Are Canadians going to sit there and allow Harper to get a majority government?

63 posts / 0 new
Last post
NorthReport
Are Canadians going to sit there and allow Harper to get a majority government?

._.

NorthReport

Are we collectively nuts?

NorthReport

I have been warning for months and months that the Ignatieff Liberals were a massive train wreck just waiting to happen and that Harper was closing in on his dream of getting a majority government. Many people such as the likes of 'debator' here, kept twisting that around and suggesting that I was a Harper supporter. Nothing could be further from the truth. Obviously the Liberals are no match for the Harper-led Conservatives.  We cannot keep allowing this situation to deteriate like this or Harper will get his majority, and then we really are fucked. So when is the real opposition to Harper going to take him on?

Lard Tunderin Jeezus Lard Tunderin Jeezus's picture

I imagine that over 50% (and probably over 60%) of Canadians would do anything legally possible to prevent a Harper majority. But with our antiquated FPTP electoral system and our corrupted, venal and incompetent media, they have no way of knowing what that 'anything' might be.

George Victor

In fact, if you assume that the 40 per cent of the folks who don't turn out to vote (a la Mercer) are of a like mind, perhaps 75 per cent of Canadians don't want  him. But some have a funny way of demonstrating that.

Bookish Agrarian

The problem is the more hysterical we sound the more average people tune out.  This Harper as the Great Satan rhetoric needs to stop.  Not saying the Cons aren't a disturbing threat, but reasonable and responsible alternatives rather than just throwing up the silver cross at the mere mention of the Conservatives like this is some old Christopher Lee movie just turns people off. It is behind, I think, in at least part the drop in the Liberal polling numbers, and before that the NDP.  Being against Harper needs to be based on substance, not just knee-jerk anti-Conserative rhetoric (which I am at least as guilty of as the next person)

The hysteria needs to be dialed back and the alternative polcies needs to be dialed way up. 

Stockholm

Lard Tunderin Jeezus wrote:

I imagine that over 50% (and probably over 60%) of Canadians would do anything legally possible to prevent a Harper majority. But with our antiquated FPTP electoral system and our corrupted, venal and incompetent media, they have no way of knowing what that 'anything' might be.

I think you're grossly exagerrating how many Canadians not only don't like the idea of a harper majority but would "do anything legally possible to prevent one". According to just about every poll I've seen the proportion of Canadians who STRONGLY disapprove of Harper is about 17%. Then there is another 35% or so who "somewhat" disapprove of him. to me if you say that you only "somewhat" disapprove of Harper then you are ipso-facto NOT "willing to do anything legally possible" to prevent him from getting a majority.

Get outside yur little bubble of leftwing NGOs and people who wear mismatched socks to anti-globalization rallies and you'll see that the average person doesn't have particularly strong feelings about Harper. They may never vote for him, they might not like him, but the intensity just isn't there.

MUN Prof. MUN Prof.'s picture

Don't worry, Kinsella is surely gasing up the Liberal fear machine as we speak.

Tommy_Paine

Well, his last attempt to start a media buzz around leadership contentions in the NDP, intended to take the edge off the Corderre debale went over like a Sylvia Brown reading at a meeting of the sceptical movement.

 

remind remind's picture

stockholm wrote:
Get outside yur little bubble of leftwing NGOs and people who wear mismatched socks to anti-globalization rallies

You know shit spewing  like this is unnecessary!

KenS

NorthReport wrote:
Many people such as the likes of 'debator' here, kept twisting that around and suggesting that I was a Harper supporter. Nothing could be further from the truth. Obviously the Liberals are no match for the Harper-led Conservatives.  We cannot keep allowing this situation to deteriate like this or Harper will get his majority, and then we really are fucked.

"Many people"? Only Debater has made such a suggestion, and even in his case it was obviously sarcasm brought on by your incessant sky is falling schtick.

That is what bugs many people. Including people who have essentially the same politics and motivation.

You've been politely asked a number of times to explain why it is you do this. As obvious as it may sound to you, it isn't at all clear. At any rate, I've never seen you answer.

And here we are, there is already a thread about 'how the Conservatives will get their majority'. A perfectly good soapbox.

But no, you've got to put your schtick right in its own thread title. That does get more attention. But its not as if your point- unclear or incomplete as it is- has not been already thoroughly heard by everyone.

Make at least some general suggestions what you think should be done about the situation you see as so dire.

SCB4

It looks grim, but I take some comfort in having seen this movie before -- inept Liberal leader with plunging poll numbers and Harper with the whip hand around election timing -- and it didn't end in a Conservative majority.

Harper has this reputation as a master strategist. However, he is by no means perfect; his posturing on Quebec arts funding cost him a majority last time out and his party funding bill last December damn near cost him the Tory leadership and his job as PM. Any Psychology 101 couse will teach you that the single best predictor of future behaviour is past behaviour. Harper has shown a tendency to screw up by overplaying his hand and he may yet again.

Bookish Agrarian

Tommy_Paine wrote:

Well, his last attempt to start a media buzz around leadership contentions in the NDP, intended to take the edge off the Corderre debale went over like a Sylvia Brown reading at a meeting of the sceptical movement.

 

There's like probably 5 people who get this, but man did it make me chuckle - thanks Tommy.

Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

I used to think an Iggy-led govt would be worse than Harper's, now I'm not so sure. I'm scared to death of either of these bastards getting a majority, although it looks like Iggy is leading a train wreck. Iggy's incompetence looks like Harper may get his majority after all. The only consolation I get from the Liberal train wreck is that the NDP and BQ may also (like the Cons) pick up a few seats at Liberal expense.

ETA: Lest someone jump in and say the Libs are not as bad as the Cons, let's remember that the Libs have been complicit in all the damage the Cons have done, by supporting the Cons in 79 straight confidence votes.

KenS

Here are the conditions Harper requires:

1.] He needs either strong confidence -nor merely an aspiration- that he can get a majority, or equal confidence he can after the election cut a deal with either the Bloc or NDP to survive the Throne Speech if he goes for the majority and doesn't get it.

2.] He has to be able to trigger a confidence motion that has at least a fig leaf of substantive need to it.

#2 is fairly easy, but not trivial. It happens to governing parties that when they have the window, they can't trigger an election, and the opportunity passes.

#1 is the tough nut. A back pocket deal with an opposition, that is close to ironclad, party worked out before an election is pretty remote. Without it, he can be turfed after an election he doesn't get a majority in. Even a staus quo outcome where he is still just a dozen seats short of a majority. That wouldn't normally be good enough or stable enough for the opposition parties to all want to go for it. But we aren't in normal- in large part because of Harpers polarizing practice [and because the Liberals will be as desperate as Dion was to try anything].

I wouldn't bet anything that the oppostion parties would pull it off- even want to- in such an election outcome scenario. But its a very real possibility

Bottom line: Harper already has something that works, and hes made it perfectly clear both that he'll take it, and that he'll work to mainatin so he doesn't lose it. He's not going to put that at risk unless he has a solid basis for expecting a majority [or an escape hatch to keep governing if he doesn't get it].

Getting closer to the stars possibly aligning isn't good enough.

Is that reason to be complacent? No.

But does seeing it otherwise, that Harper is almost there- and being able to solidly support the argument- make any practical difference about what might be done right now?

Tommy_Paine

There's like probably 5 people who get this, but man did it make me chuckle - thanks Tommy.

Comedians refer to that as the "Denis Miller percentage".

 

The problem is the more hysterical we sound the more average people tune out.

I've been coming back to that in my mind as I've been doing stuff around the house today.   I think that this isn't entirely right, and by that I mean the message has to be tailored to the audience.  Hysteria for some, hard hitting rhetoric for others, and reasoned substantive things for others.   

At one time, one had  to rely on one big media, which makes this kind of targeting impossible.  But, nowadays, I think you can tailor messages to your audience.

You  know, people at the bottom end  of the economy have every reason to get hysterical over the prospect of either a Harper  or Iggy government.  Already, they are tellegraphing their interest in paying off the deficit. 

And, you know who's going to pay for that.

 

 

bobojoobi

Harper can feel it, the majority coming. it's coming, it's coming. Harper's got a feeling.

http://vodpod.com/watch/1784083-youtube-black-eyed-peas-i-got-a-feeling-...

KenS

In the past, Harper hysteria got more people to vote for the Liberals, sideswiping the NDP and getting betrayal from the Liberals as reward.

I don't think repeating Harper hysteria necessarily gets the same result. But simply raising its specter again is a crap shoot. [Noted that increasing already troubling voter apathy and turnoff is an addded likely consequence to raising the specter.]

Singing about Harper hysteria, in conjunction with an endlessly litany of how untrustworthy and incompetent the Liberals are... may motivate a few people around here to care more about the fate of the NDP... but on its own thats damn thin gruel... even for around here.

Let alone the questions of what difference does it make 'outside' to be jumping up and down inside the bubble?

Bookish Agrarian

Tommy_Paine wrote:

There's like probably 5 people who get this, but man did it make me chuckle - thanks Tommy.

Comedians refer to that as the "Denis Miller percentage".

 

The problem is the more hysterical we sound the more average people tune out.

I've been coming back to that in my mind as I've been doing stuff around the house today.   I think that this isn't entirely right, and by that I mean the message has to be tailored to the audience.  Hysteria for some, hard hitting rhetoric for others, and reasoned substantive things for others.   

At one time, one had  to rely on one big media, which makes this kind of targeting impossible.  But, nowadays, I think you can tailor messages to your audience.

You  know, people at the bottom end  of the economy have every reason to get hysterical over the prospect of either a Harper  or Iggy government.  Already, they are tellegraphing their interest in paying off the deficit. 

And, you know who's going to pay for that.

 

 

That's probably true - well no it is true.

But I was trying to get at more the overheated rhetoric that sometimes gets thrown around.  There is a fine line between tough, blunt talk and screeching and frothing.  Sometimes we tend to screech, and I include myself in this.  Average people are just not that unfair minded.  They want to see the best in people so by being to overheated we push them towards that natural inclination to stick up for the underdog - never mind that Harper is of course not the underdog given a compliant media, tub loads of cash and so on.

But still it is a matter of feeling he is being picked on.  I've seen the Cons learn to exploit this over the last few years and I think we need to take it away from them.

KenS

NorthReport wrote:
I have been warning for months and months that the Ignatieff Liberals were a massive train wreck just waiting to happen and that Harper was closing in on his dream of getting a majority government. Obviously the Liberals are no match for the Harper-led Conservatives.  We cannot keep allowing this situation to deteriate like this or Harper will get his majority, and then we really are fucked. So when is the real opposition to Harper going to take him on?

What do you suggest?

Street demonstrations to demand that people wake up and vote for the NDP?

[But I like BAs nuanced point in the previous post better than the blunt instument I'm wielding here.]

Uncle John

Talking up a Harper majority may actually be good for the NDP.

As in "Well, the polls are telling us the Tories are likely to win, and who do you want speaking up for your interests, the ineffective Liberals you normally vote for, or the NDP which has a proven track record of standing up for people like you?"

Within the context of "progressive" Liberal voters who are disenchanted with Ignatieff, there is a potential for a shift of 5-15% of voters from the Liberal camp to the NDP.

I think the question is which party is going to benefit from electoral efficiency in the FPTP system.

 

NorthReport

Go back to sleep Ken.Tongue out

KenS

My tone is no longer very nice.

But there's a legitimate question there. Actually, a choice of questions you could answer.

What does it mean "when is the real opposition going to take Harper on"?

Even in the most general terms.

Tommy_Paine

In the past, Harper hysteria got more people to vote for the Liberals, sideswiping the NDP and getting betrayal from the Liberals as reward.

 

That's because when we're faced with the spector of a Conservative government,  elements of the NDP start telling people to vote Liberal.

(!?)

If the proper ground work was done, people would be less dispossed to view the Liberals as a progressive alternative to the Conservatives.  But we blow it all the time.

It is said there is a Chinese proverb that declares the best time to plant a tree is twelve years ago.  The second best time is now.

Since Labour and the CCF got together, they should have been pounding and pounding the issue that the Liberals are not a progressive political party.   And if not then, they should have been doing it twenty years ago.

And, Jumpin' Jehosephat, the Liberals have been going out of their way to make that easy in the past 15 years or so.  They've been handing it to us on a silver platter, and we've been turning our noses up at the opportunity  to show the public just who the real alternative is.

And you know, about a week before the next election is called, I will be here, on this forum, frothing at the mouth and doing my best to not use ad hominems, froth at my mouth, and unleash the bad Tommy on asses that I otherwise like around here because they'll be talking about STRATEGIC VOTING which is anything but strategic for anyone but the Liberal Party.

(deep breath)

 

Unionist

Tommy_Paine wrote:

... when we're faced with the spector of a Conservative government

 

Do you really expect M. Spector to ignore that accusation?

Sealed

Tommy_Paine

Ex Specter ates in your general direction.

Frmrsldr

Lard Tunderin Jeezus wrote:

I imagine that over 50% (and probably over 60%) of Canadians would do anything legally possible to prevent a Harper majority. But with our antiquated FPTP electoral system and our corrupted, venal and incompetent media, they have no way of knowing what that 'anything' might be.

That sums it up right there, LTJ.

A_J

Boom Boom wrote:
 only consolation I get from the Liberal train wreck is that the NDP and BQ may also (like the Cons) pick up a few seats at Liberal expense.

They're not doing well lately, but the Liberals are still polling well above what they received in last year's election - and the NDP are down slightly.

Boom Boom wrote:
ETA: Lest someone jump in and say the Libs are not as bad as the Cons, let's remember that the Libs have been complicit in all the damage the Cons have done, by supporting the Cons in 79 straight confidence votes.

Well, that streak has finally been broken.

remind remind's picture

Reality shows the Libs are collapsing, as opposed to being well above what they received in the election.

janfromthebruce

And Tommy that strategic voting thing has already started in another forum here - you know the libs and NDP team up - DON'T RUN AGAINST EACH OTHERS ENCUMBS. - nothing formal but a wink and a nod.

West Coast Greeny

No, the Liberals aren't collapsing, they collapsed last election, to about the greatest extent the Liberal Party could. They won 77 seats, only 28 clear of the Bloc, of which a grand total of 21 came outside of Ontario and Atlantic Canada.

Yes, the Liberals are treading towards Dion territory, in that they're polling below 30%, but they aren't actually in that range of between 23-28% that they were polling towards the end of Dion's stint. Moreover, the Conservatives aren't yet above 36% in any poll. No, if an election were held today, the Liberals would gain seats... not many... maybe up to 90.

A Conservative majority is still possible mind you, and granted momentum is on their side for now. Its about a 3 point swing from where we are now and a 6 point swing from where we were last election, but we would need to see the CPC LPC gap move from 36-30 (where it is now), past 38-26 (where it was last election), to about 40-24.

madmax

West Coast Greeny wrote:

Yes, the Liberals are treading towards Dion territory, in that they're polling below 30%, but they aren't actually in that range of between 23-28% that they were polling towards the end of Dion's stint.

Liberals are vowing they will not support the government in future confidence motions, leaving the government on uncertain ground in the months ahead.

"If there are confidence votes to be taken, we will be voting no," Liberal House Leader Ralph Goodale said.

The vote came on a day when a new poll showed little change in voters' preferences. The Angus Reid/Toronto Star poll showed the Conservatives at 37 per cent, Liberals at 27 per cent, NDP at 17 per cent, Bloc Quebecois at 11 per cent and Greens at 6 per cent.

The poll of 1,000 Canadians was done Tuesday and Wednesday and is considered accurate within 3.1 per cent, 19 times out of 20.

janfromthebruce

And I think that the libs' numbers will go down this week, the fall out of all the extremely bad press is going to bite them in the butt.

NorthReport

West Coast Greeny wrote:

No, the Liberals aren't collapsing, they collapsed last election, to about the greatest extent the Liberal Party could. They won 77 seats, only 28 clear of the Bloc, of which a grand total of 21 came outside of Ontario and Atlantic Canada.

Yes, the Liberals are treading towards Dion territory, in that they're polling below 30%, but they aren't actually in that range of between 23-28% that they were polling towards the end of Dion's stint. Moreover, the Conservatives aren't yet above 36% in any poll. No, if an election were held today, the Liberals would gain seats... not many... maybe up to 90.

A Conservative majority is still possible mind you, and granted momentum is on their side for now. Its about a 3 point swing from where we are now and a 6 point swing from where we were last election, but we would need to see the CPC LPC gap move from 36-30 (where it is now), past 38-26 (where it was last election), to about 40-24.

 

ARS  Poll released today.

Cons - 37%

Libs - 27%

NDP - 17%

 

 

NorthReport

Has Harper found his tipping point?

 

Perhaps the cruellest problem the Liberals face is the fading of Quebec as the crucial national battleground. Whether or not the Liberals get their Quebec act together, the Conservatives are on the verge of being able to form a majority government even without effective Quebec representation, a prospect that will be more evident in future years after parliamentary redistribution.

The dim prospects for the opposition parties suggest that we will not have an election for at least another year, possibly much longer. Given their weakness, national opinion and the constant readiness of the Conservatives' electoral organization, Mr. Harper's government can get on with the job almost as though it had a majority. Unless something quite unexpected occurs, the Conservatives' virtual majority will become a real one whenever the next election is held and a new template will be in place for the foreseeable political future.

 

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/has-harper-found-his-tippin...

Lard Tunderin Jeezus Lard Tunderin Jeezus's picture

Ick. I need a shower. Why in the world would you link us to one of Michael Bliss' wet dreams?

You did, however, quote the most insightful paragraph in the screed. From it I take the fact that parliamentary re-distribution must not be allowed to go forward without electoral reform. The opposition parties must be united and firm on this point.

canuquetoo

Its rather difficult to convince the moderate majority of the worthiness in voting NDP when Guru Layton is voting Conservative.

The next election will see Harper gain his majority because he has pursued rational policies and the electorate is fed up with opposition tactics. Leaping from anti-Harper coalition crusader to Harper's BFF in the same year will cost Layton dearly. Iggy is going from stud to dud and who cares about Gilles anyway?

The electorate isn't interested in picayune leftist resentments, they are simply interested in whats in it for them - and Harper has delivered the bribes while Iggy, Jack and Gilles have only delivered confusion, promiscuously jumping in and out of bed with each other

The largest factor affecting an election call now has nothing to do with the interests of the country. This factor is the significant number of MPs that are on the cusp of vetting their gold-plated MP pension plans -don't expect an election just yet.

So, how does the left intend to deny Harper a majority when their own leader is voting for him?

Buddy Kat

I think people should be issuing a warning that the conservatives will do anything to get a majority, including bankrupting the country. We know the fear they have perpetuated when it comes to the socialist stigma and we know they believe that the way to destroy socialism is to bancrupt the country. So people should be informing one another on the deficit problem and to beware of tory election tricks that look like bribes and giveaways.

This is almost like a Canadian formula..elect a tory ... bankrupt the country...elect a lib to fix it. Same with Saskatchewan..don't know if other provinces fit into that formula tho.

I think Canadians should and for the most part use the internet to stamp out the neocons , but if you dig deep you find the majority of conservative support is with the greater than 65 crowd and the uneducated. So that poses an intellectual problem on dealing with the mentally challenged Canadian and webless old foggy's....which are given easy access to the voting booth and probably by the conservative. So there is the target group.

Sean in Ottawa

canuquetoo wrote:

Its rather difficult to convince the moderate majority of the worthiness in voting NDP when Guru Layton is voting Conservative.

No sense quoting the rest of the paragragraph since it was so dependent on this first idea. The NDP abstained saying they opposed the government but could not justify forcing an election that would only return this government and wnated to allow the EI changes to go through.

Canadians get that there is a middle ground between agreeing with the government and wanting an election they would lose just to prove they disagree.

It is time more people on this board recognized the same thing.

Lard Tunderin Jeezus Lard Tunderin Jeezus's picture

canuquetoo wrote:

Its rather difficult to convince the moderate majority of the worthiness in voting NDP when Guru Layton is voting Conservative.

Really? 
Jack Layton didn't vote Conservative; he voted against the Liberals. The Liberals who supported all the bullshit anti-social legislation Harper brought forward, but then decided it was time to vote non-confidence in Harper's government. Liberal hypocrisy is almost beyond belief, isn't it?

So long as the Liberals refuse to side with the NDP against Harper's policies, the NDP have no reason to side with the Liberals at their convenience.

canuquetoo

Thats some amazing pretzel logic to try to avoid the fact that Jack Layton voted with the Conservatives against the Liberals and Bloc to prop up this government rather than a principled vote according to all the verbiage he has been directing against the government.

The thread is about how Canadians are allowing Harper to obtain a majority and, semantics aside, Jack Layton is Number 1 culprit.

Barely 60% of Canadians can be bothered to vote and of the entire electorate, I'd be surprised if more than 20%  use any critical thinking to explore the issues. Its all soundbites and scandal that engage the voter and fancy footwork about dear Jack saving Canadians from an election that they don't want reaches the voter as: Layton is afraid of an election so he abandons his principles to save his own ass.

Harper has been very cagy in using all the assets at the disposal of the government to shower Canadians with tax cuts, child support payments, infrastructure funding and all manner of entitlements while at the same time placing a chokehold on any sort of public dissemination of controversial subjects. The message the voter is getting is that Harper delivers entitlements while the opposition bickers and switches sides when it is opportune to do so.

Are Canadians going to allow Harper to get a majority? You bet they are because Canadians are heartily sick of the minority bickering and useless Liberal posturing plus now, Trusty Jack has basically confirmed that Harper is a good guy.

Harper has gulled the public with their own money - the Liberals always used it and it works every time. After the election, of course, with a majority in hand, there will no longer be any reason for pretense at making nice - and there will be that huge deficit to pay off.

Polunatic2

Quote:
that strategic voting thing has already started in another forum here
Interesting. Yes, that would have been me. But Janfromthebruce, you asked me twice on another thread to elucidate an electoral strategy for defeating Harper and preventing a majority.
Quote:
And I'm still waiting for how the liberal party could help the NDP party?
I did so reluctantly on that other thread but took the time to put some numbers together. There was no response from you there on the answer to your question. None. Now you're ridiculing it over here. 

Doug

canuquetoo wrote:
The thread is about how Canadians are allowing Harper to obtain a majority and, semantics aside, Jack Layton is Number 1 culprit.

If that does happen - something I still wouldn't want to bet money on - it'll be because Canadians see Stephen Harper as the best (realistically, least-worst) option and what Jack Layton has said or done in the last week will have very little to do with that.

SCB4

Doug wrote:

canuquetoo wrote:
The thread is about how Canadians are allowing Harper to obtain a majority and, semantics aside, Jack Layton is Number 1 culprit.

If that does happen - something I still wouldn't want to bet money on - it'll be because Canadians see Stephen Harper as the best (realistically, least-worst) option and what Jack Layton has said or done in the last week will have very little to do with that.

If that does happen it will be because of our perversion of a first past the post electoral system.

 

Polunatic2

Quote:
If that does happen it will be because of our perversion of a first past the post electoral system.
Right on.  Under FPTP, what Canadians "want" (as if we're homogeneous) is rarely what we get at the ballot box. 

JKR

Polunatic2 wrote:

Under FPTP, what Canadians "want" (as if we're homogeneous) is rarely what we get at the ballot box. 

 

If the Olympic movement used FPTP, Madrid would have won instead of Rio. As it is, using a fair system Rio beat Madrid out by a huge margin - 66 votes to just 32!

This is why Harper is in power. The Conservatives are the Madrid of Canadian politics.

If Canadians don't want to just "sit there ans allow Harper to get a majority government we must change the electoral system ASAP.

 

Rio wins in a lanslide!

 

First round
Madrid 28
Rio 26
Tokyo 22
Chicago 18

Second round
Rio 46
Madrid 29
Tokyo 20

Final round
Rio 66
Madrid 32

 

canuquetoo

There is no sense complaining about FPTP because only the governing party can initiate another system with any chance of success and none of the 4 pretenders to the throne, including the incumbent would voluntarily limit their own ambitions - no matter what pretty words they utter to the gullible.

Canadians may have to face a term of socially-challenged majority government under Harper. It will be scary because he will want the $58 billion stimulus funds back plus eliminating the deficit and it won't be Bay St he will be squeezing. he won't have to subject himself to wooden photo ops either and can ruminate on all the slings and arrows suffered and endured during his minority.

All Harper has to do is sit back and watch the backstabbing as the self-absorbed opposition parties snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.

JKR

One area where Harper and the Cons are extremely vulnerable is the HST. If the opposition parties were smart they would campaigning hard against the

Harper
Sales
Tax.

There's no way Harper could do well in an election supporting the HST.

 

Harper so far unscathed by HST blowback

Quote:

But while voter anger over the impact of the harmonized sales tax has scorched B.C. Premier Gordon Campbell – and singed Ontario counterpart Dalton McGuinty – Mr. Harper's federal Conservatives have so far escaped political blowback.

It's a remarkable feat given that the Prime Minister's government counselled B.C. and Ontario to embrace harmonization and then bankrolled its adoption. Ottawa is paying B.C. $1.6-billion and Ontario $4.3-billion in compensation to ease the transition.

...

One former Tory MP speculated privately that the party would be campaigning hard against the HST if it was sitting on opposition benches.

madmax

Sounds like the NDP have made a terrible political choice.

72% of Canadians Support their decision.

81% of New Democrats Support the Caucus Decision . (Do NDPers ever agree.... not if you read this forum LOL)

Yes, and the NDP avoided an election no one wanted and are getting through a "Socialist" policy to boot. This is terrible. If only the NDP voted down the government so that Harper could have his Majority. LOL.

It would appear that as long as their are policies that the NDP can support, the NDP will be preventing a CPC majority.

And that hidden Toronto Star Poll, pretty much indicates just that.

 

Sneaky Liberal paper it is Cool

janfromthebruce

Well, only 2 federal opposition parties could campaign against the HST - Lib official opposition leader and neo-liberal elitest already signaled in Ontario that he is supporting Ontario Dalton and the libs in the HST.

Bloc is not interesting - nothing to do with Quebec

That leaves the NDP and the Greens.

siamdave

I don't know if 'sit there and allow' is really the right phrasing - they're being pretty strongly herded, as far as I can see (as I talk about a bit on another post I sent in before finding this one) - the stories in both the Star and CBC of that pretty good guy Harper playing The Beatles fer gods sake, and doing a pretty good job of it too! - actually had me - ME!!!!!! - feeling just a tiny warm feeling for the guy!!! (didn't last long, intellect slapped 'like little pretty doggy feeling' down quick enough - but still - imagine those of less powerful intellect, more susceptible to 'feel-good' stuff from the tv they watch several hours every day! - the drive is on, folks, for a Harper majority, so this dream called Canada can be slapped down once and for all - and talking about it here isn't going to stop it.

Pages