It occurred to me that, when the shoes are a-dropping and the Who-skins a-warbling, I get a little sidetracked.
Due (mainly) to this, I seem full of baloney on past promises made, and prescriptions that seem to modify over time.
Spurs me to address three things quickly (my fragile self-image, this is partly a self-care exercise.)
Then, at the bottom, I'm going to tell you something about myself.
Will unmask me somewhat, but only in small circles.... so small, its safe to say what's on my mind yet remain anonymous ('cause its cool being anonymous!!!)
Promises Part:
1. Manitoba United, I said, needed the PC's and Liberals to Unite.
Then I said the Greens, too.
Q: Why?
A: Because it is a radical concept that I am unpacking slowly, but surely. I'm not done yet.
Hey listen, the Greens are key. How the PC's and Liberals treat them is a litmus test. How James & Co. flex to accommodate this golden opportunity will be... a defining movement.
Mark my words.
Thought I should make that clear.
2. I promised you a glimpse into the future....
Yes I did, and here it is:
Two elections from now, Manitoba United supporters may chose to leave (or not) under circumstances far more kind due to the changes in the electoral process which I (and others) espouse.
More fun with that later, throwing it out in bite-form now to stir your imagination and make part-good on the promise.
3. Promised list of factors influencing the Manitoba United Vote (up or down).
I'll use super-summary if / then's now, filling out 'poorly, late, widely embraced', etc. later:
A. The 'Down' list:
1. If done poorly, then more vote splitting and voter apathy.
2. If done late, then same as above.
3. If done small, then same...
Poorly / late / small cause downward pressure.
B. The 'Up' List:
1. If widely embraced, then army of highly motivated volunteers.
2. If honest philosophical underpinnings, then attract those who reject 'phony'.
3. If well explained, then understood and (more likely) supported.
4. If trustworthy 'platform', then can leave 'there' and join 'here'.
There are many sub-groups under these main headings, but I believe they are the main headings, as a list, so I present.
Upshot: this is a risk.
Execution is key, obviously. It is our responsibility to execute.
Our responsibility....
Right, Uncle Bob?
And so lastly...
About Me.
Sigh... ok.
I build 'lets-all-work-together' systems. I'm frickin' serious. On computers and such. That's me.
I have world-wide patent, trade secret, and mucho actual software designed to bring _very different_ people together to do 'good things' commonly.
And yes I'm serious, this isn't the funny part, k?
Some systems my team and I create seem... bizarre.
They come from Manitoba, an unlikley birth place for such things. They required a tonne of resource (sweat, blood, and tears), investments not often made, especially around these parts. They are big systems... with inner working resembling living things... and that's still kinda creepy, takes getting used to.
Bizarre stuff, Keystone originals.
Yet none-the-less real, and quite effective.
I have been asked why we do such odd work.
Necessity, I say.
A mother crying in a call to you, her heart breaking. Then a dozen mothers. Then hundreds. My heart broke a bit each time, large cracks developed.
(I'd give detail on the contents of the 'calls', but I'm staying anonymous...)
Necessity comes forward and breaks my heart, then this bizarre 'system-stuff' flows out through the cracks. It is meant to help, and often it does.
My day job. Kinda weird, eh?
Now I 'hear' a new system needed in Manitoba, my home.
I imagine a Manitoba United System born in response to cries of necessity.
I, a strange expert, say this can be done. I would like to help.
It felt important to say it out loud.
So... that's a bit about me (me-me, not Rouge me... umm... yeah.)
(I feel kinda naked now.... where's my anonymous blanky?)
Hey, lets do this, right?
Ciao
Thursday, 1 March 2012
Wednesday, 29 February 2012
Manitoba United Cast: Sandra Who-skins?
Ah, the Free Press, Manitoba's great gift to clarity of purpose. We see ulterior purpose each time they put ink on newsprint about Man U, don't we?
Well, don't we?
Case in point (as if you needed it...): Sandra Who-skins (Hoskins.)
Sandra What-skins?
Heh .....
Ok, ok, sorry, sorry Sandra. To be fair, you ran in an election, and apparently you are on the Liberal board, so the Internet remembers you at least.
The Internet remembers when you said:
Three years ago, my daughter contacted Gary Doer, Theresa Oswald, Hugh McFayden and Jon Gerrard. Jon Gerrard was the only politician who responded to request for help. Jon helped us navigate the health care system to have my daughter placed on the waiting list for a double hip transplant. Six months later, my daughter had both her hips replaced one week apart. It fundamentally changed her life. From this experience, I have learned that one person can make a significant difference in the lives of others. I am running to make a difference for the voters in Dawson Trail.
Do you remember, Sandra, when the man who the Free Press says you just called a toxic obsequious toad of a carnival barker, inspired you through his right actions to take part in the political process?
Well, the Internet remembers, Sandra Who-skins. And now everyone who reads this blog does, too.
Ladies and gentlemen, let me be so very clear on the topic of why the Manitoba United party is a requirement for the next Manitoba Provincial election.
I present to you: Sandra How-skins
Because persons like Sandra are so involved in it, the current Liberal Party of Manitoba holds very, very low attraction for most right-minded persons. And we are legion.
The ideas that the party is to represent (which ones? Watch Jon for a while, it becomes obvious...), these core ideas get lost in the grade-school rhetoric of a who-gives-a-crap 'party insider' like Sandra Hoskins. Yeah, I actually know her name.
Because the Winnipeg Free Press (a misnomer if there ever was one, 'cause it ain't cheap to buy this paper...) prints Sandra little ranty, and not the real story, they win the award for most transparent ulterior motive of the year. (If we're lucky, the Black Rod (s) will hand them the prize.... go get'm big guy (s))
Sandra is an important character in the Manitoba United cast due mainly to the 'what we must reject' nature of her role. You have to walk away from her, you just have to, and that's a cool chunk of cathartic art right there. I could not have written her any better myself (and I have mad skills, and you know that.)
Oh, and by the way, Manitoba Party? Umm... did anyone hear that the name is taken? Oh you did? And you still refer to the new party as the Manitoba Party? Oh... did you ever hear of the law? I mean, like, ever?
Manitoba United Party.
It is inevitable.
Thanks to people like Sandra, the time is nigh.
Thanks Sandra. You made a difference after all.
Well, don't we?
Case in point (as if you needed it...): Sandra Who-skins (Hoskins.)
Sandra What-skins?
Heh .....
Ok, ok, sorry, sorry Sandra. To be fair, you ran in an election, and apparently you are on the Liberal board, so the Internet remembers you at least.
The Internet remembers when you said:
"Why are you running?
Do you remember, Sandra, when the man who the Free Press says you just called a toxic obsequious toad of a carnival barker, inspired you through his right actions to take part in the political process?
Well, the Internet remembers, Sandra Who-skins. And now everyone who reads this blog does, too.
Ladies and gentlemen, let me be so very clear on the topic of why the Manitoba United party is a requirement for the next Manitoba Provincial election.
I present to you: Sandra How-skins
Because persons like Sandra are so involved in it, the current Liberal Party of Manitoba holds very, very low attraction for most right-minded persons. And we are legion.
The ideas that the party is to represent (which ones? Watch Jon for a while, it becomes obvious...), these core ideas get lost in the grade-school rhetoric of a who-gives-a-crap 'party insider' like Sandra Hoskins. Yeah, I actually know her name.
Because the Winnipeg Free Press (a misnomer if there ever was one, 'cause it ain't cheap to buy this paper...) prints Sandra little ranty, and not the real story, they win the award for most transparent ulterior motive of the year. (If we're lucky, the Black Rod (s) will hand them the prize.... go get'm big guy (s))
Sandra is an important character in the Manitoba United cast due mainly to the 'what we must reject' nature of her role. You have to walk away from her, you just have to, and that's a cool chunk of cathartic art right there. I could not have written her any better myself (and I have mad skills, and you know that.)
Oh, and by the way, Manitoba Party? Umm... did anyone hear that the name is taken? Oh you did? And you still refer to the new party as the Manitoba Party? Oh... did you ever hear of the law? I mean, like, ever?
Manitoba United Party.
It is inevitable.
Thanks to people like Sandra, the time is nigh.
Thanks Sandra. You made a difference after all.
Tuesday, 28 February 2012
'Manitoba United' Breaking News: 2 Down, 1 to Go...
(I am too slow to affect history, clearly. Cant even get it all out there in Blog-print before it starts happening....)
Writing away on the next installment of of the 'Man U' pieces, when two of the three shoes drop.
The Green Shoe, and the Red Shoe.
Only need the Blue Shoe, and then Man U will be walking hard.
Look, folks, the 'Man U' official colours are Blue, Red, and Green. And I'm not taking any of these materials back, ok? The colours are picked, and they ain't changing.
The Graphic Arts tail wags the Party Dog this time.
(Hello Blue Rod.
Had enough time off yet?
Time to get busy, compadre. Man U needs your colour, ok?)
Ok, so, like I was saying, the three parties unite under one tent, and go all-out against the Kings and Queen's of Orange. Obvious enough.
If this was just about two parties joining, sure, we'd all yawn, right? Believe me, it ain't that.
The 'real' journalists thinks Uniting Green and Red is about 'saving / growing their little parties'. Go read the Freep article today, you'll see.
Hey, real journalist. Maybe you should think a little bit about what happens when the conservative base looks at the last Liberal platform and says,
'Gee Martha... they are much more fiscally conservative and responsible that the PC's....'
'And that nice Dr. Gerrard would never privatize Hydro, Stanley.'
'And those Greens actually seem to care about farmers, Martha. Look, they even understand the whole watershed issue out here in the country... Hair's a little long, but so was cousin Eddie's, and he turned out all right.'
'Stanley, I heard they want to change the voting system, let people have their say about who they like, and who they don't like.'
'Well, you don't say, Martha... you don't say...."
(Give a farmer a chance to gripe a little, and you will make one man happier.)
Do you get this vision, my Freep friends? Are you feeling the real potential behind Man U?
Well, if you aren't, that's ok. Its pretty bold stuff, this sea-change in Manitoba Politics. Takes a while to really sink in. Just stay open, alright?
(Toodle, doodle, doo... one Blue Shoe....)
Ciao, folks.
Writing away on the next installment of of the 'Man U' pieces, when two of the three shoes drop.
The Green Shoe, and the Red Shoe.
Only need the Blue Shoe, and then Man U will be walking hard.
Look, folks, the 'Man U' official colours are Blue, Red, and Green. And I'm not taking any of these materials back, ok? The colours are picked, and they ain't changing.
The Graphic Arts tail wags the Party Dog this time.
(Hello Blue Rod.
Had enough time off yet?
Time to get busy, compadre. Man U needs your colour, ok?)
Ok, so, like I was saying, the three parties unite under one tent, and go all-out against the Kings and Queen's of Orange. Obvious enough.
If this was just about two parties joining, sure, we'd all yawn, right? Believe me, it ain't that.
The 'real' journalists thinks Uniting Green and Red is about 'saving / growing their little parties'. Go read the Freep article today, you'll see.
Hey, real journalist. Maybe you should think a little bit about what happens when the conservative base looks at the last Liberal platform and says,
'Gee Martha... they are much more fiscally conservative and responsible that the PC's....'
'And that nice Dr. Gerrard would never privatize Hydro, Stanley.'
'And those Greens actually seem to care about farmers, Martha. Look, they even understand the whole watershed issue out here in the country... Hair's a little long, but so was cousin Eddie's, and he turned out all right.'
'Stanley, I heard they want to change the voting system, let people have their say about who they like, and who they don't like.'
'Well, you don't say, Martha... you don't say...."
(Give a farmer a chance to gripe a little, and you will make one man happier.)
Do you get this vision, my Freep friends? Are you feeling the real potential behind Man U?
Well, if you aren't, that's ok. Its pretty bold stuff, this sea-change in Manitoba Politics. Takes a while to really sink in. Just stay open, alright?
(Toodle, doodle, doo... one Blue Shoe....)
Ciao, folks.
Wednesday, 18 January 2012
United Review 1: In Support and Against 'Man U'
(Sneaky Man U usage, hmmm? You think Manchester United's copy write protection would extend to cover my little theft? Not bloody likely, eh, wot?
Its not an admission of theft, Legal. Just stirring the fun pot, s'all.)
Let's begin a year long review of the reasons why, and why not, to Unite all other political factions in Manitoba to run against the NDP Government, including some how's and why's for the whole thing, with an article on the heart of the for-and-against argument, and a big fat run on sentence. Run-on having been accomplished, let's proceed with the rest.
A. Why Not to Unite
Coming together under one roof, so to speak, has one serious drawback; the people you suddenly find yourself shoulder to shoulder with.
I heard this at just such a party (in my mind...)
'So Jon says to James, 'I really did like your carr-uncy idea. Barter with vegetables might spark rural entrepreneurs to supply more local produce.' And Hugh says, 'But Jon, how the hell do we list that on the Exchange...?' James says, 'Carbon Credits, Hugh. Carbon Credits.' Then James looks at Jon and rolls his eyes, you know that look.....
Who's gonna blink, folks? Who will give up on their core beliefs to pitch in with the 'other guys'? It's like the geeks and the hippies and the jocks all coming together in some raucous teen dramady where the pimply-faced factions unite to stop something... something important to them all..... something they never faced before in their pampered, sheltered childhoods. A coming of age story in Keystone rather than Devon.
What could spur such famous foes to pitch the big United tent and play the most important game of their lives, together, as a team?
Watch your coming of age teen dramadies, kiddies. Its all about the love interest they share. She who crosses all cliques, who digs nobel response from pocket protector, jock strap, and jean jacket. The lady with the secret which, once revealed, spurs even the most hardened clique leader to secret meeting with his most bitter, bitter rivals. (Uh, yeah, ladies, trade genders in the above as you wish. Its a device, not a male dominated society admission. Cool, thanks.)
So, gentle reader, ask yourself this; what could our three leaders love so selflessly that they would turn from tradition and historic trajectory towards a sardine can full of bitter enemies?
Go on, ask yourself.
If you can't find an answer, don't worry. You are in good company, as it appears that no-one knows.
(Yet.)
So, the main argument against 'Man U' (aka The Manitoba United Party) is this: The established parties and their leaders do not seem to love anything more than their own interests.
Heartbreaking. And I mean that most sincerely.
To be sure, all other complex, persnickety, pesky problems involving uniting into one party flow from this lack of selfless, sacrificing, super-love to unite them. Trapped in their cliques, the Keystone High School kids are doomed to forever lose the big homecoming game to the Dipper High team, and the head cheerleader will once again lose the bet and have to... ummm... I guess this is a family blog, you'll have to imagine what she has to do (hint: it ain't pretty.)
Lets see if we can help those Keystone High kids this time.
B. Why to Unite
(Cue Holly Cole, 'My Foolish Heart: "This time its loooovvee.... this time its love, My, Fooooo-lish, Heaaart...."
I love her so much.)
Anyways, let's cut to the chase on 'why to unite' against the NDP (aka The Kings and Queens of Orange).
NEWSFLASH: First-Past-The-Post Voting System Corrupting Democracy in Keystone Province, Plethora of Parties Leads to Appointment of New Monarchy
Ummm... Natural Ruling Party? Heard of it? Do you get what they mean when they call themselves (or are called) the natural ruling party either Federally or Provincially? Remember when they used to say 'I rule by rights given to me by God..."
Natural Ruling Party means that, by pandering to a rock-solid core of their most zealous supporters, that party can defeat the other parties through vote splitting. Every time, forever, or until the cows come home with the flying pigs in tow.
That such a party exists means that a core principle has been cut from the Democratic Apple, being, that there is a GOVERNMENT IN WAITING WHO IS HER (HIS) MAJESTY'S MOST LOYAL OPPOSITION*.
The test of the true mettle of those drawn to politics is never found in the hall of power. It is found in the vestibule, the gallery, the groundswell, the answer to the cry of the mother who weeps for a child cruelly mistreated by The Government.
The test for those crazy Keystone High School kids isn't how well they would govern. It is how well they react to the condition which causes them to always fail separately. They are tested best when they are powerless.
It is why they are the most loyal, serving the Queen (King) despite not being in power. In fact, such service is the highest form, the most nobel, and that service is relied upon most heavily by the Queen (King) for the democratic system to function as intended.
Without such selfless service, the party in power stays in power, indefinitely, and they can do whatever the hell they like, right? I mean, not to put to fine a point on it, but that is a fact, right?
Further, and listen closely: by failing in their duty to Her Majesty, the Keystone kids are actually letting vile usurpers walk right in the front door of the palace. By failing to provide an alternative to the NDP government, the other parties are causing, in effect, a new Monarchy to form.
(Yes, this is why I have been calling them the Kings and Queens of Orange. Now you get it, right? Good.)
Her Majesty is to represent her office as best she can. Her office represent the highest form of nobility, the best of us, our pinnacle, our ideal. She travels, speaks, signs, presides over, causes, and inspires the rest of us to do the very best we can for her most sacred trust: the well being of her Citizens.
Her Citizens are our children. They are our wives, our husbands, mothers, fathers, friends and foes, families and the family-less. Rich, poor, and all gradients in between. They is us, all of us.
So by failing to selflessly love her Majesty's office, the Keystone kids remain powerless to stop the vile usurpers in the Natural Ruling Party. The new Kings and Queens serve only their friends, and not 'the people', because they can, and because it works for them in the first past the post system. Yes, same for the Federal King, his Highness Harper. Same thing, same results.
In Manitoba, the homecoming game is lost, the cheerleader (yes, folks, its the Queen) has her fate sealed, and the kids hang their heads, in shame, once again. Damn. If only....
(Now tell me, doesn't this sound like a much better description of what is happening in Manitoban politics today than the other pundits have poured out thus far? Thanks. I need the stroking.)
So, why unite?
To save the Queen, 'natch. I'm telling you, its always about that selfless love thing.
In Summation:
This last Manitoba Provincial election taught all three losing parties that they cannot form government under these current conditions. Yes, blame the voting system, but also blame those who played right into it.
To continue along this path, I am of the opinion that the three parties (you like this James? I'm totally including you guys, and I mean it) are committing an act that will, in the future, be seen as nothing short of treasonous. Continuing on this way is against the Queen, her subjects, and against democracy.
And now the hammer: either we abandon, wholesale, the Keystone leaders and their cliques in order to form a new United party, or we are just as guilty as they are, and shame on us.
That is... unless they see clearly the folly of their ways, get together, and pitch the tent.
(The big game is 3.5 years away, boys. Do not wait until it is 2 years away, or it could be too late.)
NEXT UP: The Rod Rouge plows 9.5 years into the future to find the United Party un-United, but in a very different (see: non-treasonous) way.
Oh, those crazy Keystone kids!!
PS: I'm going to work hard over the next year. Oh, boy, would I ever appreciate more links on folks' blogs....
* Stylin' formatting inspired by the Black Rod's Blog, All Rights Reserved.
Its not an admission of theft, Legal. Just stirring the fun pot, s'all.)
Let's begin a year long review of the reasons why, and why not, to Unite all other political factions in Manitoba to run against the NDP Government, including some how's and why's for the whole thing, with an article on the heart of the for-and-against argument, and a big fat run on sentence. Run-on having been accomplished, let's proceed with the rest.
A. Why Not to Unite
Coming together under one roof, so to speak, has one serious drawback; the people you suddenly find yourself shoulder to shoulder with.
I heard this at just such a party (in my mind...)
'So Jon says to James, 'I really did like your carr-uncy idea. Barter with vegetables might spark rural entrepreneurs to supply more local produce.' And Hugh says, 'But Jon, how the hell do we list that on the Exchange...?' James says, 'Carbon Credits, Hugh. Carbon Credits.' Then James looks at Jon and rolls his eyes, you know that look.....
Who's gonna blink, folks? Who will give up on their core beliefs to pitch in with the 'other guys'? It's like the geeks and the hippies and the jocks all coming together in some raucous teen dramady where the pimply-faced factions unite to stop something... something important to them all..... something they never faced before in their pampered, sheltered childhoods. A coming of age story in Keystone rather than Devon.
What could spur such famous foes to pitch the big United tent and play the most important game of their lives, together, as a team?
Watch your coming of age teen dramadies, kiddies. Its all about the love interest they share. She who crosses all cliques, who digs nobel response from pocket protector, jock strap, and jean jacket. The lady with the secret which, once revealed, spurs even the most hardened clique leader to secret meeting with his most bitter, bitter rivals. (Uh, yeah, ladies, trade genders in the above as you wish. Its a device, not a male dominated society admission. Cool, thanks.)
So, gentle reader, ask yourself this; what could our three leaders love so selflessly that they would turn from tradition and historic trajectory towards a sardine can full of bitter enemies?
Go on, ask yourself.
If you can't find an answer, don't worry. You are in good company, as it appears that no-one knows.
(Yet.)
So, the main argument against 'Man U' (aka The Manitoba United Party) is this: The established parties and their leaders do not seem to love anything more than their own interests.
Heartbreaking. And I mean that most sincerely.
To be sure, all other complex, persnickety, pesky problems involving uniting into one party flow from this lack of selfless, sacrificing, super-love to unite them. Trapped in their cliques, the Keystone High School kids are doomed to forever lose the big homecoming game to the Dipper High team, and the head cheerleader will once again lose the bet and have to... ummm... I guess this is a family blog, you'll have to imagine what she has to do (hint: it ain't pretty.)
Lets see if we can help those Keystone High kids this time.
B. Why to Unite
(Cue Holly Cole, 'My Foolish Heart: "This time its loooovvee.... this time its love, My, Fooooo-lish, Heaaart...."
I love her so much.)
Anyways, let's cut to the chase on 'why to unite' against the NDP (aka The Kings and Queens of Orange).
NEWSFLASH: First-Past-The-Post Voting System Corrupting Democracy in Keystone Province, Plethora of Parties Leads to Appointment of New Monarchy
Ummm... Natural Ruling Party? Heard of it? Do you get what they mean when they call themselves (or are called) the natural ruling party either Federally or Provincially? Remember when they used to say 'I rule by rights given to me by God..."
Natural Ruling Party means that, by pandering to a rock-solid core of their most zealous supporters, that party can defeat the other parties through vote splitting. Every time, forever, or until the cows come home with the flying pigs in tow.
That such a party exists means that a core principle has been cut from the Democratic Apple, being, that there is a GOVERNMENT IN WAITING WHO IS HER (HIS) MAJESTY'S MOST LOYAL OPPOSITION*.
The test of the true mettle of those drawn to politics is never found in the hall of power. It is found in the vestibule, the gallery, the groundswell, the answer to the cry of the mother who weeps for a child cruelly mistreated by The Government.
The test for those crazy Keystone High School kids isn't how well they would govern. It is how well they react to the condition which causes them to always fail separately. They are tested best when they are powerless.
It is why they are the most loyal, serving the Queen (King) despite not being in power. In fact, such service is the highest form, the most nobel, and that service is relied upon most heavily by the Queen (King) for the democratic system to function as intended.
Without such selfless service, the party in power stays in power, indefinitely, and they can do whatever the hell they like, right? I mean, not to put to fine a point on it, but that is a fact, right?
Further, and listen closely: by failing in their duty to Her Majesty, the Keystone kids are actually letting vile usurpers walk right in the front door of the palace. By failing to provide an alternative to the NDP government, the other parties are causing, in effect, a new Monarchy to form.
(Yes, this is why I have been calling them the Kings and Queens of Orange. Now you get it, right? Good.)
Her Majesty is to represent her office as best she can. Her office represent the highest form of nobility, the best of us, our pinnacle, our ideal. She travels, speaks, signs, presides over, causes, and inspires the rest of us to do the very best we can for her most sacred trust: the well being of her Citizens.
Her Citizens are our children. They are our wives, our husbands, mothers, fathers, friends and foes, families and the family-less. Rich, poor, and all gradients in between. They is us, all of us.
So by failing to selflessly love her Majesty's office, the Keystone kids remain powerless to stop the vile usurpers in the Natural Ruling Party. The new Kings and Queens serve only their friends, and not 'the people', because they can, and because it works for them in the first past the post system. Yes, same for the Federal King, his Highness Harper. Same thing, same results.
In Manitoba, the homecoming game is lost, the cheerleader (yes, folks, its the Queen) has her fate sealed, and the kids hang their heads, in shame, once again. Damn. If only....
(Now tell me, doesn't this sound like a much better description of what is happening in Manitoban politics today than the other pundits have poured out thus far? Thanks. I need the stroking.)
So, why unite?
To save the Queen, 'natch. I'm telling you, its always about that selfless love thing.
In Summation:
This last Manitoba Provincial election taught all three losing parties that they cannot form government under these current conditions. Yes, blame the voting system, but also blame those who played right into it.
To continue along this path, I am of the opinion that the three parties (you like this James? I'm totally including you guys, and I mean it) are committing an act that will, in the future, be seen as nothing short of treasonous. Continuing on this way is against the Queen, her subjects, and against democracy.
And now the hammer: either we abandon, wholesale, the Keystone leaders and their cliques in order to form a new United party, or we are just as guilty as they are, and shame on us.
That is... unless they see clearly the folly of their ways, get together, and pitch the tent.
(The big game is 3.5 years away, boys. Do not wait until it is 2 years away, or it could be too late.)
NEXT UP: The Rod Rouge plows 9.5 years into the future to find the United Party un-United, but in a very different (see: non-treasonous) way.
Oh, those crazy Keystone kids!!
PS: I'm going to work hard over the next year. Oh, boy, would I ever appreciate more links on folks' blogs....
* Stylin' formatting inspired by the Black Rod's Blog, All Rights Reserved.
Wednesday, 11 January 2012
NDP vs. Manitoba United Vote Count in 2011 Election
Nearly a month to add this up. That's not all I did, but hell's, that's a lot of adding, folks. In my spare time I did this. I reek of dedication, right? Thanks.
Below you will find all NDP seats won by them in the 2011 Manitoba Provincial Election.
At the head of each riding result listed below you will find the "NDP to United" vote count (eg. 1234 to 4321)
('United? wass'at mean, precious...?' you ask. 'All other votes', I say... for now....)
We'll start with this list, and go forward publishing various articles regarding:
1. A new United Party called.... The Manitoba United Party.
2. Inclusion of the Lib's, PC's, and Greens!! (Whoo-hoo!! Start the fireworks!!!)
3. The necessity of including, as a fundamental unwavering election promise, the revamping of the current election system, to be completed 2 years before the subsequent election.
But for now, to the list below, and a general observation.
Obviously, my magic number (7) required to flip from NDP to 'United' is not mathematically present in the list below. We clearly win Tyndall Park, St. Norbert, St. James, and Kirkfield Park. That's cool, but we're 3 shy of a victory. Poor us, hmm?
But check this out.... look at the spitting distance test in each remaining riding. Ask, hey... did the United vote come within spitting distance of winning in Transcona, The Maples, Swan River, Southdale, Selkirk, Seine River, Riel, Radisson, Logan, Kildonan, Kewatinook, Interlake, Gimli, Fort Rouge, Fort Richmond, Fort Garry Riverview, Flin Flon, Elmwood, Dawson Trail, Dauphin, or Brandon East?
Well? Did they?
Depends on how far y'all spit, but given I am gob-blessed and can spit 10% of a vote count if justice is on my side and the sun is just right, then 'hell's yeah' is the answer in many of the ridings listed above.
Waaayyy more potential winners than makes up the magic number, if 10% is a good spitting distance, and even 1/2 came through on the good side.
Hmmmm... I say. Are we resonant, folks? Hmmmm... all at the same time.
Lets explore, yes?
NEXT UP: a list of factors to write on, and on, and on about regarding particular and general influences of a United Vote, both up or downwards, on the next general election.
Toodles!
Below you will find all NDP seats won by them in the 2011 Manitoba Provincial Election.
At the head of each riding result listed below you will find the "NDP to United" vote count (eg. 1234 to 4321)
('United? wass'at mean, precious...?' you ask. 'All other votes', I say... for now....)
We'll start with this list, and go forward publishing various articles regarding:
1. A new United Party called.... The Manitoba United Party.
2. Inclusion of the Lib's, PC's, and Greens!! (Whoo-hoo!! Start the fireworks!!!)
3. The necessity of including, as a fundamental unwavering election promise, the revamping of the current election system, to be completed 2 years before the subsequent election.
But for now, to the list below, and a general observation.
Obviously, my magic number (7) required to flip from NDP to 'United' is not mathematically present in the list below. We clearly win Tyndall Park, St. Norbert, St. James, and Kirkfield Park. That's cool, but we're 3 shy of a victory. Poor us, hmm?
But check this out.... look at the spitting distance test in each remaining riding. Ask, hey... did the United vote come within spitting distance of winning in Transcona, The Maples, Swan River, Southdale, Selkirk, Seine River, Riel, Radisson, Logan, Kildonan, Kewatinook, Interlake, Gimli, Fort Rouge, Fort Richmond, Fort Garry Riverview, Flin Flon, Elmwood, Dawson Trail, Dauphin, or Brandon East?
Well? Did they?
Depends on how far y'all spit, but given I am gob-blessed and can spit 10% of a vote count if justice is on my side and the sun is just right, then 'hell's yeah' is the answer in many of the ridings listed above.
Waaayyy more potential winners than makes up the magic number, if 10% is a good spitting distance, and even 1/2 came through on the good side.
Hmmmm... I say. Are we resonant, folks? Hmmmm... all at the same time.
Lets explore, yes?
NEXT UP: a list of factors to write on, and on, and on about regarding particular and general influences of a United Vote, both up or downwards, on the next general election.
Toodles!
Wolseley 4229 to 2755
Candidate Name Party Votes
ALTEMEYER, Rob NDP 4,229
BEDDOME, James GPM 1,368
TURKA, Harpreet PC 850
STEWART, Eric V.T. Lib. 517
Tyndall Park 2596 to 3152
Candidate Name Party Votes
MARCELINO, Ted NDP 2,596
SEVILLANO, Roldan C. Lib. 2,007
AGLUGUB, Cris PC 908
KOSHELANYK, Dean GPM 237
Transcona 4488 to 3219
Candidate Name Party Votes
REID, Daryl NDP 4,488
STAPON, Craig PC 2,668
McLEOD-JASHYN, Faye Lib. 551
Thompson 2586 to 1188
Candidate Name Party Votes
ASHTON, Steve NDP 2,586
CAMPBELL, Anita PC 1,068
DILLEN, Ken Lib. 120
The Pas 2995 to 1074
Candidate Name Party Votes
WHITEHEAD, Frank NDP 2,995
McDONALD, Alfred PC 959
TESSEMA, Girma Lib. 115
The Maples 3894 to 3619
Candidate Name Party Votes
SARAN, Mohinder NDP 3,894
TOMAS, Jose Dakila C. PC 1,943
SARINAS, Pablito Lib. 1,395
REDEKOPP, John GPM 281
Swan River 4280 to 3342
Candidate Name Party Votes
KOSTYSHYN, Ron NDP 4,280
POWELL, Dave PC 3,078
COOK, Reynold Lib. 264
St.Vital 5023 to 3337
Candidate Name Party Votes
ALLAN, Nancy NDP 5,023
BROWN, Mike PC 2,876
WOLBERT, Harry Lib. 461
St. Norbert 3966 to 4818
Candidate Name Party Votes
GAUDREAU, Dave NDP 3,966
VELTHUYS, Karen PC 3,935
LAURENDEAU, Marcel Lib. 883
St. Johns 4157 to 2145
Candidate Name Party Votes
MACKINTOSH, Gord NDP 4,157
LARKIN, Ray PC 1,405
WEINBERG, Alon David GPM 392
MUELLER, Trevor Lib. 348
St.James 4432 to 4476
Candidate Name Party Votes
CROTHERS, Deanne NDP 4,432
GILLINGHAM, Scott PC 3,414
ALLARD, Gerard Lib. 685
VANDALE, Trevor GPM 377
St.Boniface 5914 to 2673
Candidate Name Party Votes
SELINGER, Greg NDP 5,914
CLARK, Frank PC 1,537
GROSS, Brad Lib. 606
LANDRY, Alain GPM 530
Southdale 5662 to 5225
Candidate Name Party Votes
SELBY, Erin NDP 5,662
EASTMAN, Judy PC 4,898
SINGH, Amarjit Lib. 327
Selkirk 4279 to 3359
Candidate Name Party Votes
DEWAR, Greg NDP 4,279
BELL, David K. PC 3,008
COURCHENE, Marilyn Lib. 351
Seine River 5500 to 4864
Candidate Name Party Votes
OSWALD, Theresa NDP 5,500
STEEVES, Gord PC 4,569
OSINAME, Troy Lib. 295
Rossmere 5392 to 4137
Candidate Name Party Votes
BRAUN, Erna NDP 5,392
SIDHU, Kaur (Karl) PC 3,430
BELLIVEAU, Rene Lib. 356
MAYDANIUK, Evan GPM 351
River Heights (Just for fun...)
Candidate Name Party Votes
GERRARD, Jon Lib. 4,756
MORANTZ, Marty PC 3,389
MANNING, Dan NDP 1,843
CAMERON, Elizabeth May GPM 370
Riel 5352 to 4396
Candidate Name Party Votes
MELNICK, Christine NDP 5,352
SQUIRES, Rochelle PC 3,916
GILARSKI, Cheryl Lib. 480
Radisson 5033 to 4094
Candidate Name Party Votes
JHA, Bidhu NDP 5,033
PENNER, Desmond PC 3,588
ROBERT, Shirley Lib. 506
Point Douglas 3806 to 1350
Candidate Name Party Votes
CHIEF, Kevin NDP 3,806
VERNAUS, John PC 917
BOURGEOIS, Mary Lou Lib. 257
PUN, Teresa GPM 176
RANKIN, Darrell CPC-M 38
Minto 3615 to 1773
Candidate Name Party Votes
SWAN, Andrew NDP 3,615
SQUANCE, Belinda PC 833
WOODSTOCK, Don Lib. 609
DYCK, Harold GPM 331
CARR, Cheryl-Anne E CPC-M 56
Logan 2985 to 2096
Candidate Name Party Votes
MARCELINO, Flor NDP 2,985
CHAN, Joe Lib. 868
KRAWETZ, Tyrone PC 840
ANDREWS, Kristen GPM 335
TYMOSHCHUK, David CPC-M 53
Kirkfield Park - 4928 to 5613
Candidate Name Party Votes
BLADY, Sharon NDP 4,928
de GROOT, Kelly PC 4,907
BOKHARI, Syed Lib. 367
GRAY, Alanna GPM 339
Kildonan - 4808 to 3271
Candidate Name Party Votes
CHOMIAK, Dave NDP 4,808
PENNER, Darrell PC 2,880
SAGRIOTIS, Dimitrius Lib. 391
Kewatinook - 2043 to 1532
Candidate Name Party Votes
ROBINSON, Eric NDP 2,043
BIRCH, Michael PC 1,389
GREEN, Philip GPM 94
WOODFORD, Orville Lib. 49
Interlake - 3374 to 3312
Candidate Name Party Votes
NEVAKSHONOFF, Tom NDP 3,374
LUPKY, Steve PC 2,903
ZASITKO, John Ind. 215
RATT, Albert Lib. 194
Gimli - 5012 to 4716
Candidate Name Party Votes
BJORNSON, Peter NDP 5,012
WHARTON, Jeff PC 4,210
WHITEMAN, Glenda GPM 309
EINARSSON, Lawrence Lib. 197
Fort Rouge - 4501 to 4286
Candidate Name Party Votes
HOWARD, Jennifer NDP 4,501
HESSE, Paul PC 2,031
DOMINIQUE, Sonny Lib. 1,778
WEEDON, Stephen GPM 477
Fort Richmond - 4026 to 3505
Candidate Name Party Votes
IRVIN-ROSS, Kerri NDP 4,026
McCAFFREY, Shaun PC 2,908
HILES, Dustin Lib. 369
McINTYRE, Caitlin GPM 226
Fort Garry-Riverview - 5146 to 4117
Candidate Name Party Votes
ALLUM, James NDP 5,146
RABB, Ian PC 3,052
FREEDMAN, Kevin Lib. 666
BACKÉ, Daniel GPM 399
Flin Flon - 1901 to 1411
Candidate Name Party Votes
PETTERSEN, Clarence NDP 1,901
LINKLATER, Darcy PC 791
HEINE, Thomas Lib. 510
HARVIE, Saara GPM 110
Elmwood - 3864 to 3212
Candidate Name Party Votes
MALOWAY, Jim NDP 3,864
HUTTEN, David PC 2,399
DRATOWANY, Anthony Lib. 467
ESKRITT, Ray GPM 346
Dawson Trail - 4291 to 3875
Candidate Name Party Votes
LEMIEUX, Ron NDP 4,291
TETRAULT, Laurent (Larry) PC 3,554
HOSKINS, Sandra Lib. 321
Dauphin - 4463 to 3679
Candidate Name Party Votes
STRUTHERS, Stan NDP 4,483
McKINNEY, Lloyd J. PC 3,356
FRIESEN, Tamela GPM 199
TESSEMA, Sisay Lib. 124
Concordia - 4008 to 2348
Candidate Name Party Votes
WIEBE, Matt NDP 4,008
WARRAICH, Naseer PC 1,803
POIRIER, Ryan GPM 308
OYELERU, Isaiah Lib. 237
Burrows - 3063 - 2099
Candidate Name Party Votes
WIGHT, Melanie NDP 3,063
NEGRYCH, Rick PC 1,314
MOTKALUK, Twyla Lib. 629
PEEPEETCH, Garett GPM 124
KOMARNISKI, Frank CPC-M 32
Brandon East - 3864 to 3168
Candidate Name Party Votes
CALDWELL, Drew NDP 3,864
WADDELL, Mike PC 2,711
CAMERON, Shaun Lib. 280
FLEURY, Vanda GPM 177
Assiniboia - 5095 to 3656
Candidate Name Party Votes
RONDEAU, Jim NDP 5,095
AUCH, Susan PC 3,258
SHENG, Anlina GPM 204
BOKHARI, Moe Lib. 194
Thursday, 15 December 2011
Where am I...? (More answer, less question.)
Hey, check this out. This is what I've been up to the last month.
So I'm mulling over the whole schtick about the Liberals 'dying', and the PC's 'dying', and the stupid electoral system that we use to award the minority a majority.
And I decided to do a wee little study, esp. in light of my recommendation last month, and the Frickin' Black Rod stealing my secret idea... idea. I figured I need to get scientific to one-up the folks at super-stylin' ville (way to go slipping back to bold city, eh?)
So lets do some quick math, ok?
Here are the official 2011 election results:
Wow, who cares, right? I mean, the NDP get a smokin' majority of seats with the majority of votes lined up against them. So what, eh?
Exactly. So what. Its depressing when you look at it this way.
But.
Add 19 (PC) + 1 (Liberal) = 20
Subtract 20 from 37 = 17
Divide 17 by 2 (you lose = we win) = 9 (yes, I rounded up.)
Magic number for election victory? 9 seats.
Hmmm... so I wonder, how many seats would have changed hands through a 'united second party' strategy from the 2011 results alone...?
And, ummm... hmmm... would a united party actually get more votes in the next election?
(that's where I'm burning the midnight oil....)
So, guess what I am doing. Right. You guessed it. The whole shebang, in a series of posts, just for you, lovelies.
Stay tuned, folks. Its going to be very interesting.
Black Rod, you might be surprised at these results given your 'Liberal are irrelevant' routine of late. Or not, I guess. I still haven't found the dosh to spring for your secret recipe for success, so you might already know all this.
(If you do, don't frickin' publish it, ok?? I'm working hard over here.)
Cheers
So I'm mulling over the whole schtick about the Liberals 'dying', and the PC's 'dying', and the stupid electoral system that we use to award the minority a majority.
And I decided to do a wee little study, esp. in light of my recommendation last month, and the Frickin' Black Rod stealing my secret idea... idea. I figured I need to get scientific to one-up the folks at super-stylin' ville (way to go slipping back to bold city, eh?)
So lets do some quick math, ok?
Here are the official 2011 election results:
| NDP | 37 | 199,066 | 46.16% |
| PC | 19 | 188,528 | 43.71% |
| Lib. | 1 | 32,420 | 7.52% |
| CPC-M | 0 | 179 | 0.04% |
| GPM | 0 | 10,886 | 2.52% |
| Ind. | 0 | 215 | 0.05% |
Wow, who cares, right? I mean, the NDP get a smokin' majority of seats with the majority of votes lined up against them. So what, eh?
Exactly. So what. Its depressing when you look at it this way.
But.
Add 19 (PC) + 1 (Liberal) = 20
Subtract 20 from 37 = 17
Divide 17 by 2 (you lose = we win) = 9 (yes, I rounded up.)
Magic number for election victory? 9 seats.
Hmmm... so I wonder, how many seats would have changed hands through a 'united second party' strategy from the 2011 results alone...?
And, ummm... hmmm... would a united party actually get more votes in the next election?
(that's where I'm burning the midnight oil....)
So, guess what I am doing. Right. You guessed it. The whole shebang, in a series of posts, just for you, lovelies.
Stay tuned, folks. Its going to be very interesting.
Black Rod, you might be surprised at these results given your 'Liberal are irrelevant' routine of late. Or not, I guess. I still haven't found the dosh to spring for your secret recipe for success, so you might already know all this.
(If you do, don't frickin' publish it, ok?? I'm working hard over here.)
Cheers
Friday, 4 November 2011
Frickin' Black Rod Steals My 'Secret Idea'... Idea
...you know, a Rouge Rod could get glowin' hot upon waking to find another Rod in the Red Idea cookie jar. Feeling a bit like Gollum, tricksy thieving Black Hobbits'es....
See, I had this secret idea for the next election. And I figured I'd leak it ever so slowly in my little blog posts, just a hint at a time, then, whammo!! I'd launch that sucker full force. I was actually feelin' a little smug and smart, and I'll admit to liking those all-to-rare feelings.
(I never thought about asking for money, though. I'm such a Newb, right? Good on you, B.R. (s))
So today I read that the Black Rod has already figured out the winning formula for a revitalized Liberal / PC winning ticket. And He's (she's) gonna sell it on eBay (or something....)
And since I am quite sure there is only one secret formula, and since I was literally working on presenting said formula... I'm pissed, just a little.
Can you blame me??
(Hey, read the thievin' tricksy hobbits'es' post here: http://blackrod.blogspot.com/)
Anyways, about the secret formula. Check this out.
Funny thing about polarity, the gathering of 'constituents' on either end leaves mucho room in the middle separating the extremes. Light vs. dark, hot vs. cold, labour vs. business, good vs. evil, city vs. country, yadda yadda. The more polarization, the more the 'barbell' effect leaves most on the extremes, with few in the middle (right, Grit friends?)
The gulf of extremism divides and conquers.
Right?
(Cue the therapy couch image, soft music, and me with my pipe....)
But we don't live in a world of black or white. We can't survive in Hot or Cold alone. Too much light or darkness both lead to blindness. Look at the distribution of population around the world. We flock to temperate, thrive there, multiply there.
So, step one: Polarization Must Be Countered, Temperate Must Reign.
No more city vs. country. No more labour vs. business. No more rugged individualist vs. died-in-wool socialist. It is time to join the factions in the shades of grey where a thriving economy could live.
(If it were not for the transfer payments, I'd be stating the obvious. But those frickin' welfare cheques cover the truth, don't they? Let's rip the lid off, 'k?)
For brevity, let me proceed rapidly through the remainder of the steps.
Under the new banner of temperate unity, follow the remaining 7 Step Rod Rouge Secret Formula (BAM! Take that, BR!):
1. Unite the PC and Liberal parties.
2. Run on ethical fiscal management, efficient + effective social programming, and a new voting system.
3. Do not frickin' promise a single penny in additional spending, and do not borrow (EVER!!).
4. Expose the current NDP regime simply for what it is.
5. Win the next election.
6. Change the voting system once in power.
7. Face the brave new world a better voting system brings.
Polarization is the enemy of the Keystone Province. It must be destroyed. The PC and Liberal parties must step up to this task starting _right now_. Only a unified front can counter the Lefty Machine. Nothing else will do it (bloody hell, talk about stating the obvious.) We must do this now.
Must, as in, we have NO OTHER ETHICAL CHOICE. Think of the children, ok?
Well.... there is one other choice, I guess. You could buy the Black Rod's idea. You know, if you have any money left, right...? (Heh....)
Oh, my plan would offend your little Federal Friends?
Don't care.
Oh, it would alienate some of your base?
Right, unlike now...
Oh, (fill in some other silly excuse)...
Stop. Just stop being childish and self-interested.
Just Do It. Do the Rod Rouge Plan.
Do It Now, for the children, ok?
So ok, there you have it. Free. I don't even use banner ads. Totally no charge, no profit. Just a better Manitoba for me and mine, you are yours, they and theirs. Good enough for me, and you are welcome.
If you PC's or Grits want a fancy formated version, with maybe some additional options, buy the Black Rod's version. I am sure it is a very reasonable price....
(...in fact, I'm thinking of making an offer.
Hey, Blue Rod, you with me? You likely have the bucks to pull it off, eh?)
Come on, folks. Let's push this forward, ok?
For the Children, ok?
Ok. Thanks.
See, I had this secret idea for the next election. And I figured I'd leak it ever so slowly in my little blog posts, just a hint at a time, then, whammo!! I'd launch that sucker full force. I was actually feelin' a little smug and smart, and I'll admit to liking those all-to-rare feelings.
(I never thought about asking for money, though. I'm such a Newb, right? Good on you, B.R. (s))
So today I read that the Black Rod has already figured out the winning formula for a revitalized Liberal / PC winning ticket. And He's (she's) gonna sell it on eBay (or something....)
And since I am quite sure there is only one secret formula, and since I was literally working on presenting said formula... I'm pissed, just a little.
Can you blame me??
(Hey, read the thievin' tricksy hobbits'es' post here: http://blackrod.blogspot.com/)
Anyways, about the secret formula. Check this out.
Funny thing about polarity, the gathering of 'constituents' on either end leaves mucho room in the middle separating the extremes. Light vs. dark, hot vs. cold, labour vs. business, good vs. evil, city vs. country, yadda yadda. The more polarization, the more the 'barbell' effect leaves most on the extremes, with few in the middle (right, Grit friends?)
The gulf of extremism divides and conquers.
Right?
(Cue the therapy couch image, soft music, and me with my pipe....)
But we don't live in a world of black or white. We can't survive in Hot or Cold alone. Too much light or darkness both lead to blindness. Look at the distribution of population around the world. We flock to temperate, thrive there, multiply there.
So, step one: Polarization Must Be Countered, Temperate Must Reign.
No more city vs. country. No more labour vs. business. No more rugged individualist vs. died-in-wool socialist. It is time to join the factions in the shades of grey where a thriving economy could live.
(If it were not for the transfer payments, I'd be stating the obvious. But those frickin' welfare cheques cover the truth, don't they? Let's rip the lid off, 'k?)
For brevity, let me proceed rapidly through the remainder of the steps.
Under the new banner of temperate unity, follow the remaining 7 Step Rod Rouge Secret Formula (BAM! Take that, BR!):
1. Unite the PC and Liberal parties.
2. Run on ethical fiscal management, efficient + effective social programming, and a new voting system.
3. Do not frickin' promise a single penny in additional spending, and do not borrow (EVER!!).
4. Expose the current NDP regime simply for what it is.
5. Win the next election.
6. Change the voting system once in power.
7. Face the brave new world a better voting system brings.
Polarization is the enemy of the Keystone Province. It must be destroyed. The PC and Liberal parties must step up to this task starting _right now_. Only a unified front can counter the Lefty Machine. Nothing else will do it (bloody hell, talk about stating the obvious.) We must do this now.
Must, as in, we have NO OTHER ETHICAL CHOICE. Think of the children, ok?
Well.... there is one other choice, I guess. You could buy the Black Rod's idea. You know, if you have any money left, right...? (Heh....)
Oh, my plan would offend your little Federal Friends?
Don't care.
Oh, it would alienate some of your base?
Right, unlike now...
Oh, (fill in some other silly excuse)...
Stop. Just stop being childish and self-interested.
Just Do It. Do the Rod Rouge Plan.
Do It Now, for the children, ok?
So ok, there you have it. Free. I don't even use banner ads. Totally no charge, no profit. Just a better Manitoba for me and mine, you are yours, they and theirs. Good enough for me, and you are welcome.
If you PC's or Grits want a fancy formated version, with maybe some additional options, buy the Black Rod's version. I am sure it is a very reasonable price....
(...in fact, I'm thinking of making an offer.
Hey, Blue Rod, you with me? You likely have the bucks to pull it off, eh?)
Come on, folks. Let's push this forward, ok?
For the Children, ok?
Ok. Thanks.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)