Castanet

That's the challenge voters face, putting their vote behind the candidate who will actually understand and represent their interests in Victoria, or Ottawa, or right here at home. Too many of us are easily swayed, and it is the nature of the politician to exploit that weakness.

Absolutely. Nothing concerns me more, than someone holding public office, that has never encountered backlash. To me, that signals someone who is saying everything that the people want to hear (a smooth politician) ... but it sure doesn't indicate that they are prepared to do or say something that may tarnish their image of perfection. I don't want to vote for someone that is 'liked' by everyone.
Personally, I look for someone who speaks their mind ... even if it gets them in trouble sometimes. At least you know who you are dealing with (or have a better idea).

This party politics and towing the whip problem has gone on since the inception of the British Parlimentary Model. True constitiuency representation is impossible until another model is adopted. Don't hold your breath though. My ideal model would be the abolishment of party affiliation and thus party leadership positions. Every riding elects a person that chooses to run based on his vision for his riding and the gov't direction in general. People could still declare left, centre, or right....but no party. All successful riding candidates would then imediatley meet in the house/legislature and people could be nominated for leadership of the gov't, not party, and voted on untill all were eleiminated but one. This person could then appoint a cabinet and govern with free votes. Sure there would be internal loobying to lend support to certain bills, but lobbying is discussion and discussion is good. What is gone is towing the party line and penaltiies/reprimands if voting for your constituents wishes takes priority.

My pipe dream in a nutshell.

For some years now I've belonged to a national volunteer group that has been described as an "upside down organization". (Not to be confused with The Upside Down Organization, a program of the Children's Guild Institute) All decisions are made at the grassroots member level and the entire organizational structure is designed to move information in both directions from the individual member to the national level to facilitate informed decisions. Procedures are designed with the intent of maintaing focus on the job at hand, keeping personal agendas out of the picture and representatives at all levels beyond the individual serve as messengers of the majority. People are elected on the basis of experience and expertise, not on popularity or campaign money. Nobody is denied a voice. Expenses are covered but nobody gets paid. It's a treat to watch this organization function and very fulfilling to be a part of it., and its efficiency is impressive. It's a system that has taken great pains to protect itself from just the type of problems facing our current model of provincial and federal government, to be specific a thirst for power and money.

twobits wrote:This party politics and towing the whip problem has gone on since the inception of the British Parlimentary Model. True constitiuency representation is impossible until another model is adopted. Don't hold your breath though. My ideal model would be the abolishment of party affiliation and thus party leadership positions. Every riding elects a person that chooses to run based on his vision for his riding and the gov't direction in general. People could still declare left, centre, or right....but no party. All successful riding candidates would then imediatley meet in the house/legislature and people could be nominated for leadership of the gov't, not party, and voted on untill all were eleiminated but one. This person could then appoint a cabinet and govern with free votes. Sure there would be internal loobying to lend support to certain bills, but lobbying is discussion and discussion is good. What is gone is towing the party line and penaltiies/reprimands if voting for your constituents wishes takes priority.

My pipe dream in a nutshell.

Although I don't think this will become a reality any time soon ... your pipe dream makes sense. There is no one political party that is ideal ... at least I've not found one. As I said earlier, many people choose to support a particular party because of another party that they 'do not' want in power. Certainly doesn't seem like a system that would get great results ... however, it is the best we have at this time. Perhaps it is a subconscious desire to fight that system that draws me to candidates that could be considered renigade. I like a politician who isn't afraid of perceived scandal and reprimands (when he/she feels it is necessary) ... to me, that is leadership.

I think that work for the government, either by direct employment, elected position, or on contract, has become synonymous with "easy money" and this is costing you and I dearly. [/rant]

Can't disagree with you there Fluffy. However, when it comes to those that are elected in Municipal positions (Mayor and Council) ... I think they earn every penny. Those are truly the thankless positions ... particularly the Mayor's job. You would have to be able to turn that job off at the end of the day if you wanted to come out of the four years even somewhat unscathed.
With that said, I agree with your rant on Government jobs in general. Those of us that have forged our own way with small business etc. ... pay through the nose to ensure that the Government employees get those wonderful benefits throughout their working years ... and fat pensions when they are ready to retire.

.

haycait wrote:well, after at least three annoying recorded phone calls this week begging support for Mark Ziebarth, from ONTARIO for gosh sakes, I know who I will NOT be voting for under ANY circumstances tomorrow. seriously, if you feel a need to use such tactics, at least spend your money with a local canvassing firm.

If this is true, I would have to agree, using an Ontario calling firm to ask for support locally seems off the mark to me. no pun intended.

.

haycait wrote:.

Interesting observation....now that that the election is over and Mr. Ziebarth is not elected as many of us suggested he would not be, the anon. smearing has been removed.