taxes...to what avail, to put more debt on the future. The media had touted him as an economist...yet he was trying to buy votes and only paying the minimum on the credit card...and we know how that goes.
During his resignation speech, he sounded relieved...relieved because I believe he knew it wasn't working...it now it didn't rest on his shoulders.
Let's just all suck it up and make the best of it. We are going to have to pay more to live in this country...and it is worth it!

[greybeard]

I've always been impressed with Harper when he gave impromptu interviews or responded to questions in a non-scripted
situation.
But I will agree his campaign went way off the rails. Way to heavy on American style smear and fear.
The Lib's appeared to be running an Obama type "hope and change" campaign steamrolled the republicans in 2008.

The CBC was definitely on the Justin bandwagon.
Justin's daddy was very good to the mother corp. But it was nothing like what is there today. All there is left is a bunch of over-paid 9 to 5 government employees.
I'll bet they survey at less than 20% market share.
Most important,I think "familiarity breeds contempt".
Who can honestly say they liked the top group of Harper's main guys.

[AlbertaFarmer5]

I am so insulted by election signs that only have a name and a party. Evidently they must assume that most voters will vote by name recognition, policies are irrelevant? I think it is safe to say that most voters know almost nothing about the issues or the policies of the candidates. So why not have a skill testing question about the candidate you are voting for, and the parties policies. If you get it right, your vote counts, if wrong, the vote is void. And ideally, allow the competition write the questions.

That way, I could still vote for someone just because he has nice hair, and I've heard his name in the media a lot, but when I can't answer how he plans to pay for all of the promises, my vote doesn't count.

[burnt]

AlbertaFarmer5 - A brilliant summation of the process! I've often had similar thoughts - what, exactly, is the purpose of poking a thousand signs into the ground on a busy intersection or open country mile? Wow, are we so intelligent that we might be influenced and who has the biggest of most signs?

The only problem with your proposal is that it would disenfranchise a lot of low-information voters. You know, the ones who help elect to one who makes the biggest, emptiest promises.

Oh wait...

[AlbertaFarmer5]

Perhaps there is an election law forbidding any useful information on a sign?

[perfecho]

I dislike the signs as well, but I certainly disliked the radio adds.
The Conservative adds here started early, the "He's not ready"...got tired of them real quick. During the campaign, I actually had considered not voting, because they all stunk...and the last few days were the worst.
I really wished we didn't have "parties"...just people.

[mustardman]

Around here the Bigger the Sign, the less intelligent the candidate.

My Cypress Hills-Grasslands encumbent Always has Huge signs