One Question

If you could ask the Leader of the Official Opposition one question before the upcoming election what would it be?

When are we going to invade the US and take over the world with our secret superhuman army that runs on maple syrup?

The birth-place of democracy has rejected austerity as an unethical, unworkable economic policy  - what is your opinion on austerity?

ALSO

There is a strong argument that banking credit should be a public resource like water or hydro and not a for-profit institution - do you agree?

Is capitalism the final stage of human social evolution, or is there still progress to be made?

Currently the Prime Minister of Canada has sole ability to authorize military force - would you agree that in a democracy this decision should only occur by a vote in Parliament?

Harper has said that people "should not commit sociology" - is sociology a dangerous or criminal activity that should be avoid?

Who do you support in the Ukraine: the fascists or the anti-fascists?

Who do you support in Syria: the government or ISIS?

What is your view on the apartheid in Israel? (Always a fun one!)

I saw Mulcair SPEAK IN nORTH bAY tonight. It was actually good, he is clearly against austerity. If I can paraphrase, he basically said it is complete nonsense that Canada can not afford social programs because a few billionaires said so. He pledged $15 min Wage and $15 a day public child care. He also want to return Canada to the role of diplomats rather that the military operations that Harper has attached us too.

I sincerely hope when he gets elected he backs up these positions.

Thanks for the report.

I'm not sure what stage the negotiations are for a televised 'leaders debate' are - but perhaps I will go against all experience and logic and actually watch it.

I plan to watch/listen to the debate if it is on the radio, or if I can stream it on the net. I don't have cable, and even though you can stream "The National", I am worried about what they will edit out from the debate. The quality of CBC's reporting has been in a nose-dive for years. IMHO.

I have to unfortunately agree that CBC's reporting has been terrible for a number of years now. It is sad.

The decline in CBC is a national tragedy but the core problem with these debates is that they are negotiated between the major parties media hacks and the whatever network is saddled with broadcasting them.

It is not a truly 'public' debate but an arrangement worked-out between a few PR people who want to rig everything in their candidates favor - and a key part of that is keeping smaller parties from even appearing of the stage. The current debate is in trouble according to this headline: NDP says Tom Mulcair won't debate if Harper won't; Elizabeth May furious at 'doublecross'


I highly recommend looking over the Wikipedia article on the Canadian leaders' debates - if only for this great picture of Joe Clark photo-bombing Pentecostal whacko Stockwell Day. Imagine when a Conservative candidate would do something like this for a health-care!

Did anyone watch the debate?

Yeah - well, I watched a few live twitter feeds.  No one fucked-up, everyone played their role competently.

I was nicely surprised by the crowd's cheering when Muclair said he would strike down Bill C-51.  It is always fun watching Harper get rattled when May and Muclair double-team him. Trudeau has a tricky balancing act because he is selling idealism AND Liberals' security policies that resemble the Conservatives. Foreign policy is still a mess: no one will criticize NATO or dare face the wrath of all the Ukrainian-Canadian voters. Harper invoked chaos in Chinese Markets as a reason to keep him in power - I got to look into Harper's relationship to China someday, something strange is going on.

At the end I was worried though. Harper knows 1/3 of Canadian will vote for him no matter what and the opposition is split. He just has to sit there and be cynical.

I watched it as well and I really wanted someone to take a stand against NATO's aggression, however, I did read some of the Green parties "visions" and they apparently do take a mild stance against NATO.  Here is what the website says "Re-align our defence spending - increasing the emphasis on disaster assistance, and shifting our focus away from NATO war missions towards UN Peacekeeping contributions".  

It was about the time they were discussing foreign policy that I was struggling and wanted to throw the TV through the window...

I would also like to know more about Harper and the Chinese.

I watched it. Mulcair played it safer than I would have liked, he seemed to let Elizabeth May go in for the hits. I also noticed she often said "I agree with Mr. Mulcair". I suspect the two of them planned that. This debate was a lot more controlled and calculated than most I have seen over the years. Usually once they get going some things go off script, not so much in this one.

I hope for an ndp govt in Oct. I want to give the ndp a chance to prove they can be different. I hope they don't let me down if they win. I don't expect to agree with all their policies, but I want some of the control back from corporations. At the very minimum have the control systems revealed to the common public.

I agree with you. I want to give the NDP a chance at governing. I don't agree with all their policies but it is a step in the right direction. I have concerns about their stance on free trade agreements and have written the local NDP canidate to ask his views and how he would vote on CETA and the TPP and I have yet to receive a reply. Muclair has supported trade agreements that had Canadian worker opposition and that makes me uneasy about these big agreements.
Don't get me wrong ...I support the NDP and will be voting for them and dancing and cheering if they win. I am just voicing some concerns.

having spent the last decade insulating myself as much as possible from the hope-slaying conflagration of puppet show lying smiles and earth-crime atrocities that is politics I have to say I'm a little surprised, is there actually a chance that the NDP could win?

In a two party system I would imagine an outlier would have to become one of the two (in everything but name)

I haven't voted since I was 18 and covered the ballot with anarchy symbols. I must admit I have zero faith in our system, and even less in the power of my vote. I'll never forget my mom telling me she was voting for (whichever puppet/party it was) because they were going to win. It must have been around the same time as a character on one of my shows betrayed his side because "he knew what way the wind was blowing", the kind of cowardly pragmatism that will ensure the lowest common denominator always wins.

pretty off-topic. my one question (not that I'd expect an answer):

lord Mulcair, has there ever been anyone you met in the world of politics that you consider a good person?

how's this for a question, what would happen if we separated wealth and power? Say if you want to go into politics you have a concrete salary cap. If you want to be wealthy pursue wealth, but if you want to be part of the group that makes policy you cannot earn more than x.

I have voted in every election and all but one or two I have made my own box that says "no confidence" and put a check beside it. I know it was considered a spoiled ballot but I want to have my voice.