|
Author
|
Topic: MyDaughters Friends
|
Toedancer
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10934
|
posted 12 January 2006 11:55 PM
All came on at once to our msn chat/it is the only way I can keep up with her on a daily basis. Her friends barged in, to discuss why NDP can help them? Yes, the majority of her friends are Gay, which stands to reason considering her career choice. But nevertheless, do you know? they are all falling for the Liberal ads, that say of course, they must vote strategically. I talked about many things around NDP policy, nevertheless they seemed sure they only way to keep out the CONS was to vote Liberal. Just wanted to add this, so you know what young people in U/C are thinking. Their scared and are voting Liberal. I gave them this url, but I doubt they will have any time to read, their very busy, exams, then a whole week off.
From: Ontario | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Toedancer
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10934
|
posted 13 January 2006 01:45 AM
Well good CIW, i'm glad to hear it, but here in Ontario, the kids are just screaming for some leadership. But one thing they did say, was No, they don't believe Martin didn't know about the AdScam right from the get-go, nevertheless, they are determined to discuss amongst themselves, with no determination. Hopefully, some will at least come here and learn, as I have.
From: Ontario | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478
|
posted 13 January 2006 07:59 AM
quote:
Originally posted by V. Jara:
Do you know if the Conservatives even stand a chance in the riding where these friends of your daughter are voting?Because if not, what's the harm in voting for a party that shares your values?
Toedancer, I think V. Jara's point is a good one to raise with your daughter's friends. Tell them to find out what the figures are on each party's candidates (and maybe what the figures were last election). There's no point in voting to defeat a Conservative who isn't any kind of threat in the first place.
From: gone | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
NDPundit
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3847
|
posted 13 January 2006 11:32 AM
Your daughters friends should be encouraged just to read this one article in today's Toronto StarHere's an excerpt: quote:
Hapless PM can't trip up Harper
Jan. 13, 2006. 05:38 AM
CHANTAL HÉBERT
What's wrong with this picture? On Wednesday night in Scarborough, Liberal leader Paul Martin launched his fiercest attack of the campaign on Stephen Harper, describing his Conservative opponent as a huge threat to minority rights.
Martin's strong words were delivered against the backdrop of a lineup of staunch social conservatives, all of whom are proudly running for his party in this election. For the past two years, some of the incumbents standing behind Martin at the rally have been the single biggest impediment to the recognition by Parliament of the rights of gay couples. They voted against same-sex marriage at every step of the legislative way, turning a deaf ear to their leader's pleas to line up the definition of marriage with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Indeed, if the Bloc Québécois and the New Democrat Party had not supported same-sex marriage, Martin's social conservative Liberals would have tipped the balance in Parliament against it. Many of the Liberal MPs who fought same-sex marriage tooth and nail have an unbroken track record of opposing gay rights, including the notion of protecting homosexuals from hate crimes. Some of them also came into politics on an anti-abortion ticket. Under two consecutive Liberal leaders, they were allowed to vote as they saw fit on matters of minority rights.
From: Green and Pleasant Land | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
ceti
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7851
|
posted 13 January 2006 11:48 AM
Hebert has been in love with Harper for two years.At least Martin is sticking up for SSM, especially with the conservative Liberals in the background. A Tory minority will tip the balance the other way, as we go backwards on this issue. But there are a hell of a lot of other issues out there that we will be going backwards on. That said, none of the Scarborough Five deserve being reelected, except to keep the Conservative grubby mitts off of them.
From: various musings before the revolution | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
primary
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8598
|
posted 13 January 2006 03:41 PM
quote:
Originally posted by ceti:
Hebert has been in love with Harper for two years.At least Martin is sticking up for SSM, especially with the conservative Liberals in the background. A Tory minority will tip the balance the other way, as we go backwards on this issue. But there are a hell of a lot of other issues out there that we will be going backwards on. That said, none of the Scarborough Five deserve being reelected, except to keep the Conservative grubby mitts off of them.
If somebody supports ssm and is largely going to base their vote on that issue, they should vote NDP. As in 1999 Martin stood up in the House and voted in favour of traditional marriage. Has anybody ever heard Martin acually say he supports ssm? I know he says he respects the courts decision.
From: Windsor | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Reality. Bites.
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6718
|
posted 13 January 2006 03:57 PM
quote:
Originally posted by primary:
If somebody supports ssm and is largely going to base their vote on that issue, they should vote NDP.
No, they should vote for whichever non-Conservative candidate has the best chance of winning in their riding. Has anyone ever heard Ed Schreyer stand up and say he supports marriage? I'm so bloody sick of this holier-than-thou attitude from a party that knowingly runs and recruits bigots, from Monia Mazigh, to Bev Desjarlais, to Ed Schreyer.
From: Gone for good | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Toedancer
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10934
|
posted 13 January 2006 04:39 PM
quote:
Originally posted by skdadl:
Toedancer, I think V. Jara's point is a good one to raise with your daughter's friends. Tell them to find out what the figures are on each party's candidates (and maybe what the figures were last election). There's no point in voting to defeat a Conservative who isn't any kind of threat in the first place.
Exactly. And so far today, they are having alot of fun doing that. Lord but they are a very funny group. So lighthearted and ridiculous, they've injected at least some fun in this election for myself.
From: Ontario | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
the grey
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3604
|
posted 13 January 2006 04:49 PM
quote:
Originally posted by RealityBites:
No, they should vote for whichever non-Conservative candidate has the best chance of winning in their riding. Has anyone ever heard Ed Schreyer stand up and say he supports marriage? I'm so bloody sick of this holier-than-thou attitude from a party that knowingly runs and recruits bigots, from Monia Mazigh, to Bev Desjarlais, to Ed Schreyer.
And your response is to suggest that it's better to vote for a Liberal who will be freely allowed to exercise their "bigotry"? You'd rather in 2004 that people voted for O'Brien instead of Mathyssen in London-Fanshawe? Mazigh made a commitment not to block SSM. Desjarlais lost her nomination. As for Schreyer: "when asked if he supported same-sex marriage, the NDP candidate said he did" (CTV - 18 Dec)
From: London, Ontario | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gir Draxon
leftist-rightie and rightist-leftie
Babbler # 3804
|
posted 14 January 2006 04:17 PM
quote:
Originally posted by RealityBites:
No, they should vote for whichever non-Conservative candidate has the best chance of winning in their riding.
Oh. Like Tom Wappel?
From: Arkham Asylum | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Email this thread to someone!
What is your daughter's career choice?
If I had a nickle for every time I ran into this attitude in the LGBT community. I understand the desire to protect hard-earned gains, but this damn stupidity of "voting strategically" in ridings that are already overwhelmingly Liberal (ie: Toronto)... gawd, it pisses me off!
