Force an election over the winter months???

[ClusterFreak]

Do so Harper, Layton and Duceppe...and do so at your peril.

Canadians will be so pissed at this, they will return the Martin government with a MAJORITY this time. Canadians are aware and accept a late winter/early spring vote, as Martin has promised. But ask them to drag their asses to the polls when it's minus 15, with two foot snow drifts everywhere....and you fuck with the wrong people.

Martin is far from perfect, so is his government. The alternatives are wholly unacceptable.

To borrow a Dubbya-ism....bring it on.

[CHIMO]

1. I Disagree

The alternatives are unknown and therefore are not unacceptable.

The present path is known by its nature. One has only to examine the direction to see where the present path ends. If one is not inside, then one has to examine things by the nature of the beast. What is it doing that gives one the references for establishing the objectives?

And what is it with forcing an election? If the party in control does not have the confidence with the people then it should not be there. It does not say that if the opposition is not wanted then there should be no election.

If one wants a party to reflect their values then one has to have some values other than a wolf at the door.

[glarius]

2. What we DO KNOW is that Harper went on Fox TV and apologized to

America for Canada not joining the Iraq attack!....If he had been P.M. at that time we would be in that miserable war, and young Canadians would be coming home in body bags....If we elect him now, he would no doubt have us into any other misadventures George Bush is planning in the future....Martin and the Liberals are far more preferable than the Conservatives, IMO.

[CHIMO]

3. I Think

That most Canadians would agree with you, as the conservatives were only able to obtain about 30% of the vote.

However, it is one hell of a life to lead when there is no political party that can win on a positive position.

All we have now is a campaign that will say the wolf is at the door and there may be another wolf inside the door.

Do you see a political party that represents your interests?

[glarius]

4. Actually, I'm satisfied with how the Liberals are running things.

Aside from their current problems with the Sponsorship Program, I think they have done a decent job in government....I really have no serious complaints....

[AX10]

10. I like Paul Martin. I'd take him as our President over Bush.

I hope the best for him and a majority government too!

:kick:

[iverglas]

11. gee, did we deserve to be cursed?

Guess it's just lucky you don't have a vote! I wish you could imagine how creepy it feels to have a foreigner wishing a government on you that you really, really don't want. I want to ask why you hate me.

It's lovely that you like Paul Martin. I'm pretty confident you don't know much of anything about him, but there ya go. You do realize that people who actually understand Canadian politics ... and acknowledge that they understand it ... regard the Martin Liberals as a right-wing party?

Yeah, not right-wing by present-day US standards, where Ronald Reagan would probably be hailed as a lefty liberal. But those aren't the standards that apply. We really just don't spend our time bickering about women's reproductive functions and other people's sex habits and hymnboooks out here in the rest of the world, and by the standards that apply here -- standards that actually have something to do with political economy -- yup: right-wing. I mean, you do know there is an actual left up here, right? And the Liberals aren't it?

Here are some Paul Martin fun and games, for the uninitiated. Think of all the time and money he's had in his life, and how completely devoid of interest in fair trade practices and global warming and the health of people in Africa he has been through the whole thing.

http://www.cbc.ca/disclosure/archives/030401_csl/introduction.html

Paul Martin and his family have successfully navigated CSL through the competitive and cutthroat world of international shipping by going off-shore, setting up shell companies and seeking out tax havens in distant countries. By doing that, Martin has avoided Canadian corporate tax rates and the kind of labour standards he would be expected to uphold as prime minister.

Not to mention how he used Canada's tax laws, while he was Finance Minister, to create and protect those little tax havens for himself ... while those steamships were supposedly in one of those blind trust thingies ...

http://www.cbc.ca/disclosure/archives/030401_csl/tax.html

In 1992, a year before he became Finance Minister, CSL set up five companies in Liberia, Africa, a tax haven of choice in the offshore shipping business. ... And while CSL was setting up its shell companies in Liberia, Canada’s Auditor General was trying to shut down those kinds of tax havens. Denis Desautels said they were costing the government hundreds of millions of dollars ... .

In 1994, the new Finance Minister, Paul Martin, took action: “Certain Canadian corporations are not paying an appropriate level of tax,” Martin said in his budge speech. “Accordingly, we are taking measures to prevent companies from using foreign affiliates to avoid paying Canadian taxes which are otherwise due.”

But Martin didn’t shut down all the tax havens. Across the Atlantic, he kept Barbados open, and that’s exactly where CSL went next. ...

Yeesh. The stink of corruption is gagging me.

Lots and lots to read and see there. And a lot of it should look familiar to a resident of another country being governed by a corrupt rich-boy scion of financial empire.

[IntravenousDemilo]

33. Yes, but...

The current prime minister is not the prime minister who kept us out of Iraq. I'm not convinced that we wouldn't be there had Martin been the prime minister. He does tend to suck up to the US administration more than his predecessor.

On the other hand, Jack Layton and Gilles Duceppe were the two party leaders running this time who last time who were on record as being against involvement. Those two we know for certain. Martin I'm still not sure of; there are times I just wish he wouldn't bend over and grasp his ankles every time the president of the United States undoes his belt buckle.

You sound very much like someone who would just prefer to see the NDP go away. You must realize that in minority government situations, the NDP has been the only thing preventing the Liberals from acting like Conservatives. I still want to see the LIberals returned to power, but with an unassailable and definite NDP balance of power that will keep the government in line and behaving like Liberals.

[glarius]

35. I don't know why you think I feel that way about the NDP

I have voted for them in the past....I'm just worried that Harper will get in, that's all....I don't think Martin has been what we expected he would be either, but he's certainly better than Harper and his right wingers as far as I'm concerned...:)

[Spazito]

5. Agree, there is simply no benefit to the NDP to cooperate

in forcing Canadians to the polls in February when there will be an election come March or April anyway. Up until this decision, I gave Layton full credit for the decisions he has made in working with the Liberals and forcing them to lean more left. It brought up the NDP party's credibility with Canadians, not enough to elect them as the governing party as yet but definitely closer.

With this decision, he will now be seen as aligning his party with the faux Cons and the Bloc instead and for what benefit? It makes no sense politically, imo.

[V. Kid]

25. I disagree...

...the NDP risks looking too much like the Liberals if they continiously cooperate with them, while getting nothing for it. Besides which, those who buy the "strategic voting" argument, but have no knowledge about the seats they live in, will likely leave the NDP and vote Liberal to "stop the Conservaties" without thinking about the consquences. The NDP needs easy to understand wedge issues with the Liberals, and if the NDP believes in public health care, but gets such pathetic offers from the Liberals to stop it (which they did), the NDP can't remain credible on the issue of health care and stick with the Liberals. Therefore it was prudent for Layton to pull the plug, otherwise Martin could've just said, "you agree with us", "we share the same values", "NDP voters, support me to stop the EVIL Conservatives".

[Spazito]

26. The reason, imo, the NDP's numbers have gone up is precisely

because he was forcing the Liberals to lean left, forced a more socially oriented budget on them, etc. By now aligning himself and his party with the Bloc and The faux Cons, he runs a very real risk of reducing that gained support come voting day. Canadians, by a two to one margin, do NOT want a Jan or Feb election and tend to be cranky when forced into one. When cranky, they look at whom to blame and the NDP will share any blame attributed, imo, and again, for what political gain?

[V. Kid]

27. I don't think that's the point though...

...you can only work with people so long as they're willing to work with you. Yes, the NDP wasn't able to push the Liberals further to the left, but they didn't offer them anything to do that with so what could the NDP have done, accepted a lame offer that really didn't do anything to protect the public health care system? It would have been better to have gotten something from the Liberals, but the NDP's position is weaker now that Desjarlais left, and that Chuck Cadman is dead and Martin has dithered in calling a by-election. The BQ/Con combination outnumbers the Libs/NDP anyways, and the Indps in the house will likely side with the BQ/Cons out of spite for their former parties. Jack Layton has less pull on Martin, so yes he has to set himself up to look better in the next campaign.

Besides which, why would the voters be happy with the Liberals next election? Because they had to vote in December or January? They don't pay attention to politics often anyways, so why would they all the sudden be put out when a campaign is held during those months. I think this is a tempest in a tea pot. Will the average person say to the Liberals, yes we still think your corrupt, yes you haven't really done anything on health care etc, yes your long in the tooth, but you did promise to have an election in April so yes will vote for you? I think people think all politicians are relativley corrupt, and won't care. I think far too many people who are a bit more intuinted to politics who are liberals are obsessed with the EVIL Conservatives (and don't get me wrong I wouldn't vote for them if I was paid too), to the point of thinking that if you even say something nice about one of them your accepting their agenda. But to think thats going to be a vote determining issue is wrong imo, people tune out alot of the name calling if it isn't a substntive fear. As far as Joe and Jane Canadian is concerned they're all relativley corrupt some more then others, and Paul Martin ain't no saint. In fact most of the polls show that Canadians by a majority think he and Jean Chretien are equally to blame for the sponsership scandal.

[Spazito]

29. Canadian voters, by and large, are centrists and pragmatists

not idealists. The Gomery commission, the scandal, etc, were dealt with, in the voters' minds, during the last election when they dealt the Liberals a blow by not giving them another majority government. Much as many would like to see the scandal as the top issue in the voter's mind while in the ballot box, it isn't, as all polls are showing. Universal health care is at key issue and between the two parties seen as capable of governing, the Liberals are seen as, marginally, the party that will be more likely to maintain universal health care over the faux Cons who are for privatization.

The simple and blunt fact is most Canadians see only two viable parties capable of governing, the Liberals and the faux Conservatives. The NDP, while raising their profile during this current session, are still not seen as a viable alternative equal to the Liberals or the faux Conservatives and wishing it were so won't make it so. The NDP are still at 22% of voters who will vote for them in the upcoming election just as they have been in the low 20s over the years.

Because of that inability or intractability of the Canadian voter to see the NDP as a third alternative, however one wishes to define it, the end result of the forced early election will be either a minority Liberal or minority faux Conservative government, with a Liberal minority being the most likely, imo.

Results from last election

National Election Results
LIB 135 36.7 %
CON 99 29.6 %
BLOC 54 12.4 %
NDP 19 15.7 %
GRN 0 4.3 %
IND 1 0.5 %

Most recent poll numbers:

The poll, obtained by Canadian Press Wednesday, also shows how Canadians are likely to vote:

33 per cent would back the Liberals
26 per cent would support the Conservatives
22 per cent would vote for the NDP
13 per cent would pick the Bloc Quebecois

When one checks previous polling history, when polls are taken before the writ is dropped, the NDP numbers seem to be higher but, once the writ is dropped and the closer to voting day, the NDP numbers drop closer to their norm as seen in the previous election results. A signifigant number of voters do decide to vote strategically especially in a close election.

[V. Kid]

30. Again your missing the point about political posturing and malaise...

..., but your talk about the ideology of Canadians is irrelevent. Do I think most people are extremists? No, of course no it's not even something I was discussing so I don't know what your point is in relating polling history and how the Liberals are nice and fuzzy? Which btw, I disagree with, but won't get into as its not really the point I wished to make. I think people vote for whomever presents themselves as reasonable during the situation at hand, whether or not they actually are reasonable though isn't particularly important.

In any case what I'm refering to is malaise and political positioning for the next election. People thought Paul Martin was going to be a saviour, he was riding at around 50% in the polls before he took over for Jean Chretien, and he scared the right so much in the country that he forced them to "unite" (1 + 1 = 1.2 ;-)), but with the sponsership scandal it simply re-enforced the view of those 60% - 65% who wouldn't vote Liberal into the anti-Liberal camp by being dissapointed by the Liberals and Paul Martin. The Liberals will not get a majority this time, and it will be difficult for them to improve on the 136 seat total, because people are tired with them, but they haven't coalesced to the point of supporting one party capable of defeating them. Because so many people do vote based on a "lesser of two evils" approach, and don't consider local dynamics, the NDP isn't going to win next time, but I already know this so I don't really know what your point is. Do I think the sponsership scandal will be the main issue that the Bloc, and Conservatives want it to be? No, its boring outside of Quebec.

Do I think Health Care will be a major issue? Yes. Now there will be a lot of naive people, or cynical people, who will say I geuss I have to vote Liberal. But these people are hard to disloge anyways. What the NDP was doing, even though it was difficult and somewhat awkward, was point out that the Liberals are not going to be doing anything to protect it by rejecting a weak offer. The Liberals will say yes we are protecting it, and the NDP is proposing un-workable strategies, but it's not important for the NDP to worry about what the Liberals are going to say in that regard, as obviously the Liberals are trying to gain votes for themselves. What the NDP is trying to do is prevent too many of their current supporters in the 18-22% range from bleeding to the Liberals by pointing out how useless the Liberals are. The NDP needs an easy wedge issue, that seems reasonable, and since the Liberals are the incumbents, time isn't on their side in being able to continiously use their old tricks. So while the Liberals will say "strategically vote", the NDP is trying to counter that, and people will only strategically vote so many times. None of the parties are in it to help each other per say, and I know your not saying this, but I find it corny that so many people are saying that they essentially should be just to keep out the EVIL *shrill scream* Conservatives out of power. Besides, the Conservatives are stupid, they do a good enough job of that themselves -- just take a look at what they do in opposition, that should be easy, and they can't even do that...so they aren't going to win.

BTW, its not so much that I disagree with everything that your saying, and I'm not trying to sound like a dick, I just wanted to make sure I was at least somewhat clear, as I realize my last post was a little garbled with typos and spelling errors (although I'm never a good speller and often don't care about spell checking :-)).

[Spazito]

31. I must admit I am totally lost as to what you are saying

I still am not understanding what political gain the NDP will get by siding with the Bloc and the faux Cons versus the risk of being seen as partially to blame for an early elections Canadians clearly do not want. If the NDP isn't doing this for political gain, what is the reason they are doing this?

[V. Kid]

32. Yes, they're doing this for political gain...

...which isn't automatically bad. While some people think siding with the Liberals is the default position that Canadians want, most people side with the Liberals because they don't have anything else to side with. The NDP is "siding with the" "faux Cons" and Bloc, because the Liberals offered a poor deal on Health Care. What Ujjal Dosanjh offered to Jack Layton, wouldn't have been a substantive offer to stop the privitization of Health Care. Therefore, the NDP couldn't have accepted the offer. And while a few bloggers, and internet posters might be annoyed about this, that's not relevent.

[Logiola]

6. -15.. i wish :D

[Bassic]

7. Frankly...

If we're dumb enough to look past one of the worst cases of corruption in canadian history just because we're too fuckin' lazy to go vote in the snow, then we deserve a majority liberal government.

(Don't get me wrong I'm no Conservative, but I think minority liberal government is the best we can hope for right now).

[ClusterFreak]

8. What would a ruling political party, what would a ruling government be...

....without corruption.

It happens to all governments, all the time, everywhere.

So, if the worst we got is a small but determined band of thieves who have now been exposed to the world...then so be it. Besides that, we have a strong economy, a large budget surplus, and the respect of the rest of the world for not being Dubbya's lickspittle and following him into his Iraq misadventure. If it's ever shown that Paul Martin and/or other currently sitting high-level officials or aides were also involved in the sponsorship scandal clusterfuck....then off with all their heads. Sadly, the opposition parties just can't wait to find out.

[Bassic]

14. True that corruption goes hand in hand with power

And the fact that most of the culprits have either been caught or are safely tucked away, sometimes emerging to call the rest of us names... is a good thing and are the reason the Libs still qualify.

The problem, however, is t hat the Libs have been there for so long, there's bound to be other horror stories such as this one. There's a real culture of entitlement within the party, and many of them have no qualms about milking their positions for all they are worth. Take Radwansky and Dingwall for example.

But, of course, the Cons would surely be a much poorer choice.

What's a canadian to do?

[ClusterFreak]

17. It's a sad reality isn't it...

...It would be lovely to be able to look to the Liberals with great pride and optimism....instead it's a situation where we look at the Liberals, then look around at the others, and then say "Well, at least the Liberals won't suck up to Uncle Sam, try to privatize everything within reach, or spend all our money. **Sigh** Let's vote for them. **Sigh** "

Maybe the current scare being put into the Liberals will take some of the starch out of their smug sense of entitlement? It would be nice....but I'm not counting on it.:dilemma:

[Bassic]

18. Niether am I really

I guess I'll do like I usually do and decide who I vote for when I have the ballot in front of me.

[ClusterFreak]

19. Don't forget to bring a clothes-pin for your nose!!

B-)

[Bassic]

20. Right, I'll remember

;)

[AX10]

9. And May Paul Martin be elected to a majority government!

Go Paul Go. Paul's not perfect, but I like him. He has taken a ton of heat for standing up to Bushco. If the NDP (the so called party of the left) wants to join forces with the Canuck-Neo Cons, then the NDP doesn't deserve to in power (via the coalition government).

"Canadians will be so pissed at this, they will return the Martin
government with a MAJORITY!" I hope so!

160 seats for the Liberals is good by me!

:kick:

[iverglas]

12. oh well

I was trying to be gentle, but that kinda put paid to that.


the NDP (the so called party of the left)

Maybe you can tell me where I've been going wrong for these 35 years or so. "So called", eh? You got a better term for it?


He has taken a ton of heat for standing up to Bushco.

Really? From whom? The majority of Canadians who opposed Canadian participation in the invasion of Iraq, for instance?

Has Martin excercised any LEADERSHIP in all this standing up? Or has he done what politicos of his ilk always do: follow noisily?

Rhetorical question.

[glarius]

13. 160 seats would be nice!

A majority Liberal Government should work out just fine!...:)

[Mother Jones]

15. Do you understand what you are REALLY saying?

Seriously.

Paul Martin is more aligned with Bush than you are aware. Unfortunately, the media isn't doing a good enough job in exposing this. (other than on the issue softwood and missile defense)

As a Liberal, even I don't want a majority Liberal govt!!!
Not with Paul Martin at the helm.

There is no real threat of the NDP "joining forces" with the cons in any serious way, other than perhaps election timing, which is no biggie and hardly a reason to stop supporting them.

[Swede]

16. The NDP will regret this.

They have a compliant Liberal government now. Layton looks like Harper,he wants his cake and eat it too.

[Lautremont]

21. But I wonder: why shouldn't Layton want his cake and eat it too?

I agree with a poster farther up: there's going to be an election anyway, and if the people of Canada allow the fact that it's happening in winter rather than spring change their vote for them, shifting it inexplicably rightward as has been repeatedly posited here, then we deserve what we get. If you live in Canada and can't handle a little snow on election day, then I don't know what.

[Telly Savalas]

23. The NDP is the "so called party of the Left"?

What are you talking about?

[V. Kid]

28. Oh, I should have said this earlier...

...but I think your imposing your view of politics, an American one, on the Canadian system. Sorry, but it's no where near the same up here. In the US there are ONLY TWO viable parties, in Canada that's not the case. Please inform yourself about the situation before commenting on it, I appreciate that your intrested in it, but your quite confused.

[HamiltonHabs32]

22. I'll be donating my 75 cents

To the Green party.

I think thats right.. for every vote they get 75cents?

[V. Kid]

24. By the time people vote...

...important issues will concern them. No one will give a rats behind about the fact that they had to vote in December or January. People aren't that stupid. And if they are, they deserve whatever goverment they get. But since they aren't they'll be voting on the issues, such as Health Care, ethics, enviroment, the economy etc.

[CHIMO]

34. Gamblers Take Note

Klein says Harper seen as 'too much on the right,' predicts another Liberal minority
Last Updated Wed, 23 Nov 2005 20:13:32 EST
CBC News

Premier Ralph Klein is predicting another Liberal minority government - two weeks after he offered to campaign for his federal counterparts.

Klein, on a speaking tour of eastern Canada, was asked in Halifax on Wednesday whether he expects to see a shift in power in Ottawa after the next federal election - widely expected to launch next week after the Conservatives introduce a no-confidence motion.

"If I were a betting man, I would say there would be another minority," he said. "It's a damn shame.

"Maybe the Conservatives would make some gains, but unfortunately, I don't think they're going to do well in Ontario. Maybe I'm wrong. I hope I'm wrong."

http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/national/2005/11/23/klein051123.html

King Ralph has lost his golden political touch

- Still smarting from being Martin's whipping boy, Klein grudgingly attended only the first day of the three-day First Ministers' conference on health care in September. Even at that, Klein left early from a pre-summit dinner at 24 Sussex Drive; he was later spotted gambling at a casino in Hull, Que. After three days of hard bargaining, the First Ministers agreed to a deal that will boost federal health care funding by $41 billion over the next 10 years. Back in Alberta, Klein was asked for his thoughts. Sounding positively Garbo-esque, the premier said, "I don't want anything. I want to be left alone."

http://www.macleans.ca/topstories/politics/article.jsp?content=20041101_91428_91428

Sounds like just the kind of guy you would sit down and have a beer with. Now where have we heard this before.
No wonder Harper ain't too friendly with the guy.