Federal Election - 2015 (started January 27, 2015)

391 posts / 0 new
Last post
alan smithee alan smithee's picture

John Ivison also wrote an editorial lately claiming that the Tories were going left ?!?

Who cares what a right wing rag says.

NorthReport

I always get confused when Liberals try to identify as Progressives.

Although written from an American point of view some of it at least applies to Canada as well:

How to tell the difference 
between a progressive and a liberal

 

 http://prorev.com/proglib.htm

NorthReport

I always get confused when Liberals try to identify as Progressives.

Although written from an American point of view some of it at least applies to Canada as well:

How to tell the difference 
between a progressive and a liberal

 

 http://prorev.com/proglib.htm

NorthReport

So is that true that the NDP raised the largest amount of money they ever did in 2014 to contest the next federal election?

alan smithee alan smithee's picture

NorthReport wrote:

I always get confused when Liberals try to identify as Progressives.

Although written from an American point of view some of it at least applies to Canada as well:

How to tell the difference 
between a progressive and a liberal

 

 http://prorev.com/proglib.htm

More right wing trite.

Debater

alan smithee wrote:

John Ivison also wrote an editorial lately claiming that the Tories were going left ?!?

Who cares what a right wing rag says.

John Ivison is indeed a big conservative supporter.  He regularly bashes the NDP too, and recently referred to Mulcair & the NDP as the "walking dead".

NDP supporters who quote Ivison should keep in mind that he bashes both the Liberals & NDP a lot depending on what is more beneficial to the Conservatives at the time.

NorthReport

Excuse me.

How to tell the difference 
between a progressive and a liberal

Progressives, as liberals did before Reagan, emphasize doing the most for the most – which is how we got socio-economic programs such as Social Security, Medicare, and a minimum wage. Today’s liberals favor expanding health insurance company profits over expanding Medicare and strongly support Democratic presidents who undermine the very programs that earlier liberals created such as social welfare and Social Security.

Progressives don't act like prudes, puritans and prigs.

Progressives don’t think the commerce clause of the Constitution should be used just because you feel like doing something, such as avoiding single payer health insurance. There is a huge difference between using the commerce clause to guarantee human rights and using it to subsidize health insurance companies.

Progressives recognize the Green Party and its members as part of a broad coalition. Most liberals act as though Greens were a new kind of HIV.

Progressives try to convince people with whom they disagree, not just scold them.

Progressive oppose the wars in Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iraq; liberals like them as long as a Democratic president is running them.

Progressives oppose the war on drugs, America’s most masochistic and deadly battle since Vietnam. Liberals treat it with utter indifference.

Progressives believe what people do is more important than how politely they talk about it.

Progressives don't think you should have to go to grad school to have an important role in government.

alan smithee wrote:

NorthReport wrote:

I always get confused when Liberals try to identify as Progressives.

Although written from an American point of view some of it at least applies to Canada as well:

How to tell the difference 
between a progressive and a liberal

 

 http://prorev.com/proglib.htm

More right wing trite.

NorthReport
  • Postponing major policy issues might leave Tories vulnerable in Commons: 

  • The Conservative government’s decision to shovel the major policy debates of this sitting forward has left it more vulnerable than usual to opposition attacks on some of the key issues of the next campaign.

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2015/01/26/postponing-major-policy-is...

 

NorthReport

‘There will be blood’ in Canada from oil price collapse, JPMorgan warns

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/top-business-stories/o...

NorthReport

The article itself is discouraging but the comment section is full of some good stuff.

http://rabble.ca/blogs/bloggers/tara-ehrcke/2015/01/what-could-canadian-...

NorthReport
montrealer58 montrealer58's picture

Again Justin Trudeau demonstrates he is unsuitable for political leadership in this country.

Yesterday, he said that Ottawa is going to do nothing about greenhouse gases because the provinces already did.

Today, he said that Ottawa has to be more involved.

This is an abject failure. For the sake of the NDP and the Conservatives, Trudeau must stay as Liberal Leader!

Once Harper starts showing up with pre-election goodies, Wynne and Couillard will discard J. Trudeau.

NorthReport

What's Anderson on about with his nasty comment?

What have the Liberals done now?

Pondering

montrealer58 wrote:
Again Justin Trudeau demonstrates he is unsuitable for political leadership in this country.

Yesterday, he said that Ottawa is going to do nothing about greenhouse gases because the provinces already did.

Today, he said that Ottawa has to be more involved.

That is not at all true. It seems you have to make stuff up to find something to criticize him for.

He didn't say he would do nothing he said he wasn't planning on a single national carbon tax. That is not the sole step that can be taken to deal with climate change.

Debater

montrealer58 wrote:

Again Justin Trudeau demonstrates he is unsuitable for political leadership in this country.

Yesterday, he said that Ottawa is going to do nothing about greenhouse gases because the provinces already did.

Today, he said that Ottawa has to be more involved.

This is an abject failure. For the sake of the NDP and the Conservatives, Trudeau must stay as Liberal Leader!

Once Harper starts showing up with pre-election goodies, Wynne and Couillard will discard J. Trudeau.

Here you go again with another anti-Trudeau post that is full of falsehoods.  You don't seem to have even watched the press conference between Trudeau & Wynne.  He said that because Harper has not shown any leadership on climate change, the provinces have had to act, but that Ottawa SHOULD be involved.

And Harper has been trying to buy people off with election goodies for months.  Trudeau & Wynne have a good working relationship and I don't think it would benefit either one to abandon the other.  Trudeau is more popular than Wynne in certain parts of the province, so she's not going to abandon him.

And I'm not really sure what you hope happens.  Do you want Liberal support to go down in Ontario?  We saw what happens in 2011 when that occurs.  Conservatives win.

Jacob Two-Two

That's what happened last time, because people weren't expecting it. This time if we hit a similar scenario where the Liberals are tanking and right wingers are running to the Cons, left wing Liberals can anticipate that and vote NDP to defeat the Conservatives. So it's actually the best scenario for the country.

Debater

There aren't enough left wingers in this country to elect an NDP government - that's one of the central issues we face.  This is a conservative country in many ways.  How else do so many conservatives get elected?  We have a right-wing press and a right-wing business community.  This isn't France or Sweden or a country with a history of electing socialist governments.  Most of the left wing Liberals voted for Jack Layton.  It wasn't enough because the NDP failed to win over red tories & blue liberals.

So the central question remains, which party is able to do the best job of appealing to moderate conservatives, particulary in Ontario, by taking them away from the Harper Conservatives?

Malcontent

Debater wrote:

 

So the central question remains, which party is able to do the best job of appealing to moderate conservatives, particulary in Ontario, by taking them away from the Harper Conservatives?

 

No one as the Greens, Libs and NDP are to busy going after each other instead of going after Harper.

NorthReport

+++++++++++++

NorthReport

 

Stop attacking the poster and stick to the issues.

Pondering wrote:

montrealer58 wrote:
Again Justin Trudeau demonstrates he is unsuitable for political leadership in this country.

Yesterday, he said that Ottawa is going to do nothing about greenhouse gases because the provinces already did.

Today, he said that Ottawa has to be more involved.

That is not at all true. It seems you have to make stuff up to find something to criticize him for.

He didn't say he would do nothing he said he wasn't planning on a single national carbon tax. That is not the sole step that can be taken to deal with climate change.

NorthReport

Flagged.

Pondering wrote:

montrealer58 wrote:
Again Justin Trudeau demonstrates he is unsuitable for political leadership in this country.

Yesterday, he said that Ottawa is going to do nothing about greenhouse gases because the provinces already did.

Today, he said that Ottawa has to be more involved.

That is not at all true. It seems you have to make stuff up to find something to criticize him for.

He didn't say he would do nothing he said he wasn't planning on a single national carbon tax. That is not the sole step that can be taken to deal with climate change.

NorthReport

Flagged.

Debater wrote:

montrealer58 wrote:

Again Justin Trudeau demonstrates he is unsuitable for political leadership in this country.

Yesterday, he said that Ottawa is going to do nothing about greenhouse gases because the provinces already did.

Today, he said that Ottawa has to be more involved.

This is an abject failure. For the sake of the NDP and the Conservatives, Trudeau must stay as Liberal Leader!

Once Harper starts showing up with pre-election goodies, Wynne and Couillard will discard J. Trudeau.

Here you go again with another anti-Trudeau post that is full of falsehoods.  You don't seem to have even watched the press conference between Trudeau & Wynne.  He said that because Harper has not shown any leadership on climate change, the provinces have had to act, but that Ottawa SHOULD be involved.

And Harper has been trying to buy people off with election goodies for months.  Trudeau & Wynne have a good working relationship and I don't think it would benefit either one to abandon the other.  Trudeau is more popular than Wynne in certain parts of the province, so she's not going to abandon him.

And I'm not really sure what you hope happens.  Do you want Liberal support to go down in Ontario?  We saw what happens in 2011 when that occurs.  Conservatives win.

NorthReport

Stop attacking the poster and stick to the issues.

Debater wrote:

montrealer58 wrote:

Again Justin Trudeau demonstrates he is unsuitable for political leadership in this country.

Yesterday, he said that Ottawa is going to do nothing about greenhouse gases because the provinces already did.

Today, he said that Ottawa has to be more involved.

This is an abject failure. For the sake of the NDP and the Conservatives, Trudeau must stay as Liberal Leader!

Once Harper starts showing up with pre-election goodies, Wynne and Couillard will discard J. Trudeau.

Here you go again with another anti-Trudeau post that is full of falsehoods.  You don't seem to have even watched the press conference between Trudeau & Wynne.  He said that because Harper has not shown any leadership on climate change, the provinces have had to act, but that Ottawa SHOULD be involved.

And Harper has been trying to buy people off with election goodies for months.  Trudeau & Wynne have a good working relationship and I don't think it would benefit either one to abandon the other.  Trudeau is more popular than Wynne in certain parts of the province, so she's not going to abandon him.

And I'm not really sure what you hope happens.  Do you want Liberal support to go down in Ontario?  We saw what happens in 2011 when that occurs.  Conservatives win.

montrealer58 montrealer58's picture

What I hope happens is an NDP government, because their economic policy agenda will BENEFIT ME. Trudeau's WILL NOT. Harper's WILL NOT. Any vote for Trudeau is not a vote for the NDP, and a wasted vote against Harper. Any vote for Harper is not a vote for the NDP, and is a wasted vote against Trudeau. All Tory and Liberal votes are against my interest. These are hard truths that you cannot change.

All of the sophisticated arguments that these people don't normally vote X or these people always vote Y are a load of excrement. Even in this country, people change their minds. We have had Liberal Tory same old Story for 200 years or more. In Quebec things change. Perhaps they might in the rest of the country, when people realize they have been spun by Liberal political bullshit artists with nothing to offer.

One day, and I hope it is soon, the people of this country will vote for a change. Trudeau is not a change. Trudeau is Liberal Tory same old story. The Liberal shills who come here never seem to answer this point. That there is no material difference between Liberals and Tories.

In the meantime, if I see one flaw or inconsistency, I will pounce. If I can find a churlish way to spin the results to make it look better for my gang, well if it is good enough for you, it is good enough for me.

There is no way that Trudeau and the Liberal Party are qualified to run this country. Every speech Trudeau makes proves it. And that is a hard truth you cannot change either. For the good of Canada, the Liberal Party needs to fold.

NorthReport

Don't despair.

Of course the mainstream press wants a battle between 2 right-wing parties. They don't care whether it is Conservative or Liberal, just as long as it is right wing. So 99.9999% of what you see, read, hear in the mainstream press is directed towards that end. It's so obvious you would think they would be embarassed by it, but they have no shame. But no matter how much the mainstream press tries, the corruption and lies have finally caught up with the Liberals. 

The last election the Liberals only got a measely 11% of the seats in the House of Commons.

Here's the Liberal reality:

2011 Election - 34 seats, Down 43 seats

2008 Election - 77 seats, Down 26 seats

2006 Election - 103 seats, Down 32 seats

2004 Election - 135 seats, Down 37 seats

The Liberals may well be on their way out, as the Liberals have definitely been trending South for a long, long time now.

 

 

 

 

Pondering

montrealer58 wrote:
If I can find a churlish way to spin the results to make it look better for my gang, well if it is good enough for you, it is good enough for me. 

It's not good enough for me or the Liberals although Harperites are fine with it. It works for Harperites and the extreme right but I don't believe that it works with moderate progressives. I think moderate progressives that swing between the Liberals and NDP are insulted and turned off by it. It strengthens support for Trudeau.

Debater

montrealer58 wrote:

What I hope happens is an NDP government, because their economic policy agenda will BENEFIT ME. Trudeau's WILL NOT. Harper's WILL NOT. Any vote for Trudeau is not a vote for the NDP, and a wasted vote against Harper. Any vote for Harper is not a vote for the NDP, and is a wasted vote against Trudeau. All Tory and Liberal votes are against my interest. These are hard truths that you cannot change.

First of all, why is everything about you and what will benefit you?  Your posts have become all about ME, ME, ME.

Second of all, how can the NDP get angry when people say it's vote-splitting to vote NDP or that voting for the NDP is a wasted vote when you say that voting Liberal is a wasted vote?  Who says?  Don't you realize you are making the same arguments you criticize your opponents for making?

NorthReport

Flagged

Debater wrote:

montrealer58 wrote:

What I hope happens is an NDP government, because their economic policy agenda will BENEFIT ME. Trudeau's WILL NOT. Harper's WILL NOT. Any vote for Trudeau is not a vote for the NDP, and a wasted vote against Harper. Any vote for Harper is not a vote for the NDP, and is a wasted vote against Trudeau. All Tory and Liberal votes are against my interest. These are hard truths that you cannot change.

First of all, why is everything about you and what will benefit you?  Your posts have become all about ME, ME, ME.

Second of all, how can the NDP get angry when people say it's vote-splitting to vote NDP or that voting for the NDP is a wasted vote when you say that voting Liberal is a wasted vote?  Who says?  Don't you realize you are making the same arguments you criticize your opponents for making?

NorthReport

NDP has had its best fund-raising year in the past decade. Not too shabby.

It is only relatively recently that the NDP has had the big bucks to fight the right-wing. Look how successful Layton was in 2011. 

So Mulcair, Layton's Quebec architect, and where did the bulk of the NDP seats come from in 2011 again, could do even better in 2015.

Yes the other 2 parties did well as well, but this is a biggie for the NDP, as it finally moves towards evening the playing field at least financially.

Don't despair NDPers, as even though the right-wing press will support Liberals and Conservatives, just remember it has always been like this, and it is still a secret ballot, and the NDP can win.

http://www.nationalnewswatch.com/2015/01/30/liberals-ndp-had-best-fundra...

 

 

Debater

The NDP and Liberals must come together to prevent the unthinkable

GERALD CAPLAN

Friday, Jan. 30 2015

Excerpt:

New Democrats must be sensible. They need to remember that only once before 2011 did the NDP ever poll as much as 20 per cent in any federal election. Even now, with Mr. Layton’s success a mere historical artifact, the NDP seems to have the support of somewhere in the 20 per cent range of public support. The NDP must find ways to increase its appeal and its support. Its policies, its very raison d’etre, must be broadened. Working with the Liberals would achieve this.

As for the Liberals, too often they have cynically campaigned from the left and governed from the right. But at least they’ve shown they know where the left is. A deal with the NDP would be good for Liberal souls while offering them a substantial piece of power.

I understand fully that this proposal has no chance of buy-in from either party before election day 2015. Indeed, both Tom Mulcair and Justin Trudeau have explicitly repudiated the idea of working together, and were I in their shoes right now I’d do the same. Both need to insist that it alone can defeat the Harperites and that all anti-Conservatives must unite behind one party. If this strategic voting strategy works (most likely for the Liberals), future co-operation is off the table. But if it doesn’t, members of both Opposition parties will have no ethical or political choice but to seek some form of collaboration. The alternative – leaving the country by default to the Conservative Party – is simply unthinkable.

---

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/the-ndp-and-liberals-must-c...

 

Pondering

NorthReport wrote:

NDP has had its best fund-raising year in the past decade. Not too shabby.

.....

Yes the other 2 parties did well as well, but this is a biggie for the NDP, as it finally moves towards evening the playing field at least financially.

Don't despair NDPers, as even though the right-wing press will support Liberals and Conservatives, just remember it has always been like this, and it is still a secret ballot, and the NDP can win.

http://www.nationalnewswatch.com/2015/01/30/liberals-ndp-had-best-fundra...

The Liberals have made huge strides since Justin Trudeau took the helm almost two years ago. Their fundraising haul last year was up 40 per cent over 2013.

The NDP's take was up 15 per cent over 2013 while the Conservatives were up 11 per cent.

Syriza didn't need to have the most money to win.

Pondering

NorthReport wrote:

The article itself is discouraging but the comment section is full of some good stuff.

http://rabble.ca/blogs/bloggers/tara-ehrcke/2015/01/what-could-canadian-...

I don't think it's discouraging. The author mentioned many programs Canadians are ready for.

Sound crazy? Every one of these ideas has been proposed by not-so-radical people in some part of the country. What we don't have is a political party articulating them as policy.

I don't agree with the following:

Many look to the NDP to be that party. I don't think that will happen. After many attempts, such as the New Politics Initative of the early 2000s, I don't believe it is possible to change the NDP from within. And interestingly, that isn't what happened in Greece either. The traditional social democratic party, PASOK, supported austerity until they were so unpopular they collapsed. It took a new party, built on the strength of anti-austerity activism, to put a genuinely social democratic agenda on the ballot. Spain is following the same trajectory, with the incredible rise of the brand new Podemos party, built on anti-austerity left wing politics, and rooted in social movements.

Times change. If the public were demanding not just desiring more socially responsible governance the NDP would play to that constituency as would the Liberals. It would help if the NDP would lead the way but just because they are not doesn't mean they won't support the people if the people were speaking up and demanding change.

Occupy among other clues has indicated to me that the people are ready for a lot more change than what is on offer they are just not quite convinced to take the plunge for fear of losing what we have.

NorthReport

6 deceptive stories Stephen Harper will tell you during the 2015 election

http://www.pressprogress.ca/en/post/6-deceptive-stories-stephen-harper-w...

NorthReport

Harsh spotlight shines on trio of Conservative cabinet ministers:

The last sitting of the current Parliament finds the Harper government’s best performers confined to support roles in the House of Commons.

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2015/01/30/harsh-spotlight-shines-on-...

NorthReport

Virtually every police chief in Canada wanted the long gun registry saved.

http://rabble.ca/blogs/bloggers/djclimenhaga/2013/04/former-tory-strateg...

Aristotleded24

Debater wrote:
The NDP and Liberals must come together to prevent the unthinkable

GERALD CAPLAN

Friday, Jan. 30 2015

Excerpt:

New Democrats must be sensible. They need to remember that only once before 2011 did the NDP ever poll as much as 20 per cent in any federal election. Even now, with Mr. Layton’s success a mere historical artifact, the NDP seems to have the support of somewhere in the 20 per cent range of public support. The NDP must find ways to increase its appeal and its support. Its policies, its very raison d’etre, must be broadened. Working with the Liberals would achieve this.

As for the Liberals, too often they have cynically campaigned from the left and governed from the right. But at least they’ve shown they know where the left is. A deal with the NDP would be good for Liberal souls while offering them a substantial piece of power.

I understand fully that this proposal has no chance of buy-in from either party before election day 2015. Indeed, both Tom Mulcair and Justin Trudeau have explicitly repudiated the idea of working together, and were I in their shoes right now I’d do the same. Both need to insist that it alone can defeat the Harperites and that all anti-Conservatives must unite behind one party. If this strategic voting strategy works (most likely for the Liberals), future co-operation is off the table. But if it doesn’t, members of both Opposition parties will have no ethical or political choice but to seek some form of collaboration. The alternative – leaving the country by default to the Conservative Party – is simply unthinkable.

---

">http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/the-ndp-and-liberals-must-c...

What Caplan and his ilk do not realize is that the Liberals and NDP exist as separate parties because the people who support them have unique perspectives, some of which preclude them from supporting the other, and if such a merger were to take place, enough members and supporters from both parties will either join other parties (i.e. the Conservatives or the Greens) or start a new party, and the merged party will still not have enough support to take on this new Conservative Party.

Aristotleded24

Pondering wrote:
If the public were demanding not just desiring more socially responsible governance the NDP would play to that constituency as would the Liberals. It would help if the NDP would lead the way but just because they are not doesn't mean they won't support the people if the people were speaking up and demanding change.

Occupy among other clues has indicated to me that the people are ready for a lot more change than what is on offer they are just not quite convinced to take the plunge for fear of losing what we have.

This is a naieve assessment of how effective public opinion is in setting the public policy agenda (not nearly as effective as the police crackdown on Occupy) or the effectiveness of the system in resisting change from below. In the US, when Bush proposed the bailout packages for the financial industry, the political spectrum, from libertarians on the far right to anarchists on the far left and everyone in between was united in opposing said bailouts, and Americans told Congress not to support it, but Congress went ahead and supported the bailouts anyways. There's a great system of propaganda which discourages people. As Bill Maher said, your choices are the guy who voted for the first Wall Street bailout or the guy who voted for the next ten.

Rokossovsky

Debater wrote:

There aren't enough left wingers in this country to elect an NDP government - that's one of the central issues we face.  This is a conservative country in many ways.  How else do so many conservatives get elected?  We have a right-wing press and a right-wing business community.  This isn't France or Sweden or a country with a history of electing socialist governments.  Most of the left wing Liberals voted for Jack Layton.  It wasn't enough because the NDP failed to win over red tories & blue liberals.

So the central question remains, which party is able to do the best job of appealing to moderate conservatives, particulary in Ontario, by taking them away from the Harper Conservatives?

You sound a little shrill here. You seemed more confident in your previous statements about the fortunes of the Liberal party. What is going on?

Rokossovsky

Aristotleded24 wrote:

Debater wrote:
The NDP and Liberals must come together to prevent the unthinkable

GERALD CAPLAN

Friday, Jan. 30 2015

Excerpt:

New Democrats must be sensible. They need to remember that only once before 2011 did the NDP ever poll as much as 20 per cent in any federal election. Even now, with Mr. Layton’s success a mere historical artifact, the NDP seems to have the support of somewhere in the 20 per cent range of public support. The NDP must find ways to increase its appeal and its support. Its policies, its very raison d’etre, must be broadened. Working with the Liberals would achieve this.

As for the Liberals, too often they have cynically campaigned from the left and governed from the right. But at least they’ve shown they know where the left is. A deal with the NDP would be good for Liberal souls while offering them a substantial piece of power.

I understand fully that this proposal has no chance of buy-in from either party before election day 2015. Indeed, both Tom Mulcair and Justin Trudeau have explicitly repudiated the idea of working together, and were I in their shoes right now I’d do the same. Both need to insist that it alone can defeat the Harperites and that all anti-Conservatives must unite behind one party. If this strategic voting strategy works (most likely for the Liberals), future co-operation is off the table. But if it doesn’t, members of both Opposition parties will have no ethical or political choice but to seek some form of collaboration. The alternative – leaving the country by default to the Conservative Party – is simply unthinkable.

---

">http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/the-ndp-and-liberals-must-c...

What Caplan and his ilk do not realize is that the Liberals and NDP exist as separate parties because the people who support them have unique perspectives, some of which preclude them from supporting the other, and if such a merger were to take place, enough members and supporters from both parties will either join other parties (i.e. the Conservatives or the Greens) or start a new party, and the merged party will still not have enough support to take on this new Conservative Party.

What Caplan did was err entirely on the facts.

In fact Thomas Mulcair has not repudiated "coalition" or an agreement. He has in fact clearly indicated that he is willing to work with the Liberals in a post election sphere.

Caplan continues to report as if he is on a planet orbiting Alpha Centauri and listening to yesterdays news.

The entire premise is flawed, and as per usual, clearly prejudiced against the NDP.

It is Trudeau who has rejected a post-election arrangement to defeat Harper, and he is the problem not Mulcair.

Chantal Hebert, a member of Canada's most watched political panel wrote:

The Liberals will continue to rule out — as Trudeau did in a year-end interview — the option of joining the NDP in a coalition government, the better to convince New Democrats seeking regime change to move over to them.

The losers will be the voters who will once again be held hostage to a winner-take-all approach to parliamentary democracy.

Chantal Hebert in the Toronto Star.

Pondering

Aristotleded24 wrote:

Pondering wrote:
If the public were demanding not just desiring more socially responsible governance the NDP would play to that constituency as would the Liberals. It would help if the NDP would lead the way but just because they are not doesn't mean they won't support the people if the people were speaking up and demanding change.

Occupy among other clues has indicated to me that the people are ready for a lot more change than what is on offer they are just not quite convinced to take the plunge for fear of losing what we have.

This is a naieve assessment of how effective public opinion is in setting the public policy agenda (not nearly as effective as the police crackdown on Occupy) or the effectiveness of the system in resisting change from below. In the US, when Bush proposed the bailout packages for the financial industry, the political spectrum, from libertarians on the far right to anarchists on the far left and everyone in between was united in opposing said bailouts, and Americans told Congress not to support it, but Congress went ahead and supported the bailouts anyways. There's a great system of propaganda which discourages people. As Bill Maher said, your choices are the guy who voted for the first Wall Street bailout or the guy who voted for the next ten.

I didn't say "public opinion" I said demanding not just desiring.  Support for Occupy petered out because there were no demands so in the end it seemed pointless. Just a bunch of people that want to squat in city parks and protest everything. In Montreal the meetings were all about running the community with some occasional marches against Plan Nord. There was no effort to educate the public on income inequality or why it is growing. It was a huge missed opportunity but the potential remains. Occupy was proof of that much. Activists seem stuck in a rut using up all their energies in scattered protests for scattered causes rather than focusing on the oligarchs, the people sucking us dry.

Pondering

Aristotleded24 wrote:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/the-ndp-and-liberals-must-c...

What Caplan and his ilk do not realize is that the Liberals and NDP exist as separate parties because the people who support them have unique perspectives, some of which preclude them from supporting the other, and if such a merger were to take place, enough members and supporters from both parties will either join other parties (i.e. the Conservatives or the Greens) or start a new party, and the merged party will still not have enough support to take on this new Conservative Party.

I think there would be enough support for a Liberal/NDP party but it would be a centrist party and people on the left would be stuck starting a new party. I'm not sure if that would be a good thing or a bad thing at this point. I think it's a distraction.

P.S. I do agree the membership of the parties are more distinct than the policies so the assumption that NDP members would just go along with the idea is unlikely. Members have accepted the rightward tilt out of pragmatism because they believe the heart of the party is still farther left. That would no longer be true in a merged party.

NorthReport

Please, most NDPers who are hoping for Mulcair to becomes prime minister this year, are just fine with the NDP presently being in the mid-twenties in terms of support. 

NorthReport

It's a shame what has happened to Macleans. It used to be a magazine without such right-wing biases.

It’s the economy, stupid(s)

Federal leaders are test-driving financial policy for Canada. Take your pick: safe, ordinary, or balanced?

John Geddes

January 31, 2015

Premium content image1Dave Chidley/CP

 

http://www.macleans.ca/economy/whos-the-man-with-the-economic-plan/

NorthReport

Makes sense.

Why the PM won’t meet the premiers

They want to do more together. He wants to do less.

 

http://www.macleans.ca/politics/ottawa/why-pm-wont-meet-premiers/

Pondering

NorthReport wrote:

It's a shame what has happened to Macleans. It used to be a magazine without such right-wing biases.

I have always found it right-wing.

NDPP

The NDP and Liberals Must Come Together To Prevent the Unthinkable  -  by Gerald Caplan

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/the-ndp-and-liberals-must-c...

"...Some kind of long-term rapprochement between the NDP and Liberals must be pursued. Don't think, after a lifetime of deep attachment to the NDP, it doesn't kill me to write these words. But anything else is a recipe for continued Conservative rule, a fate that Canadian progressives must not inflict on our country in the name of party loyalty..."

 

 

Brachina

http://www.thesudburystar.com/2015/01/30/mulcair-slams-thibeault-as-bene...

 

 Mulcair slams Thibeault as beneath contempt. 

 

 As for Caplan, he's closest Liberal and I remember his treachery from the Ontario election. I have no use for Caplan.

NDPP

You don't need to have any use for him. Nor do I. But he is most certainly correct. Neither the NDP nor Liberals can defeat Harper. PERIOD.

Jacob Two-Two

In my opinion, a Liberal-NDP pre-election alliance is one of the few scenarios that could actually lead to a Con majority. It would definitely backfire.

NorthReport

Harper's just salivating waiting for this dumb Liberal idea to happen.

Jacob Two-Two wrote:
In my opinion, a Liberal-NDP pre-election alliance is one of the few scenarios that could actually lead to a Con majority. It would definitely backfire.

Pages