Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About Bayman35

  • Rank
    Junior Member
  1. They chose to rally behind a drunk instead of a thief on that occasion and nobody mentions that, for gods sake the guy was smiling when they took his mug shot! He was probably still loaded
  2. Actually it was the residents of Vancouver who wanted to nominate him, not the party. We had to accept the nomination because he won a highly contested nomination for the riding. So as a leader what are your options? Accept what the riding has done, or fight it and lose a bunch of the parties money and eventually the case itself, leaving us with no money and the candidate we didn't want to win or let the people of his riding judge what he has done and try and put your best face on. Well Layton chose to put his best face on and let the riding determine his future, they did voting in what's
  3. At any point in that statement did I say "it was okay for him to run" because I don't see that anywhere so put your bag of words away and stop throwing them in people's mouthes. I didn't agree with him running, the fact is he was highly popular in his riding before "the theft" but none of that would have mattered in the long run, the fact is he would have won a human rights case against the party hands down because of the obvious reasons for us turning down his nomination would have forced us to accept him anyways. We had no choice, which is worse for a party to accept his nomination knowing
  4. That being the case, how do they have 27 federal seats? How did they almost take government in Nova Scotia, BC, Saskatchewan, NWT, and still have government in Manitoba? Whether you like it or not they are still a political force in this country and I don't think its because they are "airheads removed from the reality of workers and farmers" they just don't have influence in Alberta, so what. Canada is the some of all of its parts no just Alberta. For gods sake I hate Conservative ideology with a passion that is just about sexual in intensity but I don't think they are "airheads" because I
  5. Jack didn't really have a choice, the riding association propped him up and the party ran a good candidate against him for the nomination but he still got more backing from the riding association. As soon as he won the contested nomination he made it quite clear to the party that it was illegal to discriminate against anyone with a criminal record. With that statement out in the open what choice did we have, if we turned down his nomination he would have launched a complaint with the Human Rights commission almost immediately. So given the choices there really was no choice. That and where
  6. Well I think you are right for the most part, although I would say that in both cases losing your seat by less then 200 votes could be attributable to a gaffe on leaderships behalf. The NDP does beat the same drum every four years and believe me there are those of us involved that want "the message" to change. The problem is what does the party want? Do they want influence or do they want government? Most are contented with the former where as some of us aren't. Our message does need to change though from that of social justice every four years to something else. One of my suggestions wo
  7. No offense but we had two NDP MLA's booted by less then 200 votes. Whether you agree with them or not A) The Tories didn't need those two seats because a majority was never in jeopardy and they need some opposition in the leg. That being said when our own leader comes out the day before an election and picks a Tory majority he shot himself in the foot but 2%-3% could have kept Ray Martin and David Eggen in office. Davis was honestly one of the hardest working people I have ever met in my life and the only politician I know that took three years and every day to knock on every door in his ri
  8. Listen I don't think that is what any of us are trying to indicate. I am as far left-wing as it gets, and an admitted very proud socialist. That being said I would never say a higher voter turn out would have toppled this government that would be just plain silly. On the other hand what we are saying is that it is a sad statement for Alberta society in general, even Stelmach in an article for the Sun today suggested that the low voter turnout was disappointing and that there are soldiers currently getting killed overseas to preserve our way of life and yet almost 60% couldn't be bothered.
  9. Won't argue about the conteted issue some were. I was at a "call house" yesterday though and called about 400 people who answered the phone of those about 300 were voting, around 100 said they weren't. Of the 100 about 70 said they were deciding not to vote because they found all the leaders pathetic. Now through comparing noted from the scrutineers later only about 170 actually voted. It was really sad to hear all that though. Time and time again people saying they were on their way out to vote and then just staying at home. People it seems just couldn't be bothered.
  10. 41% turnout, awesome LOL now there is democracy in action 20% of people decide for everyone. Nobody is shocked by a Tory majority but people here should be ashamed of themselves for not voting. You can say its because it was a foregone conclusion, they knew the outcome and so on and so forth but in the end low voter turnouts especially this low is just plain senseless.
  11. Ok well I'm not saying the federal formula is any better, there is only two truly urban ridings in Edmonton federally, that being Strathcona and Edmonton-centre the rest get attached to some part of rural Alberta. For example Rona Ambrose riding is 170st west, Spruce Grove, Stony Plain and others. I think the federal formula sucks even harder. Only other question is why is it the Alberta legislature works the least amount of days of any leg don't they? I mean actually sitting in the leg?
  12. In looking at the answers to my question earlier I understand the concept of smaller cities and such but shouldn't the electoral boundaries reflect where the population is? I mean if Edmonton and Calgary carry 2/3 of Alberta's population shouldn't they carry 2/3 of the seats? It seams like pretty simple math to me?
  13. If Stelmach goes down it's going to be corporate Jimmy from Calgary that is your next leader. More then likely will be asking someone who just fought through an election to give up their seat for him.
  14. Just a non-partisan question for everyone, how is it that 2/3 of Albertans live in Edmonton and Calgary yet 1/3 of the population has more seats? Just curious?
  • Create New...