Who to vote for, well I think who ever has the best rational energy policy should be given the most consideration. Energy and its expense I believe is the biggest elephant in the room.

Besides building LNG plants to export gas lets use the gas for the cheap energy it provides to encourage industrial investment. That is what is happening in the U.S. now. The cheap energy from shale gas is actually having an effect of industry returning to the states after being chased away by rising energy costs from airy fairy inefficient expensive so called renewables and the shutting down of cheap coal energy. The US being the worlds largest energy consumer may soon become the largest producer of energy hydrocarbons. Besides developing their industry the US is also going to build LNG plants.
So while we are dicking around about building pipelines we may lose out altogether.

Another thing dump the regressive carbon tax.

“Dicking around”. I like that. Can I have it? Especially if the NDP wins.

Vote, by “deity of choice” Vote.
If you don’t like the status quo, don’t vote for status quo.
That means don’t be jack mule and spoil your ballot. All that does is allow others to make a choice for you.

Vote.

If you don’t like a party or a candidate, vote for someone else.
If you think all the major parties are full of shysters, vote for a minor party or candidate.

Vote.

If you want to see a significant change, don’t vote as you always have. That means see who is lowest in the polls and vote for them.

If you want to see a change, vote green, or even vote for the marijuana party. Sure, they have a very lite platform, but they are not them (Liberal, NDP, or Conservative).

If you think things will be different just because you vote for the other major party, you have been sold.

Vote.

Sadly, we are left with the choice of lessor evils. Let’s do something completely different this time and vote for someone complete new, inexperienced, and not beholding to major (business) contributors.

Vote.

Vote for someone who’s main concern is representing their constituents and not just the economy or business interests.

We are in for more tough economic times no matter who takes office. We do not control the global economy.

vote.

Apparently the event organizers took note.
————
Posted by: univ on April 30 2013 3:13 PM
The chamber which arranged the debate didn’t know that there are two sets of candidates for Prince George-Valemount and Prince George-Mackenzie?

They could have at least allocated half of the time to one set of candidates and the other half to the second half.
————-

I have always been right of center, but the important thing is to vote.

it takes you 20 minutes to go to the polling stations, The candidates are willing to give 4 years of their lives to represent you.

VOTE, and quit complaining about how bad politicians are.

Right of center? Me? I’m just right of the Incredible Hulk myself.

Right-of-center definition, holding conservative views in politics; right-wing

Is that what you meant?

Right or left they are both the same in that they are both totalitarian with the few at the top making decisions for the many at the bottom.

Be it communists or monopoly capitalists they both use the same banker and employ methods in the name of efficiency so as to control the means of production. If you go far enough to the right you end up at the far left… and vice versa.

It all goes full circle… what we really need is politicians that represent the center, but instead we have a left verse right party politics paradigm that entraps us in an us verse them false argument.

If we want to have politics of the center we need a new political system. The People of BC voted 2/3’rds in favor of a system that would see transferable vote ballots that could have pressurized the system to gain full support of the public and see people with 50% support required to get elected. The BC liberals ignored the will of the people of BC on a technicality.

More people in BC voted for the BCSTV system last election than voted for the government that took majority control and negated the BCSTV results.

So far right that I am falling over.

That BCSTV system is a complete farce that would change absolutely nothing in terms of the same universal POLICY all the Parties currently subscribe to. Thank God we DIDN’T adopt it, or our political situation, bad as it is, would be immeasurably worse.

Are those countries that have such a system any better governed than those that have the FPP ‘Westminster’ system we currently have?

Two that come to mind are Israel and Ireland. The first is kept afloat by the largesse of the American Congress, an overly vocal and influential oxymoronic ‘Judeo-Christian’ number of whom see the modern Israeli as the present day ‘Hebrew children’ of the fundamentalist Bible those who elected them put such great store in.

And the second is on the verge of national bankruptcy, after making the same mistake that short term ‘price inflation’ equates to long term ‘prosperity’ that we’ve made here under the Liberals. It doesn’t. And the only difference between Ireland’s parties is one of which METHOD will be the most palatable to the electorate in continuing to service their country’s accumulated debt.

“…it takes you 20 minutes to go to the polling stations, The candidates are willing to give 4 years of their lives to represent you.”
——————————————–

Considering what we now pay them to do just that, and the poor job most of them do of actually doing it if such ‘representation’ conflicts with the wishes of their Leader, it doesn’t seem to be much of a sacrifice on their part.

“We are in for more tough economic times no matter who takes office. We do not control the global economy.”
——————————————–
Then shouldn’t we be voting for or against who does? Not for a bunch of twits to whom “tough economic times” are going to reflect on financially one iota personally once we’ve favoured them with elected office?

Bobby kicked Mikes ass.

Israel doesn’t have a transferable ballot. They have a proportional rep system. I agree the proportional rep system is horrible as it rewards extremism and division. I also agree the BCSTV wasn’t the best system, but it was better than what we have now.

The best system would be the single transferable ballot as was used originally in BC that saw WAC Bennett win a surprise election coming in as everyones second choice, putting his candidates over the 50% needed to get elected.

They still had less of an overall percentage of the popular vote than the CCF (NDP now) did, Eagle.

And no real mandate for ‘social credit’, since virtually all their monetary reform candidates were defeated. And many of the rest were elected only because they were someone’s second choice, not their first.

We’d be far better of with the FPP system we have, only with a provision for an effective “Voter’s Veto” over all new legislation where a signifigant number of the electorate is opposed.

Where, after the collection of the required number of signatures on a Petition to have a referendum on it, that legislation would have to be put to a vote in a referendum.

If it was overturned the government would have to repeal it. If the government felt it was still necessary to have it for them to continue to govern, they could then go to a general election on the issue, and if they won, the legislation would stand.

This would be the best way of ensuring we don’t have repeats of the broken promises we endured with the BC Rail sale, and introduction of the HST.