Bc libs manipulate 2017 election

[Urban Cowboy]

Having a bit of trouble confusing xenophobia with reality I see. Tends to happen with those who think they are superior.

I like how you pseudo intellectual types, play that type of a card, when what's said doesn't suit you. You don't know me, so don't try to pretend you know what fears I may or may not have. You missed the mark by more than a country mile.

I get along with, and like all types of people, regardless of origin, however that does not change the fact that a lot of the immigrants stick to their own little areas, Chinatown for example, with many truly not knowing, or understanding, what happens in the other end of the Province.

It's simply not right, to create a scenario where a large group, concentrated in a couple hundred square miles of the Province, gets to dictate what happens to the other 40% who chose to live rural, by comparison.

As far as I'm concerned, we already get the short end of the stick, given that we see far less for our tax dollars, than what is spent in the lower mainland area, and now they feel we should pay for their commuting needs as well. To heck with that.

We paid for the Coquihalla, they can pay for their transportation issues.

[neilsimon]

Having a bit of trouble confusing xenophobia with reality I see. Tends to happen with those who think they are superior.

I like how you pseudo intellectual types, play that type of a card, when what's said doesn't suit you. You don't know me, so don't try to pretend you know what fears I may or may not have. You missed the mark by more than a country mile.

I'm sorry if I misread your intentions. So, why did you feel the need to refer to them as immigrants? After all, they are equal citizens to you and me and surely their vote should be equal too. Why did you feel the need to bring up those who live in Chinatown and not the disproportionate number of South African doctors in Terrace, or large number of Portuguese in Kitimat?

I get along with, and like all types of people, regardless of origin, however that does not change the fact that a lot of the immigrants stick to their own little areas, Chinatown for example, with many truly not knowing, or understanding, what happens in the other end of the Province.

Yes, and I suspect that many others don't understand what happens in Chinatown. Both there and the other end of the Province are places where you will find Canadian citizens, of equal value, importance and all equally Canadian.

It's simply not right, to create a scenario where a large group, concentrated in a couple hundred square miles of the Province, gets to dictate what happens to the other 40% who chose to live rural, by comparison.

No, it's not right, and thankfully that's not how it goes anyway. There are municipal governments who make local decisions. People living in Vancouver don't get a say in West Kelowna's local governance (except maybe Christy Clark). If you feel that we should further divide BC into having another level of federation, I can understand that, but I think that the inefficiency would outweigh the benefit.

As far as I'm concerned, we already get the short end of the stick, given that we see far less for our tax dollars, than what is spent in the lower mainland area, and now they feel we should pay for their commuting needs as well. To heck with that.

Can you provide evidence that the taxes paid by the people living outside of the lower mainland subsidise the taxes of those living there? Most places tend to find that the taxes balance tends to flow from urban to rural areas as urban areas are more efficient (greater density of housing, roads, etc.) and tend to have higher earners paying more tax.

We paid for the Coquihalla, they can pay for their transportation issues.

I agree that the Coquihalla should have been paid from a central budget, but two wrongs don't make a right. The fact is that when they do better, so do we. Infrastructure which improves economic activity in the area should generally be encouraged.

[Urban Cowboy]

I'm sorry if I misread your intentions. So, why did you feel the need to refer to them as immigrants? After all, they are equal citizens to you and me and surely their vote should be equal too. Why did you feel the need to bring up those who live in Chinatown and not the disproportionate number of South African doctors in Terrace, or large number of Portuguese in Kitimat?

Why do you say immigrants as if it was used in some sort of politically incorrect fashion?

I'm an immigrant, 6 decades back perhaps but an immigrant nonetheless.

I referred to them because I encounter a lot in the course of work, and though they are citizens, and can vote, hardly means that they know for certain what their options are, or the implications. I feel some could easily be lead.

Given the numbers put up by the NDP in the lower mainland, I can just picture a bit of fear mongering in play, to bring in the votes.
I don't believe for a moment, that a party whose staunch supporters, have zero qualms about using children as pawns, scare mongering them for their own gain, would leave any stone unturned, when it comes to getting a potential vote.

[neilsimon]

I'm sorry if I misread your intentions. So, why did you feel the need to refer to them as immigrants? After all, they are equal citizens to you and me and surely their vote should be equal too. Why did you feel the need to bring up those who live in Chinatown and not the disproportionate number of South African doctors in Terrace, or large number of Portuguese in Kitimat?

Why do you say immigrants as if it was used in some sort of politically incorrect fashion?

Because there was absolutely no need to mention that they were immigrants, or to assume that they have no understanding of how BC works. I suspect that the typical immigrant citizen has about as much of a grasp of Canadian and BC history as the typical citizen. If you have proof to the contrary, I would be more than happy to learn from it though.

I'm an immigrant, 6 decades back perhaps but an immigrant nonetheless.

As are so many people in BC. That doesn't stop xenophobia. I have noticed a particular bias against people of South-east Asian background, particularly among older generations of Canadians (immigrants or not). Many still have this antiquated view of Canada as a White country, so please forgive me if I am unfairly labelling your comment as xenophobic, but you have to admit that the signs are there.

I referred to them because I encounter a lot in the course of work, and though they are citizens, and can vote, hardly means that they know for certain what their options are, or the implications. I feel some could easily be lead.

Maybe some could. But that certainly applies to pretty much any area in BC. Again, evidence would be nice, especially something to prove that they are more easily lead and that the NDP misrepresented their platform to them.

Given the numbers put up by the NDP in the lower mainland, I can just picture a bit of fear mongering in play, to bring in the votes.
I don't believe for a moment, that a party whose staunch supporters, have zero qualms about using children as pawns, scare mongering them for their own gain, would leave any stone unturned, when it comes to getting a potential vote.

Ah! So, it's because the NDP did well in an area that the people who voted for them have to have been mislead. That just stinks of sour grapes and of course, bringing the immigrant angle into it almost sounds to me like you are saying:
"Those ignorant foolish Chinese immigrants, buying into that damn NDP propaganda. If only they knew more about BC and how she works, then they could have made the right choice and voted BC Liberal"
Again, I can understand that this may not be what you are trying to say, but that really is how it reads to me.

Anyway, I'd prefer to get back on topic and discuss how the BC Liberals manipulated the election.

[Hurtlander]

Why do you say immigrants as if it was used in some sort of politically incorrect fashion?

I'm an immigrant, 6 decades back perhaps but an immigrant nonetheless.
.

It did sound as though you used the word immigrants in a politically incorrect and condescending fashion, you also come across as someone who hasn't bothered to learn anything about the history of this province.

Many of BC's 500,000 Chinese can trace their BC ancestry back to the 1860's, while many of BC's 250,000 East Indian community can trace their BC ancestry back to 1900, those two groups had a big part in building this province. They undoubtedly consider you nothing more than a recent immigrant with your measly six decades. The East Indian community in particular have always been politically astute and aware, something they learned from a couple hundred years living under British rule.

[rustled]

I think I get what Old Techie was actually trying to say. Seems to me a second-generation North Vanner probably has as much likelihood of understanding what goes on outside their little chunk of the province as an immigrant, though. They're born into a bubble and indoctrinated with a belief system that's a far cry from what people born into rural BC have experienced.

We see the same divide between urban (idealism and bigger government) and rural (pragmatism and self-sufficiency) in all areas of BC.

Of course those are broad generalizations, but they hold true to quite a degree.

I'm with OT: the Lower Mainland shouldn't get to decide everything for the entire province.

[Hurtlander]

I'm with OT: the Lower Mainland shouldn't get to decide everything for the entire province.

That's a load of BS and you know it. All of rural and urban BC away from the lower mainland handed the Liberals a majority government for the last 16 years, and if Christy had the good sense to step down a year ago for the good of the party, the liberals would have just won another majority. The lower mainland hasn't decided everything for the entire province, however the government does spend the lions share of tax dollars in the lower mainland because it clearly is the hub of the province.

[rustled]

I'm with OT: the Lower Mainland shouldn't get to decide everything for the entire province.

That's a load of BS and you know it. All of rural and urban BC away from the lower mainland handed the Liberals a majority government for the last 16 years, and if Christy had the good sense to step down a year ago for the good of the party, the liberals would have just won another majority. The lower mainland hasn't decided everything for the entire province, however the government does spend the lions share of tax dollars in the lower mainland because it clearly is the hub of the province.

Interesting. Seems to me there's a reason you're reading into my post something that isn't actually there, just as folk are doing with OT's post. Well, I guess that's your prerogative, as your personal bias is none of my concern.

Still, to clarify for others: nowhere did I say the Lower Mainland has decided everything for the entire province. I simply said they shouldn't. (As someone who lived most of my life in rural areas, I'm very well aware where the lion's share of the taxes my family and I have generated have been spent, and why. That's fodder for another thread.)

ETA: I wonder how many voters put their dislike of Clark first and foremost, as you've suggested here? How sad for BC that it's so much about popularity. My goodness, we've become a shallow and petulant lot.

Yes, mods, . Riding boundary changes and how the Liberals used them to win the election, right?

[maryjane48]

either you are a believer of democracy or your not . theres no grey area there.your argument is we should have an electoral college. thats exactly what clark tried to do by ignoring her parties own commission . you want to cling to power while the rational folks see that as tampering in elections. you cant get around that . and we all saw how rural bclibs operate. part the ethics scandale started in prince george

[rustled]

Yes, I can see why you'd feel there's no grey, but some of us tend not to believe we always have a corner on the truth.

I'm sure the Tyee will dig further into all of this, and I expect you'll keep us posted as to what they share and how they interpret their findings.

[hobbyguy]

The NDP and their tooters desperately trying to figure out why they couldn't win outright.

The answer is staring them in the face - the Greens smacked the NDP hard. The Greens also smacked the Liberals hard.

The polls showed the Greens taking roughly 10 from the NDP, 12 from the BC Libs.

So roughly 4% for the Liberals and 3.5% for the NDP migrated to Greens. Plus, methinks, a big share of the increased vote went to the Greens, and a lot to the NDP. So the Greens jump from 8.13 to 16.84%. The NDP unionists manage a paltry .57% increase.

The Liberals at least have some concrete stuff that is staring them in the face - bridge tolls being the big one. Take away the bridge tolls and the Liberals probably have 1-3 more seats.

[The Green Barbarian]

The Liberals at least have some concrete stuff that is staring them in the face - bridge tolls being the big one. Take away the bridge tolls and the Liberals probably have 1-3 more seats.

Take away the rampant racism and sexism practiced by the disgusting NDP and the NDP definitely have two more seats.

[neilsimon]

...
Take away the rampant racism and sexism and the NDP definitely have two more seats.

I'm surprised to hear you of all people admit that racists and sexists predominantly don't vote NDP

[Urban Cowboy]

I think I get what Old Techie was actually trying to say. Seems to me a second-generation North Vanner probably has as much likelihood of understanding what goes on outside their little chunk of the province as an immigrant, though. They're born into a bubble and indoctrinated with a belief system that's a far cry from what people born into rural BC have experienced.

We see the same divide between urban (idealism and bigger government) and rural (pragmatism and self-sufficiency) in all areas of BC.

Of course those are broad generalizations, but they hold true to quite a degree.

I'm with OT: the Lower Mainland shouldn't get to decide everything for the entire province.

Nice to see someone got the drift of my post, and isn't out to turn it into some ethnic persecution drivel.

The thread is about the Liberals allegedly manipulating the election, which I tend to feel is nonsense promoted by the NDP in typical sour grapes fashion.

Ironically it is the same self serving group, rabidly pursuing proportional representation, as it would manipulate outcomes in their favor, but to the disadvantage of many.

I feel the system in place has worked for eons, and we wouldn't be having this discussion, if the current system was in the NDP's favor.

So what precedent would changing things set? That the losing party, can lobby to have the rules of the game changed, every time they lose an election? I guess we could look forward to revisiting the issue then, every time the governing party changes I suppose.

Did the NDP complain about the system last time they won? I don't think so. On the other hand they've been incessantly whining about everything, for the four terms they've lost, and working on five.

So to sum it up we have a thread begun by an anti Liberal zealot complaining about the Liberals manipulating an election, but who wishes to see proportional representation, so that the results can be manipulated in favor of the NDP.

Does it get any more hypocritical than that?

[The Green Barbarian]

I'm surprised to hear you of all people admit that racists and sexists predominantly don't vote NDP

I was referring to the disgusting policy of the horrible and disgusting NDP which discriminates against nominees based on sex and race. The idiot NDP cost themselves two ridings because of this policy. What a crappy horrible party.