No one really cares ..... :-)

They're all Campbell clones and had their noses stuck you know where. You're right Gus, no one really cares. Well maybe some Liberal lovers.

No one really cares. There is a name for that: Citizen/Voter apathy. It's not a good thing.

When they DO go and vote, too many are uninformed, ill-informed or without any real clue what the issues are.

But do they ever know how to squawk later! :-)

Some of us do care how are next premier is selected. will it be hijacked by busloads of of east indian instant members following the clan patriarch or a system that allows rural participation.

No one really cares because there isn't one amongst them who's going to do ANYTHING meaningfully different from what the guy we just hounded from office was doing.

That ISN'T citizen/voter apathy, Prince George.

It IS the end result of CONDITIONING. Through endlessly propagandising the supposed 'fact' that NOTHING meaningfully different CAN BE DONE.

Eventually, a large number of people are worn down by this, and they begin to believe it.

Especially when the same perception is encouraged by the other main-stream alternative, and, if and when they ever get in the public eye, ALL the current lesser alternatives.

The usual excuse for inaction is the universal, "We don't have the money..." We, or our parents , or grandparents, listened to that excuse for ten long years in the 1930's. And then witnessed it vanish in an instant when war was declared in 1939. "Where will we get the money?" The "money" we didn't have for ten long years? The question never even came up.

What determines what can be done is NOT the "money" ~ the Banks or the Treasury can create that in minutes, they've been doing it for centuries and are still doing it~ it's whether we have the men, and materials, and skills, and knowledge, and determination to do what needs to be done.

The BCLiberals almost unanimously passed the weighted voting system so that all ridings are equal, no matter how many members they have. In other words, it is much more representative of a provincial election where each riding stands on its own.

That passed at about 2:28pm yesterday

The preferential ballot also passed, but it was close..... 751 to 606 ... that was as of about 1:50pm yesterday.

I was on the Globe and Mail site to watch their reporters "twittering" to the panut gallery in the blog world. Here is Gary Mason's twitter from 3:21

garymasonglobe:
Just got the word: the upcoming debate won't be a debate. Another snorefest courtesy of Lib party. Waste of time for party members

There we go ..... great reporting of the facts ..... :-)

Hey .... we don't have the money ... so we can't have a war ..... LOL ....

There is ALWAYS money for a war!!!!

There is ALWAYS money for the arts!!!!

There is ALWAYS money for a trip to China!!!

Which of those statements is true? :-)

All of them, Gus. No country ever called off a war because it ran out of "money". That only happened when it ran out of soldiers, or munitions, food, oil and gas, etc., or the collective will to keep on fighting.

The fact that there ARE "arts" is an indication that someone had enough leisure to pursue such things ~ leisure being defined as an individual's unemployment from pursuing the necessities of life accompanied by an income to still obtain them. And if there's a way to get to China, and some reason supposedly involving economic gain to go, the "money" can always be had.

The end result of CONDITIONING is Citizen/Voter apathy or ennui. For if the conditioning effort had NO result it would have been abandoned as a waste of time and effort!

It, and attack ads, work!

Voter participation has been declining. If they don't bother to cast a vote there are reasons. They don't give a hoot, anymore!

"Eventually, a large number of people are worn down by this, and they begin to believe it."

Having been worn down their enthusiasm evaporates and they display apathy.

I sincerely hope that no one suggests starting another war! Our involvement in Afghanistan (war, peacekeeping, training...whatever they call it) is costing a couple of billions every year and we have blown already 20 or 30 billion dollars on it, with no end in sight.

What a drag!

You can look at it that way, too, Prince George. As far as another war goes, (though it need not be via war, but probably will be ~ again), a country is rich by what it SPENDS, not by what it SAVES.

"Voter participation has been declining. If they don't bother to cast a vote there are reasons. They don't give a hoot, anymore!"
-------------------------------------------

If you have six or seven people running for a Party's leadership, and there is no material difference in what any one of them is going to do if elected; and none of them are going to do what WE want done, why would anyone want to bother voting for any of them? The only reason is to try to find someone to keep the other Party, and what it might do, which might be worse, out.

That's the present situation at the internal level, in each of the two main Party's leadership contests.

But it's no different when they face off against one another in a general election. BOTH of them represent a group that is committed to try to prosper by removing something from the OTHER group. That 'something' is 'money'.

NEITHER questions whether what they want to remove still has any relationship to the physical reality it's supposed to accurately represent. They automatically assume it does. But does it? I don't think so!

It's why, no matter who gets to be on the "taken from" end, there is no proportional advantage to the "given to" end. For no matter how you try to 're-distribute' an insufficiency, you can't ever make it into a sufficiency. WAC Bennett understood that. But his successors have ALL forgotten it.