• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

If it came down to these.. Who would you vote for?

Which would you vote for?

  • Total voters
    38
  • Poll closed .
CanadaJohn said:
Proudly
Click to expand...

This would be a good time to mention that I often use the expression "American conservative."

Conservatives are not the same all over the world.

You may identify with American conservatives...but there IS a difference...and I think the difference between an American conservative and a conservative in Canada, the United Kingdom, Germany, or Australia...is CONSIDERABLE.
 
I would sooner be strung up by my toes than vote for any of them.
 
Definitely Cruz. He's the smartest and the most conservative of the 3.
 
None in the primaries. As for the general , we are not limited vote R.
 
Frank Apisa said:
This would be a good time to mention that I often use the expression "American conservative."

Conservatives are not the same all over the world.

You may identify with American conservatives...but there IS a difference...and I think the difference between an American conservative and a conservative in Canada, the United Kingdom, Germany, or Australia...is CONSIDERABLE.
Click to expand...

I don't disagree - I've pointed out to several DP members, both conservative and liberal, that I'm a Canadian conservative and that generally means that we believe the government should stay out of our wallets and out of our bedrooms. We prefer smaller government that takes less of our tax dollars and spends them wisely on those things government can do best and should do and we don't want them legislating in areas of personal preference and individual responsibility. Canadian conservative governments don't always meet those goals, but generally they try to. It's one of the reasons I strongly supported Harper's conservative government because Harper was set against those in his party who wanted to legislate on a variety of social issues, such as abortion, that Harper felt the government shouldn't get involved in.

American conservatives, in my view, are too much in the weeds on social issues. It's why I support a candidate like Jeb Bush who is personally socially conservative but at the same time he doesn't wear it on his sleeve or push social conservative positions onto and into government - he resists that urge because I believe he recognizes that's not government's role.

Anyway, it's good of you to notice there's a difference.
 
CanadaJohn said:
I don't disagree - I've pointed out to several DP members, both conservative and liberal, that I'm a Canadian conservative and that generally means that we believe the government should stay out of our wallets and out of our bedrooms. We prefer smaller government that takes less of our tax dollars and spends them wisely on those things government can do best and should do and we don't want them legislating in areas of personal preference and individual responsibility. Canadian conservative governments don't always meet those goals, but generally they try to. It's one of the reasons I strongly supported Harper's conservative government because Harper was set against those in his party who wanted to legislate on a variety of social issues, such as abortion, that Harper felt the government shouldn't get involved in.

American conservatives, in my view, are too much in the weeds on social issues. It's why I support a candidate like Jeb Bush who is personally socially conservative but at the same time he doesn't wear it on his sleeve or push social conservative positions onto and into government - he resists that urge because I believe he recognizes that's not government's role.

Anyway, it's good of you to notice there's a difference.
Click to expand...

Sounds like American conservatives need to take notes.
 
Saucey said:
Vote for your man.. Hypothetically speaking if your choice was one of the 3 candidates..
Click to expand...
I can't. I just... can't.

Probably Cruz, but it would hurt.

Keeping with the spirit of the thread and it was one of these three or die. In reality, the Libertarian would get my vote. Either that or I'd write in my name.
 
David_N said:
Sounds like American conservatives need to take notes.
Click to expand...

Not all American conservatives are social conservatives - many of them are like me. Many Canadian conservatives are similarly social conservatives like those in America - it's just the numbers are far fewer here.

I'd say American liberals could also take some notes and spend less time trying to insert government into our every waking hour.
 
CanadaJohn said:
Not all American conservatives are social conservatives - many of them are like me. Many Canadian conservatives are similarly social conservatives like those in America - it's just the numbers are far fewer here.

I'd say American liberals could also take some notes and spend less time trying to insert government into our every waking hour.
Click to expand...

Well... if you look at who is leading the polls on the conservative side and conservative views on social issues here..
 
David_N said:
Well... if you look at who is leading the polls on the conservative side and conservative views on social issues here..
Click to expand...

Donald Trump isn't even slightly socially conservative - he's a liberal Democrat opportunist.

Ben Carson is very much socially conservative.

Each are in the low to mid 20's. The other social conservatives, like Huckabee and Santorum are nowhere to be found.

That tells me that the social conservatives in America are a fringe of some importance, but not definitive of America's conservatives. Those social conservatives by and large hated Romney and yet he was the party nominee last time out. They can make noise and mischief and the liberal media likes to exploit it and hold it up as definitive, but it's really not.
 
CanadaJohn said:
Donald Trump isn't even slightly socially conservative - he's a liberal Democrat opportunist.

Ben Carson is very much socially conservative.

Each are in the low to mid 20's. The other social conservatives, like Huckabee and Santorum are nowhere to be found.

That tells me that the social conservatives in America are a fringe of some importance, but not definitive of America's conservatives. Those social conservatives by and large hated Romney and yet he was the party nominee last time out. They can make noise and mischief and the liberal media likes to exploit it and hold it up as definitive, but it's really not.
Click to expand...

Ted cruz, ben carson, marco rubio.. all social conservatives.
Donald trump is not a liberal, he is xenophobic, appeals to racists..
 
CanadaJohn said:
Donald Trump isn't even slightly socially conservative - he's a liberal Democrat opportunist.

Ben Carson is very much socially conservative.

Each are in the low to mid 20's. The other social conservatives, like Huckabee and Santorum are nowhere to be found.

That tells me that the social conservatives in America are a fringe of some importance, but not definitive of America's conservatives. Those social conservatives by and large hated Romney and yet he was the party nominee last time out. They can make noise and mischief and the liberal media likes to exploit it and hold it up as definitive, but it's really not.
Click to expand...

Thank you for your kind reply earlier, John.

If I may...an observation:

If one were to take the "social conservatives" who "wear their social conservatism on their sleeves" (which include the zealot "Christians" of the American south) out of the Republican Party...it would be a fringe party smaller than the Liberal Party, the Conservative Party, the Libertarian Party, and probably the Mickey Mouse Party.

The strength of American conservatism, unfortunately, comes almost entirely from an element that would be considered with suspicion, if not contempt, by the conservatives of many other countries.

Just an opinion...but one I think needs airing.
 
That would be a very very sad state of affairs, but Mr. Green Eggs and Ham is definitely out.....As is Trump. That leaves Carson by default. Lord help us.
 
Grand Mal said:
Off topic, I know, but what do you think the Conservatives did wrong?
Click to expand...

Canadians wanted their own Obama - we'll see how long the instant gratification of a style over substance leader suits them.

Other than the natural desire for change, the Conservatives had several problems.

1. The Senate - they tried, as they and the Canadian public wanted, to do something to revise or eliminate the Senate and the Supreme Court blocked them. Harper was left in the no-win situation of having to appoint Senators in order to follow the constitution and keep the Senate viable and the Senate in turn sat slopping out of the trough and Harper was blamed for it.

2. The Supreme Court blocking the Canadian government doing what Canadians wanted became an almost monthly occurrence in the Conservative's majority government from 2011 onward. The Conservatives handled that problem badly by criticizing the Supreme Court. Unlike in the US, Canadians generally respect their Supreme Court.

3. The Conservatives lost their way, in my view, by picking winners and losers using tax policy. Instead of niche tax credits and cuts for some Canadians, the Conservatives should have stuck with across the board tax reductions in the GST and/or personal income tax for all Canadians. The Liberal plan to reduce some of the lower personal income tax rates across the board as opposed to income splitting and childcare tax credits were favoured by a lot of seniors who were left out of the Conservative's plan. Seniors supported Harper previously but I'll be he lost a lot of them because of this.

4. Canadian Muslims came out in record numbers and overwhelmingly supported the Liberals. Trudeau played that demographic perfectly even though his play was pandering.

Bottom line, however, was that Canadians wanted a change for whatever personal reason and the shiny new toy enticed them as opposed to the dull old toy and the shiny new toy won. I believe Canada will suffer because of it, but I'm in the minority at this point.
 
Frank Apisa said:
Thank you for your kind reply earlier, John.

If I may...an observation:

If one were to take the "social conservatives" who "wear their social conservatism on their sleeves" (which include the zealot "Christians" of the American south) out of the Republican Party...it would be a fringe party smaller than the Liberal Party, the Conservative Party, the Libertarian Party, and probably the Mickey Mouse Party.

The strength of American conservatism, unfortunately, comes almost entirely from an element that would be considered with suspicion, if not contempt, by the conservatives of many other countries.

Just an opinion...but one I think needs airing.
Click to expand...

I think enemies of American conservatism have done an excellent job of selling just what you're saying. Unfortunately, while it's not true in my view, the American people have come to view Republicans as old, white, socially conservative, and judgmental. Granted, there's always some truth to every lie and Republicans should realize it. And it is good to air it but would be better to actually do something about it. A charlatan like Trump should never have been allowed to run in the Republican primaries and have that stage in the debates - he is single handedly severely damaging the Republican brand and it may be a long time before that can heal if the Republicans don't end up choosing a candidate like Jeb Bush against Clinton. The House and Senate elections of the past several cycles show that the American people are receptive to what Republicans are selling but only when it's responsible and respectful in its views. The Tea Party disaster in the 2010 Senate races is a prime example when so many fringe nuts got elected in primaries and the Republicans lost the Senate because of it. They cleared that up in 2014 and won control. They can throw that advantage away this time around if they're not careful.
 
CanadaJohn said:
Canadians wanted their own Obama - we'll see how long the instant gratification of a style over substance leader suits them.

Other than the natural desire for change, the Conservatives had several problems.

1. The Senate - they tried, as they and the Canadian public wanted, to do something to revise or eliminate the Senate and the Supreme Court blocked them. Harper was left in the no-win situation of having to appoint Senators in order to follow the constitution and keep the Senate viable and the Senate in turn sat slopping out of the trough and Harper was blamed for it.

2. The Supreme Court blocking the Canadian government doing what Canadians wanted became an almost monthly occurrence in the Conservative's majority government from 2011 onward. The Conservatives handled that problem badly by criticizing the Supreme Court. Unlike in the US, Canadians generally respect their Supreme Court.

3. The Conservatives lost their way, in my view, by picking winners and losers using tax policy. Instead of niche tax credits and cuts for some Canadians, the Conservatives should have stuck with across the board tax reductions in the GST and/or personal income tax for all Canadians. The Liberal plan to reduce some of the lower personal income tax rates across the board as opposed to income splitting and childcare tax credits were favoured by a lot of seniors who were left out of the Conservative's plan. Seniors supported Harper previously but I'll be he lost a lot of them because of this.

4. Canadian Muslims came out in record numbers and overwhelmingly supported the Liberals. Trudeau played that demographic perfectly even though his play was pandering.

Bottom line, however, was that Canadians wanted a change for whatever personal reason and the shiny new toy enticed them as opposed to the dull old toy and the shiny new toy won. I believe Canada will suffer because of it, but I'm in the minority at this point.
Click to expand...

For me, number one was the perception of arrogance. Harper was too willing to shut down debate in Parliament and sometimes his cabinet ministers said things like, "You're either with us or you're with the child pornographers!"
Number two was those off-putting attack ads. I've always voted Liberal federally unless I didn't like the leader or platform- then I didn't vote. I'd decided to sit this one out until those ads pissed me off. Didn't matter in my case because I live in a safe Conservative riding but those ads had the opposite effect to what was hoped for.
And yeah, flash sells. I'm pretty confident though that this Liberal government won't about-face now they've been elected.
 
I'd put the country on Cruz control.
 
Grand Mal said:
For me, number one was the perception of arrogance. Harper was too willing to shut down debate in Parliament and sometimes his cabinet ministers said things like, "You're either with us or you're with the child pornographers!"
Number two was those off-putting attack ads. I've always voted Liberal federally unless I didn't like the leader or platform- then I didn't vote. I'd decided to sit this one out until those ads pissed me off. Didn't matter in my case because I live in a safe Conservative riding but those ads had the opposite effect to what was hoped for.
And yeah, flash sells. I'm pretty confident though that this Liberal government won't about-face now they've been elected.
Click to expand...

I'd forgotten about the ads - good point - I blocked them out and I agree they were terrible. You don't win elections, as an incumbent, by targeting the other guy no matter how legitimate the target - you tell people what you've done well and what you want to do in the future that makes them want to keep you in place. And the Trudeau ad that came out in the last couple of weeks that basically started "I'll tell you what I'm ready for...." was quite effective, in my opinion. That one ad shot down over a year's worth of "He's just not ready" ads.
 
If I had to choose, Trump. At least he sometimes says things I can somewhat get behind. Besides, he'd probably piss off Congress within the first 100 days, so for over 3 years nothing would get done anyways =p.
 
Saucey said:
Vote for your man.. Hypothetically speaking if your choice was one of the 3 candidates..
Click to expand...

I choose crippling alcoholism.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom