250 News - Your News, Your Views, Now

October 28, 2017 3:05 am

Long, Long Campaign

Thursday, August 6, 2015 @ 3:45 AM

long campaign


Only in the reformacon party is reality subjective . No wonder Stevie says don’t listen to what a polititions says , watch what they do . Like lying , cheating , stealing , destroying our economy , destroying environment , destroying our reputation , undermining our democracy , undermining our infrastructure , undermining our instatutions but worst of all , the destruction of trust .

Devastating! Even the doggie stopped wagging its tail!

PrinceGeorge and Sage masters of deflection, must be devastating that the NDP and Liberals can’t get even their nominations out of the way and having to watch a one way race. Now Ataloss chiming in with a few shots for the Greens. But no matter how you try and deflect you are still wrong and that must hurt to the point of you foaming at the mouth and little seizures in the brain… Harper did not say anywhere that I can (or you can) find that the campaign will “not cost taxpayers a dime”

Hello whiners news for you the election date was no secret. Libs, NDP, Greens all show with their being unprepared and disorganized they are just not up to the task of leading a country. Maybe they can join Dizzy Lizzy in a comedy club somewhere.

Let me assist you one more time: Harper said the longer campaign will not cost any added taxpayers resources! Period! What are taxpayers resources? Taxes collected from the taxpayers and used to refund the additional expense money to the parties according to the higher limits brought on by the extended campaign! It is as clear as daylight! If you do not understand that there is nothing anyone can do.

Harper has said a lot of things that turned out to be anything but what he said…or only a small part of what ehe claimed they would be.
now if people will just remember them.

all I can say is
please not another majority government…

PrinceGeorge: Steven Harper did not say “will not cost any added taxpayers resources” but rather “Should not”, big difference between “will not” and “should not”. Maybe it’s a precursory of things to come.

My oh my! Looks like campaign spending has got Sage’s panties all in a knot. I like how she feels she got the last word in on the story “We are into the other season” before they shut the story down because of her ranting and people bashing.

Brace yourself princess, going to be a long one. Should be very amusing listening to all your rants for the next 11 weeks.

Google is going to be busy!

Jean Chretien “We hate the GST and we will kill it.”

Bill Clinton “I did not have sex with that women”

I’m not excusing Harper, because I think it’s a joke that a longer campaign isn’t going to cost taxpayer’s resources – at the very least it costs me a minute to answer the phone and explain nicely there’s no point of a secret ballot if I tell some stranger on the phone how I’m going to vote.

I just want to show there is plenty of precedence of non conservative politicians saying one thing, and meaning quite another.

BTW – if you want a laugh, Google Chretien quotes. That guy was incredibly witty. I love this one.

“I’m the Prime Minister of a country of 28 million, he’s the President of a country with 1.2 billion. I can’t tell the Premier of Quebec or Manitoba what to do, how can I tell him what to do? Sometimes you just don’t have enough influence.” – When talking about President Jiang Zemin and China’s human rights record during Jiang’s state visit to Ottawa.

And this: “I don’t know. What happened? If you don’t know, The cameras were there. Some people came in my way, it might have been… I had to go, so if you are in my way, I am walking. So I don’t know what happened. Something happened to somebody who should not have been there.” – When asked for his explanation as to why he grabbed a demonstrator’s neck.

Regardless of who is prepared for the writ being dropped 41 days early there are 3 issues that stand out for me.
1) the extra long campaign, is totally unnecessary, a waste of resources and designed purely to benefit the party with the deepest pockets
2) we will be assaulted by the visual pollution of ugly election signs planted on every available piece of green space for almost 3 full months. (More signs does not mean more votes)
3) we will be inundated with nothing but attack ads from the PCs . At no point will they even attempt to tell us what they have done right, or what they intend to do in the future to benefit the country.
By the time this campaign is over we will all be suffering from election fatigue. I will surprised if the voter turn out gets to 50%. Perhaps that’s all part of the grand plan.
Oh, and before you reformers get your S**T tied in a knot, I’m not a dipper or a Liberal…I used to support the PCs until the party was hijacked by the Reformers and their Dictator Stevie!

A longer campaign raises the amount of money that the parties can spend and the amount they will receive as a re-imbursement from taxpayers resources. That is why Harper amended the Elections Act. No matter how it was said it should not have been claimed that there would/should not be any added impact on taxpayers resources. Intentional spin of the very familiar kind.

“… the extra long campaign, is totally unnecessary, a waste of resources and designed purely to benefit the party with the deepest pockets”

A waste of resources, including taxpayers resources. Taxpayers get a refund from the government (75%) for the additional party donations, parties get a greater refund from taxes collected from taxpayers.

I have not heard from Harper any reasonable excuse for calling an early election with such a lengthy time span, so your “deepest pockets”
makes a lot of sense. BTW, I do not think that the Reform hijacked the Conservative Party – in fact I believe it was the other way around. Mulroney and Harper shaking hands after the takeover said it all. Mulroney would never shake hands with someone who hijacked his beloved Conservative Party.

nytehawk, PG it was no secret the election was coming, get it. The other parties had the same opportunity to raise money. Why where they not able to. Guess they are just not ready to wear the big boy pants. You guys got anymore excuses?

Why couldn’t the other parties raise as much money? That’s well known to everyone. The dominant contributors to Harper’s Conservatives are large corporations with bags of money, that is where most of their money comes from. Individual, private donations are in the minority as far as the totals go. In the NDP, most money comes from individual, private donations and a smaller amount from unions. However, unions are not as wealthy as Corporations and can’t contribute as much.

Now, since I answered this point in another thread, why are you continuing to still ask it?

I thought we established that Corporations, business, and Unions cannot make donations to Federal Elections. Why do people keep saying that that is where the Conservatives get their money. They get their money from donations from individuals.

The reason that the NDP cannot get much money, is because those who support the NDP do not like to give money, they are basically used to receiving money or benefits from someone else, and are not able to cope with the idea of making a donation. So if they want to get in the game, they better put the pressure on their supporters to come up with some money,. Same thing applies to the Liberals.

Keep in mind that the number one priority of any political party is to get elected,. Politics are a blood sport. Harper knows how to play the political game, the other political parties are still in a learning curve, and I suspect they will be their for sometime.

Ammonra for a school teacher (or school teacher’s spouse whichever you may be) you sure do not know your stuff. I knew you would fall for my bait in another story where I mentioned that NDP was supported by teachers unions (which I found out is illegal). Anyhow that is true for provincial but here are the federal rules for you, found at elections Canada website:

The Canada Elections Act provides a comprehensive framework designed to make the financing of the political system transparent, fair and accessible. The rules and requirements for contributions and election spending are clearly defined.
Limits on contributions adopted in 2003 became effective in January 2004. Further restrictions were imposed as of January 1, 2007; consequently, corporations and trade unions are no longer allowed to make political contributions.
Major changes to the political financing regime that came into effect in 2004 and 2007 set limits on political contributions (adjusted annually for inflation). The most important, indexed as of 2012, are as follows:

A citizen or permanent resident of Canada can give up to $1,200 each year in total to each registered political party; up to $1,200 each year in total to the registered electoral district associations, nomination contestants and candidates of each registered party; up to $1,200 in total to the leadership contestants of a registered party in a particular contest; and up to $1,200 for a particular election to each candidate who is not endorsed by a registered party.
Corporations and trade unions may not make contributions to political entities.


So you see ammonra; there must be a ton of silent majority who support the Conservatives over the NDP and the Liberals (and Greens) if they have amassed a huge war chest comparative to the other parties when polls say they stink.

A perfect example of how Harper panders to big business is the time frame for capping of oil well blowouts.. In the USA shell must cap any blowout in 24 hrs.. But harpers gov gives them 21 days… Wtf is wrong with him?

Slinky says, “Ammonra for a school teacher (or school teacher’s spouse whichever you may be)”

That’s the trouble with people who make assumptions, they usually get it wrong as you just have. I am retired, but I was a biomedical scientist for all my working life. My wife was a personal secretary.

As to the forbidden contributions, I stand corrected.

Your comment, “there must be a ton of silent majority who support the Conservatives over the NDP and the Liberals”

Or, those who support the Conservatives are the wealthier members of society so can afford to give more than regular people.

Palopu said, “The reason that the NDP cannot get much money, is because those who support the NDP do not like to give money, they are basically used to receiving money or benefits from someone else,”

That is plain bigotry.

Palopu is just lashing out in frustration, because his dear leader got caught in a lie during the election announcement, I even invited him to the debate yesterday, however he was smart enough to stay away. slinky on the other hand… not so much.

Harper will provide plenty of opportunities for us to kick some Conservative butt, he just has to open his mouth to say something.

All of this is totally unnecessary in our 2 ridings around PG.
In fact the REFORMERS are so well entrenched here that they could run a dead horse named Dick as their candidate and he would win in a landslide…oh wait…that’s already been done! Who knows what Todd will accomplish from the furthest reaches of the bank benches! Perhaps he can shine Stevie’s shoes for him!

all the contribution loopholes can never be closed. Let us assume that a corporation, union or other business entity tells its top honchos (the very well salaried ones) that everyone on the team may consider (not ordered or compelled of course) making the maximmum personal contribution to that party which will further its interests and then quietly re-imburses them on the next paycheque? Just saying.

In a more perfect world elections should not be won by the one who has the most money at hers/his disposal for deplorable attack ads. Unfortunately, we find ourselves more and more following the US example where this is the rule rather than the exception.

PrinceGeorge, some elections are won by means other than money. For example, take a look at the outcome of our last municipal election. This one was won partially due to the Labour Union’s suggestions as to who their membership should and should not vote for.

Would you not agree that Big Labour is doing it’s best to influence the way that union members vote in this next Federal election?

Hart guy.. Just because the union suggests someone to vote for doesn’t mean the union members gave to.. It’s not a dictatorship like harpers government is… Tow the party line or never be heard from again..

Union members can and do think for themselves you know.. You can suggest all you want but the members can still vote for who ever they want.. For someone that doesn’t like unions you certainly don’t understand how they work.

We know that Harper will sell out canada to any big business.. Like he said.. You won’t recognize canada when I am done with it… And he is correct…he has devastated our environment, abused our veterans and seniors, cut billions from transfer payments.. Has sunk us another 150 billion in debt.. Says he has a balanced budget even though the numbers show otherwise..etc etc..

Do you really think the union vote sent our last mayor packing? Is wasn’t her horrible leadership and ignorance to PGs needs.. She bought the election and in the end all of pg paid for it.. That’s why she was voted out..

But you keep blaming them unions for all that’s wrong in the world..

As a union member I have never been asked to vote for the NDP or any other party. Unions can do a lot of good work for their members. Those who blame all corporations for all the ills in our society are just as wrong as those who blame all the unions.

There is a place for realism and that is in the center of the political spectrum. Neither the extreme left nor the extreme right can serve the interests of the great number of people who work for a living, pay their taxes and want to be left alone in their daily affairs. Traditionally in Canada the democratic liberal approach has served the country best overall, always remembering that nothing is perfect.

Hmmm… title of this cartoon is “Long, Long Campaign”. Yet some how Hart Guy turns it into yet another opportunity to Union Bash, he just not capable of sticking to the subject at hand.

As for my comment, I just hope everyone who shows up at the polls on October 19th, remembers who call the longest election campaign period in over a century, and I would also hope they remember this needlessly extended campaign period will be costing us taxpayers dearly.

why this election WILL cost us tax payers millions more due to harper making it the longest is over 100 yrs.

Tallied up, an 11-week campaign now allows parties to spend more than $50 million.
That starts to make a real difference for taxpayers, thanks to the campaign rebate that sees taxpayers subsidize up to 50 per cent of what the political parties will spend on a national campaign. That amount increases to 60 per cent for individual candidates. Add in the money each party gets per vote.. and yes we are being screwed over again by harper….

You Harper “whiners” are so lucky! Just think, you will get 4 more years of whining about Harper!

Except for Sophie, her heads going to implode!

Hart Guy… not only that..but you can whine for years as good union members build the dam on site C… perfect :)

btw.. since you have trouble reading.. its Sophic… not sophie… you must have had a unionized teacher teach you to read thats why you cant…. bingo :)

I am of the opinion that Stephen Harper and the Conservatives will win the election!

Like it or not, that’s my opinion!


One more question Sofa, you berate and belittle other people if they wonder off topic, with that in mind what exactly does your 10:09 post have to do with the story? In case you forgot it was… Long,Long Campaign

Oh right, your standard response when called out on this is “oops sorry”

Oh the irony sparrow, and your 11:57 comment has what to do with the subject of “Long, Long Campaign”? Remember, point a finger and three point back at you.

Comments for this article are closed.