If the Coalition is dead, why are the Conservatives buying ads to kill it?

Someone should tell the Liberals as they will soon be discussing it.

http://www.canada.com/topics/news/national/story.html?id=1189545

By-the-way I was watching Mulcair being interviewed about it on the Don Newman show this week. I see why unionist is impressed with him - he definitely is leadership material after Jack has had enough. That would be quite a legacy for Layton, to be followed by the first NDP leader to be elected from Quebec.

The Coalition is about to die. If Ignatieff takes credit for the "liberal" budget, the Tories will take credit for him abandoning the Coalition.

Not at all.

Harper is still concerned about the coalition. The best way to undermine any chance of a coalition is to erode any public support. And the best way to do that is through marketing and especially television marketing which has proven so effective at persuading Canadians to act against their own best interests. 

I remain impressed that most Canadians still think the Conservatives are the best party to manage the economy as though the record doesn't exist.  It is like Ameircans still believing there were WMDs in Iraq.

Facts and evidence be damned, the TV said so.

In a related question, if the coalition is dead, why did Scott Brison repeat 3-4 times by my count on CTV Question Period today "Mulcair is right; Tom Mulcair is correct; I agree with Mulcair" ... watch for yourself:

http://watch.ctv.ca/news/ctvs-question-period/jan-18-2009/#clip130826

I'm just saying ... [10]

This coalition idea sounds alive and well to the Liberals.

http://www.radio-canada.ca/nouvelles/Politique/2009/01/18/001-lib-caucus-ignatieff.shtml [12]

 À l'émission Les coulisses du pouvoir à la télé de Radio-Canada, dimanche, M. Coderre et le député de Beauséjour Dominic LeBlanc ont notamment fait valoir la légitimité d'un éventuel gouvernement de coalition [13]avec le participation en bonne et due forme du NPD, appuyé par le Bloc québécois

Rats, NR, I can't get that link to work :-(

Oops, it's working for me now.  Sorry

It is in the interests of the Liberal party to keep the threat of a coalition alive as long as possible. Think about what Ignasty said: "A coalition if necessary but not necessarily a coalition."

The threat of the coalition is important to Ignasty and the Libsquirrels but an actual coalition they really don't want. And Ignasty is so close to Harper in policy, all he needs to do to increase his ratings his wrestle minor concessions, Harper will willingly concede to pass legislation and remain in government, and spin them as major.

One probable aspect is that the Tories desperately want to discredit the NDP and Jack Layton as much as possible, even more than they want to discredit the grits. They will try to harnesss all the prejudiced elements of the grassroots that were so easily exploited before x-mas with regards to the supposed participation of the bloc quebecois, but this time concentrating the rhetoric even more against the NDP.

Since it was initially set up the coalition has been an albatross around Harper's neck. In spite of all the nonsense about its demise in the mainstream press with its right-wing agenda, it appears to be alive and well. As we approach D-Day Harper will ignore the ramifications of the coalition at his peril.   

Whether it's alive in reality or just in spirit, I think it's given a boost to a lot of people, to know that there's another possibility.

The idea may need to coalesce a bit longer in the public mind, though.

Strategically, it really looks pretty simple.

From where he stands and whatever Iggy's preferences, going the Coalition IS a possibility. So the option has to be kept open, not just as a bluff.

Keeping the option open, means you have to spend at least some minimum amount of time talking positively about it to 'prepare the ground'.

The flip side is that there is no downside to doing this. If the Coalition does not happen, Harper will throw into Iggy's face plenty. But that bed was made before Iggy arrived on the scene.

At this point any additional sprinkling in of 'Coalition is good' messages will be forgotten when it matters.

Scott Brison is a very personable guy, and if he has a rapport with Mulcair he's going to be inclined to say that. But he's also very disciplined and clearly in favour with Iggy, so if he is making the Coalition look positive... even as indirectly as this... that is the mandated message.

Strategically speaking, I think the ads are kind of funny.

They aren't going to tip the Liberals decision about the coming confidence vote / whether to go the Coalition route.

Unless they are just a pebble thrown into the pond to see if they start something unexpected. Like the chattering classes stirring up and/or reveling new evidence of how much [more] the public dislikes the idea of the Coalition.

The chattering classes seem to be just amused. Which was pretty predictable.

Just goes to show how much money the Conservatives have: throw a couple million out there just on the small chance it will get something going.

The consensus among experts is that Harper will try to survive six months from October 14th. Beyond that it's unlikely that the GG would tap the coalition and instead, give the high sign for another election. Barring a miracle on the budget, it's up to the Liberals as far as I can tell.

Here's something for the coalition members to chew on. Apparently the stimulus package to the Canadian automakers does not send one cent their way unless there are major wage and benefit concessions from the autoworkers. Talk about helping the working people of Canada. What kind of a monster do we have as our prime minister.

Another issue that needs to be addressed by the coalition:

 http://www.ottawacitizen.com/Business/Pass+savings+Canadians+tell+banks/1193211/story.html

Playing hardball is the only way to deal with Harper. The clock's ticking.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20090119.wPOLlibs-budget0119/BNStory/politics/home

Mr. McCallum declined to divulge the measures the Liberals are considering but said a Liberal budget would follow the criteria the party has laid out: helping the vulnerable and supporting "jobs today and jobs tomorrow."

"We certainly can't rule out the possibility of bringing down the government, in which case, if there were a coalition government, we'd need to have a budget pretty quickly and so we have to give some thinking to that as a contingency."

He said a group of people are helping him draw up this alternative plan but it doesn't include other parties.

"It's a Liberal party exercise. I am also in touch with [NDP finance critic Tom] Mulcair. But he is not part of the group. But we keep in touch as potential partners."

To me, this "shadow budget" is a load of horseshit. It is what you do to respond to a government budget you know is going to pass. A sort of "this is what we would have done differently." It sounds like a Liberal effort to cover their ass when they know that they will be painted as yet again one and the same with the Harper Conservatives. The Liberals will live to regret propping up Harper and Michael Ignatieff if this is what they choose to do. A word to the NDP, get your fundraising house in order, the public financing of parties could be going down the toilet in short order.

Mulcair told them they wont have until April to bring down Harper at a time more convenient for the Liberal Party.

I think if Iggy and rightwing Liberals in that party do decide to continue propping up Harper, then this will be more a show of rightist Liberals' solidarity with Canada's big banks and Bay Street than a serious desire to put Iggy in the PMO.

But it at least appears that the Liberals are doing some homework on the economy, and so are the NDP. Is Mulcair the NDP's conduit for communicating with more leftwing elements in that other coalition party?

Its not dead by any means but rather it is gaining substance and once the common ground is found and their is balance and the momentum is built up. Watch Out!

And here is a little something I wish to share it is not the Collation that will bring Harper's Government down but their own actions or rather lack of them when it comes to ordinary working Canadians.  However the Collation has a real opportunity to show its commitment to the people of this fine country and would be advantagous in up and coming elections. 

A coalition is always an option, but does anyone seriously think Canadians will accept one that is not elected?

Who is Mulcair and why is he threatening Ignatieff? Is that of any use to Canadians?

Is this 'desperatelyseekingcoalition' about what's good for the NDP, or for the people? When it started, it was necessary, a wake up call for Harper. Seems some now have their eye on it as a 'prize'.

Seems to me ... the budget is acceptable, or it isn't. The liberals would be pretty stupid NOT to have their budget ideas in order.

 But that's just me ... I like to think our politicians would be focused on what's important for Canadians, not petty party politics and egos.

Yes I know better, but do we need to flaunt it?

That's why 40% of Canadians just ignore the whole thing.

It's a 'clique' thing, about political strategy and tactics,  winning and losing.

The losers here are Canadians, as usual, imo.

Bob Rae on Newman's show tonight said the Coalition is still on the table for the Libs.  Layton was on as well, and did a long list of all the promises Harper has broken, and said Harper simply has no credibility left, so he doesn't trust him, regardless of what might be in the budget.

I can't read Canadians minds, but I do know one thing. I want Harper out and I want him out now.

Amen to that.

Liberals have said it themselves that Harper doesnt believe in intervening in the economy. Harper's gotta go.

"Is this 'desperatelyseekingcoalition' about what's good for the NDP, or for the people?"

Destroying Harper IS what's good for the people. He is like a canecerous tumour that must be excised. Don't kid yourself - the NDP would be taking a big risk in saving Canada from Harper. Being in an Ignatieff-led coalition is frought with dangers to the NDP. If the NDP was just thinking about what would lead to more NDP seats - they would hope that the Liberals support the budget and prop up Harper and then Layton would go on a blistering attack on the Grits for propping up Harpert and facilitating him doing even more damage.

Like piranhas to a wounded trout!

 Is Ignatieff bluffing or not?

Ignatieff : Harper has one more shot

http://www.canada.com/surreynow/news/story.html?id=f31e3090-a524-4570-a89d-07b307f63c2e

I thought it was interesting that the Tories were imploring citizens to demand that their MPs support a budget which none of us have even seen. Sounds like the old Harper - "support the budget or there'll be an election, or worse, another coup attempt."

Harper is now going to be starting to sweat as his days may well be numbered as pm.  The sqeeze is on, and he who laughs last laughs best.  Duceppe trumpets coalition's strengthBloc Québécois Leader doubts Prime Minister will change tone and meet Liberal-NDP demands on budget

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20090120.wPOLduceppe0120/BNStory/politics/home [40]

Mr. Duceppe, however, said he doesn't believe murmurs in the press that suggest Mr. Ignatieff has cozied up to the Conservatives.

“Mr. Harper spoke about an emerging consensus — I don't know where he heard that,” he said. “I haven't seen it.”

The coalition agreement is still intact but the opposition parties won't take their positions until the government presents its budget, the sovereigntist leader said. “We'll see the facts, then we'll react.”

----------------

http://www.thestar.com/News/Canada/article/573889 [41]

Stockholm,

Oh. I see. Carry on.

On that topic ...

ANGUS REID- Winners in Leadership qualities survey questions:

Jack Layton 5

Steven Harper 3

Michael Ignatieff 1

http://www.angusreidstrategies.com/uploads/pages/pdfs/2009.01.17_Federal...

"Thinking about the following qualities and characteristics, do you think they apply to Stephen Harper/ Michael Ignatieff/ Jack Layton?"

 "Cares about the environment: Harper 19% (-1), Ignatieff 24% (+1), Layton 51% (-6)"

(Looks like if there's a party the Green Party is going to unite with, there is only one that has the cred)

 I also liked the fact that 45% also think Layton understands the problems of Canadians and 44% see that Layton has a vision. Also of note, that more folks in comparison with the other 2 leaders, see they are in agreement with Layton on issues they care about.

You know the results of this survey are quite good for the NDP. I have to say, and perhaps that is because I sit in Ontario, but I don't see the NDP on the MSM much, or when I do, there appears to be a negative slant, or it's so little in comparison to Iggy this and Iggy that (think Torstar), and yet the NDP keeps beeping along. 

 It makes me think what could be if we had relatively NDP friendly press - alas, it seems the people see the NDP in a good light, and Layton in particular. I think it all has to do with that last great election campaign.

______________________________________________________________________________________ Our kids live together and play together in their communities, let's have them learn together too!