Hi Rob,
On , you wrote me:

 RM>> The problem with not voting or 'potest' voting for some
 RM>> no-name party is that, perhaps the party you voted for before
 RM>> has peeved you some but do you want to see the next runner-up
 RM>> in power instead? You really should be voting for the one
 RM>> you want in there the most, or at least the one you Hate the
 RM>> least, because someone else getting in may do you more damage
 RM>> in the long run.

 MG>>You do make good points.  That's the Catch 22 of the situation.

 MG>>Consider the results from yesterday: the Green Party managed to
 MG>> increase thei
  >>share of the vote to the point where they now qualify for funding
  >> via the
  >>system.  I did not vote Green, but those who did probably were
  >> largely people
  >>who saw value in making a statement with their vote.

 RM> True.. as long as a party they REALLY didn't want in didn't get
 RM> in by a hair in their riding.

 MG>>They did not know the Green Party was going to do as well
  >>as it did.  The net effect is there is now another small
  >>party for the big guys to think about.

 RM> They won't think about it much though. Only a decent number of
 RM> seats gives any party leverage. They can now moan about things
 RM> being passed that they don't like (the green party can) but
 RM> with no fprce behind it they will be ignored much like the
 RM> NDP has been in the past 11 years.

But growth is growth.  The NDP have had some too.

What the scene might be in another 11 years is anyone's guess.

 MG>>What did you think of the minority result for the Liberal party?
  >>What did you think of the increase in NDP ranks?  Do you think the
  >> message wa
  >>Canadians weren't happy with the status quo, and considered the
  >> alternatives
  >>still to be a bit unpalatable?

 RM> The result was probably the least harmful alternative. The Greens and
 RM> the NDP were, I think, either protest votes against the Liberals
 RM> or people who believe everything they hear being bribed by
 RM> promisses of great things without explanation of how those things
 RM> would get paid for.

 RM> I don't really vote Party, I vote Policy. I find most people who
 RM> are loyal to a single Party have blinders on and their party
 RM> can do no wrong. One staunch Conservative I was talking with
 RM> was complaining about the Trudeau years of high spending...
 RM> In his first 3 terms (11 years) no question he did put us in
 RM> debt by an extra $44 Billion... But this person didn't even
 RM> seem to notice Mulroney (Conservative) who increased our national
 RM> debt by $300 Billion in just 9 years.

I think people develop Party Staunchness due to apathy.  They let the Party
do the thinking and just support them because they sounded good the one
time you were listening.

Were I king, every citizen would have to cast a vote and there would be an
abstain box on the ballot.  And no lawyer could sit in the Commons.

 MG>>If I were Paul Martin, right now I would be doing some thinking
 MG>> about how I
  >>was going to win the NEXT election in 2008 or 2009 (assuming they
  >> survive
  >>non-confidence votes until then).  I think the message should be
  >> clear:
  >>Canadians want responsible government.

 RM> No question people want to see better handling of the coffers..
 RM> That's what this 'near loss' was all about... However, I'd think
 RM> if Martin ran Tomorrow he might pick up enough votes to form a
 RM> majority because a LOT of people in Quebec would, I think, dearly
 RM> love to change their vote from the P.Q., now that their true
 RM> colours are showing, and Quebec only votes P.Q or Liberal.

True colours?  Advise.

The news has been particularly quiet concerning Federal government issues
since the election.  Curious.

 MG>>I'm no expert at politics.  I'm a victim of apathy, but I'm
  >>trying to change.

 RM> I'd say I'm about the same. There have been a lot of times when
 RM> I looked at party policies and I didn't care WHO got in since
 RM> they would all do about the same amount of good/harm..

 RM> That's only a viable 'choice' though if you KNOW what everyone
 RM> is planning to do to/for you once they get in...

You got to trust them to be telling the truth then.  Such hard is
exceedingly hard to come by.



From the desk of...


   Michael
... Most Canadians still think drinking is the stuff of comedy.
- Edward Philips, novelist, Sunday Best, 1990



--- Devil's Point System 6.66