01-06-2004 03:33									#211
	Support Apolyton

Again, you've completely missed the change from 1993.

The difference is that back then French Quebec did vote PC in large numbers. 11 years ago the dynamic you mentioned was in full swing. The Bloc picked up nearly every French riding in the province due to federalist votesplitting. Nowadays:

a) The Conservatives poll much lower in Quebec than they did in 1993

b) Their support is concentrated in anglo ridings, strongholds for the Liberals which have next to no chance of going blue and which have less than no chance of going Bloc

The 50% support they enjoy in Quebec right now vs. 40% for the Liberals and 10% for assorted other parties is much different than 1993's 55-60% vs. 25% for the Liberals and 15% for the PC. Much different both in overall gap in support between them and their nearest rivals and in the way the vate is distributed. You should look at what happened in 1997 as an object lesson. The support for the Bloc in that election hardly changed at all in terms of overall percentages. What changed was that federalist votesplitting became unimportant. Nobody's forgotten this lesson.

	01-06-2004 03:36									#212
	Remove this text

Hey, Ben. Put your money where your mouth is. I'm predicting 45 seats for the Bloc, you're predicting 66.

For every seat the Bloc takes over and above 55, I'll send you 10$ Canadian. If they win less than 55 seats you send me 10$ Canadian for every seat they miss 55 by.

	01-06-2004 03:37									#213
	Tired of ads?

*rubs hands at the thought of taking Ben for at least 100$

	01-06-2004 03:39									#214
	Get a bigger avatar today!

Riding by riding, the Conservative and Alliance combined, in Quebec, would have recieved 11.8%.

Now, lets look at each riding. Did the Conservatives do better in the Liberal ridings, or in the BQ ones?


Richmond, Arthabaska went Alliance with 41% voting for the Conservatives.

Edit:

RIDING / % CONSERVATIVE / WINNER / BQ in 3rd.

Now, in order:

PortNeuf-- 24% LIB
Quebec East-- 22% LIB
Levis-et-Chutes-de-la Chaudier 21% BQ
Charlesbourg-Jacques Cartier 21% BQ
Drummond 20% BQ
Louis-Hebert 19% LIB
Hull-Aylmer 18% LIB
Pontiac-Gatineau 18% LIB
Brome-Missisquoi 18% LIB
Beauport 17% LIB
Ile-d'Orleans 17% LIB, BQ 3rd
Westmont Ville-Marie 16% LIB, BQ 3rd
Lotbiniere-L'Erable 15% BQ
Beauce 15% BQ
Lac St. Louis 15% LIB, BQ 3rd
Pierreford-Dollards 12% LIB, BQ 3rd
Mount Royal 10% LIB, BQ 3rd


Surprisingly, there seems to be no pattern to the seats that elected the most Conservatives in the last Federal election in Quebec. Rather than seeing the BQ finish third in the top Conservative ridings, it seems that this is not the case.

	01-06-2004 03:42									#215
	Increase the size of your Attachments

Did you just miss my entire spiel on why support for the PC does not translate into support for the Conservatives? The 8% or so that the COnservatives are polling at in Quebec comes almost entirely from people who voted Alliance. Please do your analysis based on this.

	01-06-2004 03:42									#216
	Remove this text

I don't bet cash.

How about an avatar?

1 week for every 2 seats?

	01-06-2004 03:43									#217
	Put an end to popups!

Come on. Put your money where your mouth is. We'll all see who has to send the other money in 4 weeks.

	01-06-2004 03:43									#218
	Support Apolyton

Snooze. Boooooooorrrrrriiiiiiiinnnnnnnggggg

Avatar bets suck. I need to buy a scanner, and the money you have to send me will go a long way.

	01-06-2004 03:46									#219
	Increase Your PM Length

quote: Did you just miss my entire spiel on why support for the PC does not translate into support for the Conservatives? The 8% or so that the COnservatives are polling at in Quebec comes almost entirely from people who voted Alliance. Please do your analysis based on this.

Gee, the Alliance only got 6% support last election, and the Progressive Conservatives got 5%.

So if they are at 8%, some of that support likely comes from the PC's.

I don't see why Progressive Conservative support won't go over to the new Conservative party. It's not just the old Alliance.

Heck, would the old Alliance expect to grab 40 seats in Ontario? Would they have a leader who boasted of his ability to speak french?

	01-06-2004 03:48									#220
	Remove this text

quote: I need to buy a scanner, and the money you have to send me will go a long way.

And I need to buy a new soundcard.

No dice. I don't bet cash. I prefer humiliation over out of pocket expense.

Perhaps if you are over in BC I'll buy you a beer for every percent.

	01-06-2004 03:49									#221
	Put an end to popups!

Fine then. Your prediction is going into my sig and we'll leave it at that.

	01-06-2004 03:51									#222
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

"As I was walking, this ribbon of highway."

	01-06-2004 06:26									#223
	Support Apolyton

I was wondering how much attention this would get. Not much, I guess. *Sigh*

quote: Originally posted by St Leo Oh, no! The homeless and the welfare impoverished will no longer be able to place paid $5000+ announcements in the papers about their plight. This is a travesty of justice.

quote: Originally posted by Flinx Does Ms. Corbella think Canada should have a political system where only rich white male property owners have a say or one where the rules are such that a millionaire and a working class person have the same opportunity and ability to express themselves?

I think the real issue is that the writer is appalled that the GoC would take it upon itself to regulate expression by citizens on a topic like politics (which she might argue is the most important form of expression of all). Her distress is compounded by the stamp of approval given to this odious law by the SCoC.

So tell me, how much is the average editorial page worth and will editors have to register their pens with Elections Canada in some sort of Registry of Rhetoric? Are the various parties run by angelic entities who are somehow better qualified at influencing opinion than us mere peons?

	01-06-2004 09:05									#224
	Put an end to popups!

The point is that the vast majority of peons don't have the moolah to even start influencing public opinion. It's not free speech if we are not free to engage in it.

IANAL, but there is a difference between an editorial and an ad. Editorials are a "pull" medium. People opt in to read editorials. Ads are a "push" medium. They force people to look at them.

	01-06-2004 09:09									#225
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: The point is that the vast majority of peons don't have the moolah to even start influencing public opinion. It's not free speech if we are not free to engage in it.

Since when does one need substantial cash to get the ball rolling?

There are plenty of forms of advertising that do not cost much, especially when people start to pool their money together.

Yet, according to the gag law, these groups are not allowed to run advertisements? How fair is that?

It's a poor argument that just because people do not have equal amounts of money, that we should squelch the speech of those who do have money.

	01-06-2004 10:19									#226
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by St Leo IANAL, but there is a difference between an editorial and an ad. Editorials are a "pull" medium. People opt in to read editorials. Ads are a "push" medium. They force people to look at them.

Are you mad? Last time I bought a paper it was to read the print, not to look at the ads.

Do you skip the programming and fast-forward to the ads?

	01-06-2004 10:19									#227
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

I think you've misunderstood him. That's exactly what he was saying.

	01-06-2004 10:21									#228
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

How does one force anyone to look at anything? I have gotten quite good at tuning out the ads.

	01-06-2004 10:23									#229
	Remove this text

Ben: We need to get rid of the senate. It serves no purpose. In Canada, it is a rubber stamp. In the US, it gives too much power to the rich and distorts the basic concept of one person, one vote.

The crazy Reform/Alliance/Conservatives (RAC) want a senate with seats assigned by province. That means the 140,00 people on PEI would get the same power as the 4 million people in BC. That's crazy. That's undemocratic.

More than that, it would give the rural areas too much power. Imagine four senators for BC: one for the Lower Mainland, one for the Island, one for the North and one for the Southern Interior. The majority of BC residents would only get one senate vote (lower mainland) while the minority would get three votes. That's undemocratic.

And the battles within the region woud create massive problems for the senators. Kelowna and Penticton have different interests. Each city has its own MP, but which city would a senator represent?

It's already difficult for an MP to serve the 100,000 people who live in a riding. How effectively could a senator serve 2 million people? How effectively could a senator reflect their opinions and their needs? Not very well.

Creating this Americanized senate would deprive all Canadians of a basic democratic right: one person, one vote because a US-style senate would become all powerful.

Conservatives say it would be a house of sober second thought, but why would the senate politicians be different than the MPs? They wouldn't be any different.

They also say that there wouldn't be party politics in a Senate, but they never say why. To get elected to a senate would require massive resources in terms of money and manpower. Candidates would naturally join political parties to tap into these resources.

A two-tiered system also gives politicans an easy way to shift blame. Look at the US. If something goes wrong, senators blames H of Rs and the H of Rs blames the senators. In the Canadian system, we know who to praise and who to blame. Mulroney and the PCs screwed up and got the boot. The Liberals look like they're headed the same way.

An elected senate is simply a stupid idea.

	01-06-2004 10:27									#230
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: Originally posted by Tingkai An elected senate is simply a stupid idea.

However, having a PM with the powers of a dictator is worse.

	01-06-2004 10:31									#231
	Suffering from ads?

The PM doesn't have the power of a dictator.

	01-06-2004 10:32									#232
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by notyoueither How does one force anyone to look at anything? I have gotten quite good at tuning out the ads.

His point is that you buy the newspaper knowing what the editorial stance is, whereas the ads which are there base themselves on simply catching your eye. They're forced upon your attention much more than an editorial is. I don't necessarily agree with the argument; I'm just correcting what appeared to be a misinterpretation.

	01-06-2004 10:33									#233
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

Really? Tell me the last bill that was defeated that the PM said would pass, and meant it.

	01-06-2004 10:38									#234
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

I'm in favour of a unicameral legislature, however:

if people want an elected, powerful Senate enough then we should do it as follows: (I've posted this idea before)

1) Divvy up the Senate seats by region, based strictly on population (changes as pop. shifts). The Maritimes get 10%, Quebec gets 25%, the West gets 30%, Ontario gets 35%

2) Within each region the candidates are elected based on a proportional representation system

3) The Senate will be less powerful than in the US. Instead of having the ability to propose bills, write in amendments etc. they have a simple power of veto. They must vote on all bills passed to them by the Commons within 4(?) weeks. Commons may pass a bill over a Senate veto with a 2/3 supermajority.

	01-06-2004 10:39									#235
	Get a bigger avatar today!

I wish it were legal to creampie politicians.

	01-06-2004 10:39									#236
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by KrazyHorse His point is that you buy the newspaper knowing what the editorial stance is, whereas the ads which are there base themselves on simply catching your eye. They're forced upon your attention much more than an editorial is. I don't necessarily agree with the argument; I'm just correcting what appeared to be a misinterpretation.

And I say bull **** to the idea that the ads somehow force themselves into your consciousness over a short period of time.

However, you also buy the paper knowing that we live in a free society (I would hope) where any number of miscreants may assault your senses through the purchase of advertising in said paper.

What is being said is that we must be protected from the freedom in the ultimate arena of the free. And that, my good sir, is hogwash.

	01-06-2004 10:41									#237
	Increase Your PM Length

Does anybody else find the US legislative process as Byzantine as I do?

	01-06-2004 10:41									#238
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: Originally posted by St Leo I wish it were legal to creampie politicians.

I'll bet you do wish that your security were assured while that of others is not. Now... leftist.

	01-06-2004 10:42									#239
	Put an end to popups!

quote: Originally posted by notyoueither And I say bull **** to the idea that the ads somehow force themselves into your consciousness over a short period of time. However, you also buy the paper knowing that we live in a free society (I would hope) where any number of miscreants may assault your senses through the purchase of advertising in said paper. What is being said is that we must be protected from the freedom in the ultimate arena of the free. And that, my good sir, is hogwash.

Why are you arguing with me? I told you it's not my point of view.

	01-06-2004 10:43									#240
	Increase Your PM Length

quote: Originally posted by notyoueither Really? Tell me the last bill that was defeated that the PM said would pass, and meant it.

Joe Clark

A PM cannot do whatever he/she feels like doing. The PM must maintain the support of the party.

Look at Thatcher. She lost support within her party and was kicked out of power.

Diefenbaker had the same thing happen to him, IIRC.