Frankly, I don't have much more to say beyond the thread name.

I'm watching a "political debate" right now and it's just like watching a continuous loop of commercials. It's essentially four guys standing around promising what they've said 100 times (and none have yet achived)... so what's the point?

I used to think that not voting was unpatriotic but honestly... all I see is a choice between adequate and mediocre, in other words it doesn't matter. It amazes me that people are suprised that voting numbers are decreasing.

History will not stop so that you can remain comfortable in apathy and indifference. Politicians become not just boring and inane, but also rapidly dangerous when we choose to pretend we can in security ignore what is happening to us.

It matters for people to participate in their collective political life. The opportunity for epidemics of poverty, suffering, oppression, and war is inversely proportional to informed popular participation in political processes. Never in history has mankind been so empowered to learn and act collectively in our own common interests. It is both childish and selfish to pretend otherwise.

Being politically aware and active is the equivalent of personal social maturity. You can rely on the "adults" to deal with affairs you consider out of your hands, or grow up and take some responsibility. We have outgrown this planet as a place where isolated people can live out their lives without regard even for the macro sense of geopolitics.

Make the seemingly miniscule choices you can at every opportunity to vote. Make the really big impact by challenging assumptions and authority. Don't be selfish- Pull your own weight: If you can't be bothered to concertedly try and leave this planet in better shape than you found it, then you diminish not only yourself, but us all.

(yawn) But you're right, political debates can be boring. I wish that moderators, elected on a differing cycle, could "close their threads" when the rhetoric of politicians flows into that flat featureless sea of politspeak without conveying anything sincere or meaningful. And that's all I have to say about that.

They can be boring, but at least they're there. Think GW would consent to a debate? Would he have the earphone in? Or maybe he's got a cranial implant by now.

We need some debates like in the old days. Bring back the Lincoln-Douglas debates. Back when people would get fiery in their politics and it was good way to waste the afternoon.

Thanks for that, nexus. The Lincoln-Douglas debates (http://www.nps.gov/liho/debates.htm) are a telling comparison, showing how our sound-byte media culture has devolved politics.

We should demand that our contemporary leaders stand and deliver in at least as thorough a fashion. Cretins like Dubya would then be laughed out of Washington, and shadowy manipulators would have a very hard time getting their soulless puppets into power.

I blame politics being restricted to a box once a year, and some fat blokes on TV. Before their decline, and still today to a lesser extent, my political body of choice wouldve been a trades union.

And a return to politics on the street wouldnt hurt (much) either. Parties and unions marching, no-go areas, picket lines and beating up the other parties campaigners. When you have faith in an idea to the point youll risk broken bones and a black eye, you can feel real solidarity. If Oswald Moseley tried to march through the East End today, he'd probably just get a mild tut from someone's mum. Politics relies on, and is about you, not the politician.

They can be boring, but at least they're there.

though they are boring, that isn't the problem. It's that they all just spout vacant plataudes at each other. In my 'short' time as an observer of politics I have yet to not know precisely what a given candidate will say. Honestly, why doesn't each party just program their platform into a computer and let it run the show. It'd be exactly the same as now but we wouldn't have to pay them and there would be no more scandals.

The same special interests now trampling on life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness would take over all programming- But it won't in such a case be the same at all: Scandals, oppression, and wars will go into overdrive. Please try another justification for apathy.

who said anything about apathy? My father is a politician, my grandmother was a politician and I'm active. I just don't think I'm going to vote this time around because, as much as parties try to distinguish themselves from each other, I can't help but notice when they actually get into office it's EXACTLY the same shit in a different pile.

To the outside world, the 2004 Presidential race will be overwhelmingly about whether the American public endorses the Bush Doctrine. To a slightly lesser extent, this will also be perceived as a foreign policy referendum by both voting and politically apathetic Americans, because there is no more profound story happening in current American life than what our place in the world is and shall be, and the Bush Administration picked up a new trajectory without debate. Just because the Kerry campaign has failed to offer coherent alternatives to major policies does not mean that counterincumbency has no message. If the Bush Administration is fired, the successor will have to take notice.

If all that our polls for President (since we don't really vote) do is check these two willful horses as they snap at each other in gridlock, it's a better choice than just letting them run wild. Voting is just one small political responsibility, but this time around, it is going to be pivotal. There are two proposed futures murkily visible ahead, neither glorious, but neither completely alike. And there is the choice not to choose, which is the darkest road of all for any sincere (small "d") democrat.

"who said anything about apathy?"
I did. In your case, it's a failure to discriminate an abrupt and dangerous change in zeitgeist that is closely associated with the Bush Administration.

actually you folks in america are the exception, I agree whole heartedly that every person including those in comas should be working day and night to remove bush. He's the scariest leader of a democracy in history, giving him in the presidency again is like giving an 8 year old bully a tank for christmas.

My comments were regarding the election in canada. I know it's sometimes hard for you guys to remeber this but believe it or not, elections have been known to occur outside of the US.

So you hate politics and politicians.... why not get involved and change it from the inside then?

Buffys: Oh, Canada! My mistake - I had forgotton your situation. Well, good luck up there, too, and save some room for we potential refugees down South. I would be clueless whom to vote for there.

So you hate politics and politicians.... why not get involved and change it from the inside then?

I addressed this earlier.

I know this is a radical idea but you may find reading the thread before actually commenting on it often saves you from saying something stupid. I know, it's a crazy thought but it really works. For christ's sake, the thread isn't even a page long yet, it's not that hard.

just add that to the list of stupid things i've said. (the count is around 3,436 right now) lazziness loses every time...

:foot also in mouth:

I will just have to be King then and solve all your problems.

Penultimate frustrating issue for any enfranchised citizenry.
Same here buffys, though I will be voting against Bush.
It does seem like the politico's are so much blah blah blah.
Meet the new boss, same as the old boss

I sang O' Canada before a hockey game once when the Canadian singer was a no show. It felt kind of wierd not being my home or native land. But the show must go on. Maybe next election you'll find a candidate that doesn't blow.

hey, youll have to fight George the second for the title, crazy151 drinker

Buffys being from Canada and watching those debates I personally felt a bit better. If you look at the debates the fact that the Liberals are on the hot seat, and the NDP is coming back up the debate was a really good one. Considering the last 3 elections with the Liberal dictatorship, where Jean hardly had to talk I think these were much better. Like in the US here in Canada we have a real choice in this election, if we get the Conservatives in there, then Canada will change…for the worse, increased militarization, increased cohesion with the US on NMD, partial privatization of healthcare, and scraping of the Kyoto accord. We really might as well get rid of the border to tell you the truth. Most Canadians are wiling to pay the taxes they do as long as Canada maintains its social structure, but the Conservatives want to cut taxes very deeply yet increasing spending, it’s really quite disgusting. If anything this election changes the fate of Canada for a very long period of time.

I like the the NDP's views a lot, my province has been under their leadership for 12 years now. Unfortunately, they've almost singlehandedly made us among the poorest provinces in canada. It's getting so bad that our youth, professionals and businesses in every field are actually RUNNING to get out of here. From our very personal experience, the NDP tends to be one of those parties that looks good on paper but is a disaster in practice. They (like all other parties) talk about more healthcare spending but we are already #1 in spending on the planet and healthcare is still teetering on collapse, something has to give.

I find the PC's are quite good on a small level (provincially) but as leaders of the country I think they are too hawkish. That means the liberals are left, not a perfect scenario certainly but they are the best of a bunch of bad choices in my opinion. I very much think they would perform better as a minority so I hope the pc's have a good showing but the liberals are the least scary option in my opinion.

I like the the NDP's views a lot, my province has been under their leadership for 12 years now. Unfortunately, they've almost singlehandedly made us among the poorest provinces in canada.

Sorry but I am running a blank here? Are we talking Saskatchewan? If so your province has always been at the bottom ring. The NDP is not a party that will ever really win a federal election, the NDP best serves Canada as a strong opposition party. I think we as Canadians have to realize that its either going to be Liberal or Conservative. If the Conservatives get into power I’d much rather have a stronger NDP opposition then a Liberal one.

I find the PC's are quite good on a small level (provincially) but as leaders of the country I think they are too hawkish.

Coming from Ontario, and being a product of the “common sense” revolution that statement does seem to be a stretch. The Liberals aren’t much better either, and the NDP were also administrative disasters. To tell you the truth I don’t see anything here that Harris did that was really that much better for Ontario, I suspect that this federal gov’t will spread the “common sense revolution” across Canada and the “common hatred” of it will spread. Also the PC’s don’t exist anymore, they have been taken over by the ultra-conservative Albertan based Canadian Alliance (yuck).

[i]If so your province has always been at the bottom ring.

if you mean it's never been the richest province that's certainly true but we've been stable, successful and happily small for most of our history. It's our more recent hemorrhaging of manpower, business and professionals that concerns us and it is very closely linked to the ndp's time in power.

Also the PC’s don’t exist anymore, they have been taken over by the ultra-conservative Albertan based Canadian Alliance (yuck).

I should have been more clear, when I say pc's it's an umbrella term for all the conservative offshoots. Alberta is a good example of how a right wing, nut case of a party can actually do really well as long as they are only making provincial level decisions. Like or hate their politics, alberta (nearly identical in geology and climate to saskatchewan) is practically swimming in cash.

Since provinces don't get to make the big decisions I'd be ok with conservative party in power. They couldn't do any worse than the ndp's without actually nuking saskatchewan or randomly blowing up local buisnesses.

I should have been more clear, when I say pc's it's an umbrella term for all the conservative offshoots. Alberta is a good example of how a right wing, nut case of a party can actually do really well as long as they are only making provincial level decisions. Like or hate their politics, alberta (nearly identical in geology and climate to saskatchewan) is practically swimming in cash.

Why is Alberta “swimming in cash” and Sask. not? Oil, if he didn’t have oil to prop up his government he would be in the same situation as Sask. I don’t give him too much credit (Klein) he is damned lucky he has so many oil reserves. Look at Ontario who doesn’t have oil, but is by far the largest province in Canada (in terms of economy, political power). Under the PC’s we have a $5 billion deficit, I thought that conservatives are supposed to be in the black not the red? Wasn’t the common sense revolution supposed to reign in spending? Sadly most Canadians have experienced the revolution.

Why is Alberta “swimming in cash” and Sask. not? Oil.

actually we have a great deal of both oil and natural gas still untapped in saskatchewan.

But I suppose the bottom line is the pc's have done badly in ontario and the ndp has done badly in saskatchewan. I'd rather have a party lead by satan himself at this point than see the ndp's in power any longer and you might say the same about pc's in ontario so that brings us back to my thread title, "god... I hate politics".

But I suppose the bottom line is the pc's have done badly in ontario and the ndp has done badly in saskatchewan. I'd rather have a party lead by satan himself at this point than see the ndp's in power any longer and you might say the same about pc's in ontario so that brings us back to my thread title, "god... I hate politics".

That is the nature of democracy, trust me hating politics is ok, but at least we have a choice, so really we shouldn’t complain. That’s very western elitist of us.

wrong! I only can't complain if I'm not involved (and I am) so I get to complain all I want. Frankly I think not complaining is "elitist", it's spits at the whole concept of a democracy (that and not being involved).

Since the supreme court is the actual power in the country though, I suppose it could be argued we don't (technically) live in a democracy.

wrong! I only can't complain if I'm not involved (and I am) so I get to complain all I want. Frankly I think not complaining is "elitist", it's spits at the whole concept of a democracy (that and not being involved).

I think complaining about the democratic process (which you are doing) is elitist, not complaining about the parties policies. If this current system of political management doesn’t satisfy you then what alternate political system will?

I'm not complaining about the democratic process, just our deeply flawed iteration of it.

I really don't see the flaw in the system; we in Canada have a good cross section of opinion in our parties. We are significantly better off then the US; at least here we have a real choice in our government. You might not like the effects of these governments but that’s the fate of the game. Politics is not for the faint hearted, and public office is not the easiest in the world.

I think being a politician is one of the most difficult, underpaid, under-appreciated and over-criticized jobs in canada. It's the politics I loathe, not the politicians. I'm the first to admit these people are walking talking political ads because we don't allow them to be anything else. Thats one of the reasons I appreciate klien, I disagree with nearly every word out of his mouth but at least he will say and do unexpected things. And generally when he screws up he's quick to admit it and move on, that is not just rare but nonexistent anywhere else.

But you "don't see the flaw"? are you just yanking my chain or are you being serious? I'll assume serious. I could scream for hours about the senate but I won't, I'll just leave it at that. Huge flaw #1, the senate. Huge flaw #2 the supreme court, don't get me wrong I believe strongly in the concept but they step further and further out of their area of responsibility taking a lot of power away from those we vote in. Or more simply put, political decisions are being made by appointee's that answer to no one, that's incredibly dangerous. I could keep going but I'm on my way out, our system is better that a theocracy, monarchy or dictatorship, I'll give it that but it is deeply, deeply flawed.

I could scream for hours about the senate but I won't, I'll just leave it at that. Huge flaw #1, the senate.

Oh god who cares about the Senate! It’s not like they are ever there, most never even come. If you have a problem with the senate then fine, but I don’t see why there is so much controversy on the Senate. I know ppl in the West want the Triple E senate, but I really don’t see the controversy. I know the NDP wants to just get rid of it, but really when was the last time they did anything?

Huge flaw #2 the supreme court, don't get me wrong I believe strongly in the concept but they step further and further out of their area of responsibility taking a lot of power away from those we vote in.

I personally see the courts as something to be trusted, much more then the legislature in certain circumstances, for example abortion, and marriage, etc. They aren’t bound by the very same thing you seem hate, politics. They are much more objective then our legislatures and would do a much better job at protecting our civil liberties then the commons.

Or more simply put, political decisions are being made by appointee's that answer to no one, that's incredibly dangerous. I could keep going but I'm on my way out, our system is better that a theocracy, monarchy or dictatorship, I'll give it that but it is deeply, deeply flawed.

Let’s not get ahead of ourselves here; the courts have to exist to make sure that no laws contradict the charter of rights, and the constitution. I can understand why someone wouldn’t like the structure of our government, based on the British form. But do we really want the American?