Castanet

http://vancouversun.com/opinion/columni ... -to-plecas

Even vaughn is asking why is coleman making unbased. accusasitions ?


This is why they wont win next election. Flat out lies wont get any votes

It's getting really bad when the leader of the opposition stoops to such tactics. It proves to me that this tired, angry old BC Liberal party have nothing better to do in QP regarding the new government than to accuse them of behaviour that has been the BC Liberal m.o. since 2001.

If there was any more damage the BC Liberals could have done to themselves since becoming the opposition party, Coleman can be proud of doing just that as his last act in QP as leader of the has-beens.

maryjane48 wrote:http://vancouversun.com/opinion/columnists/vaughn-palmer-coleman-casts-for-info-on-precarious-promises-to-plecas

This is why they wont win next election. Flat out lies wont get any votes

Certainly hasn't inspired any better conduct within your team, leader Horgan being a prime example of a liar.

You are right though, he won't win another election.

maryjane48 wrote:... Flat out lies wont get any votes

Actually, lies and deception seem to be about the best way to win elections (see Trump, Brexit, etc.). In fairness though, as the Liberal supporters will attest, the Liberals won the election, so take from that what you will.

I certainly don't defend Coleman's line of questioning unless he's aware of something that actually was offered to Plecas. I assume not since he didn't mention anything specific in his questioning. Those who vote Liberal are able to acknowledge the shortcomings of that party, and its individual representatives, and it would be nice if NDP'ers could do the same.

Verum wrote:In fairness though, as the Liberal supporters will attest, the Liberals won the election, so take from that what you will.

To paraphrase Bill Clinton's famous line, "It depends on what your definition of "won" is."

If winning means ending up with more seats in the legislature than either of the other parties, then the Libs won.

If winning means forming the next (surviving...?) government, then the NDP and Greens won.

Folks will choose the one they like best, according to their political affiliation.

Coleman's (and the Lib's) destiny will be influenced by the choice of their next leader. If it's a member of the old guard, many in BC will feel the party (and Coleman) will carry on in their typical 'slimy' ways. If it's a new leader, who's distanced themselves from the old guard, we might see some desperately needed housecleaning.

Either way, the Libs will likely win the next election, putting an end to the Dipper/Green abomination.

Urbane wrote:I certainly don't defend Coleman's line of questioning unless he's aware of something that actually was offered to Plecas. I assume not since he didn't mention anything specific in his questioning. Those who vote Liberal are able to acknowledge the shortcomings of that party, and its individual representatives, and it would be nice if NDP'ers could do the same.

Here you go again claiming that the Liberal supporters are better than the NDP ones. I guess that is what one expects from a Liberal partisan.

By the way, anywhere an NDP supporter claims that they are better than the Liberal supporters, I will happily say that that makes them partisans too.

Everyone knows that it's the stubbornly unaligned who are the best

Verum wrote:Here you go again claiming that the Liberal supporters are better than the NDP ones. I guess that is what one expects from a Liberal partisan.

By the way, anywhere an NDP supporter claims that they are better than the Liberal supporters, I will happily say that that makes them partisans too.

Everyone knows that it's the stubbornly unaligned who are the best

Pointing out a fact isn't being partisan. Look at the promises that Horgan has broken since becoming premier (taking big money out of politics, Uber by the end of this year, consulting on the threshold for the electoral reform referendum - just to name three) and there is silence from NDP'ers on here. Except to say something like, "They learned from the best." And yet time and time again on here we see those who voted Liberal calling out the Liberals for this or that. So you are simply wrong.

OldIslander wrote:

Verum wrote:In fairness though, as the Liberal supporters will attest, the Liberals won the election, so take from that what you will.

To paraphrase Bill Clinton's famous line, "It depends on what your definition of "won" is."

If winning means ending up with more seats in the legislature than either of the other parties, then the Libs won.

If winning means forming the next (surviving...?) government, then the NDP and Greens won.

Folks will choose the one they like best, according to their political affiliation.

Coleman's (and the Lib's) destiny will be influenced by the choice of their next leader. If it's a member of the old guard, many in BC will feel the party (and Coleman) will carry on in their typical 'slimy' ways. If it's a new leader, who's distanced themselves from the old guard, we might see some desperately needed housecleaning.

Either way, the Libs will likely win the next election, putting an end to the Dipper/Green abomination.

I disagree. JC himself could return as leader of the BCLP and lose. There has never been an 'abomination' in B.C. like the BCLP abomination.

Urbane wrote:

Verum wrote:Here you go again claiming that the Liberal supporters are better than the NDP ones. I guess that is what one expects from a Liberal partisan.

By the way, anywhere an NDP supporter claims that they are better than the Liberal supporters, I will happily say that that makes them partisans too.

Everyone knows that it's the stubbornly unaligned who are the best

Pointing out a fact isn't being partisan. Look at the promises that Horgan has broken since becoming premier (taking big money out of politics, Uber by the end of this year, consulting on the threshold for the electoral reform referendum - just to name three) and there is silence from NDP'ers on here. Except to say something like, "They learned from the best." And yet time and time again on here we see those who voted Liberal calling out the Liberals for this or that. So you are simply wrong.

Even assuming that your claims about behaviour on this board is correct, which I certainly don't think it is, that assumes that this board is representative of NDP or Liberal supporters. In fairness, this is a very hostile board to NDP supporters and quite welcoming to the Liberal supporters. I suspect that he latter outnumber the former at least 2:1. It's one of the reasons I call out the Liberal supporters more often, there is more reason and opportunity to do so.
You seem to focus on the most outspoken NDP supporters as if they are typical of all NDP supporters. Additionally, the NDP have for the most part actually been doing what the NDP supporters want. It's kind of easy to do so for the first few months since difficult decisions which may divide the supporters can be kicked down the road for a while. Add in to the mix the fact that the NDP actually haven't made a huge number of decisions, and they don't look too bad to the typical supporter. The Liberals have far more baggage from 16 years of rule of largely similar quality, in my opinion, and are just easier to criticise as a result. The shine will wear off, but failure to criticise now is at least somewhat understandable. Also, criticising the NDP for doing what their supporters want, such as electoral reform, would be like criticising Clark for looking after the resources industry. It may make sense to the opposition, but not to the supporters.
By the way, you seem to frequently complain when the government behave in a "politics as usual" manner, such as with the 50%+1 requirement for the upcoming election reform, yet, I don't remember you complaining about the Liberals not offering a speaker from their own ranks to allow the government of BC get down to work, nor when Clark tried to hang on to power for dear life, etc. The fact is that to me, your comments are essentially in a similar vein to those who are the most ardent NDP supporters, but you seem are unable to see such, and rather obviously think that you and your fellow supporters are better than the NDP supporters. Something you double down on when it is suggested that maybe you're being a little partisan. If that doesn't scream partisanship, I don't know what does.

OldIslander wrote:

Verum wrote:In fairness though, as the Liberal supporters will attest, the Liberals won the election, so take from that what you will.

To paraphrase Bill Clinton's famous line, "It depends on what your definition of "won" is."

If winning means ending up with more seats in the legislature than either of the other parties, then the Libs won.

If winning means forming the next (surviving...?) government, then the NDP and Greens won.

Folks will choose the one they like best, according to their political affiliation.

Coleman's (and the Lib's) destiny will be influenced by the choice of their next leader. If it's a member of the old guard, many in BC will feel the party (and Coleman) will carry on in their typical 'slimy' ways. If it's a new leader, who's distanced themselves from the old guard, we might see some desperately needed housecleaning.

Either way, the Libs will likely win the next election, putting an end to the Dipper/Green abomination.

Well, my stance is ripped from the Alien vs. Predator movie. Whoever wins, we lose. At best, the two major parties are flip sides of the same coin. They are completely devoid of creativity and a focus on long term quality of life. Both seems to be stuck in the 90s and someone should let them know that the 90s are dead. Neither seem to care too much about anything except playing to and placating their core voters.

If PR comes in, I think it will be a toss up as to who forms the next government. But after the next election, I would expect to see a greater variety of parties and then things get interesting and creative.

Verum: I'm sure that the NDP is doing many of the things that its supporters want but supporters could still say, "I like this, this, and this, but Horgan shouldn't have broken his promise on _________________ " Just like I can say, I prefer the Liberals' approach to governing over that of the NDP but I don't care for Coleman using that line of questioning if he doesn't have any evidence. See? Simple really.

As for the Liberals not offering up a speaker, that subject was discussed a lot and by convention it's the governing party that offers up the speaker. But of course by convention it's the party that has more seats than any other to have the first chance at governing. That convention was thrown out the window, which you NDP'ers were fine with, but then you wanted the Liberals to break the convention regarding the speaker. See how ridiculous that sounds?

Anyway, I'm not afraid to criticize the Liberals when they deserve it (I've done so a lot on here) and I didn't like Coleman's line of questioning. It's too bad that Plecas broke his word on accepting the speakership but he did. That's something that he'll have to live with long beyond his days in the House. That's no excuse for Coleman's questions though unless he has evidence of some quid pro quo.

MLAs and also MPs can make any accusation that they want in the confines of the House. And some take advantage of the rules to just make up stuff. The test of whether or not it is true is if they have the confidence to make the accusations of corruption outside the Legislature or House of Commons.

Verum wrote:Actually, lies and deception seem to be about the best way to win elections (see Trump, Brexit, etc.). .

And yet those opposed to Brexit and those running against Trump were also using lies and deception, so not sure what your point is exactly.