You can't even organize your convention to allow enough time to discuss the only policy proposal that was known beforehand and could be considered noteworthy, and you want us to trust you with running the entire country.
Good luck with that.
Monday, August 17, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
24 comments:
Obviously, if the party actually considered it a priority and wanted to vote on it, they would've.
Layton's NDPer's trying to replace Ignatieff's Liberal's
fh
I guess some things are just too important to let the rank and file decide.
Rank and file? From what I saw most of the delegates there were from unions.
A huge proportion of Canadians are unionized, and many of them fall within the "Tim Hortons crowd" that the Conservatives try to appeal to.
The name change thing served it's purpose, publicity, lots of it.
As soon as Ed Broadbent announced he was against the name change,
it was pointless to have Dippers fighting the old guard over it.
Liberals should be very worried about Dippers knocking off their radical edges.
I am unionized myself Eric, and the funny thing is that at no time has my union ever asked me if I would like dues to be used to support the NDP.
How many union delegates were there? Multiply that by the convention fees and suddenly you have an end run around the party finance laws.
Could you imagine the outrage if say Imperial Oil or Syncrude paid for and sent hundreds of delegates to the CPC convention.
I've heard plenty of stories about executives giving multiple donations to the Liberals or the Conservatives in the names of their employees.
And I'm sure most unions don't ask such a thing of their members.
Eric it is illegal for unions to make donations to political parties so I am not sure what you heard.
I don't know what you're referring to.
Thank goodness we can always depend on Jack to remind us that Canada is no better than a squalid third-world country. Heavy sigh.
A strong NDP vote means a weaker Liberal Party. Let's keep the morons fighting each other
A huge proportion of Canadians are unionized, and many of them fall within the "Tim Hortons crowd" that the Conservatives try to appeal to.
---------------
Less than one-third is nowhere near a "huge" proportion, and even that number has been falling steadily since the 1980's. Nice try...
I wasn't trying anything. But, yes, 1/3 of the entire country is a huge proportion of the population. Any party that would discard one third of the population would be foolish.
Actually many have stated they were dirty tricks allowed by the executives to stall or run the clock so democracy within party ranks was not allowed to introduce the motion.
Say one thing do another.
I was a member of the largest union in Canada for several years, the U.F.C.W., and can say that I've never been offended by anyone slamming a Union as the reality is that in my experience, they were unresponsive to many concerns of average members and resorted to threats and thuggery to get their way when members suggested an unwillingness to tow the union line in response to that lack of grass-roots support.
My parents, likewise, worked their whole lives in Union jobs, and have also expressed serious reservations over Union practices.
So - deriding a union hardly amounts to disregarding the "Tim Horton's" crowd.
As I'm sure everyone here does, I know some unionised people who are very pro-union and others who are very anti-union. The point being, union members and union supporters come from all walks of life, and not all of them are NDP supporters. Clearly, considering the support the NDP has nationally, we can't even say that a majority of unionised Canadians are NDP supporters.
Eric, when you said exec's I thought you were referring to union exec's, not corporate exec's so that is why my comment on illegalities.
Next your last comment summed up my point. If you cannot say that most unionized workers support the NDP, why the almost universal support for the party among the unions?
When was the last time you have seen unions actively do something positive for the CPC? If the stats are the same within unionized workers as they are within the general population then at least 30% of them support the CPC.
Clearly, people involved with unions see the NDP as more attuned to their interests than the Conservatives. Unionised people, on the other hand, have different issues at heart. So they might very well be voting for a party that isn't looking out for their interests, at least in the working world.
I wasn't trying anything. But, yes, 1/3 of the entire country is a huge proportion of the population. Any party that would discard one third of the population would be foolish.
----------
That's under 1/3 of the total *workforce*, not the population... and at the rate the percentage of unionized workers is falling, soon it will be about 1/4.
True, but then you can get into the dependent families of unionised workers and you start to talk about a large portion of the population.
"And you want to run the country."
"but of course AA" Layton knows how the media tick; he knows without a doubt that the media will protect him-they have too or else he will expose them to the public for what they(media)really are, did and continue to do-MANIPULATE.
Layton and Duceppe both have the MSM and the medias' beloved LPOC on the palm of their hands to do with as they please.
Mind you, there are reporters out there who are very good and do take their work seriously for the love of their country. Unfortunately they are really heard or seen.
Post a Comment