I put these posts in a thread yesterday. My posts fit under the thread title. But got lost in a sea of polemics.
Obviously there isnt hot interest in discussing this. But I thought I'd extract them from the polemics thread to see if there is some interest.
Chantal Hebert's rambling blah blah blah actually has squat to do with whether Harper would throw the switch now.
The overarching strategic reality for the Cons: because they have so polarized politics, in the next election they have to get a majority, or they will no longer be governing. Certainly there is a chance that they could survive as government with another minority. And we could argue that endlessly. But the question is moot. Because Harper Crew has to incorporate into its strategic choices the reality that if they dont get a majority, the odds are highest they will not be governing.
So it becomes a question of when are they most likely to get a majority. Because all the parties have been stalled within a narrow band of movement, and the top of that range for the Cons would see them with about the same number of seats.... the odds against them getting a majority are at least fairly high. Even with the reasonable expectation that they will make gains during the campaign.
The goal is within reach, but difficult enough that timing is critical. It is not the same as the choice in 2008- where just trying for a majority was good enough. Last time they could expect to keep government without a majority, and each election weakened the Liberal Party.
The Conservatives get to roll the dice once more. And of course, they dont have the choice not to- to just stay where they are... which works well for them, thank you very much.
They have 2 years left for that choice. Because they are stalled, opinion among swing voters about them does not change; and both the coming economic conditions and government fiscal situation are likely to worsen their prospects for making gains.... just waiting for things to get better is not good enough.
In fact, 'external' conditions for the Harper government will probably never be better than now. The likelihood is that they get a little bit worse over time.
People seize on that as the reason Harper will call an election now or soon. But it isnt that simple- because of that bar of needing to get a majority. If it doesnt look like you can get a majority now, then the fact conditions will probably be worse later does not do you any good. If you arent likely to get a majority, then you stay with what you have, and work to change the strategic situation. If nothing else, you wait to seize on a lucky break change in the conditions. Even that is a better plan than trying to get a majority when it isnt there... just because conditions dont look like they are going to get better.
So the Harper government is not going to call an election for the legions of reasons that Hebert and others bring up.
But those reasons are enough for them to seriously look at whether maybe they can force the situation.
What is Harper Crew good at? Good at campaigning and have a far superior organization. Not sufficient to make up the existing gap in getting a majority, but a big part of the solution. And they are good at polarizing the debate, driving the agenda. Often does not work in their favour. Backfires badly at times. But no question that they are good at getting it done, and somethimes it works for them.
So there is the solution, and why we may have an election very soon.
Stampede the voters, get them moving in a direction that there is at least a decent chance breaks in your favour. When the stampede is moving, poll like hell to see if the ballot question is having the desired effect. If it does, throw the switch on the election and run with the ballot question.
If you aren't getting the desired effect, then just carry on as you were. Not good that you dont get to use the conditions probably as good as they get, and not good that the ballot question of the Coalition bogeyman is now one time cried wolf.... but wait and work for the next opportunity.
We have already been throughone itteration of this: the prorogue followed by Throne Speech and Budget Speech. The weeks before the opening of Parliament were to be for turning up the heat on the ballot question. But that whole thing was stillborn almost as soon as it was out of the gate.
This time around, if it is happening now, it will be much faster. And my guess is that if it is happening, we'll start seeing it roll out in earnest today or this weekend.
Election now speculation has been very muted, but it Started with Flaherty's speech Monday. I cant find the full text.
Its definitely a turn up the heat speech. That doesnt mean it is with an election [if things break right] in mind. But I dont think it makes any sense just for the purpose to change the channel now. The Coalition bogeyman yoked to peoples' paramount concerns of the economy, is the one big sword the Conseravtives have.
Its the one thing that is latent out there, which they could make much more of. But it wont be a big bad sword in an election if they go waving it around any old time for some immediate effect at the moment.
Flaherty's speech has been met with derision from the press corps. It is pretty weird. And Flaherty not the most likely messenger.
But it fits as an opening salvo to get attention. A weird and out of character speech from the Finance Minister will do that.
And they werent going to turn up the heat until the gun registry was off the stage.
The gun registry as issue would muddy the ballot question. More to the point: its for use in the ridings, and might even harm them if it stayed on the national stage. So its off already. The decks are cleared.
And we'll see.
And what it looks like to me the next day (today):
I think the appointment of the new Chief of Staff is pretty inconsistent with the scenario putlined above. He doesnt even come in right away, and the change is consistent with the longer haul settling in to turn that ballot question in the government's favour.
Ballot question 24/7 now. No more gun registry and census foolishness.
Signs of no election, unless Nigel Wright is being trotted out now, and will be shown off later more, as a 'glow' for the governments ballot question of managing the economy. That being the reason he isnt taking the job till later: after the election, if there still is a job for him.
Plausible, but I dont know how likley. And if there is going to be an election, we'd be seeing major turning up of the heat very soon- although maybe not on the weekend.
I wonder if the Conservatives actually did deregulate the cell phone business.
Since I switched off the Rogers/Bell/Telus oligopoly I am now only paying $45 a month + HST for unlimited cross-canada calling, unlimited incoming, and unlimited text.
Before I used to worry about minutes or go to a payphone for a long call. As I don't have a lot of dough it made a difference.
This might affect my vote.
It's rather funny to watch you make up artificial justifications for your natural inclinations, UJ.
But don't worry, Canadians are still being gouged, and Mr. Harper has no plans to interfere.
I'm not the only one who makes artificial justifications for voting.
I remember explaining a fact to a voter and he said to me,
"But the problem with that, Uncle John, is that it is the truth!!"
I dont use an iPhone. I have another brand with a qwerty keyboard. I dont have internet, but I have unlimited talk and text to and from anywhere in Canada. There are three companies now operating in Toronto and some other major centres which now have much better rates. I saw that one of them had an unlimited data plan for $40 a month.
Chantal Hebert's rambling blah blah blah actually has squat to do with whether Harper would throw the switch now.
I think I can agree with you that Harper won't decide whether to have an election based on what Chantal Hébert thinks. 
I dont use an iPhone. I have another brand with a qwerty keyboard. I dont have internet, but I have unlimited talk and text to and from anywhere in Canada. There are three companies now operating in Toronto and some other major centres which now have much better rates. I saw that one of them had an unlimited data plan for $40 a month.
wow, your plan is good, in the space of 3 posts, it got 5 dollars cheaper per month
Except that it isnt his plan that was cheaper but a plan that he noticed about one company.
Wasn't his plan to disrupt this thread with nonsense?
Seems to be working...
