Liberals environment record

Bilbo assumes that the Libs would actually do anything good for the environment. CO2 emmissions rose sharply and the environment was not on the Liberal agenda for the 13 years that they were in power. We heard nice words.

If you like nice words and a party that talks well but doesn't deliver, then the Liberal party is perfect for you.

Change from the two-party system running this country is what is needed. That means the Liberals and the Conservatives must be relegated to opposition status, otherwise it will be status-quo...

Why vote..?

The young people of this generation, my son being one of them, have no interest in politics. Since they have never had any catalyzing events, (no 911 doesn't count in Canada), they have no concrete reason to involve themselves in elections.

Truthfully I can not blame them, articles like this one come out and tell the young people that they will not be listened to anyway. A 2-1 vote? How is that fair?

Critical thinking in the schools hasn't been taught in I don't know how long, and the young people believe things that they see on Youtube without discernment. In a way I am thankful they don't have the ability to make a difference.

Thank the Liberals and Conservative governments for their continued interest in educating our children.

emulatenorway

Thanks for the comment on Crawford's story.

RE: ... articles like this one come out and tell the young people that they will not be listened to anyway. A 2-1 vote? How is that fair?

The author says that because seniors turn out to vote in numbers nearly twice that of young voters, persuading one eligible senior voter to your side is like swaying two young voters.

What would change that is if young people voted more.

The main problem is that the

The main problem is that the vast majority of people have never experienced dictatorship and most of those who did, including and especially immigrants, liked it.

We already are living under a ruling class dictatorship in Canada, forcing policies on people and governments, but as long as it provides "jobs" and especially the future possibility of "borderless shopping", people don't give a hoot.

In my 3 postwar years in Austria, while the government and politicians were shedding crocodile tears about their country having been occupied by Germany, the vast majority of people, even the mutilated war wounded in the hospitals, were crying and dreaming how good they had it under Hitler.

If there had been elections immediately after the war, with Hitler running, he would have received a good majority both in Germany and Austria, with people creeping out from under the ruins on crutches, voting for him.

Anybody who studied real history knows that democracies are not knocked down by barbarians, but self destruct through apathy, mainly because dictatorships relieve people from thinking.

This is why the cry for "strong leader".

Ed Deak, Big Lake.

The young vote?

We keep trying to get young people interested in the elections process by talking about lowering the voting age. No person still living under their parent's roof or going to college with parents paying the tab are going to worry about who is making the political decisions that effect them later. It is only after they have worked for a living for a while does the notion register that there are ways to influence the forces that effect you. Oh there are exceptions but they are very few. The 2:1 does not come as a surprise. It has always been thus. We delude ourselves into thinking that young people are more mature now than they were thirty years ago. They may witness more of living on the TV but they are still insulated from the hard knocks of life. To expect good voting choices from them before they know something more than classroom politics is foolish.

Seniors may vote more often but many don't vote on anything more than tradition. They don't change loyalties very often and while it would be nice to see them vote as a block and use that power to help the elderly, it is unlikely to happen. Maybe if things get really bad like in the dirty thirties we might see some real power exercised.

Why would anyone who lived through the last 60 years, witnessed the gradual decline of the planet, wars and the mess the world is in still think that the conservatives with their trickle-down economic ideology will ever make this world a better place. Logic demands that we change our approach and try something new.

Fiat Lux... you are bang on the money

This whole business about "strong leader" is absurd.

By definition, a "strong leader" is a dictator. What is more appropriate for a civilized society is an "excellent consensus builder".

With regards to Harper being a "strong leader". Yup. Just ask all his muzzled MPs and MP wannabes. "Steady hand on the tiller and plotting a straight course". Yup. Except that we are headed straight over the Niagara Falls.

The Game is Up

Seniors (in general) are looking for short term (20 year) stability, the rest of us need to be thinking many years past that and deciding on a strategic path forward that will result in the best outcome for the economy, the environment and society as a whole.

None of the parties are even close to thinking outside of the government-term box on critical issues of food security and agriculture, sustainable water use, energy descent, climate change refugees... the list goes on.Alex Atamenenko, NDP in the Kootenays, is the only one I've heard speak intelligently on any of these topics.

I think the game is up. Anyone else see rolling bailouts until the printing press runs out of paper?

Cheers,
Mike

"Seniors may vote more often

"Seniors may vote more often but many don't vote on anything more than tradition. They don't change loyalties very often and while it would be nice to see them vote as a block and use that power to help the elderly, it is unlikely to happen."

Touche! My dad just gets more stubborn with age- he isn't going to suddenly switch his vote for say, the Green party. He is very well informed but will never switch loyalties. The world could be going to hell in a handbasket (did I say "could"??) and he will always vote the same way... *cringe*

Fii

Pardon me, but isn't that what defines 'loyalty'?

I think it's possible your Dad is voting his principles rather than his self-interest.

And maybe that's something that's been turned on its head in younger people.

Just a thought.

Loyalty must be earned with good deeds

"Pardon me, but isn't that what defines 'loyalty'?"

So you're saying loyalty to a political party is a good thing?

Since I started working there has been nothing of the sort from the organizations I've been affiliated with.

My governments have been selling out my country year over year while I see my son wondering what to do. What advice should I give him?

The politicos wrap mudballs covered in sugar for us to swallow just so we can get them down without gagging.

Our elders are the ones that built this country.

Such a shame.

emulatenorway

Not at all. I'm saying that loyalty is a good thing - I also wrote that loyalty isn't always a question of self-interest and that voting the same way could be a question of principle.

I totally agree with you about what our elders have done and the main impact of what I asked Fii to consider was the implication that her Father's motives were insincere.

That's what I took from her remarks.

My own parents have always voted for the same party too. A party that they agreed with on principle and a party to which they were loyal despite the fact that their never got elected in the area where they lived.

They believed that was what you did if you believed in change and cared about others.

I think that kind of loyalty isn't something to sneeze at or decry.

Okay? Hope that clears up my comment for both of you....

The only advice I have, if you don't like the way this government has behaved, is to vote for the party YOU think would do better - not the party that will win.

Trying to pick a winner is what gets us into trouble.

My view.

Loyalty = Strong Leader

I have heard the same crap over and over again. We are loyal to our party. We are loyal to our (strong) leader. Sure like lemmings over the cliff.

The Rev. James Jones was a strong leader and demanded loyalty. This "Loyalty in the Face of Whatever" is the same kind of Kool-Aid and so many people of so many political, and social groups are demanding that we drink of this Kool-Aid.

We don't need loyalty, we need the pursuit of common goals with the unifying factor of obvious common sense direction on obtaining the goal.

Oh yes, Emerson and Stronach were loyal. Sort of. Well, at the beginning no, but later yes. Kind of...

I'm loyal to the Canucks! .. as long as they are winning

Loyalty when getting screwed.

Very few people seem to understand the relationship between government actions and the resulting effects. It is like they buy the spin. The economy goes sideways and they hear, "It could have been a lot worse if we had not been at the helm." Such self serving nonsense is not even disputed by the media who at times are so gullible it makes one ill. Loyalty after getting royally screwed is downright idiotic. "Fooled me once, shame on you but fooled me twice, shame on me." I am prepared to cut the party I vote for considerable slack, but there is a distinct limit to the shelf life of my loyalty.

Some seniors will never change party and it does not matter how much they get screwed. You live in a run down trailer park and vote for Harper. It doesn't make a lot of sense.