Unite the center-left, or Harper will rule until 2025

104 posts / 0 new

Topic locked

Tue, 2011-05-03 11:31

observer521

Unfortunately, the left is the cause of its own failure. And if the left doesn't smarten up, Harper is going to get 3 back to back Majorities, and destroy the country.

The left vote is split on the left, that's it. The center-left needs to reach out to average Canadians, and learn how to communicate. Yes, they have to tell them they are going to cut their taxes, and do it. Average people are generally self-centered, and resent the tax they pay. They are not thinking about the major issues, like those who think about this for a living.

If the center-left doesn't grow up, and merge, and get all of the progressive on one side, then Harper is going to run Canada until 2025. He is going to close everything down, and the average person will have no access to the facts.

If the LEADERS on the center-left don't get over their own self-centered thinking, and organize the center-left into a block, that they can control and not have it hijacked, then we are screwed. Its that simple.

And for gods sakes, those on the left need to hire some experts who understand mass communications. Look at Harper, and Ford. They do slogans, as slogans work for the average undecided voter. The center-left also needs to reach Joe 6-pack and throw him a bone. They need to hire some political pros, to show how to reach different people.

If the center-left does not unite, then we have nowhere to go, and Canada is going to be dismantled. Are Bob Rae and others going to allow the left to unify? No, as they care about their own careers first. Its a terrible situation.

Will the NDP and Libs work together? No, they try to destroy eachother, and hand Harper the country.

Vote splitting is slitting your own throat. And those who want the NDP to go more left, are beyond crazy, as it needs to go more center. People have to be realistic, or if not, then Harper will rule for 3 Majorities. The neo-con proto-fascists have figured out how to fix elections, using every technique in the book. Why is the center-left so primitive?

If the center-left does not unite, then Harper is going to rule and pillage Canada for 15 years. Then it will be too late. Will the center-left unite? I hope so. But I don't think they will, as they are more concerned with ideology than being realistic.

Issues Pages:

Elections

Tue, 2011-05-03 11:37

gyor

observer521 wrote:

Unfortunately, the left is the cause of its own failure. And if the left doesn't smarten up, Harper is going to get 3 back to back Majorities, and destroy the country.

The left vote is split on the left, that's it. The center-left needs to reach out to average Canadians, and learn how to communicate. Yes, they have to tell them they are going to cut their taxes, and do it. Average people are generally self-centered, and resent the tax they pay. They are not thinking about the major issues, like those who think about this for a living.

If the center-left doesn't grow up, and merge, and get all of the progressive on one side, then Harper is going to run Canada until 2025. He is going to close everything down, and the average person will have no access to the facts.

If the LEADERS on the center-left don't get over their own self-centered thinking, and organize the center-left into a block, that they can control and not have it hijacked, then we are screwed. Its that simple.

And for gods sakes, those on the left need to hire some experts who understand mass communications. Look at Harper, and Ford. They do slogans, as slogans work for the average undecided voter. The center-left also needs to reach Joe 6-pack and throw him a bone. They need to hire some political pros, to show how to reach different people.

If the center-left does not unite, then we have nowhere to go, and Canada is going to be dismantled. Are Bob Rae and others going to allow the left to unify? No, as they care about their own careers first. Its a terrible situation.

Will the NDP and Libs work together? No, they try to destroy eachother, and hand Harper the country.

Vote splitting is slitting your own throat. And those who want the NDP to go more left, are beyond crazy, as it needs to go more center. People have to be realistic, or if not, then Harper will rule for 3 Majorities. The neo-con proto-fascists have figured out how to fix elections, using every technique in the book. Why is the center-left so primitive?

If the center-left does not unite, then Harper is going to rule and pillage Canada for 15 years. Then it will be too late. Will the center-left unite? I hope so. But I don't think they will, as they are more concerned with ideology than being realistic.

actually Bob Rae is probably the biggest supporter of merger in Parliment. My prediction is that during the next leadership race for the liberals Bob will champion merger, Justin stasus quo but with some reforms, and an unknown third will champion the liberal right.

Tue, 2011-05-03 11:44

Life, the unive...

Merger is useless. Let the Liberals die on the vine. Maybe then we can get real progressive politics back in Canada.

Tue, 2011-05-03 11:58

observer521

If the center-left could meet quickly, and start organizing for 4 years from now, they could defeat Harper in Ontario, and he would be out.

But if the NDP just rants and raves as the opposition, and the Libs reorganize, I promise you Harper will rule for 2-3 Majorities.

But the Lib loyalists will never agree of course.

And the NDP won't either.

So the horror is Harper the proto-fascist is going to rule with absolute power for 15 years. I know many who voted for Harper, and they are clueless about what he is going to do, and they are scared of the NDP spending.

Frankly, it looks like Harper encouraged the NDP to split the vote.

If the center-left doesn't form one super-party, then its game over. That is reality.

Tue, 2011-05-03 12:02

klexo

I don't think "useless" is the word I would use to describe a merger.

The creation of a Lib Dem ((New?) Dem-Libs?) party, in red-orange, with a new platform and a leader selected by the new merged membership, would represent a monumental shift.

I am curious: among the New Dems, how open are we to this? What are the bottom lines in any negotiations? Could merger with the tainted Libs hurt more than help in PQ and in the West?

I don't know, but I am inclined to think if we can take in 1/2 or more of the existing Liberal party, leaving little more than a rump, it would be hard not to jump at that.

Tue, 2011-05-03 12:03

knownothing knownothing's picture

In Saskatchewan the Liberals died out. Now it is just NDP and Conservative. Only problem is that the Sask Party is right-wing and the Sask NDP are Centrists. maybe by having the Liberals it pushes the NDP more to the left.

Tue, 2011-05-03 12:04

knownothing knownothing's picture

Kevin lamoureux should cross the floor and join NDP. That would be awesome.

Tue, 2011-05-03 12:09

josh

There has to be a willingness on both sides to do this. I suspect the Liberals are too proud (arrogant) to do this from a position of weakness.

Tue, 2011-05-03 12:10

observer521

Could you imagine if Jack and the Libs met in the next month, and formed something NEW to combat the Cons? They could start planning for 4 years from now.

Pick the BEST progressive from both parties.

Or, come up with a deal to not run against eachother in areas. Something.

If not, we are screwed. It would not surprise me if the cons dumped millions into taking over the Libs now somehow, and then running them to split the vote.

But if progressive organized NOW, and formed one center-left, they could win in 4 years. There are 4 parties on the left, and that is insane.

Are they going to smarten up? If not, Harper is going to pillage and rape, and stack the judges, and get Canada in wars, etc.

Why are the center-left "leaders" so f__ing stubborn and self-centered?

Tue, 2011-05-03 12:14

#10

SRB

I don't know that leaders are stubborn. There are real organizational issues that would need to be addressed, or large swaths of the membership of both parties would be alienated. The PC and Reform merger is NOT a good model, where one party leader betrayed his party's supporters, which meant (basically) that one party was eaten alive by the other.

Tue, 2011-05-03 12:21

#11

observer521

A political party is a mechanism, not a person.

There is no choice other than to unify the 65% of Canada who is against the neo-cons. My greatest fear is that the NDP will believe they can win all of Canada. Maybe they can, but not before Canada is dismantled.

If the NDP-Libs, Que, Greens wanted to unify, they could do it. But each group has their own fiefdom, and won't give it up.

I am terrified that the idealism of the NDP will make them think they are the new dynasty. The reality is that there is no choice, other than to get the center-left on the same page.

Do they have to wait for 3 failed elections? That is 2025. That is a generation.

The neo-cons are smart and ruthless, and they are winning. If the center-left globally doesn't smarten up, then the neo-cons will take over and rig the system so they can't get kicked out.

90% of the media is now Con.

The only hope now is center-left unification. Now is the time.

Tue, 2011-05-03 12:28

#12

Northern Shoveler Northern Shoveler's picture

Political parties are the sum total of the members. They are individuals who work for their own personal reasons. The idea that the NDP membership would agree to a merger with the Liberals is absurd. The idea that operatives from political parties should work to limit the choices offered to voters is anti-democratic.

In four years from now the NDP will be looking at gaining 15 to 20 seats from the Conservatives and they will not need a merger to do that. Any left liberals who want to join the NDP will be welcomed. Memberships are not expensive and they come with the right to vote in a nomination election to choose the candidate. If the left of the Liberal party want to get their few actual progressive people elected they can always join the NDP and win the nomination battles.

Tue, 2011-05-03 12:36

#13

observer521

Not a merger, a deal to work together.

But its NOT going to happen. The NDPers believe they can win 20 seats more. The Libs want a new leader and the glory days.

Meanwhile, Canada will be raped and dismantled.

Why can't the center come up with a movement...Unite for Canada.

If not, we are screwed. The NDP has low % in many areas, and its not going to grow for many years. But if the center-left United, in 4 years Harper could be OUT.

But there is no sign the center-left will unite, and work together. Pretty ironic.

The only hope for progressives is to Organize and unify.

But here is the horror. Its not going to happen. The NDP thinks it can win 20 more seats from the Cons with the Libs splitting the vote? Maybe in 2025 once the country has been ransacked.

If the left stays split, Canada will be under NeoCon ABSOLUTE rule for a generation.

Tue, 2011-05-03 12:37

#14

Life, the unive...

I love this bs of just build it and they will come notion. What exactly was it you missed in this election. When the Liberal vote collapsed a significant number of Liberal supporters went and voted CONSERVATIVE. There is zero evidence to suggest that some kind of officially merged party wouldn't scare the bejeezus out of a lot of those remaining Liberal supporters and drive even more of them to the CONSERVATIVES. Look at reality, not some pie in the sky hoped for calculation.

There is only one viable solution going forward, a kind of informal merger if you will. And that is destroying the elitist, stand for nothing Liberal party that never was and never will be progressive and encouraging those deluded progressives who have been supporting the Liberals to join with the NDP in the project of building a Conservative defeating, national party with actual progressive values in the NDP at the local level across the country. That is where the fight will be won.

Tue, 2011-05-03 12:37

#15

Anonymouse

Let's get it over with before it is too late. Merge the NDP and Liberals to form the Liberal Democrats. Let it have an explicitly nationalist wing to accomodate Québec. The NDP will have the "whip hand" in any merger as it will have the most MPs. The caucus representation will be fully national and no longer skewed so badly towards Québec. The NDP will move its image to the middle and bring in the centrist voices that it needs to win in places where it currently gets squeezed out (look at the West and all of Conservative Ontario). Mike Harris II must be stopped. I'm willing to settle for a Liberal Party II, so far as this one (e.g. the Liberal Democrats) actually give a shit about progressive issues (e.g. I think the NDP caucus can be largely counted on for this + some of the re-elected Liberals are not that bad...Brison & Jimmy K & Denis Coderre & Joyce Murray excepted)

Tue, 2011-05-03 12:40

#16

edmundoconnor

I'm amazed at the number of races where the NDP lost by a hair. There's a hatful of Quebec races that could have gone our way, and sure as hell won't go blue four years from now. As the Liberals go into a tailspin, and the Bloc disappears as a meaningful force, there is still room to grow.

I'm in the let them wither on the vine camp. They've made their bed, now let them lie in it as it collapses about them.

Tue, 2011-05-03 12:41

#17

knownothing knownothing's picture

The NDP must be strict about how it handles merger talks so as not to tarnish our name with the dirty Liberal brand. They should have to cross the floor or run as NDPers in the next election.

But in reality, I think most Lib Mps are thinking they should join the Conservatives and get in on the payday!

Tue, 2011-05-03 12:43

#18

JeffWells

I can't imagine there is much appetite among New Democrats for this. There certainly isn't in this one.

Ignatieff said during the campaign - during the campaign! - that he never considered the Liberals a party of the left. Now at last there should be no ambiguity about which federal party is the choice of progressives. It's that ambiguity, fostered by the Liberals, which has kept the left disunited. Well thank God, finally at long last they're out of the way. Look for the left to unite now, without equivocation, in the NDP camp, no merger machinations necessary.

Tue, 2011-05-03 12:43

#19

observer521

Yes, the Progressive Democrats Liberals.

Or the New Democratic Liberals. Or whatever. Just give a clear choice for the center left, and people will vote.

did you see the NDP cheer for the Greens? We don't need the Greens, the NDP is green.

Just get all the Progessives to UNIFY and organize. Have a big meeting of progressives ASAP, and just freaking do it. It will be chaos, but that is the left.

So its up to the Libs to choose a new leader, and then UNIFY somehow with the progressives.

Then guess what? Harper craps his pants. He could be out in 4 years.

Then let the progressives fight it out among themselves, that's fine. If not this global NeoCon agenda is going to bury us.

Do we have to wait until its too late? They should have done this years ago, but NOW is the time.

Also, it will be NEW and have the buzz to it.

Tue, 2011-05-03 12:48

#20

observer521

That is true that the Liberal brand is toxic.

But look at Harper. He has given the right NO CHOICE, they must vote for him. That is smart.

So the progressive center-left needs the same.

Just don't let some fascist take over the center-left party either!

Maybe the New NDP is the answer. But can we wait 15 years to find out? I don't think we have time to wait for 2-3 elections.

If the progressives Unify, then Harper is in serious trouble.

Tue, 2011-05-03 12:50

#21

Aristotleded24

You forget that the one thing the Liberals had going for them was that they always contended for government, and that's why people voted for them. I'm not going to rule out the Liberals winning a few more seats next go around, but with the Liberals in as bad of shape as they are, what's the reason anyone would vote for them? I think with the Liberals doing so poorly and not having seats in places such as Kitchener, London, Essex, rural Ontario, south Winnipeg, Edmonton and Calgary, people are going to re-examine their options. Don't forget that without incumbents, the Liberals will be at a disadvantage to build a presence, which would open up space for the NDP/Greens to organize locally. I'd even go out on a limb to suggest, for example, that excluding Winnipeg North, that the race in every other Winnipeg riding next go around will be Conservative/NDP, even though the Liberals finished second in many city ridings last night.

I think you're also stretching it to suggest that Harper will govern until 2025. There were several polls that put the NDP tied with the Conservatives, and a few that placed Jack Layton as the better Prime Minister than Harper.

Tue, 2011-05-03 12:56

#22

pwr_2_da_ppl

I really don't see the logic behind a merger with the Liberals. I would prefer to get all the Greens on board first because their policcies are far more similar to the NDP and that alone would put us up to 35% minimum.

For example, the Liberal party are pro war and voted to extend the afghan mission: how do we reconcile that in a merger situation? What if the "liberal" faction of a merger were to steer the new merged party towards support for American wars and support of American takeover of the Canadian economy and security? Is there a point in `winning`the next election if we continue to take part in the murder of civilians around the world? I guess I really question the logic of a merger coinsidering the voting record of the Libs. I think we'd be better off with a name change and 4 years of convincing the "left" liberals that Harper is a War Mongerer who is under invetigation for War crimes.

It should be an easy win for the NDP on their own next time, but only if they beginb to really hold Harpers feet to the fire on the issues of his wars and selling out the economy to big business. Have a little bit of confidence!

Tue, 2011-05-03 12:57

#23

bagkitty

klexo wrote:

[...] I am curious: among the New Dems, how open are we to this? What are the bottom lines in any negotiations? Could merger with the tainted Libs hurt more than help in PQ and in the West?

[...]

Well this New Dem is not open to the idea at all. I do not accept the premise that the LPC are a center-left party. I constantly hear people saying they are, they will assert this quite vehemently as if it were a matter of fact -- but repeating an assertion does not prove it. To determine what they are, one has to look at what they do... and the old Canadian truism about them "run from the left, govern from the right" reveals them for exactly what they are - closet aristos who wrap themselves up in a cloak of "managerial expertise" and then act in the interests of Bay Street. When a party is running in an election they are marketing themselves, they are advertising. Personally, I don't buy into the advertising, I look at what they do -- and Tommy Douglas' Mouseland truism trumps all the commentary wherein the LPC is referred to as a center-left party.

There are a couple of threads running here right now asking "what must be done". Here is a suggestion, stop accepting the premise that the LPC is a center-left party. Stop giving legitimacy to the commentators and pundits (professional and otherwise) who demand that the acceptance of this premise is a prerequisite for any discussion. If you want an honest discussion about the true nature of the LPC you have to ditch the MSM commentary. You have to ditch the baby-boomers who keep telling everyone that nothing has ever changed and how it was (or at least how they remember it) is how it has always been, and how it will always be. You have to retire the Jeffrey Simpsons, the "At Issue" commentators, the warhorses of the sovereignty debate (both sides), the NEP warhorses (well there is only one side left standing for that one) and let voices emerge that don't share the same, out-of-date, tunnel vision.

It is time for most of the commentating class to retire. Let them exchange their war-stories at the retirement home, not on the airwaves or on the net.

Tue, 2011-05-03 13:02

#24

pwr_2_da_ppl

bagkitty: I couldn`t agree more with your last post. Why do people insist that the Libs are left wing, it boggles my mind that people can be so stupid.

Tue, 2011-05-03 13:03

#25

Wellington

"They should have done this years ago, but NOW is the time."

I think it would be premature.

First, the Liberals have to decide what their future looks like - whether they will "go gentle into that good night" or "rage, rage against the dying of the light." My sense is that the Liberal Party is now headed down the same path as the former Progressive Conservative Party, but the Liberals don't accept that yet.

Second, the NDP's first task is to develop itself as an effective caucus and Opposition. Given the inexperience of many of the new members, it will take time to build the Parliamentary team and help promising new MPs grow into leadership roles. I'm confident that will happen, but it will not happen overnight.

Third, I think that Canada in general and the NDP in particular will need to discover (and the NDP will need to articulate) what the shift in the Quebec political landscape actually means. The "new face" of Quebec in federal politics is potentially the most decisive change coming out of this election - more significant, I suspect, than the Harper majority.

The above are three factors that I think make it inadvisable to force the pace on a merger - although that could well be something that happens down the road.

Tue, 2011-05-03 13:03

#26

HumbleOne

The Libs are not a left of centre party. Look at 90's they talked about left leaning policy but in power the ruled from the right. They cut medicare and then gave up 100 billion tax break over 5 years. The surplus was not invested into new programs rather a tax cut.

Tue, 2011-05-03 13:05

#27

observer521

But when the vote is spilt, average people are confused where to vote. Look at Bob Rae's riding. The Libs usually won massive. But the NDP jumped a lot, as the Libs jumped ship to the NDP.

Somehow, if the center-left united, then there is not the confusion in 5 years.

Of course, Lib true believers will vote Liberal, as some have done it for their entire life.

I like Jack, but I don't think the NDP can form a majority before several elections with the vote-split.

If the center doesn't unite now, Harper is going to re-engineer Canadian identity to his brand of Conservative. That is his goal.

If a center-left united, then they could have a Majority in 4 years. If the vote didn't split in Ontario, Harper would be out on his ass right now.

We'll see if any of the Leaders in the progessive side want to do it.

If not, sadly, Harper is going to rule Canada for a generation. That is the reality, as I see it. I know many many moderate people, who voted for the Cons. Why? Taxes. They want to pay less taxes, that's it. Its a human response.

If the center-left doesn't unify, then the global neo-con agenda is in Canada, probably until its too late. That is what I think.

Tue, 2011-05-03 13:12

#28

KenS

Oh lordy.

Not interested.

Its not the leaders who are the problem. Or the imputed certainty that we can win the 20 more seats.

Yes, I want to win those seats. Do I think its attainable? Definitely.

Do I think its something like a certainty? No way. I dont even think like that. You put your best foot forward, and wait to see how people judge you.

If we dont get more seats next time, if we drop a bunch next time.... I'm still utterly uninterested in merger talk. And I'm pretty representative.

What the other parties do is their affair. I'm ready for whatever. I actually like pluralism, thank you very much.

Stop assuming the stubborness is rooted in simple partisanship.

And here's my reciprocated advice: get a grip, relax. There is too much to do to waste time with hysteria. And its no fun.

Tue, 2011-05-03 13:12

#29

Anonymouse

The NDP beat exactly 1 Conservative incumbent in this election (two if you count former Conservative Keith Martin) and the Conservatives beat 1 NDP MP (ETA: 2 if you count Jim Maloway) and hardly a laggard at that (Tony Martin). How is this even remotely a good result?

Where the race was polarised between the NDP and Conservatives, the Liberals falling off the map made the Conservative MP more secure not less. WTF? If the NDP doesn't find a way to win these centrist votes it is Mike Harris II for the foreseeable future and no...I am not confident that Layton and the NDP can win the middle. I don't think they could find it if you handed them a political map.

Tue, 2011-05-03 13:13

#30

observer521

I know the Libs are not a left party, like the Paul Martins. But did the average voter know that?

I know many average people who voted Con. They just want to THINK they will pay less tax, and fell for some knee-jerk stuff.

But if the center unified, in one swoop, that could smash Harper.

But not if the party is seen as too left-wing. But if the left stays too idealistic, then we get Harper.

What's worse? A moderate left-center party that keep taxes lower for Joe 6-pack and does SOME progressive stuff, or the Harper proto-fascist nightmare of deception?

Harper won't move on abortion and those issues for a long time. But they think they can roll Canada back, but it will take a generation.

Do we have to wait 15 years to see it first? I hope not. What if its too late by then, due to the social indoctrination?

SunTV is not an accident, that is going to push everything to the right, and CTV will soon be like SunTV, and the CBC, will get strangled very soon.

I don't want to wait until its too late.

Tue, 2011-05-03 13:13

#31

pwr_2_da_ppl

I really think the vote splitting on the left will continue to benefit the NDP at this stage now, until the Libs roll over and die. The problem with yesterday`s election, was that so many of the Lib supporters refused to jump ship and (quite foolishly) thought that the Libs were the `strategic`choice this election, but they were not. Next time around, the ABC voters will align themselves with the NDP as NDP will be the incumbent in 102 ridings and will represent the obvious choice to most easily replace the Cons. The ABC voters will not risk another election like yesterdays next time around, and it`s up to us to make sure they understand that.

But again, we on the true left have to have confidence in ourselves and our ability to define the issues. And we have to not cave in to the expectations of the corporate media who would now like nothing more than to detroy the NDP by merging it with the Liberal party.

Tue, 2011-05-03 13:14

#32

Anonymouse

The Conservatives can eat the NDP's lunch in much of BC, all of Alberta, Saskatchewan, and most of Manitoba and Ontario. What does that leave the NDP, a majority won through the maritimes? holding on to 58 seats in Québec? Riiiiiiight.

Tue, 2011-05-03 13:23

#33

observer521

I know the average NDP member doesn't want to do it. I don't think its going to happen, the NDP is jumping for joy, when in fact Harper has total control.

I don't think this is hysterical. Harper has serious plans, and he's going to do them, over many years. Harper is doing social engineering, and its working.

G20 was no accident. SunTV is no accident. If Harper puts Canada into a few wars, its game over. Balloon deficit, then slash programs. Reaganomics.

Sadly, I predict the center-left will not unify. And Harper's bosses will rob Canada blind, and be able to hide it from the general population, as they control 90% of the media.

This is a turning point in Canada's history. Sadly, I don't see the center-progessives organizing and coming together.

Its the nature of the left to be more diffuse, and that is why the neo-cons have taken over the world. Literally. And they just took over Canada, as we all know.

But Joe Canada doesn't know it.

Tue, 2011-05-03 13:24

#34

pwr_2_da_ppl

The NDP can win in any riding in the country, but only when they really start calling out Harper and his war crimes. Even the good people of Calgary do no want a PM that is under investigation by the world criminal court. Jack has never been in a position to be heard on these issues, but as OO Leader he will be leading the daily charge in the media. We have now, an unprecedented opportunity to redefine the political discussion in this country, but only if we reject the politics of the greatest common denominator and return to our guiding principles. Justice and equality are popular no matter what side of the debate you`re on. Harper is totally corrupt and should be an easy target fort Jack, especially now that he`s been given so much support in the house.

Things can only get better for the NDP from here, and yes they could win more seats than the Cons next time, but it`s going to take a rejection of the so called centre, in favour of justice and trustworthiness; really, the stuff that got Jack in the position he`s in today.

Tue, 2011-05-03 13:28

#35

gyor

Anonymouse wrote:

The Conservatives can eat the NDP's lunch in much of BC, all of Alberta, Saskatchewan, and most of Manitoba and Ontario. What does that leave the NDP, a majority won through the maritimes? holding on to 58 seats in Québec? Riiiiiiight.

people thought the bloc had an eternal lock on Quebec a lock Jack broke. Some people may think that the cons have a lock on the west, but no one owns the Wests vote anymore then the Bloc owned Quebecers votes, or Liberals the GTA.

Tue, 2011-05-03 13:29

#36

jerrym

A large part of the success of the Cons in Ontario is the deindustrialization of the province. While many in Ontario blame this on the provincial Liberals and associate the federal Liberals with these policies, the continual repetition of the big lie that Canada is doing well economically has helped the Cons gain most of the Ontario ridings. The truth of the matter is that our "economic growth" is based on the sale of our natural resources, especially oil and gas, driving the dollar ever higher, which, in turn, leads to the loss of more manufacturing jobs. After we have totally hollowed out our industrial sector, primarily located in Ontario and Quebec, it will become evident that our resource-based economy is not sufficient to maintain high employment. It is not by accident that more than 60% of our population is located in Ontario and Quebec, They had the manufacturing jobs necessary to sustain such a relatively large population. No matter how high the resource sector grows, it will never replace the jobs lost in the manufacturing sector, just redistribute the wealth to those already at the top. When the bubble bursts, our economy will collapse in the same manner as the US, where rust-belt cities depopulate and become ghost towns.

Tue, 2011-05-03 13:30

#37

bagkitty

@Anonymose

Lawrence Cannon (Foreign Affairs), Dona Cadman, Sylvie Boucher, Daniel Petit, Josee Verner (Intergovernmental Affairs), Jean Pierre-Blackburn (Veteran Affairs) : by my count that is six Con incumbents taken down by the NDP, three of them cabinet ministers.

Tue, 2011-05-03 13:31

#38

observer521

Next election is too late! That is 5 years from now, and Harperites control 90%-99% of the media now.

Then if/when it fails in 5 years, then 5 more years of Harper!

Harper is not an idiot. He won't act too crazy for his first mandate, and be super sneaky.

As others have said, Que will turn on the NDP, maybe they have already!

Canada has about 65% center-left. Out only hope is having one place to vote, in this corrupt colonial voting system of ours.

Harper, Ford, Hudak is next. The neo-cons are smart, rich, ruthless, and fanatically motivated. And they like following orders.

I can't see a way out except to have a new progressive unification.

Tue, 2011-05-03 13:33

#39

KenS

observer521 wrote:

I know the average NDP member doesn't want to do it. I don't think its going to happen, the NDP is jumping for joy, when in fact Harper has total control.

I don't think this is hysterical.

So maybe you are not hysterical. Although there is a fundamental problem with an agenda built around so many certainties that others do not agree with.

At any rate, one thing I knwo for sure: you operate on unfounded assumptions about others.

Tue, 2011-05-03 13:35

#40

KenS

I'd like to hear how you intend to peddle this urgently needed recovery plan to us when we are too partisan and/or too block headed to smell your coffee.

Tue, 2011-05-03 13:39

#41

Incorrect

Life, the universe, everything wrote:

I love this bs of just build it and they will come notion. What exactly was it you missed in this election. When the Liberal vote collapsed a significant number of Liberal supporters went and voted CONSERVATIVE. There is zero evidence to suggest that some kind of officially merged party wouldn't scare the bejeezus out of a lot of those remaining Liberal supporters and drive even more of them to the CONSERVATIVES. Look at reality, not some pie in the sky hoped for calculation.

There is only one viable solution going forward, a kind of informal merger if you will. And that is destroying the elitist, stand for nothing Liberal party that never was and never will be progressive and encouraging those deluded progressives who have been supporting the Liberals to join with the NDP in the project of building a Conservative defeating, national party with actual progressive values in the NDP at the local level across the country. That is where the fight will be won.

I have been advocating for an informal Liberal-NDP pact since the beginning of this election. I admit that for a while it looked to me like the NDP might not need such an arrangement, but I was caught up in the moment like many others probably were. Now the sobering reality has set in. I welcome the urgency and even the repetition of the posters who are pressing for the two partires to set differences aside and work in cooperation. If the parties had done this from the beginning, the Liberals might have been able to retain their less progressive supporters and send a more moderate coalition government to parliament, ideally with Jack Layton as Prime Minister. Instead, we are stuck with this absolute disaster of a majority Conservative government supported by less than 40% of the electorate. It is a complete disgrace. We can bemoan the fact that we do not have proportional representation, but get over it already. That is the system that we have. We knew that when the elction started, and we have to work around it to regain power, even if it is in coalition. And yes, even if it includes a few less progressive Liberal partners.

Tue, 2011-05-03 13:45

#42

observer521

By the way, I don't belong to either NDP or Lib or Green, so have no axe to grind. I like aspects of all of them, and dislike other parts. Fairly average.

We are in a bad situation, the lesser of evils option. I just want a moderate place in the center to vote. Harper gave Cons only 1 place to vote.

So now the center-left has to match that. If not, we are totally screwed. The average Canadian is not going to vote NDP as they fear the spending, true or false, that is what they think.

Harper LOVED the NDP surge, as that scared the shit out of his base. Compromise and unify. Not very idealistic, but there is no choice.

Harper has Canada by the balls, and he is not going to give it up. Harper might be there for 15 years, he is the new face of the new neo-con dictator, who wears a sweater-vest, and plays the piano.

We know that, but the public does not know that. They just want to pay less taxes.

The 65% of Canada needs one place to vote.

Tue, 2011-05-03 13:46

#43

Northern Shoveler Northern Shoveler's picture

The last thing Layton needs now is a move to the right to become the Liberal party with a new name.

I will be really interested to see the demographic breakdowns in voting patterns. Did Quebec see a rise in youth voters compared to the rest of Canada or did the usual voters in Quebec just decide it was time to back a new opposition party with the better paint job? I hope for the sake of our future that the upsurge in Quebec was in part because a higher percentage vote in the youth cohorts. If that is the case then the NDP can build a winning strategy for a left message aimed at getting new voters who want real change. Corporate Canada would like nothing better than to water the social democratic party's wine even further. They like milquetoast opposition to their rule.

Tue, 2011-05-03 13:46

#44

KenS

Incorrect wrote:

I have been advocating for an informal Liberal-NDP pact since the beginning of this election. I admit that for a while it looked to me like the NDP might not need such an arrangement, but I was caught up in the moment like many others probably were. Now the sobering reality has set in. I welcome the urgency and even the repetition of the posters who are pressing for the two partires to set differences aside and work in cooperation. If the parties had done this from the beginning, the Liberals might have been able to retain their lees progressive supporters and send a more moderate coalition government to parliament...

I guess you buying into this- and some other individuals- is an indication there is more to it than just hysteria. Although I would still argue that a lot of it is the hysteria of the moment. [Excepting the career sky is falling hysterics of course.]

I'm not interested for multiple major reasons. But I've seen no evidence that this has any legs even on the alleged pragmatics. We've just witnessed our umpteenth lesson in what a huge proportion of Liberal voters go Conservative when the LPC is tanking. Not to mention HUGE swaths of the country for which a two party dynamic will sew up most of the seats for the Conservatives. Like Western Ontario for starters.

That dog just dont hunt.

Tue, 2011-05-03 13:50

#45

klexo

I find all this interesting. A few quick responses

"The idea that the NDP membership would agree to a merger with the Liberals is absurd."

What if we ask the members? Do you support that? A very DEMOCRATIC process is one absolute imperative here.

"There is zero evidence to suggest that some kind of officially merged party wouldn't scare the bejeezus out of a lot of those remaining Liberal supporters and drive even more of them to the CONSERVATIVES."

You surely would not bring all of the Libs along, true. But right now I like the chances of the NDLP periodically exercising state power, more than those of either of its component pieces. And the NDLP should be more appealing, less scary, to Con voters then the NDP, no?

"I'm in the let them wither on the vine camp."

This is a more than respectable position, and perhaps the right one, who knows. But, I am inclined to think we are all likely to grow old and die before the LPC does, at least in Ontario and the East. (The party has been dead pretty much everywhere else for years.) In Ontario, on our best night ever, and their worst night ever, we tied in popular vote, 20 points back of the CPC. We are looking at repeating this provincially in 4 mos time putting Mr. Hudak in power. I sense people on the left (in Ontario at least) are getting sick and damn tired of this and increasingly open to looking at ways out of this box. Again, if you can best kill off the Liberal party by embracing it into the NDP's smothering bosom, why not?

"There is only one viable solution going forward...encouraging those deluded progressives who have been supporting the Liberals to join with the NDP"

I am sure with that warm, open-minded approach, you will meet with great success! How many more of these deluded progressivs do you think are out there anyway?

"For example, the Liberal party are pro war and voted to extend the afghan mission: how do we reconcile that in a merger situation? "

How about democratically by the (combined, greatly expanded) membership? Or, should it be settled by the back room boys and girls first? By the way this afghan policy issue was so important layton hardly mentioned it in the campaign.

"I do not accept the premise that the LPC are a center-left party..."

With respect, I do not find the debate about whether this label is properly applied to the LPC to be all that compelling or even interesting. And it seems strangely old fashioned and thus at odds with your desite to "ditch all the baby boomers" etc, a plan I am sure the leadership is dying to sign on to! Are "we the people" better off with a merged lib-left party or not?

Note that aside from Afghanistan, no one so far has mentioned any policy differences whichj could not be bridged. We did after all just finish a (wildly successful) campaign based almost entirely on Jack's positive and winning personaility.

Tue, 2011-05-03 14:00

#46

Northern Shoveler Northern Shoveler's picture

observer521 wrote:

By the way, I don't belong to either NDP or Lib or Green, so have no axe to grind. I like aspects of all of them, and dislike other parts. Fairly average.

Your posts show that you probably also know few people who are active in any political party. This is not arm chair stuff to people who have spent decades volunteering on executives and fund raising and driving their family crazy with political talk. Those characteristics cut across party lines.

The people who give of their time, energy and money do so because they are partisan. Its nice of you to tell them they have to merge for the good of the country. All this from the comfort of your couch. Get involved in a party and meet some of the people and tell NDP'ers to their faces that they need to become the Liberal Democrats. Please though wear flame retardant clothing and protective eye wear since you never know what kind of explosion you will get in response.

Tue, 2011-05-03 14:05

#47

JeffWells

klexo wrote:

Note that aside from Afghanistan, no one so far has mentioned any policy differences whichj could not be bridged. We did after all just finish a (wildly successful) campaign based almost entirely on Jack's positive and winning personaility.

Quebec is more sophisticated than that. They saw his personality as a good vehicle by which to advance a progressive agenda and vision for Quebec in Canada.

Tue, 2011-05-03 14:08

#48

Incorrect

What we need, quite frankly, is a popular mass media advocate. We need "hard news, straight talk" for the progressive community. The right has managed to do this, but the left won't organize a response. Is there no history of a popular left wing press in the history of industrialized economies? Why do we allow a corporate controlled media to defend our interests and act as an unchallenged authority on what is and is not true? The left has allowed a supposedly neutral "professional" news media to control the narrative. To it's, er, credit, the right has recognized that it is not enough to allow this "neutral" media to manage public perceptions of government policy. They have gone one step further and have created a conservative media that plays an advocacy role. We should do the same, but with objectivity and integrity. Why do we content ourselves with an arsenal of blogs, discussion forums, and other participatory outlets that reach such a limited audience?

How expensive can it be to set up volunteer operated AM radio stations and websites that broadcast to local and national audiences under one centralized umbrella. Look at the new SUN TV station. It's an expensive looking production but it's operating income must be not very great. It depends on sponsors whose products and promotions are basically late night infomercials! It's content is basically replays of earlier broadcasts. How much does it cost to establish a radio station or even just a website that mimics a television station, where people can get their news and commentary in a simple, compact, easily consumed format?

Hell, two comedians in the United States have managed to do a parody of one called Red State Update, which plays on Youtube. It's hilarious and incredibly low budget. Can we not at least begin with something equally small and grow it over time?

As Jack Layton stated last night, quoting Tommy Douglas:

"Dream no little dreams!"

Look how that turned out. What are we waiting for?

Tue, 2011-05-03 14:13

#49

Life, the unive...

Anonymouse wrote:

The Conservatives can eat the NDP's lunch in much of BC, all of Alberta, Saskatchewan, and most of Manitoba and Ontario. What does that leave the NDP, a majority won through the maritimes? holding on to 58 seats in Québec? Riiiiiiight.

This is just nonsense. I am old enough to know better. These so-called locks disapear suddenly all the time. There was a time when the Liberals owned the west for example. The only solution is to start building now for election 2015.

By the way - I am also old enough to know that as bad as a Conservative majority will be - the sun will still come up tomorrow, the Leafs will still lose the Stanley Cup and life will go on. We have a fight on our hands, but the world is not ending.

Tue, 2011-05-03 14:14

#50

klexo

>>>"Quebec is more sophisticated than that. They saw his personality as a good vehicle by which to advance a progressive agenda and vision for Quebec in Canada."<<<<

I will grant that, but the point remains, what are the actual policy differences which stand in the way of a merger? What part of the LPC platform could you just not abide?

Or is it just the name and the color orange which command loyalty?

Tue, 2011-05-03 14:18

#51

observer521

yikes, my worst nightmare is coming true. All the talk is of the Libds "rebuilding" and the NDP finding a few more seats.

Harper and his mega-corp cronies are having orgasms today. They are going to pillage hundreds of billions, and keep power for a generation. They won.

John Kenneth Galibraith spoke about this in his book "Power". Those on the right are more rigid and follow orders, and thus can better organize, and thus seize power.

Whereas the left is more diffuse, and thus more disorganized, so they remain in opposition.

Sadly, I predict it will be more of the same for at least 3 elections. The NDP and Libs fighting eachother, and Harper transfering hundreds of billions in wealth to his international bosses.

Canada's oil wealth made it essential for a take-over, and unlike Iraq they didn't have to use an army. Just use the media.

This is far worse than the G20 nightmare. This is G20 everyday possible for a generation. blech.

Pages

Topic locked