gdp's Comments

Macleans.ca : Looking north (II)

Mon, 9 May 2011 19:30:15 +0000

CR, you may have noticed that Emily is like Humpty Dumpty. When she uses a word, it means what she says it means; she pays it extra.

Macleans.ca : Ch-ch-changes

Mon, 9 May 2011 18:27:31 +0000

Just exercising my hyperbole muscle.

Macleans.ca : Ch-ch-changes

Mon, 9 May 2011 18:26:54 +0000

Not just history's, but in the entire existence of the universe. Goodbye, cruel comment board. . . .

Macleans.ca : Ch-ch-changes

Mon, 9 May 2011 16:16:58 +0000

Now we're going need to learn a completely new set of identities to ignore or anticipate among the comments.

Macleans.ca : Looking north

Mon, 9 May 2011 15:58:00 +0000

These comments ignore the similar appeals made to families and immigrant groups by the Liberals and the New Democrats. I doubt they had any effect on the electorate's choices.

Macleans.ca : What's Wrong With This Picture (Literally)?

Mon, 9 May 2011 15:47:14 +0000

Is Wicca not a religion?

Macleans.ca : 'It was just symbolic'

Mon, 9 May 2011 02:04:02 +0000

What are the odds she will be a worse MP than Rahim Jaffer was? I put them at 50/50. And he was re-elected several times.

Macleans.ca : 'It was just symbolic'

Mon, 9 May 2011 02:00:18 +0000

Our CPC and LPC at their best.

Macleans.ca : How Osama bin Laden was hidden in plain sight

Fri, 6 May 2011 18:43:47 +0000

It's difficult to determine what the purpose of the new Pakistani security measures in Abbottabad is. Are they trying to give the impression that they are in charge, and what happened was planned? Are there other Al-Qaeda leaders still in the area who need to be protected? Do they expect terrorist reprisals against the neighbourhood for somehow failing to protect Osama? Or is it a classic case of closing the barn door after the horse has been assassinated?

Macleans.ca : Alternate realities

Fri, 6 May 2011 17:35:44 +0000

This change faces the same seemingly insurmountable problem as the other suggested changes. Those who have power to change things got that power from the way things are. There's nothing for them to gain. The Reform Party started out with high ideals for MPs' personal power and accountability, and has morphed through time into the current, tightly and centrally controlled and secretive, CPC. Perhaps this is the only way a parliamentary system can function in a diverse country. I hope not.

Macleans.ca : Alternate realities

Fri, 6 May 2011 16:44:36 +0000

A major drawback of proportional representation is that it removes the connection between local concerns and representation. With our current system, that connection is already frayed by the dependence to each candidate on the approval of the party leader, but at least there is a locally elected person to approach with personal or local concerns. "Constituency work" is still part of the job for MPs. If, rather than changing the way votes are counted, party candidates were selected entirely by local constituency associations of the party, with no party leader approval, and those elected, the party caucus, then chose the party leader from among their number, it would make a real difference what the qualities and qualifications were of the candidates in your own consituency. This approach seems to me to be a better way of improving government in Canada.

Macleans.ca : The untold story of the 2011 election: Chapter 3

Fri, 6 May 2011 15:51:18 +0000

For the rational voter, an election is about calculating who will disappoint you the least if elected.

Macleans.ca : No country for good men

Thu, 5 May 2011 23:53:25 +0000

"Canadians are content with the way things have been under Stephen Harper." Perhaps the 40% of voters who supported CPC candidates are. What about the other 60%, who wanted someone else to be in charge?

Macleans.ca : No country for good men

Thu, 5 May 2011 23:49:16 +0000

I guess neither you nor Leo has noticed that websites customize advertising depending on the URL of the person browsing.

Macleans.ca : The fringe standings

Thu, 5 May 2011 20:33:50 +0000

The Communists only ran 20 candidates, while the Marxist-Leninists ran 70. So there were many more opportunities for the M-L Party to get votes (presumably from the near-sighted, the poorly co-ordinated, and the fans of random response, in addition to their base).

Macleans.ca : 'There's a problem'

Thu, 5 May 2011 17:06:30 +0000

During the second last week of the campaign, Rob Anders was door-knocking - 300 km from his constituency. It was in support of a vain effort to get a former PMO staffer elected in Edmonton-Strathcona. Clearly, staying were you are running is not a priority for some CPC MPs.

Macleans.ca : Did torture nab bin Laden?

Wed, 4 May 2011 18:44:22 +0000

This meme will probably be as hard to kill as the one that the 9/11 hijackers crossed to the US from Canada. The first story out of the gate seems to be the stickiest.

Macleans.ca : A personal reflection on the Ignatieff Era

Wed, 4 May 2011 16:38:15 +0000

You forgot to mention retired people. There are lots of us commenting.

Macleans.ca : A personal reflection on the Ignatieff Era

Wed, 4 May 2011 16:27:21 +0000

You criticize the Liberals because theu allegedly believe everyone who doesn't vote Liberal is a misguided idjit. In my experience, the base for every party feels that anyone who does not support their party is misguided. And why shouldn't they? No matter how they came to their beliefs, they hold them dear, and to think anyone could think otherwise is to believe themselves to be wrong. It's interesting that you can preserve the belief that the media support the Liberals when no major newspaper advised their readers to vote Liberal.

Macleans.ca : Monday vote sees modest bump in turnout

Tue, 3 May 2011 21:40:55 +0000

The published figure is probably an overestimate. Elections Canada says that the number of eligible voters does not include those who registered on election day. Assuming that at least some of them were not listed as eligible at some other polling station, and that those are not outnumbered by those registered as eligible in error (the deceased, for example), the number of eligible voters will be an underestimate, resulting in an overestimate of the percentage of eligible voters voting.