Well, what summer we had here in Eastern Ontario (cool and wet, except when I took my holidays when it turned hot and muggy) will pretty much end with the young ones going back to school on Monday.
So how do we assess the summer from a political standpoint?
If you look at the polling, not much has changed from the beginning of the summer. The Liberals and the Conservatives are still very close to each other, some polls saying the Liberals hold a slim lead, some saying the two parties are tied and others saying the Conservatives hold a slim lead. In other words the polls can be ignored.
Not alot happened during the summer with regard to the various leaders either. Mr. Harper virtually disappeared until his great northern adventure. If you are to believe our MSM, Mr. Ignatieff did not tour the country talking to Canadians. Jack Layton did not show up until he had a little talk with Stephen Harper last week. Gilles Duceppe...?
The greatest events of the summer was the saga of Ms. Mohamed, the media's where's Iggy meme and the virtual begging by Mr. Harper, to Mr. Ignatieff, to not force an election.
The treatment of Ms. Mohamed by this government highlighted just how much this government believes there are two or more class of citizens in this country and it has not been lost on many immigrant communities that their members are not members of the first class. That perception will only get worse as Ms. Mohamed's lawsuit winds through the courts, although I suspect the government will settle just days before any election. The upshot of all of that is the diligent efforts of the Conservatives to court the immigrant vote these last three or so years has been destroyed.
The media's treatment of Mr. Ignatieff was predictable but not over damaging. Some would point to some recent polls to say he has faded in popularity but I would point out that always happens to opposition leaders during long Parliamentary breaks and I would also point out that he is much closer to Mr. Harper than Mr. Harper ever was to Mr. Martin, in between elections.
Mr. Harper's begging has been telling. Gone is the belligerent and arrogant Stephen Harper who made bathroom breaks confidence motions. Instead he has given us a very good demonstration that him and his government are vulnerable and afraid of the Liberals. That should make Liberals very happy and hopefully between now and the next election (June 2010) they can use that weakness and fear to their advantage.
So, no dramatic changes occured this summer. The government is still progressing towards the point where winning the next election will be impossible for them regardless of what they do, a process that started when Mr. Harper prorogued Parliament. The Liberals, who are still considered the only other party trustworthy enough to govern, continue their progression back to government.
Saturday, August 29, 2009
Monday, August 24, 2009
The Liberals are in the driver's seat
I should have bought a lottery ticket on the weekend. When I saw Stephen Harper stating that he "needed" a majority government to maintain some "stability" during the economic downturn (the same one many of his Members were saying was over just weeks ago) it hit me that Canwest and Ipsos would release a poll to support such a notion. Dammit, I wasted that moment of precognition on politics instead of choosing the winning 649 numbers on Saturday.
Anyway, the poll is useless like all polls are. Any political observer worth his salt knows to ignore the actual estimates and to instead look at the media frame for the poll. Doing so for this poll speaks volumes.
It was not too many months ago that if a poll indicated that the Conservatives were pushing 40% the media would be speculating on when Stephen Harper would be calling an election. For this poll the media frame is the poll will cause Michael Ignatieff to think twice about forcing an election. That is quite the change.
I said it after Stephen Harper prorogued Parliament to save his political hide that everybody in this city knows that he has won his last election. They know that, barring proof that Michael Ignatieff is a reptilian kitten eater, the Liberals will win the next election. The frightened and defensive media frame on a poll that should make the Conservatives and its shills at CanWest gung ho for an election just further demonstrates that belief.
Anyway, the poll is useless like all polls are. Any political observer worth his salt knows to ignore the actual estimates and to instead look at the media frame for the poll. Doing so for this poll speaks volumes.
It was not too many months ago that if a poll indicated that the Conservatives were pushing 40% the media would be speculating on when Stephen Harper would be calling an election. For this poll the media frame is the poll will cause Michael Ignatieff to think twice about forcing an election. That is quite the change.
I said it after Stephen Harper prorogued Parliament to save his political hide that everybody in this city knows that he has won his last election. They know that, barring proof that Michael Ignatieff is a reptilian kitten eater, the Liberals will win the next election. The frightened and defensive media frame on a poll that should make the Conservatives and its shills at CanWest gung ho for an election just further demonstrates that belief.
Monday, August 17, 2009
Sometimes I feel sorry for Jason Kenney
Jason Kenney has been given an almost impossible task. He has been charged with bringing the "immigrant vote" into the Conservative tent. Since most of them live in the three big cities their votes are imperative to the Conservatives attaining their much sought after majority government. Unfortunately, Mr. Kenney is a member of a party that has the reputation for being anti-immigrant, intolerant and bigoted
Such reputation is unfair. The Conservative Party is not any of these things but they do seem to have a fair number of prominent Members of Parliament, who are all of these things, who just cannot keep their mouths shut. As well, many of these Members have been re-elected numerous times so it would seem that at least a small part of the Conservative base is all of these things as well.
This background makes Mr. Kenney's job very difficult to begin with but it becomes impossible when his own government knocks the pins out from under him. They have done it to him twice in less than six months this year alone.
The first instance was the imposition of the visa requirements on Mexicans. That was just stupid. It is probably not lost on many of the Latin American immigrants to this country that the Canadian government does not seem to have any problem bringing in seasonal workers from Mexico, to work for low wages in the fields of many agricultural operations, while forcing others from that country to jump through hoops just to visit this country as tourists, or more importantly, as business people looking for business opportunities in a NAFTA partner.
The second instance was Ms. Mohamed. Although it has not been mentioned by anybody in the mainstream, many believe that if the person being held by the Kenyan government would have been white with a surname like, Smith, Michaud or Levine, no government representative would have been allowed to state that she was an imposter and they would have been returned to Canada within days instead of three months.
This has not been mentioned, except for some whispers, in the mainstream, but you can be certain that this idea has not been lost on many of the immigrant communities in this country. This government has shown them that if they get into trouble while they visit family and friends in the country of their birth they are on their own. The Canadian government will not lift a finger to help them and might actually help the governments in their birth country to make their trouble even worse.
Conservatives and their media apologists seem to believe that reaching out to and schmoozing with some prominent representatives of the immigrant communities will actually bring around the whole of the communities. They have no idea that the treatment that Ms. Mohamed was forced to endure, as a direct result of the Canadian government, will have a much more profound negative effect on their support within the immigrant communities than any positive effect any schmoozing Mr. Kenney has done in the last few years.
Like I say, sometimes I actually feel sorry for him.
Such reputation is unfair. The Conservative Party is not any of these things but they do seem to have a fair number of prominent Members of Parliament, who are all of these things, who just cannot keep their mouths shut. As well, many of these Members have been re-elected numerous times so it would seem that at least a small part of the Conservative base is all of these things as well.
This background makes Mr. Kenney's job very difficult to begin with but it becomes impossible when his own government knocks the pins out from under him. They have done it to him twice in less than six months this year alone.
The first instance was the imposition of the visa requirements on Mexicans. That was just stupid. It is probably not lost on many of the Latin American immigrants to this country that the Canadian government does not seem to have any problem bringing in seasonal workers from Mexico, to work for low wages in the fields of many agricultural operations, while forcing others from that country to jump through hoops just to visit this country as tourists, or more importantly, as business people looking for business opportunities in a NAFTA partner.
The second instance was Ms. Mohamed. Although it has not been mentioned by anybody in the mainstream, many believe that if the person being held by the Kenyan government would have been white with a surname like, Smith, Michaud or Levine, no government representative would have been allowed to state that she was an imposter and they would have been returned to Canada within days instead of three months.
This has not been mentioned, except for some whispers, in the mainstream, but you can be certain that this idea has not been lost on many of the immigrant communities in this country. This government has shown them that if they get into trouble while they visit family and friends in the country of their birth they are on their own. The Canadian government will not lift a finger to help them and might actually help the governments in their birth country to make their trouble even worse.
Conservatives and their media apologists seem to believe that reaching out to and schmoozing with some prominent representatives of the immigrant communities will actually bring around the whole of the communities. They have no idea that the treatment that Ms. Mohamed was forced to endure, as a direct result of the Canadian government, will have a much more profound negative effect on their support within the immigrant communities than any positive effect any schmoozing Mr. Kenney has done in the last few years.
Like I say, sometimes I actually feel sorry for him.
Thursday, July 30, 2009
The TO strike and attitudes towards unions
One of the most interesting things I found about the Toronto strike was the reaction of folks to the idea of banking sick days. Many ordinary Canadians resented the fact that TO city employees could bank their sick days. This of course was born of jealousy but it is also indicative of the general attitude towards unions amongst the working people of the English speaking world. We saw the same thing during the lead up to the bail-out of the big three auto companies. The unions were largely and wrongly blamed for their troubles.
The reason of course is many people believe the unions are out of control. They are too powerful.
I find this attitude misplaced and disturbing. The business class of the industrialized world, through their greed and incompetence, just finished triggering a crisis in confidence in the international financial system that was only prevented from collapsing by governments, from around the world, pumping trillions of dollars into it. This resulted in the worst recession since the Great Depression, which has destroyed millions of jobs worldwide (and counting) and is suppressing wages and is reducing the job security for those still working.
Have we seen the working masses rise up and demand the heads of these people? Have we even seen signs of a burning resentment towards these people for the inestimable damage they have done to the economy and the interests of the average worker? Of course not. However, when it is revealed that a group of workers are striking to maintain their right to bank their sick days a bitter resentment comes bubbling up very quickly.
So why would ordinary workers side with the business class over people of their own class?
They say that the price of freedom is vigilance. Well, the same can be said of the hard won workers rights we now enjoy and take for granted.
Of course, in order to be vigilant you do need information on what is going on. The main source of information for most people is the media which we all know is controlled by the same folks who caused this recession. However, there are plenty of other sources of information out there that is not controlled by the media elite and all it takes is a little effort to find it. Sadly that effort is not being made.
So, the result is ordinary workers are not just seeing that the labour rights they have come to enjoy are slowly being eroded away they are actually allowing themselves to be recruited by those who would erode those rights to assist them in working towards that goal. They have actually allowed themselves to be used to work against their own interests.
That is both interesting and disturbing.
The reason of course is many people believe the unions are out of control. They are too powerful.
I find this attitude misplaced and disturbing. The business class of the industrialized world, through their greed and incompetence, just finished triggering a crisis in confidence in the international financial system that was only prevented from collapsing by governments, from around the world, pumping trillions of dollars into it. This resulted in the worst recession since the Great Depression, which has destroyed millions of jobs worldwide (and counting) and is suppressing wages and is reducing the job security for those still working.
Have we seen the working masses rise up and demand the heads of these people? Have we even seen signs of a burning resentment towards these people for the inestimable damage they have done to the economy and the interests of the average worker? Of course not. However, when it is revealed that a group of workers are striking to maintain their right to bank their sick days a bitter resentment comes bubbling up very quickly.
So why would ordinary workers side with the business class over people of their own class?
They say that the price of freedom is vigilance. Well, the same can be said of the hard won workers rights we now enjoy and take for granted.
Of course, in order to be vigilant you do need information on what is going on. The main source of information for most people is the media which we all know is controlled by the same folks who caused this recession. However, there are plenty of other sources of information out there that is not controlled by the media elite and all it takes is a little effort to find it. Sadly that effort is not being made.
So, the result is ordinary workers are not just seeing that the labour rights they have come to enjoy are slowly being eroded away they are actually allowing themselves to be recruited by those who would erode those rights to assist them in working towards that goal. They have actually allowed themselves to be used to work against their own interests.
That is both interesting and disturbing.
Wednesday, July 29, 2009
Gary Bettman and the NHL are idiots
It is absolutely amazing that these yahoos can decide to reject a potential owner who has plans to move a failing hockey team to a better market while accepting a potential owner who wants to keep the team in a city where it is losing money hand over fist.
According to reports the Coyotes have lost 10s of millions of dollars since the team was established in Phoenix. To think the new owner will be able to change that is ludicrous. Which means, according to the rules of the NHL, the other teams will be bailing this team out for the forseeable future, probably to the tune of more 10s of millions of dollars.
Every dollar that goes down the desert sinkhole are dollars that do not go into the profits of the other teams. How can the board of governors of the NHL unanimously choose to maintain that position while rejecting an opportunity to reverse that and actually have that team contribute to the common pot as opposed to taking from it?
Of course, the owner they accepted will only keep the team in Phoenix for about a season before he moves it to Kansas City, another hot bed of hockey in the US.
For the life of me, if these bozos, whose combined net worth is greater than the GDP of most countries, can become billionaires by making such bonehead business decisions I am beginning to think that becoming a billionaire really is not that difficult.
Incidentally, I do not care whether Hamilton gets a team or not. I really just dislike seeing business men, who as a class, through their greed and incompetence, nearly destroyed the international financial sector, making these kinds of stupid business decisions. It really makes me wonder why so many people listen to them when it comes to making economic policy for individual countries and the world.
According to reports the Coyotes have lost 10s of millions of dollars since the team was established in Phoenix. To think the new owner will be able to change that is ludicrous. Which means, according to the rules of the NHL, the other teams will be bailing this team out for the forseeable future, probably to the tune of more 10s of millions of dollars.
Every dollar that goes down the desert sinkhole are dollars that do not go into the profits of the other teams. How can the board of governors of the NHL unanimously choose to maintain that position while rejecting an opportunity to reverse that and actually have that team contribute to the common pot as opposed to taking from it?
Of course, the owner they accepted will only keep the team in Phoenix for about a season before he moves it to Kansas City, another hot bed of hockey in the US.
For the life of me, if these bozos, whose combined net worth is greater than the GDP of most countries, can become billionaires by making such bonehead business decisions I am beginning to think that becoming a billionaire really is not that difficult.
Incidentally, I do not care whether Hamilton gets a team or not. I really just dislike seeing business men, who as a class, through their greed and incompetence, nearly destroyed the international financial sector, making these kinds of stupid business decisions. It really makes me wonder why so many people listen to them when it comes to making economic policy for individual countries and the world.
Wednesday, July 15, 2009
Stephen Harper and the long term goal of the Conservatives
What is Stephen Harper's reason for becoming the leader of the government? For many it is to implement the so called "hidden agenda" so that Canadians "will not recognize" their country when he is done. This has been the biggest fear amongst progressives since he came to power. As well, that has been the biggest hope of Conservatives since he came to power.
Of course, both progressive and conservatives have been left a little dumbfounded by what Mr. Harper has done. Although, he has nibbled around the edges he has not fundamentally changed Canada. Everything he has done can and will be reversed. Indeed, he will be the first government leader in a very long time who will leave absolutely no legacy. He will be forgotten.
So why is he being so timid? Part of it is the constraints of the minority government. However, he had a couple of years where he had a virtual carte blanche that he squandered. So there must be another reason.
For a clue of that reason you must look at Tom Flanagan and other conservative thinkers in this country. Tom Flanagan in particular has stated on several occasions the the goal of the Conservatives is to become the new "Natural Governing Party" in Canada. In other words they are thinking long term.
The interesting thing is the country could be ripe for just such a change. The population is getting older and that usually leads to more conservative views on the part of voters. As well, the low voter turnout is mostly fed by the fact the young people in this country have essentially walked away from its politics. That leaves the aging boomers and their kids who are showing signs of becoming more conservative.
So why are the Conservatives failing in reaping this change. That's simple, they have the wrong guy leading them. Canadians may becoming more conservative but the progressive habit runs deep so they are going to have to convinced to break that habit. Stephen Harper is not the man to do it. He does not inspire and he does not cause people who might me sympathetic to his ideas to actually decide to agree with them.
He knows it too. That is why he is so damned partisan. He knows he will not inspire Canadians to see the Conservatives as the "Natural Governing Party" of Canada with ideas and his charisma. Instead he believes that the only way to do it is to diminish the other guys. He believes that if he can keep the Liberals out of power long enough a sufficient number of Canadians will begin to see the merit of the Conservatives to sustain their position as the dominant party in Canadian politics.
Of course, it cannot last. Every government gets tired and eventually defeats itself and no matter what their efforts and the efforts of the NDP, poll after poll after poll has demonstrated that the Liberals are still considered the only real alternative to the Conservatives when it comes to governing. So, it is virtually inevitable that the Liberals will win the government again and if a recent poll is to be believed they could very well win a majority government the next time around.
It is ironic that Stephen Harper, in trying to realize the dream of his teachers in the Calgary School, could very well utterly fail to achieve their long term objectives and, in the process, squander the one opportunity for him to actually make the changes to the country, in the short term, that he got into politics for in the first place.
Of course, both progressive and conservatives have been left a little dumbfounded by what Mr. Harper has done. Although, he has nibbled around the edges he has not fundamentally changed Canada. Everything he has done can and will be reversed. Indeed, he will be the first government leader in a very long time who will leave absolutely no legacy. He will be forgotten.
So why is he being so timid? Part of it is the constraints of the minority government. However, he had a couple of years where he had a virtual carte blanche that he squandered. So there must be another reason.
For a clue of that reason you must look at Tom Flanagan and other conservative thinkers in this country. Tom Flanagan in particular has stated on several occasions the the goal of the Conservatives is to become the new "Natural Governing Party" in Canada. In other words they are thinking long term.
The interesting thing is the country could be ripe for just such a change. The population is getting older and that usually leads to more conservative views on the part of voters. As well, the low voter turnout is mostly fed by the fact the young people in this country have essentially walked away from its politics. That leaves the aging boomers and their kids who are showing signs of becoming more conservative.
So why are the Conservatives failing in reaping this change. That's simple, they have the wrong guy leading them. Canadians may becoming more conservative but the progressive habit runs deep so they are going to have to convinced to break that habit. Stephen Harper is not the man to do it. He does not inspire and he does not cause people who might me sympathetic to his ideas to actually decide to agree with them.
He knows it too. That is why he is so damned partisan. He knows he will not inspire Canadians to see the Conservatives as the "Natural Governing Party" of Canada with ideas and his charisma. Instead he believes that the only way to do it is to diminish the other guys. He believes that if he can keep the Liberals out of power long enough a sufficient number of Canadians will begin to see the merit of the Conservatives to sustain their position as the dominant party in Canadian politics.
Of course, it cannot last. Every government gets tired and eventually defeats itself and no matter what their efforts and the efforts of the NDP, poll after poll after poll has demonstrated that the Liberals are still considered the only real alternative to the Conservatives when it comes to governing. So, it is virtually inevitable that the Liberals will win the government again and if a recent poll is to be believed they could very well win a majority government the next time around.
It is ironic that Stephen Harper, in trying to realize the dream of his teachers in the Calgary School, could very well utterly fail to achieve their long term objectives and, in the process, squander the one opportunity for him to actually make the changes to the country, in the short term, that he got into politics for in the first place.
Sunday, June 28, 2009
Ugh, not another Mike Harris
Mike Harris made me a Liberal. I have always been a liberal but it was Mike Harris who made me become a partisan for the Party. Before Mike Harris I voted for whoever I thought would do the best job regardless of political affiliation.
However, when I saw him importing the ideology of Newt Gingrich and his merry band of wingnuts into Canada I knew I did not have that luxury anymore. His idea of blaming the poor for the last recession and punishing them for it just grated against all that I thought was right. Nobody chooses to be poor and they are a symtom of economic problems not the cause. So, I looked for and found a political party that generally matched my view on the role of governments in society and began working for them. Needless to say that was the Liberals. (Although, the LPC's treatment of Mr. Dion has caused me to reconsider that at the federal level.)
So, when I saw that Tim Hudak won the leadership of the Ontario PCP I shuddered and thought not again.
Certainly, everybody believes that Mr. Hudak has little chance in the next election but they said the same thing about Mr. Harris.
He was leading a third place party that had an ideology that went against the progressive instincts of the majority of Ontario voters. I like many others believed that Ontario voters would not buy his blame the poor philosophy nor would they fall for the promise of deep tax cuts while maintaining government services.
My was I and everybody else wrong. The recession of the 90s changed the progressive nature of Ontario voters and the electorate was ripe for the lie of low taxes and gold plated government services.
We now find ourselves in another recession. Ontario is being particularly hard hit so we are setting up the 1995 scenario again for 2011. This time however the PCPO is in second place and the Ontario electorate has demonstrated a few times since 1995 that they are not nearly as progressive as they were beforehand. As well, we have seen on more than one occasion in more than one jurisdiction that the electorate is willing to buy the lie about low taxes and good government service, Ontarians demonstrating it at least three times since 1995. Finally, Dalton McGuinty will be seeking his third mandate and fighting his fourth election. That is difficult when times are good so I can only imagine how difficult it will be in the aftermath of one of the worst recessions Ontario has ever experienced.
I would urge Ontario Liberals to not underestimate Mr. Hudak or overestimate the progressive nature and political awareness of the Ontario electorate. They are going to have to find another argument than he is a Mike Harris "clone". That argument will not work. We have former Harrisites in the Federal cabinet, put their by the voters of Ontario, twice. Mike Harris will never be forgiven by Liberal and NDP partisans for what he did to Ontario but that attitude is not shared by Ontario voters at large so you had better come up with a counter to Mr. Hudak that does not involve vilifying Mike Harris.
You have two years, I suggest you get started.
However, when I saw him importing the ideology of Newt Gingrich and his merry band of wingnuts into Canada I knew I did not have that luxury anymore. His idea of blaming the poor for the last recession and punishing them for it just grated against all that I thought was right. Nobody chooses to be poor and they are a symtom of economic problems not the cause. So, I looked for and found a political party that generally matched my view on the role of governments in society and began working for them. Needless to say that was the Liberals. (Although, the LPC's treatment of Mr. Dion has caused me to reconsider that at the federal level.)
So, when I saw that Tim Hudak won the leadership of the Ontario PCP I shuddered and thought not again.
Certainly, everybody believes that Mr. Hudak has little chance in the next election but they said the same thing about Mr. Harris.
He was leading a third place party that had an ideology that went against the progressive instincts of the majority of Ontario voters. I like many others believed that Ontario voters would not buy his blame the poor philosophy nor would they fall for the promise of deep tax cuts while maintaining government services.
My was I and everybody else wrong. The recession of the 90s changed the progressive nature of Ontario voters and the electorate was ripe for the lie of low taxes and gold plated government services.
We now find ourselves in another recession. Ontario is being particularly hard hit so we are setting up the 1995 scenario again for 2011. This time however the PCPO is in second place and the Ontario electorate has demonstrated a few times since 1995 that they are not nearly as progressive as they were beforehand. As well, we have seen on more than one occasion in more than one jurisdiction that the electorate is willing to buy the lie about low taxes and good government service, Ontarians demonstrating it at least three times since 1995. Finally, Dalton McGuinty will be seeking his third mandate and fighting his fourth election. That is difficult when times are good so I can only imagine how difficult it will be in the aftermath of one of the worst recessions Ontario has ever experienced.
I would urge Ontario Liberals to not underestimate Mr. Hudak or overestimate the progressive nature and political awareness of the Ontario electorate. They are going to have to find another argument than he is a Mike Harris "clone". That argument will not work. We have former Harrisites in the Federal cabinet, put their by the voters of Ontario, twice. Mike Harris will never be forgiven by Liberal and NDP partisans for what he did to Ontario but that attitude is not shared by Ontario voters at large so you had better come up with a counter to Mr. Hudak that does not involve vilifying Mike Harris.
You have two years, I suggest you get started.
Saturday, June 27, 2009
End of session polls
We have had a few come out since the end of the Parliamentary session, with the latest being the Nanos offering this morning. The Liberal blogsphere has been abuzz about the estimates and many have speculated on the reasons why the Liberals seem to have fallen off a bit.
My advice to them is not to worry. The estimates are what they are. Trying to explain movements of less than 2-3% is what the MSM does and always very badly. Leave it to them.
What I would point out is the Liberals have lead and are now tied (still leading according to Nanos) the campaigning, errr I mean, the governing party for over 6 months. That is very unusual. Even during the worst revelations of the Gomery Inquiry the Conservatives could only gain small leads that lasted less than two weeks.
As well, I believe the most telling result of the last few polls was the one that stated that Stephen Harper has become a weakness for his party instead of a strength. That is very bad news for them. By design, Stephen Harper has made himself and the Conservative Party synonymous and he has been very successful doing so. It will be very difficult to now separate them going forward so even if the Conservatives try to take the spotlight off of Stephen Harper it will have minimal effect and whatever effect it does have will be neutalized once a campaign begins and Stephen Harper again becomes front and centre.
Canada's political history is full of examples of leaders who were considered strong and popular, who had a big reversal in that opinion and dragged their party down. It happened to Trudeau, Mulroney, Martin, Harris, just to name a few. We could be seeing the beginnings of the same thing for Stephen Harper.
My advice to them is not to worry. The estimates are what they are. Trying to explain movements of less than 2-3% is what the MSM does and always very badly. Leave it to them.
What I would point out is the Liberals have lead and are now tied (still leading according to Nanos) the campaigning, errr I mean, the governing party for over 6 months. That is very unusual. Even during the worst revelations of the Gomery Inquiry the Conservatives could only gain small leads that lasted less than two weeks.
As well, I believe the most telling result of the last few polls was the one that stated that Stephen Harper has become a weakness for his party instead of a strength. That is very bad news for them. By design, Stephen Harper has made himself and the Conservative Party synonymous and he has been very successful doing so. It will be very difficult to now separate them going forward so even if the Conservatives try to take the spotlight off of Stephen Harper it will have minimal effect and whatever effect it does have will be neutalized once a campaign begins and Stephen Harper again becomes front and centre.
Canada's political history is full of examples of leaders who were considered strong and popular, who had a big reversal in that opinion and dragged their party down. It happened to Trudeau, Mulroney, Martin, Harris, just to name a few. We could be seeing the beginnings of the same thing for Stephen Harper.
Thursday, June 18, 2009
Thank you Mr. Dion
For the second time in six month Mr. Harper was forced to deal with the Liberal Party in order to save his government. For the second time in six months Michael Ignatieff was front and centre on the Canadian political stage and he was able to show Canadians that an alternative is available whenever they finally grow tired of Stephen Harper and the Conservatives.
That is a pretty good outcome considering 8 months ago the Liberals were coming off one of their worst electoral defeats in its history.
Most of what has transpired over the last six months can be attributed to the steady hand Mr. Ignatieff has had on the Liberal bridle. However, all Liberals should thank Stephane Dion because it was his actions in November that put the Liberals onto the path they are currently traversing.
Think back to November 2008. Stephane Dion had just come through two years of hell which culminated in a humiliating defeat. His party had swept him aside, telling him they did not want him any more, but asking him to stay on as interim leader until they chose someone they wanted. Interim leaders by their very nature are supposed to be care takers. They are not to rock the boat, particularly in a minority Parliament nor allow themselves to be noticed too much. That last thing an interim leader is supposed to do is take action that will trigger an election or make themselves more noticeable than their future replacements.
So, when Stephen Harper tabled the November economic update I bet he believed that Mr. Dion would live by the interim leader rule and not make too much noise about it.
He did not and my did things change after that.
Just imagine if he had just let it go. The Conservatives would have been forced to recant some of that statement because it was all fantasy but they would have done it on their time with their apologists in the media mitigating some of the negative fallout amongst Canadians and the Liberal leadership race mitigating the rest. The Liberal leadership race would have continued, in all likelihood being a short, divisive race that would have left deep wounds in the Liberal Party after the May convention. There would have been no effective opposition to focus Canadians on the gross incompetence of this government over the last 6 months. In short, this weeks meetings between Mr. Harper and Mr. Ignatieff would not have occured because the Liberals would not be in a position of strength relative to the Conservatives as they are now.
Instead, Mr. Dion broke the interim leader rule and stood up to Mr. Harper. We all know what happened then. Stephane Dion force Stephen Harper to prorogue Parliament just weeks after opening a new session, causing him to burn up every last bit of political capital he might have gained with his election victory and he force him to conduct a scorched earth strategy against the coalition that took a slow decline in Conservative fortunes in Quebec and turned it into a leap off of a cliff.
Finally, by design or by accident Mr. Dion allowed himself to become the lightning rod for the coalition so when Mr. Harper's strategy to exploit Canadians' ignorance of their own political system began to succeed he just resigned his post as leader, allowing Michael Ignatieff to take over without the prospect of the coalition hanging over his head.
The trend that has seen the Liberals being the favourate to win a summer election if it would have happened began in November when Stephane Dion stood up to Stephen Harper even when it went against the norm for interim leaders. For that Liberals should be truly grateful.
Incidently, it should be noted that Stephane Dion's actions to oppose Mr. Harper's economic update was the first and only time he had the full support of this party and caucus. With that support he knocked Stephen Harper and the Conservatives on their collective asses, from which, they have yet to recover. Kind of makes me wonder how things might have turned out if he would have had that kind of support from the beginning instead of having his own party undermine him at every opportunity.
It might have still been a disaster but then again maybe not. I guess we will never know.
That is a pretty good outcome considering 8 months ago the Liberals were coming off one of their worst electoral defeats in its history.
Most of what has transpired over the last six months can be attributed to the steady hand Mr. Ignatieff has had on the Liberal bridle. However, all Liberals should thank Stephane Dion because it was his actions in November that put the Liberals onto the path they are currently traversing.
Think back to November 2008. Stephane Dion had just come through two years of hell which culminated in a humiliating defeat. His party had swept him aside, telling him they did not want him any more, but asking him to stay on as interim leader until they chose someone they wanted. Interim leaders by their very nature are supposed to be care takers. They are not to rock the boat, particularly in a minority Parliament nor allow themselves to be noticed too much. That last thing an interim leader is supposed to do is take action that will trigger an election or make themselves more noticeable than their future replacements.
So, when Stephen Harper tabled the November economic update I bet he believed that Mr. Dion would live by the interim leader rule and not make too much noise about it.
He did not and my did things change after that.
Just imagine if he had just let it go. The Conservatives would have been forced to recant some of that statement because it was all fantasy but they would have done it on their time with their apologists in the media mitigating some of the negative fallout amongst Canadians and the Liberal leadership race mitigating the rest. The Liberal leadership race would have continued, in all likelihood being a short, divisive race that would have left deep wounds in the Liberal Party after the May convention. There would have been no effective opposition to focus Canadians on the gross incompetence of this government over the last 6 months. In short, this weeks meetings between Mr. Harper and Mr. Ignatieff would not have occured because the Liberals would not be in a position of strength relative to the Conservatives as they are now.
Instead, Mr. Dion broke the interim leader rule and stood up to Mr. Harper. We all know what happened then. Stephane Dion force Stephen Harper to prorogue Parliament just weeks after opening a new session, causing him to burn up every last bit of political capital he might have gained with his election victory and he force him to conduct a scorched earth strategy against the coalition that took a slow decline in Conservative fortunes in Quebec and turned it into a leap off of a cliff.
Finally, by design or by accident Mr. Dion allowed himself to become the lightning rod for the coalition so when Mr. Harper's strategy to exploit Canadians' ignorance of their own political system began to succeed he just resigned his post as leader, allowing Michael Ignatieff to take over without the prospect of the coalition hanging over his head.
The trend that has seen the Liberals being the favourate to win a summer election if it would have happened began in November when Stephane Dion stood up to Stephen Harper even when it went against the norm for interim leaders. For that Liberals should be truly grateful.
Incidently, it should be noted that Stephane Dion's actions to oppose Mr. Harper's economic update was the first and only time he had the full support of this party and caucus. With that support he knocked Stephen Harper and the Conservatives on their collective asses, from which, they have yet to recover. Kind of makes me wonder how things might have turned out if he would have had that kind of support from the beginning instead of having his own party undermine him at every opportunity.
It might have still been a disaster but then again maybe not. I guess we will never know.
Well, that was predictable
Why did I do it? Why did I bother checking to see the media reaction to the deal made yesterday by Mr. Ignatieff and Mr. Harper?
As I stated yesterday I knew what there reaction would be but I still took a look. Silly me.
As I predicted much of our MSM claimed that Mr. Ignatieff caved and was weak for not forcing an election. Of course, less than 48 hours ago that same MSM was shouting that Canadians did not want an election. The loudest of which were the members who support the Conservatives. They knew that an election this summer would have led to a Liberal victory as did most of the rest of the chattering class. So their concern about a summer election was not about saving Canadians from the trouble but to allow the Conservatives to hang on for a few more months.
The level of dishonesty of our MSM is breathtaking. I used to believe that they were just lazy but more and more I believe they just do not have any scruples.
As well, they do not even try to hide it which shows an amazing level of cynism and contempt for the intelligence of Canadians. Do they think Canadians would have forgotten what they said less than two days ago? Judging by what I read today I guess the answer is yes.
One story that has been percolating for months, if not years, has been the decline of the MSM as the main news source for people. All of them are losing audience with the resulting fall in advertizing revenue. Tell me you yahoos have you ever thought that there may be a co-relation between your obvious contempt for your audience and your problems maintaining your audiences and advertizing dollars? Maybe the journalist don't see it but you would think the suits in the front offices would.
Then again, maybe the stupidity of our MSM has its roots in the abject stupidity of those running the MSM organizations.
As I stated yesterday I knew what there reaction would be but I still took a look. Silly me.
As I predicted much of our MSM claimed that Mr. Ignatieff caved and was weak for not forcing an election. Of course, less than 48 hours ago that same MSM was shouting that Canadians did not want an election. The loudest of which were the members who support the Conservatives. They knew that an election this summer would have led to a Liberal victory as did most of the rest of the chattering class. So their concern about a summer election was not about saving Canadians from the trouble but to allow the Conservatives to hang on for a few more months.
The level of dishonesty of our MSM is breathtaking. I used to believe that they were just lazy but more and more I believe they just do not have any scruples.
As well, they do not even try to hide it which shows an amazing level of cynism and contempt for the intelligence of Canadians. Do they think Canadians would have forgotten what they said less than two days ago? Judging by what I read today I guess the answer is yes.
One story that has been percolating for months, if not years, has been the decline of the MSM as the main news source for people. All of them are losing audience with the resulting fall in advertizing revenue. Tell me you yahoos have you ever thought that there may be a co-relation between your obvious contempt for your audience and your problems maintaining your audiences and advertizing dollars? Maybe the journalist don't see it but you would think the suits in the front offices would.
Then again, maybe the stupidity of our MSM has its roots in the abject stupidity of those running the MSM organizations.
Wednesday, June 17, 2009
So, Ignatieff is playing a long game
With the deal today between Mr. Ignatieff and Mr. Harper we will find ourselves having an election free summer.
Reactions to the deal will be largely predictable.
Conservatives and their apologists in the media will claim Mr. Ignatieff caved, that he is weak for not triggering an election. Of course, they will hope that Canadians will not see the hypocracy and inconsistancy in that message and the fact that about 24 hours ago those same folks were shouting the message from the rooftops that Canadians did not want an election. I am not worried about them. It is not Conservatives that the Liberals have to win over and the media, in general, does not do consistant.
I suspect the NDP will claim that deal proves that the Liberals and the Conservatives are just two sides of the same coin so they are the only alternative to them. As well, they, along with the Bloc, will claim that they are the only real opposition in the House. As to their first argument, the NDP has been saying the Liberals and the Conservatives are the same since the creation of the NDP. It is an argument that falls on deaf ears and it will continue to do so. The second argument is one that is easy to make when your actions do not carry consequences for Canadians. And that is the reality because the NDP have never even had a sniff at national power and the Bloc does not care about it.
Many Liberals will be disappointed and criticize Mr. Ignatieff for this deal. They will argue that:
Reactions to the deal will be largely predictable.
Conservatives and their apologists in the media will claim Mr. Ignatieff caved, that he is weak for not triggering an election. Of course, they will hope that Canadians will not see the hypocracy and inconsistancy in that message and the fact that about 24 hours ago those same folks were shouting the message from the rooftops that Canadians did not want an election. I am not worried about them. It is not Conservatives that the Liberals have to win over and the media, in general, does not do consistant.
I suspect the NDP will claim that deal proves that the Liberals and the Conservatives are just two sides of the same coin so they are the only alternative to them. As well, they, along with the Bloc, will claim that they are the only real opposition in the House. As to their first argument, the NDP has been saying the Liberals and the Conservatives are the same since the creation of the NDP. It is an argument that falls on deaf ears and it will continue to do so. The second argument is one that is easy to make when your actions do not carry consequences for Canadians. And that is the reality because the NDP have never even had a sniff at national power and the Bloc does not care about it.
Many Liberals will be disappointed and criticize Mr. Ignatieff for this deal. They will argue that:
- the Conservatives are down in the polls, and they have had a bad few weeks so now is the time to strike,
- the economy will improve in the next few months and the Conservatives will be able to claim credit for that, and
- Canadians want to get rid of this government.
To the first point, they have an argument up to a point. However, I would point out that the Liberals have seen their fortunes improve for the first time since 2004. That is five years where the Liberal fortunes were in the dumps. It has been about 5 months that the Liberals have enjoyed their good fortune. In other words, the dynamic we have seen in the last few months is still very fragile. As a result, triggering an election this week would have been fraught with risks. Allowing the current political dynamic to deepen and to broaden over the next few months will reduce that risk and even if the Liberals could have overcome those risks they would have probably only won a minority government.
As to the second point, economic recoveries are very uneven with the little guy usually being the last to see the benefits. I would remind folks that the recovery from the last recession in the 1990's was 18 months old when Kim Campbell was crushed by Jean Chretien. As well, we were on the cusp of the longest and steepest economic expansion in the post-war period when Bob Rae lost his government to Mike Harris. As I stated a couple of posts ago, it is the period immediately after the recession when governments really begin feeling the wrath of voters. During the recession everybody has a sense of being in it together. Businesses are hurting along with ordinary citizens. However, once the recession ends the stock markets climb along with business profits but the ordinary workers are still feeling the pinch of high unemployment and eroding wages and purchasing power. That causes resentment which usually manifests itself as anger against the sitting government. (Incidentally, Dalton McGuinty should be very worried about that dynamic, particularly if the PCPO elects a credible leader.)
Since we have not yet hit that stage in the recession cycle we have not yet seen the floor of Conservative support. As the recession and immediate post recession period unfolds over the next 6-12 months we should see Conservative support erode even more.
To the final point, it is usually very bad for a political party to project their desires on the voters at large. They really appreciate that. It is true that Canadians seem to be turning their backs on this government. It is certainly true of Quebec but we are only seeing the tentative beginnings of such a trend in Ontario and it has not even begun in the West. Given the nature of this government and the short to medium-turn economic outlook it is probably only a matter of time before we see this trend solidfy to the point where there will be nothing the Conservatives can do to prevent a Liberal government and they might not even be able to prevent a big Liberal win.
Of course, politics being politics anything can happen and there is a risk that waiting will actually harm the Liberals. However, Mr. Ignatieff and the Liberal brain trust have decided that on balance, the risk/benefit ratio associated with an election this summer is less favourable than the risk/benefit ratio of waiting a few more months.
I really cannot fault their thinking.
Monday, June 15, 2009
Oh Iggy, you sly dog
Iggy, it is people like you and those around you that made me give up being a "backroom" operative in the '90s.
When you put the Conservative government on "probation" in January and demanded a "report card" by June on their economic performance I felt it was just a good strategy for getting around supporting the budget. Support the budget with conditions, prevent an election and get your name in the media as someone thoughtful enough to Canadians to prevent an election just three months after the last one.
However, today I saw the real strategic brilliance of you and those around you. When you made the demand for the "report card" you knew that Stephen Harper would completely violate the spirit of what you were asking. You knew your man and he did exactly what you expected of him with that vague piece of fluff he peddled during that "town hall". When he did you brought forward the next part of the strategy your people hatched up over the Christmas break last year and asked for specifics. And we all know that this government abhors specifics, particularly when those specifics have the potential to hurt them.
Even if the Conservatives were operating from a position of strength this strategy would put them on the defensive and it would raise your profile going into the summer. However, with their weakness this strategy is even better. If forces them to comply and lose support or not and be largely blamed for causing an election. After all, the questions and demands you made are probably considered quite reasonable to most of those Canadians that do not live and breath politics. As well, you delivered this part of the strategy very well. I thought the offer to extend the session of Parliament a nice touch. The idea of our Parliamentarians delaying their summer break to work for them would appeal to many Canadian, particularly if they believe you are working on the issues you outlined today.
As an added bonus the NDP and the Bloc must be having kittens right about now. Both stand to lose big if the election were held this summer so they want to avoid one like the plague.
Jack Layton growled like a toothless hound today (predictably so) but I imagine the NDP brain trust is crapping their pants because they are left with a very stark choice. Stick to their guns, and hope you and Mr. Harper come to an agreement, and risk going into an election where they will lose many of their seats in Ontario, or do a climb down on Friday, making themselves look silly and weak. As the week goes on the NDP will be more and more on the spot and it will be fun to watch how Mr. Layton and his people react to that.
You see, their national poll numbers are not much lower than they were during the last election. However, their numbers in Ontario have fallen off a cliff. So their national numbers are increasingly made up by all of those voters in the West, who voted Conservative last time, switching to the NDP. Unfortunately, past patterns have shown that they cannot eat into the Conservative vote enough to actually capture many seats in the West but they can eat into the Conservative vote in a few pockets in Manitoba and Saskatchewan that would allow the Liberals the come up the middle to take those seats.
So, you and I both know that they desperately want you or the Bloc to support the government.
Speaking of the Bloc, they must be in a similar position. The last time the Liberals were considered by Quebecers to be the only federalist option in Quebec they reduced the Bloc to historic lows in the House. That was 2000, and the Liberals actually began that election with a double digit deficit in popular support not the statistical tie you enjoy.
Of course, you could not have known that the political chips would fall where they have fallen when you conceived this strategy over last Christmas but that does not take away from the brilliance of it now.
Well done Iggy.
When you put the Conservative government on "probation" in January and demanded a "report card" by June on their economic performance I felt it was just a good strategy for getting around supporting the budget. Support the budget with conditions, prevent an election and get your name in the media as someone thoughtful enough to Canadians to prevent an election just three months after the last one.
However, today I saw the real strategic brilliance of you and those around you. When you made the demand for the "report card" you knew that Stephen Harper would completely violate the spirit of what you were asking. You knew your man and he did exactly what you expected of him with that vague piece of fluff he peddled during that "town hall". When he did you brought forward the next part of the strategy your people hatched up over the Christmas break last year and asked for specifics. And we all know that this government abhors specifics, particularly when those specifics have the potential to hurt them.
Even if the Conservatives were operating from a position of strength this strategy would put them on the defensive and it would raise your profile going into the summer. However, with their weakness this strategy is even better. If forces them to comply and lose support or not and be largely blamed for causing an election. After all, the questions and demands you made are probably considered quite reasonable to most of those Canadians that do not live and breath politics. As well, you delivered this part of the strategy very well. I thought the offer to extend the session of Parliament a nice touch. The idea of our Parliamentarians delaying their summer break to work for them would appeal to many Canadian, particularly if they believe you are working on the issues you outlined today.
As an added bonus the NDP and the Bloc must be having kittens right about now. Both stand to lose big if the election were held this summer so they want to avoid one like the plague.
Jack Layton growled like a toothless hound today (predictably so) but I imagine the NDP brain trust is crapping their pants because they are left with a very stark choice. Stick to their guns, and hope you and Mr. Harper come to an agreement, and risk going into an election where they will lose many of their seats in Ontario, or do a climb down on Friday, making themselves look silly and weak. As the week goes on the NDP will be more and more on the spot and it will be fun to watch how Mr. Layton and his people react to that.
You see, their national poll numbers are not much lower than they were during the last election. However, their numbers in Ontario have fallen off a cliff. So their national numbers are increasingly made up by all of those voters in the West, who voted Conservative last time, switching to the NDP. Unfortunately, past patterns have shown that they cannot eat into the Conservative vote enough to actually capture many seats in the West but they can eat into the Conservative vote in a few pockets in Manitoba and Saskatchewan that would allow the Liberals the come up the middle to take those seats.
So, you and I both know that they desperately want you or the Bloc to support the government.
Speaking of the Bloc, they must be in a similar position. The last time the Liberals were considered by Quebecers to be the only federalist option in Quebec they reduced the Bloc to historic lows in the House. That was 2000, and the Liberals actually began that election with a double digit deficit in popular support not the statistical tie you enjoy.
Of course, you could not have known that the political chips would fall where they have fallen when you conceived this strategy over last Christmas but that does not take away from the brilliance of it now.
Well done Iggy.
Saturday, June 13, 2009
Go now or wait?
The latest information from Nanos seems to indicate that waiting would not do any harm to the Liberals and might actually assist them by allowing time for the negative impressions of Mr. Harper and the Conservatives to solidify.
And they will solidify. People being people, once someone or something generates negative feelings it is damned difficult to reverse those feelings no matter what they do. Just ask Stephane Dion.
The ideal conditions for the Liberals would be where no matter what the Conservatives did they could not win the next election. In other words, a situation where Canadians have grown so tired of the Conservative government they will turf it out regardless of what it promised and what it said about the Opposition.
So the question becomes, are we there yet?
My sense is not quite but getting closer.
I really do not have an opinion on election timing. I am just throwing out possibilities for everybody to discuss. I believe we reached the tipping point last Fall when Mr. Harper prorogued Parliament to save his political hide with the result that the Liberals are most likely to win the next election no matter when it occurs.
As well, none of the other parties wants an election so if Mr. Ignatieff announced he was not going to support the Conservatives latest infomercial, errr, economic report card I am certain Mr. Harper and Jack Layton would make some kind of a deal to prevent an election. The Bloc would not as the Conservatives are too unpopular in Quebec so the Bloc would not want to tie themselves to Conservatives right now.
So I still believe that we will have to wait until at least the Fall.
And they will solidify. People being people, once someone or something generates negative feelings it is damned difficult to reverse those feelings no matter what they do. Just ask Stephane Dion.
The ideal conditions for the Liberals would be where no matter what the Conservatives did they could not win the next election. In other words, a situation where Canadians have grown so tired of the Conservative government they will turf it out regardless of what it promised and what it said about the Opposition.
So the question becomes, are we there yet?
My sense is not quite but getting closer.
I really do not have an opinion on election timing. I am just throwing out possibilities for everybody to discuss. I believe we reached the tipping point last Fall when Mr. Harper prorogued Parliament to save his political hide with the result that the Liberals are most likely to win the next election no matter when it occurs.
As well, none of the other parties wants an election so if Mr. Ignatieff announced he was not going to support the Conservatives latest infomercial, errr, economic report card I am certain Mr. Harper and Jack Layton would make some kind of a deal to prevent an election. The Bloc would not as the Conservatives are too unpopular in Quebec so the Bloc would not want to tie themselves to Conservatives right now.
So I still believe that we will have to wait until at least the Fall.
Friday, June 12, 2009
The other parties wish they were in the Liberals' position
Do the Liberals force an election in the Summer or wait until the Fall?
Those who say summer point to the recession and the current troubles with the Conservatives and say strike while the iron is hot. Do not let the Conservatives have the summer to recover, perhaps along with an economic recovery they say.
There is some merit to this argument. The Liberals have been rising slowly but steadily since November. The Conservatives on the otherhand have become unglued and have proven once again that when they go off script they are hopeless. You would think at least one of the Conservative Party elite would be able to think on their feet.
We are beginning to see some positive trends developing for the Liberals. They have virtually solidified their status as the Federalist option in Quebec while the Conservatives are fighting with the NDP and the Greens to stay out of the basement. Now we are seeing what could be the beginning of Ontario trending Liberals and by a wide margin. Under these conditions the Liberals would probably win a minority government.
Others say the Liberals should wait. They should take more time to fill their coffers, to prepare for the next election and to allow the current trends to grow and solidify even more. They say Canadians do not want to have an election over the summer.
There is some merit in those arguments as well, although the Liberals would not be punished for triggering an election. Stephen Harper triggered one over the Christmas holidays and it did not cost him and he called one despite breaking his own law and it did not cost him. Simply put, if an election is called people will come out to vote.
You cannot disagree with their arguments about fundraising and election readiness. By most accounts both are much better than in the past but those improvement are still new so a little more time to maximize their impact would not be a bad thing.
As well, in all likelyhood the current trends will continue. Recessions are government killers. You just need to see what happened to previous government that governed during recessions to see that. Many believe that signs of recovery will help the Conservatives. I doubt it. Recessions have a life cycle. Part of that lifecycle is the immediate recovery period after the recession. At that point economic growth increases, albeit not by much, the stock markets begin to perk up and businesses begin to show profits but those on Main Street do not share the recovery. Indeed, it is during these periods that governments suffer the most because voters can see the contrast between businesses, the wealthy and themselves and their resentment of the situation becomes more pronounced leading to a more negative reactions to the government. (Whom all but the most ardent free marketer expects to prevent such inequality in the economic recovery and who are usually helpless to meet that expectation). If you do not believe me you only need to look at the experiences of Bob Rae, Brian Mulroney and George Bush Senior. All of their governments had the misfortune to govern and to fight elections during this period and we all know how that worked out.
So, the need for an immediate election is not urgent. Indeed, there is a very good chance that waiting a few more months will solidify the current trends so that the Liberals could win even bigger than they might this summer.
So, Michael Ignatieff has a very happy choice. Both carry risk but both could very well see him as the next PM of Canada regardless of which one he chooses.
I am curious to see which one he chooses.
Those who say summer point to the recession and the current troubles with the Conservatives and say strike while the iron is hot. Do not let the Conservatives have the summer to recover, perhaps along with an economic recovery they say.
There is some merit to this argument. The Liberals have been rising slowly but steadily since November. The Conservatives on the otherhand have become unglued and have proven once again that when they go off script they are hopeless. You would think at least one of the Conservative Party elite would be able to think on their feet.
We are beginning to see some positive trends developing for the Liberals. They have virtually solidified their status as the Federalist option in Quebec while the Conservatives are fighting with the NDP and the Greens to stay out of the basement. Now we are seeing what could be the beginning of Ontario trending Liberals and by a wide margin. Under these conditions the Liberals would probably win a minority government.
Others say the Liberals should wait. They should take more time to fill their coffers, to prepare for the next election and to allow the current trends to grow and solidify even more. They say Canadians do not want to have an election over the summer.
There is some merit in those arguments as well, although the Liberals would not be punished for triggering an election. Stephen Harper triggered one over the Christmas holidays and it did not cost him and he called one despite breaking his own law and it did not cost him. Simply put, if an election is called people will come out to vote.
You cannot disagree with their arguments about fundraising and election readiness. By most accounts both are much better than in the past but those improvement are still new so a little more time to maximize their impact would not be a bad thing.
As well, in all likelyhood the current trends will continue. Recessions are government killers. You just need to see what happened to previous government that governed during recessions to see that. Many believe that signs of recovery will help the Conservatives. I doubt it. Recessions have a life cycle. Part of that lifecycle is the immediate recovery period after the recession. At that point economic growth increases, albeit not by much, the stock markets begin to perk up and businesses begin to show profits but those on Main Street do not share the recovery. Indeed, it is during these periods that governments suffer the most because voters can see the contrast between businesses, the wealthy and themselves and their resentment of the situation becomes more pronounced leading to a more negative reactions to the government. (Whom all but the most ardent free marketer expects to prevent such inequality in the economic recovery and who are usually helpless to meet that expectation). If you do not believe me you only need to look at the experiences of Bob Rae, Brian Mulroney and George Bush Senior. All of their governments had the misfortune to govern and to fight elections during this period and we all know how that worked out.
So, the need for an immediate election is not urgent. Indeed, there is a very good chance that waiting a few more months will solidify the current trends so that the Liberals could win even bigger than they might this summer.
So, Michael Ignatieff has a very happy choice. Both carry risk but both could very well see him as the next PM of Canada regardless of which one he chooses.
I am curious to see which one he chooses.
Friday, May 15, 2009
The Depressing State of Canadian Politics
The recent troubles of Ruby Dhalla and the release of yet another round of attack ads from the Conservatives, directed personally at Michael Ignatieff, is just further indications of how low Canadian politics has sunk in a very few short years. Not much more than a decade ago the Dhalla story would have been barely mentioned as the personal troubles of a Member of Parliament were generally ignored. Maybe it would have received some mention in the Toronto papers, buried deep, deep in the inner pages, but it would not have received days of coverage nor would it have warranted days of Parliamentary hearings. As for the attack ads, not too many years ago they would have been met with howls of outrage from the media. There was a time when political opponents could question each others judgement, vision, governing style and policy proposals but personal attacks were strickly off limits. Actually questioning your opponent's patriotism and/or Canadian identity would have been met with heaps of scorn from our chattering classes.
There was a time when politics was about people with honest disagreements on how to resolve the many problems that arose in the life of this country. Certainly they disagreed with each others ideas and policy proposals but it was implicitly understood and acknowledged that your opponent came by his opinions out of their love of Canada, the desire to make it better and to assist all Canadians.
Now of course personal attacks are just a routine part of the political "debate".
Many Liberals believe that attacking Mr. Ignatieff in the way the Conservatives are attacking him will backfire. Perhaps, but they would not have released these ads if they did not believe they would resonate with some Canadians.
I blame the American Republican Party for this sad state of affairs. Newt Gingrich and his merry band of neo-cons in the US made politics personal by personally attacking Bill Clinton at every opportunity. Granted President Clinton gave them more than a few openings but the witch hunt regarding his financial dealings during his time as Governor and the impeachment of him largely because of a blow job were way over the top. However, it ultimately worked because the Republicans rode the disgust they so assiduously cultivated amongst the American electorate to the White House (with the assistance of some partisan state officials and Supreme Court justices). The Reform movement in this country saw that and they began to follow the same practices. It began with Stock Day but he was not very good at it so it took Stephen Harper and his gang to perfect it. Mind you, the Liberals cannot claim to be squeaky clean in this either. They launched an ad campaign against Mr. Harper before the 2004 election which did not directly question his patriotism and loyalty to Canada but it certainly inferred they were both lacking.
I disagree with Stephen Harper on many issues on many different levels. However, I do not believe that any of his actions are out of malice towards Canada. I believe that he truly believes that his ideas and policy solutions to real and perceived problems in this country will make Canada better and stronger. His ideas are certainly more radical than what we have seen in the past but that does not make him unpatriotic or disloyal.
Thankfully, the situation seems to be changing and again that change is being seen first in the US. The masters of personal attacks in the US have been soundly defeated. They have not accepted this yet and they are happily reducing the Republican Party to a rump. It will be awhile before that changes. The hatefilled, parochial, ignorant, narrow-minded wingnuts that now dominate that party are still drunk on the idea that they had one of their own elected president twice. It is going to take another crushing defeat in 2012 and the prospect of facing a fresh, young VP cum presidental candidate in 2016, after Joe Biden announces his retirement from politics in 2011, to change that. At that point the adults in the Republican Party will reassert their dominance and re-establish the Republican Party back to something resembling a political party that is able to represent true conservative minded Americans.
It is going to take awhile for that dynamic to be seen here but I am hopeful that we will begin to see that kind of change within the next few years.
There was a time when politics was about people with honest disagreements on how to resolve the many problems that arose in the life of this country. Certainly they disagreed with each others ideas and policy proposals but it was implicitly understood and acknowledged that your opponent came by his opinions out of their love of Canada, the desire to make it better and to assist all Canadians.
Now of course personal attacks are just a routine part of the political "debate".
Many Liberals believe that attacking Mr. Ignatieff in the way the Conservatives are attacking him will backfire. Perhaps, but they would not have released these ads if they did not believe they would resonate with some Canadians.
I blame the American Republican Party for this sad state of affairs. Newt Gingrich and his merry band of neo-cons in the US made politics personal by personally attacking Bill Clinton at every opportunity. Granted President Clinton gave them more than a few openings but the witch hunt regarding his financial dealings during his time as Governor and the impeachment of him largely because of a blow job were way over the top. However, it ultimately worked because the Republicans rode the disgust they so assiduously cultivated amongst the American electorate to the White House (with the assistance of some partisan state officials and Supreme Court justices). The Reform movement in this country saw that and they began to follow the same practices. It began with Stock Day but he was not very good at it so it took Stephen Harper and his gang to perfect it. Mind you, the Liberals cannot claim to be squeaky clean in this either. They launched an ad campaign against Mr. Harper before the 2004 election which did not directly question his patriotism and loyalty to Canada but it certainly inferred they were both lacking.
I disagree with Stephen Harper on many issues on many different levels. However, I do not believe that any of his actions are out of malice towards Canada. I believe that he truly believes that his ideas and policy solutions to real and perceived problems in this country will make Canada better and stronger. His ideas are certainly more radical than what we have seen in the past but that does not make him unpatriotic or disloyal.
Thankfully, the situation seems to be changing and again that change is being seen first in the US. The masters of personal attacks in the US have been soundly defeated. They have not accepted this yet and they are happily reducing the Republican Party to a rump. It will be awhile before that changes. The hatefilled, parochial, ignorant, narrow-minded wingnuts that now dominate that party are still drunk on the idea that they had one of their own elected president twice. It is going to take another crushing defeat in 2012 and the prospect of facing a fresh, young VP cum presidental candidate in 2016, after Joe Biden announces his retirement from politics in 2011, to change that. At that point the adults in the Republican Party will reassert their dominance and re-establish the Republican Party back to something resembling a political party that is able to represent true conservative minded Americans.
It is going to take awhile for that dynamic to be seen here but I am hopeful that we will begin to see that kind of change within the next few years.
Friday, May 08, 2009
Impeach President Obama
He likes Dijon mustard on his hamburger. That is just,..., just,..., just unAmerican.
What's next, mayonnaise on his French Fries, er..., I mean Freedom Fries?
Will someone please think of the children!!!! (With apologies to Maude Flanders)
What's next, mayonnaise on his French Fries, er..., I mean Freedom Fries?
Will someone please think of the children!!!! (With apologies to Maude Flanders)
Ruby Dhalla exposes Conservatives' fear
I was not going to write about the troubles of Rudy Dhalla. For the life of me I really do not care about the problems she is having with her former employees. However, when I saw how much the Conservatives are piling on this story I could not help but comment. Hell, I even had a moment that left me gaping at the television set.
For the life of me I cannot believe the Conservatives are spending so much time and energy on this story. They are even thinking of bringing Ms. Dhalla's accusers in to testify at a Parliamentary committee hearing. That would be interesting because if I were a Liberal MP my first questions would be why did you wait a year to do anything and why was your first act to talk to a reporter instead of the authorities.
It is obvious that they believe this will harm the Liberals, which just demonstrates that they are hopelessly out of touch.
At the risk of sounding sexist I can virtually guarantee that every male, who is not a political animal, is ignoring this story because of the NHL playoffs and the latest round of the Balsillie/Bettman war. I would imagine most of them would briefly see a headline about Ms. Dhalla on their way to a story where they would be able to see what is "the latest excuse of that prick Bettman" for denying Canada another hockey team. This is particularly true in Southern Ontario where both of these stories are receiving the most exposure. As for women, I imagine they may be more interested but again for those who are not political animals I imagine the greatest reaction is "Lucky her, she can afford a live-in nanny". Then for that small few that can afford a live-in nanny many would probably feel for Ms. Dhalla because having your live-in employees exposing family business, good or bad, in some way is probably their greatest nightmare with regard to their help.
Despite that the Conservatives are moving heaven and earth to try to make this a bigger story than it actually is. There has even been some suggestion that they orchestrated this whole affair. While I believe such a scenario is possible I do not believe it is plausible. Make no mistake, the Conservatives are capable of this kind of underhanded actions and they are arrogant enough to believe they will not get caught or if they do get caught their arrogance will allow them to claim they did nothing wrong. However, as of now I do not believe they are really behind this.
But for the sake of argument let's say they are. Why would they let this story hit now during a relatively peaceful political period? In this atmosphere this story will be but a blip for both the Liberals and Ms. Dhalla. This is the type of story that should be released during the pressure cooker of an election. That is when a story like this would have its maximum impact on both the candidate and her party. Now, not so much.
So why are they playing this story up so much?
Because the Liberal resurgence is real and the corresponding Conservative fading is also real. Everybody in this town knows it. You can see it in the sudden rapprochement of the NDP, Bloc and Conservatives. You can see it in the body language and demeanour of the Conservatives themselves.
Even the Conservative cheerleaders in the media can see the writing on the wall, which is what brought me to the jaw dropping moment while watching the news. While idly listening to the CTV news I heard Bob Fife, a bald face Conservative shill if there ever was one, refer his viewers to the Toronto Star. Mr. Fife works for CTV, which is owned by the same company that owns The Globe and Mail. The G&M's chief competition in the GTA and the Golden Horse Shoe is the Toronto Star. To see Bob Fife refer his viewers to one of his company's biggest competitors left my mouth hanging around my ankles. (It was then followed by a belly laugh that left me red face and sputtering with my wife pounding me on the back to start me breathing again).
The fear amongst Conservatives, their supporters and their media cheerleaders is palpable. They know things are slipping away and many are beginning to wonder just how far it will slip. Judging by their reaction to Ms Dhalla's domestic problems I would say they believe the slip will not be small.
Thanks Ms. Dhalla.
For the life of me I cannot believe the Conservatives are spending so much time and energy on this story. They are even thinking of bringing Ms. Dhalla's accusers in to testify at a Parliamentary committee hearing. That would be interesting because if I were a Liberal MP my first questions would be why did you wait a year to do anything and why was your first act to talk to a reporter instead of the authorities.
It is obvious that they believe this will harm the Liberals, which just demonstrates that they are hopelessly out of touch.
At the risk of sounding sexist I can virtually guarantee that every male, who is not a political animal, is ignoring this story because of the NHL playoffs and the latest round of the Balsillie/Bettman war. I would imagine most of them would briefly see a headline about Ms. Dhalla on their way to a story where they would be able to see what is "the latest excuse of that prick Bettman" for denying Canada another hockey team. This is particularly true in Southern Ontario where both of these stories are receiving the most exposure. As for women, I imagine they may be more interested but again for those who are not political animals I imagine the greatest reaction is "Lucky her, she can afford a live-in nanny". Then for that small few that can afford a live-in nanny many would probably feel for Ms. Dhalla because having your live-in employees exposing family business, good or bad, in some way is probably their greatest nightmare with regard to their help.
Despite that the Conservatives are moving heaven and earth to try to make this a bigger story than it actually is. There has even been some suggestion that they orchestrated this whole affair. While I believe such a scenario is possible I do not believe it is plausible. Make no mistake, the Conservatives are capable of this kind of underhanded actions and they are arrogant enough to believe they will not get caught or if they do get caught their arrogance will allow them to claim they did nothing wrong. However, as of now I do not believe they are really behind this.
But for the sake of argument let's say they are. Why would they let this story hit now during a relatively peaceful political period? In this atmosphere this story will be but a blip for both the Liberals and Ms. Dhalla. This is the type of story that should be released during the pressure cooker of an election. That is when a story like this would have its maximum impact on both the candidate and her party. Now, not so much.
So why are they playing this story up so much?
Because the Liberal resurgence is real and the corresponding Conservative fading is also real. Everybody in this town knows it. You can see it in the sudden rapprochement of the NDP, Bloc and Conservatives. You can see it in the body language and demeanour of the Conservatives themselves.
Even the Conservative cheerleaders in the media can see the writing on the wall, which is what brought me to the jaw dropping moment while watching the news. While idly listening to the CTV news I heard Bob Fife, a bald face Conservative shill if there ever was one, refer his viewers to the Toronto Star. Mr. Fife works for CTV, which is owned by the same company that owns The Globe and Mail. The G&M's chief competition in the GTA and the Golden Horse Shoe is the Toronto Star. To see Bob Fife refer his viewers to one of his company's biggest competitors left my mouth hanging around my ankles. (It was then followed by a belly laugh that left me red face and sputtering with my wife pounding me on the back to start me breathing again).
The fear amongst Conservatives, their supporters and their media cheerleaders is palpable. They know things are slipping away and many are beginning to wonder just how far it will slip. Judging by their reaction to Ms Dhalla's domestic problems I would say they believe the slip will not be small.
Thanks Ms. Dhalla.
Thursday, February 26, 2009
Why are people surprised by political expediency?
So, Michael Ignatieff has criticised a National Geographic article that was somewhat critical of the Alberta Oil Sands. He has actually defended the Oil Sands. The response from some Liberals has been surprise and consternation. How could he they ask?
What did they expect?
If they wanted a green leader many more Liberals should have supported the last one. He was greener than the Greens but he was subjected to the death of a thousand cuts by his own party and then dealt the final cut by an election, which he fought using a green initiative as the centrepiece of this campaign.
Some have said that he was defeated by the notion of a tax but that tax was in context of a green plan. Canadians consistantly stated that they were concerned about green issues up until that election but when it came time to really act on that concern they rejected the Liberal Green Shift in record numbers.
If anybody believes that the Liberals in general and Mr. Ignatieff in particular did not notice that outcome they are being really naive. The environment is dead as a winning political issue. That is particularly true now that we are in a recession that still shows no signs of easing up. The economy and jobs are what is on peoples minds and any political party or political leader that does not recognize that reality is not going to be very successful.
Development of the Alberta Oil Sands will be curtailed in the coming months but it will not be the result of any action by any politician, either on this side or the other side of the Canada/US border. It will be the result of lower oil prices and the continued credit crunch.
Which brings me to President Obama. Many Liberals are hoping that he will be the one to finally bring about change in the Oil Sands. He will introduce a hard cap-and-trade system they say that will cause Premier Stelmach's and Mr. Harper's heads to explode.
Don't count on it. Oh, he will probably make the proposal for one but it will still need to be approved by Congress.
We all know that a cap-and-trade system will cost business and industry alot of money. During an economic downturn it will not be too difficult for Big Oil and many other industries to argue that such a system would be too costly and a job killer. They will begin a lobbying and a public relations campaign, ironically, partially funded from the money from President Obama's stimulus package, aimed at Congress.
Every Congressman and a large number of Senators will be facing voters in less than two years. They will have the disadvantage of doing so during an economic downturn to begin with and any suggestion of them supporting a plan easily depicted as something that will make job losses worse is a non-starter.
By that election some of the lustre of the Obama Presidency will have worn off. It is inevitable and in order for President Obama to push through any kind of environmental package he will have to compromise. In other words, he will have to water down his principles for the sake of political expediency.
Political expediency on both sides of the border will prevail when it comes to the Oil Sands. Not much more that token measure will be enacted to curtail their development and Liberals better get used to that fact.
What did they expect?
If they wanted a green leader many more Liberals should have supported the last one. He was greener than the Greens but he was subjected to the death of a thousand cuts by his own party and then dealt the final cut by an election, which he fought using a green initiative as the centrepiece of this campaign.
Some have said that he was defeated by the notion of a tax but that tax was in context of a green plan. Canadians consistantly stated that they were concerned about green issues up until that election but when it came time to really act on that concern they rejected the Liberal Green Shift in record numbers.
If anybody believes that the Liberals in general and Mr. Ignatieff in particular did not notice that outcome they are being really naive. The environment is dead as a winning political issue. That is particularly true now that we are in a recession that still shows no signs of easing up. The economy and jobs are what is on peoples minds and any political party or political leader that does not recognize that reality is not going to be very successful.
Development of the Alberta Oil Sands will be curtailed in the coming months but it will not be the result of any action by any politician, either on this side or the other side of the Canada/US border. It will be the result of lower oil prices and the continued credit crunch.
Which brings me to President Obama. Many Liberals are hoping that he will be the one to finally bring about change in the Oil Sands. He will introduce a hard cap-and-trade system they say that will cause Premier Stelmach's and Mr. Harper's heads to explode.
Don't count on it. Oh, he will probably make the proposal for one but it will still need to be approved by Congress.
We all know that a cap-and-trade system will cost business and industry alot of money. During an economic downturn it will not be too difficult for Big Oil and many other industries to argue that such a system would be too costly and a job killer. They will begin a lobbying and a public relations campaign, ironically, partially funded from the money from President Obama's stimulus package, aimed at Congress.
Every Congressman and a large number of Senators will be facing voters in less than two years. They will have the disadvantage of doing so during an economic downturn to begin with and any suggestion of them supporting a plan easily depicted as something that will make job losses worse is a non-starter.
By that election some of the lustre of the Obama Presidency will have worn off. It is inevitable and in order for President Obama to push through any kind of environmental package he will have to compromise. In other words, he will have to water down his principles for the sake of political expediency.
Political expediency on both sides of the border will prevail when it comes to the Oil Sands. Not much more that token measure will be enacted to curtail their development and Liberals better get used to that fact.
Sunday, January 11, 2009
Liberals Tying Themselves in Knots over the Middle East
I have been watching the ongoing disagreement amongst Liberals, over what has been going on in Gaza for the last few weeks, with interest and amusement.
On one side you have Jason Cherniak essentially giving the Israelis a free pass on everything they do. On the other side you have others, James Curren being one of the most vocal, who have condemned their actions. It has become quite personal at times and Mr. Cherniak has even used his position as an administrator of Liblogs to advance his position using Liblogs.
While watching all of this has given me great moments of mirth it has also left me shaking my head at the shear silliness of it all.
I have my own opinions about what is going on over in Gaza but I have kept them to myself.
The reason is simple. Nothing I say or do will have an iota of an effect on the current or future situation in the Middle East. Further, there is nothing the Canadian government can do to have any effect either.
The Arab-Israeli conflict has been around since 1948. The Israeli-Palestinian conflict has been around in its contemporary form since 1967. With one exception the different sides in these conflicts have not shown any desire to make a lasting, equitable peace. All sides have demonstrated that they have no problem with the current situation. In the case of the Israelis and the Palestinians their leadership decided long ago to accept the death of their people as a price for continuing the status quo. Both sides use their civilian populations as pawns in their little game.
This is not going to change as a result of anything Liberals say for or against either side.
As well, it has been amusing to see how many have expressed disappointment in the statements by Mr. Ignatieff. There have been rumblings about the lateness of his statement and its content.
With regard to its lateness I would just mention that it is inappropriate for the Leader of the Opposition to make a statement about a foreign policy crisis before the government. The real scandal here was how long it took the government to finally make a statement. But of course Liberals pretty much ignored that issue and focused on what Mr. Ignatieff said instead.
When the Liberals finally begin to focus on the Conservatives instead of their own leadership they will finally demonstrate that they are ready to govern again. Until then it is much safer for them to be in Opposition.
It is also not appropriate for the Leader of the Opposition to contradict the government during a crisis. That is something the Conservatives do but I would hope that the Liberals have more class and a greater sense of responsibility. So, Mr. Ignatieff's statements were appropriate. When Mr. Ignatieff is sitting in the PM's chair he will be able to put forward government policy and it will be at that point that we as Liberals can critique that position.
I have always been a big believer that there is no use getting myself worked up over things I cannot change. The situation in the Middle East is the epitome of that. Nothing I say or do will change that situation so although I will always have an opinion on what is going on there I will not let those opinions cost me any friendships or remove my focus away from the goal of finally turfing the Harper government.
On one side you have Jason Cherniak essentially giving the Israelis a free pass on everything they do. On the other side you have others, James Curren being one of the most vocal, who have condemned their actions. It has become quite personal at times and Mr. Cherniak has even used his position as an administrator of Liblogs to advance his position using Liblogs.
While watching all of this has given me great moments of mirth it has also left me shaking my head at the shear silliness of it all.
I have my own opinions about what is going on over in Gaza but I have kept them to myself.
The reason is simple. Nothing I say or do will have an iota of an effect on the current or future situation in the Middle East. Further, there is nothing the Canadian government can do to have any effect either.
The Arab-Israeli conflict has been around since 1948. The Israeli-Palestinian conflict has been around in its contemporary form since 1967. With one exception the different sides in these conflicts have not shown any desire to make a lasting, equitable peace. All sides have demonstrated that they have no problem with the current situation. In the case of the Israelis and the Palestinians their leadership decided long ago to accept the death of their people as a price for continuing the status quo. Both sides use their civilian populations as pawns in their little game.
This is not going to change as a result of anything Liberals say for or against either side.
As well, it has been amusing to see how many have expressed disappointment in the statements by Mr. Ignatieff. There have been rumblings about the lateness of his statement and its content.
With regard to its lateness I would just mention that it is inappropriate for the Leader of the Opposition to make a statement about a foreign policy crisis before the government. The real scandal here was how long it took the government to finally make a statement. But of course Liberals pretty much ignored that issue and focused on what Mr. Ignatieff said instead.
When the Liberals finally begin to focus on the Conservatives instead of their own leadership they will finally demonstrate that they are ready to govern again. Until then it is much safer for them to be in Opposition.
It is also not appropriate for the Leader of the Opposition to contradict the government during a crisis. That is something the Conservatives do but I would hope that the Liberals have more class and a greater sense of responsibility. So, Mr. Ignatieff's statements were appropriate. When Mr. Ignatieff is sitting in the PM's chair he will be able to put forward government policy and it will be at that point that we as Liberals can critique that position.
I have always been a big believer that there is no use getting myself worked up over things I cannot change. The situation in the Middle East is the epitome of that. Nothing I say or do will change that situation so although I will always have an opinion on what is going on there I will not let those opinions cost me any friendships or remove my focus away from the goal of finally turfing the Harper government.
Tuesday, December 23, 2008
Stephen Harper and the stench of political death
There is a rather noxious odor coming from 24 Sussux and it is not the smell of the mould that is to be removed during the renovations.
Stephen Harper is looking more and more like a government leader who knows that his days in that position are numbered. It is apparent in the way he is carrying himself and in his actions. Indeed, the similarities between him and Paul Martin after the Brault revelations during the Gomery Inquiry hearings is striking.
After those revelations everybody in this town knew that Mr. Martin would never win another election.
The November economic statement was the beginning of the transformation from political strongman to political has been and the Senate appointments will be what cements Mr. Harper's fate. For the second time in less than a month I heard my co-workers talking about politics today, specifically the Senate appointments, and like a few weeks ago their statements were not at all positive towards Mr. Harper. Mr. Harper, Mr. Manning and other Reformers, God bless them, were very successful in denigrating the Senate in the eyes of Canadians so the stacking of the Senate by one of them, with party bagmen and party hacks, is going to have a much greater impact on public opinion than if a Liberal would have done it. All of the other acts of hypocracy by this government were largely ignored but this last one is going to stick.
Again, like Mr. Martin, I believe Mr. Harper will enjoy a temporary reprieve from the Headman's axe in January but it will be short-lived. The idea of a coalition does not sit well with Canadians and that fact is causing an artificial boost in support for the Conservatives. However, once the "threat" of a coalition disappears at the end of January Conservative Party numbers will catch up to the sudden low standing Stephen Harper enjoys with Canadians. Then, sometime in the spring or summer the Big Three automakers are going to announce massive layoffs AFTER accepting billions in government handouts and that will mark the beginning of the final death spiral of support for the Conservatives. Incidently, those layoffs are going to happen no matter what. The structural problems with the Big Three cannot be solved with tax payers money. It will only be solved by major restructuring and that means lost jobs in the thousands.
Stephen Harper is beyond political redemption. My guess is we will no longer by talking about him during the holiday season of 2009. His own party will either turf him or Canadians will turf him, probably in the Fall of 2009.
Stephen Harper is looking more and more like a government leader who knows that his days in that position are numbered. It is apparent in the way he is carrying himself and in his actions. Indeed, the similarities between him and Paul Martin after the Brault revelations during the Gomery Inquiry hearings is striking.
After those revelations everybody in this town knew that Mr. Martin would never win another election.
The November economic statement was the beginning of the transformation from political strongman to political has been and the Senate appointments will be what cements Mr. Harper's fate. For the second time in less than a month I heard my co-workers talking about politics today, specifically the Senate appointments, and like a few weeks ago their statements were not at all positive towards Mr. Harper. Mr. Harper, Mr. Manning and other Reformers, God bless them, were very successful in denigrating the Senate in the eyes of Canadians so the stacking of the Senate by one of them, with party bagmen and party hacks, is going to have a much greater impact on public opinion than if a Liberal would have done it. All of the other acts of hypocracy by this government were largely ignored but this last one is going to stick.
Again, like Mr. Martin, I believe Mr. Harper will enjoy a temporary reprieve from the Headman's axe in January but it will be short-lived. The idea of a coalition does not sit well with Canadians and that fact is causing an artificial boost in support for the Conservatives. However, once the "threat" of a coalition disappears at the end of January Conservative Party numbers will catch up to the sudden low standing Stephen Harper enjoys with Canadians. Then, sometime in the spring or summer the Big Three automakers are going to announce massive layoffs AFTER accepting billions in government handouts and that will mark the beginning of the final death spiral of support for the Conservatives. Incidently, those layoffs are going to happen no matter what. The structural problems with the Big Three cannot be solved with tax payers money. It will only be solved by major restructuring and that means lost jobs in the thousands.
Stephen Harper is beyond political redemption. My guess is we will no longer by talking about him during the holiday season of 2009. His own party will either turf him or Canadians will turf him, probably in the Fall of 2009.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)