+_+
Issues Pages:
Election, 2011 (1)
Fri, 2011-03-25 17:15
#1
Election, 2011 (1)
Fri, 2011-03-25 16:17
#2
Harper got off easy today - no questions. Ignatieff not so hot. Duceppe and Layton did well.
4 elections in 7 years. Harper can't work with anyone else so he has to go.
The Cons have already started a full court press suggesting a Kim Campbell election for the Liberals.
Fri, 2011-03-25 16:25
#3
What I found interesting was that no one in the media thought to say- but didn't Harper cause 2 of those elections himself?
Fri, 2011-03-25 16:33
#4
The NDP needs to feed questions to the media to ask just like the Cons and the Libs constantly do.
Fri, 2011-03-25 16:41
#5
watching on CPAC what i couldn't understand was Iggy getting asked directly at least three times about a "coalition" and he rambled on and on. Someone off camera (sounded like Craig Oliver) said he was going to get flogged with the question the whole campaign if he didn't get a direct answer and Iggy just smiled gamely and dissembled some more, at which point the reporters all started shouting "answer the question!"
after the vote, CPAC interviewed Pierre Pollivere, Ralph Goodale and Libby Davies. Pollivere kept droning on and on about the Cons "low tax plan" and the "Coalition's high tax and spend" plan. the interviewer then asked Goodale point blank about a coalition option and Ralph started rambling about everything but with Pollivere chirping him from off camera..."answer the question Ralph". haha.
what on earth are the Liberals thinking? they really did look pretty evasive on the issue, and whomever said it is right, they are going to get flogged with it until they give a straight answer. what are they afraid of?
Fri, 2011-03-25 16:52
#6
Boom Boom
The Liberals can't win on the coalition question. No matter what answer they give, they piss someone off.
Fri, 2011-03-25 16:55
#7
Ignatieff should probably say that he will not form a coalition with any other party. (of course that does not preclude the possibility that he would form a minority government and get support for legislation from varying combinations of other parties)
Fri, 2011-03-25 17:05
#8
I'm sick of the right-wing propaganda on the CTV News Channel. A few minutes ago they had on two radio personalities (one was Dave Rutherford) who claimed that Canadians are tired of elections and said the mood is out there for a Conservative majority. Whenever CTV has on these radio types (isn't talk radio dominated by the right?) it drives me nuts because every single one of them seems to have a pro-Con agenda. They're given this platform to spout their BS while making out like they're speaking on behalf of all Canadians, and there's no one there to rebut. Ugh. This kind of stuff really helps to shape the views of casual voters who listen to the BS and then regurgitate it.
Fri, 2011-03-25 17:06
#9
Regardless of who says what, history was made today with the conservatives found in contempt..basically a seal of approval proving they are lienig criminal rat bastards.....
All party's should be jumping up and down throught the election saying "Don't believe a word they say, if they can lie to parliament they can sure as hell lie to you"..
The liberlas lose to lackof integrity...the conservatives lose to lack of trust...just one party left...
But yeah the conservative media would rather play the coalition card...instead of inoring Harper and his band of fraudsters. They shouldn't even be acknowledged as a party after this and the cheating scandel.
Fri, 2011-03-25 17:07
#10
Ignatieff should probably say that he will not form a coalition with any other party. (of course that does not preclude the possibility that he would form a minority government and get support for legislation from varying combinations of other parties)
That's most likely what he is going to say. The Conservatives are using the coalition issue to alienate the Liberals right wing. Harper only needs a few of these "blue Liberals" to vote Conservative to get a fake FPTP majority so Ignatieff will likely have to disavow a coalition with "the socialists and separatists."
If we had PR/fair voting there would be no chance of Harper getting a fake FPTP majority and Ignatieff could just say that coalitions are part and parcel of our political system.
I wonder if this experience will help more Liberals understand why they should suport electoral reform?
Fri, 2011-03-25 17:10
#11
@ Stockholm
But then he pisses off the people who want Harper out at all costs and expect the parties to work together to get rid of him
The only real answer is - the only way to avoid a coalition with the Bloc for any party is to defeat as many Conservatives and BQ MPs as possible. Then we will see where we stand.
I find the whole thing though really disrespectful of the democratic rights of Quebecers to send to Ottawa whomever the hell they want and then expect them to be treated as representatives of the people. It is profoundly anti-democratic. But nothing matters these days but scaremongering.
Liberals keep up this evasion though and we will see their poll numbers plummet off both sides and to the BQ I find it amazing that on the day the House found a government in contempt of Parliament all reporters wanted to talk about was coalitons and Layton's health.
Hello Historic Moment Here- Please Look This Way
Fri, 2011-03-25 17:13
#12
One way for the opposition parties to change the channel in their favour is to announce a policy proposal that puts attention onto an area that benefits one of them and hurts the Conservatives.
Fri, 2011-03-25 17:28
#13
Ignatieff is an idiot. Where is he going first but to Outremont to try and knock off the NDP. Where is Layton going first to Alberta to pick up more seats from the Cons for the NDP.
Here's a good article by Delacourt. It's obvious Harper does not want to work with others and so is not fit for the job.
A Parliament of shutdowns
http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/politics/article/961986--a-parliament-of-shutdowns
Fri, 2011-03-25 18:16
#14
Boom Boom
The latest:
1. Baird complained about the tyranny of the majority in bringing down the government (and the Conservatives want a majority??? 
)
2. Bad news for the Liberals in Quebec tomorrow - a new poll has them behind the NDP.
3. Frank Graves poll today has the Cons just 7 points ahead of the Libs, but the NDP at just 14%.
4. Ignatieff really, really needs to trim his eyebrows!
Fri, 2011-03-25 18:54
#15
Somebody made a good point on another blog - the Tories' "us versus the coalition" line could be a double-edged sword for them, in that it is 'legitimizing' an opposition coalition as an option. The danger of framing the ballot question as "Tory majority or coalition" is that the Tories might not like the answer they get from the voters. If Harper falls short of a majority and the opposition parties try to form a coalition, he won't be able to say "this isn't what people voted for" since he himself framed the election as a choice between a Tory majority or a coalition government.
That said, the Libs have to come up with a good answer on the 'coalition question', pronto. Iggy can't hem and haw his way through the next six weeks. If they don't give a straight answer, the press will not let it go and the issue will dominate the entire coverage of the Liberal campaign. It is a bit of a Hobson's choice for them - they don't want to categorically rule out a coalition lest they be in a position to form a coalition government when the dust settles, but on the other hand the best strategy for Grit gains in this election is to polarize the electorate between Libs and Cons (squeezing the NDP and Greens), while keeping the blue Liberals onside. Talking about a coalition does not help that narrative much, and as noted above will alienate the blue Grits.
I can only see a coalition working in a fairly specific set of circumstances (ie where Lib + NDP seats are greater than Tory seats). If the Tories are the biggest party by a substantial margin again, I just don't see a coalition happening.
Fri, 2011-03-25 19:16
#16
Boom Boom
I think Ignatieff will turn out to be the worse leader the Liberals have ever had.
Fri, 2011-03-25 19:42
#17
And, perhaps, the LAST leader they ever have.
Fri, 2011-03-25 19:45
#18
He was just horrible, and this was the question they or anyone could see coming.
They did send him out with a line and it stank. One door, two door, red door, blue door!
Fri, 2011-03-25 19:52
#19
Quite possible. Ignatieff is certainly not off to an auspicious start. Even on Kinsella's blog the Liberal supporters are dumping all over Ignatieff for looking totally evasive on the issue, and the Liberal war room for not having an answer to a question they ought to have known was coming. I am likewise mystified that the Liberal brain trust would send Iggy out into the kleig lights without a line on the possibility of a coalition.
I disagree. We have had plenty of minority governments before and yet never a contempt vote. This is historic. And the things done that caused it were very unusual. Even Mulroney never tried that kind of stunt. The fact that the division was on a partisn line has as much to do with Conservatives willing to respect our democratic institutions as pure partisanship.
ETA
Hey that was odd. I was responding to the comment about the contempt of Parliament and now it has disappeared.
Fri, 2011-03-25 20:03
#20
Boom Boom
I think what we saw today is the first stage of an impending Liberal meltdown. I'm not sure who it's going to benefit, though.
Fri, 2011-03-25 20:04
#21
Asking Ignatieff and Layton about the idea of a coalition, something which is off the table at the moment, is an illegitimate question at best and at worst shows that the Canadian press has been bought off by Harper and intends to be his propaganda arm throughout this campaign to ensure he remains in government. Stooges all!
I bet at his presser tommorow Harper will be asked fluffy questions about how he slept last night, if he is ready for the campaign, to summarize his lovely budget details, etc. Disgusting!
Fri, 2011-03-25 20:05
#22
I think what we saw today is the first stage of an impending Liberal meltdown. I'm not sure who it's going to benefit, though.
A liberal meltdown means a conservative majority of 200 seats or more with the BQ as official opposition wth the NDP the third largest party at around 40-43 seats imo.
Fri, 2011-03-25 20:08
#23
ETA
Hey that was odd. I was responding to the comment about the contempt of Parliament and now it has disappeared.
Yeah, I thought better of it after I wrote it and decided to withdraw it, but forgot to add an ETA. My bad.
Fri, 2011-03-25 20:08
#24
And, perhaps, the LAST leader they ever have.
Here is hoping.
Still to be fair any leader would be in a pickle, still having iggy as boss makes it worse as his background is in American and now liberal politics so nothing he has experience with gives him any idea where to turn. He is out of his element as this election does not look like it will resemble the previous ones where the watch word was horse race. The only edge the libs have is habit and years of indocurantion that says the ndp is bad and that grows weaker very election. This is a whole new political world and all bets are off.
Fri, 2011-03-25 20:08
#25
Quite possible. Ignatieff is certainly not off to an auspicious start. Even on Kinsella's blog the Liberal supporters are dumping all over Ignatieff for looking totally evasive on the issue, and the Liberal war room for not having an answer to a question they ought to have known was coming. I am likewise mystified that the Liberal brain trust would send Iggy out into the kleig lights without a line on the possibility of a coalition.
[ETA: Comment about the 'historic' nature of the finding of contempt removed due to second thoughts.]
Fri, 2011-03-25 20:12
#26
It might create a situation like 1922(the "leapfrog" election in the UK where Labour moved past the old Liberals and became the Official Opposition, going into government only two years later).
That may be the best hope.
The scariest possibility would be a huge swing of Liberal voters defecting to the Tories if it looks like the Liberals are falling into third place, out of fear that "the socialist barbarians are at the gates", to use Wacky Bennett's traditional B.C. provincial election cry of doom(a message that worked for the Socreds for almost twenty years).
Fri, 2011-03-25 20:14
#27
Boom Boom
Dare we say it? NDP as Official Opposition? 
Fri, 2011-03-25 20:17
#28
Saying it is part of the process of making it happen. Think of it as "psychic freeing".
Fri, 2011-03-25 20:18
#29
Oooppsie To slow a typer - I was responding to Rob
That's not sensible. In the last election the NDP was 1rst or second in about 100 ridings. Or about a third. You would never guess that from the stupid Liberal/Conservative only matter press coverage though. Anyway a Liberal metldown could mean a Conservative majority, but it could also mean a bunch of other things. It could mean a whole lot of seats could suddenly come into play for the NDP and who knows what that might mean, because in a lot of cases those are Conservatives they are beating.
Fri, 2011-03-25 20:21
#30
Fri, 2011-03-25 20:22
#31
Boom Boom
I think I need a drink!
Fri, 2011-03-25 20:53
#32
My dream scenario is the NDP sweeping to power nationally the way the way that they did in Ontario in the 90s. Jack is incredbly experienced now and would not be inexperienced the way Rae and his cabinet were in ON. Don't see how it could happen though.
Fri, 2011-03-25 21:24
#33
In the last election the NDP was 1rst or second in about 100 ridings.
I live in one of those 2nd place ridings. Sometimes 2nd place finishes are very overrated
Fri, 2011-03-25 21:43
#34
Dare we say it? NDP as Official Opposition?
If the ndp can gain offical op status then it only makes sense to at least attempt build an NDP coalition.
Fri, 2011-03-25 22:03
#35
In the last election the NDP was 1rst or second in about 100 ridings.
I live in one of those 2nd place ridings. Sometimes 2nd place finishes are very overrated
The point is that elections in Canada (outside of Quebec) are no longer simply Conservative-Liberal contests- yet the media still presents them as if they are. Where the Liberals are also that far back the media still treats them as Lib-Con contests. That world no longer exists- but the media still pretends like it does. Today's excuse for media coverage confirmed this.
Fri, 2011-03-25 22:29
#36
In the last election the NDP was 1rst or second in about 100 ridings.
I live in one of those 2nd place ridings. Sometimes 2nd place finishes are very overrated
The point is that elections in Canada (outside of Quebec) are no longer simply Conservative-Liberal contests- yet the media still presents them as if they are. Where the Liberals are also that far back the media still treats them as Lib-Con contests. That world no longer exists- but the media still pretends like it does. Today's excuse for media coverage confirmed this.
The problem is too many seats where there is no contest
Fri, 2011-03-25 22:35
#37
I am afraid that is the view of the young. I am old enough to have seen many seats change hands in ridings where supposedly no one could possibly defeat the incumbents in. I beleive a Conservative plurality is the most likely outcome, but I do not believe it is a given that the end results of the election will mirror polls taken a few days ago. If, as was the theory, the Liberals collapse, (which I doubt is true to the extent suggested by the way) than all bets are off because the body politic would be about to get a tilt-a-whirl worthy shake up. But I stand by my assertion that the media narrative of Con vs Lib doesn't actually meet the reality test.
Fri, 2011-03-25 22:42
#38
I am so afraid that the LIberals have just handed Harper a majority.
So afraid
Fri, 2011-03-25 22:44
#39
I think the Liberals have too.
Fri, 2011-03-25 22:49
#40
Boom Boom
Whoever didn't prepare Ignatieff for the questions he got on the "coalition" today will likely have been replaced. Maybe the Libs are at the bottom of the barrel now and have no place to go but up.
Fri, 2011-03-25 22:51
#41
There's something to that I think Boom Boom. When expectations are so low, it is hard to under-impress.
Fri, 2011-03-25 22:53
#42
The Cons have never been as vulnerable as they are right now. If they really improve under these circumstances, it could only be because the opposition parties rolled over and played dead. I don't think that will happen.
Sat, 2011-03-26 00:56
#43
I just watched the coverage tonight on RDI. Gilles Duceppe was interviewed and called out Harper as a hypocrite over the coalition issue and brought up the discussions he and Layton had with Steve in 2004. Then later on the journalist's panel, Anne Lagace-Dowson also called out Harper as a hypocrite and showed Harper's 2004 letter to the camera.
Sat, 2011-03-26 01:07
#44
The Cons have never been as vulnerable as they are right now. If they really improve under these circumstances, it could only be because the opposition parties rolled over and played dead. I don't think that will happen.
If the opposition parties want to gain on the Conservatives they'll have to come up with some concrete policies that the people like.
If the opposition parties can't come up with policies the people like, they shouldn't expect the people to give them greater support.
The parties will also have to do a good job selling their policies. I hope they get at least 4 debates, at least 2 in English and 2 in French, to sell their polices and to contrast them with the Conservatives.
Sat, 2011-03-26 01:09
#45
I doubt there will be that many debates. Unfortunately in Canada some of our leaders try to avoid having a lot of debates, and the Conservatives will probably want Harper to do as few as possible since he doesn't have the best track record at it. In 2008 Dion was the surprise winner of the French debate and Jack Layton won the English debate.
From what I'm hearing the debates may not be until the 4th week of the campaign. Is that true?
And Elizabeth May claimed on CBC earlier tonight that she is going to be there.
Sat, 2011-03-26 01:49
#46
Harper's chances of doing well in the debates are even worse now that he has such a terrible record to run on. I think the debates will expose his relative weakness on the issues. If the opposition can come up with some great policies, the debates could be a turning point in the election. Going by her performance in the 2008 debates, May is willing to assertively confront Harper on his dismal record. If she gets into the debates, she might help bring down the Conservative's current lead.
In the UK they had 3 debates during last years election. Gordon Brown also had a horrible record in office and basically lost the debates before they started. Harper may be in a similar situation. Harper seems to be getting more and more evasive. Unlike all the other leaders today, Harper shamefully didn't answer a single question from reporters today. Most people have no idea how undemocratic Harper is. Does Harper ever do press conferences? His ability to duck the inspection of the media is hard to believe. The media has basically just let Harper walk all over them.
He should have had to answer the question, "what does in feel like to be the first government in the history of the Commonwealth to be held in contempt of Parliament?"
But as it turned out Harper evaded answering the tough almost unanswerable questions and Ignatieff fumbled an easy one.
Harper government cited for contempt of Parliament - CTV
MPs voted 156-145 in favour of a Liberal motion expressing non-confidence and citing the Harper government for contempt of Parliament -- a first for a national government anywhere in the Commonwealth.
If this doesn't make for a great campaign ad, I don't know what does.
Sat, 2011-03-26 01:49
#47
Malcolm
Elizabeth May has as much right to be in the debates as the leader of the Natural Law Party.
Sat, 2011-03-26 01:54
#48
Does anyone know the latest discussions as to whether May will be invited? What are the networks deciding?
This time she doesn't even have a fake Green seat to use as an entry point.
Sat, 2011-03-26 02:13
#49
Liberals lose a Quebec candidate
http://davidakin.blogware.com/blog/_archives/2011/3/25/4780188.html
Sat, 2011-03-26 02:13
#50
Liberals lose a Quebec candidate
http://davidakin.blogware.com/blog/_archives/2011/3/25/4780188.html
Sat, 2011-03-26 02:13
#51
Elizabeth May has as much right to be in the debates as the leader of the Natural Law Party.
Why, I'd be just fine with the NLP leader being in the debates...providing he or she agreed to demonstrate yogic flying during the opening statements.