Stephen Harper After 5 Years

[Ark2]

Originally Posted by calculoso

Create a compromise agenda with people who reject each and every thing before it is even proposed? Pretty tall order.

I think that people need to understand that a minority government is not about compromise. It's about scoring political points at every available opportunity.

[redforever]

Originally Posted by WilsonFourTwo

I'll say one more thing. Now that PM Harper has established control in the Senate, I expect (demand) that Senate reform by at the absolute top of the legislative agenda. It's the moment many (most) westerners have waited a lifetime for. Make it happen.

Don't forget that there is very little you can do to reform the Senate without opening up talks to revise our present Constitution.

The PM of the day could agree to accept candidates elected in the provinces, and the PM of the day could perhaps get the cooperation of the present Senators to only serve 8 year terms. But the PM or ruling party of the day can not enforce that, only suggest it.

However, to get a true Triple E Senate requires the Amending Formula as it reads in our present Constitution, 7/10 provinces have to agree with 65% of Canada's population represented.

And some will say, just abolish the Senate. Well you can't do that either without using the amending formula.

Right now, there is no appetite to open the present Constitution and amend it.

[flamesfever]

I think Harper's biggest contribution is his handling of the economy during a very difficult and scary time. I also believe that his Finance Minister, Jim Flaherty has done an outstanding job, and is to the Conservatives what Paul Martin was to the Liberals. I believe that reducing taxes on corporations to stimulate employment is the correct way to go, contrary to what the other parties seem to think...especially the NDP. My biggest fear is that the Liberals will form a coalition with the NDP in order to gain power, and we'll all suffer for it...especially Ontario.

Things like the TFSA and allowing retired couples to average their income will be, and is, a huge benefit for Canadians.

Also I think the Conservatives steps to maintain our sovereignty over the North, and upgrading our military is necessary and well timed.

I remember being impressed by Harper when he came to my house as a young aspiring polititian many many years ago. When you consider all the things he has gone through since then to get where he is, I believe he has to be a truly amazing and gifted individual.

[Cheese]

Originally Posted by flamesfever

I think Harper's biggest contribution is his handling of the economy during a very difficult and scary time. I also believe that his Finance Minister, Jim Flaherty has done an outstanding job, and is to the Conservatives what Paul Martin was to the Liberals. I believe that reducing taxes on corporations to stimulate employment is the correct way to go, contrary to what the other parties seem to think...especially the NDP. My biggest fear is that the Liberals will form a coalition with the NDP in order to gain power, and we'll all suffer for it...especially Ontario.

Things like the TFSA and allowing retired couples to average their income will be, and is, a huge benefit for Canadians.

Also I think the Conservatives steps to maintain our sovereignty over the North, and upgrading our military is necessary and well timed.

I remember being impressed by Harper when he came to my house as a young aspiring polititian many many years ago. When you consider all the things he has gone through since then to get where he is, I believe he has to be a truly amazing and gifted individual.

Again, how can Harper be congratulated for how he handled the recession? The Conservatives werent going to do a damned thing until the other parties basically strong armed them into spending. Jim Flaherty is a pompous a$$ just like Harper.

[John Doe]

Originally Posted by Ark2

I think that people need to understand that a minority government is not about compromise. It's about scoring political points at every available opportunity.

I hope you are being sarcastic and I really hope that you are not actively involved in politics because this is wrong in so many ways.

First of all, any government (minority or not) should be about governing. There are many other countries in the world who have minority governments (e.g. England, Israel). Are you suggesting that their main focus should be to "score political points"?

Secondly, we get the government that we deserve. If we elect liars and cheats, then that is exactly who we deserve. If we elect good people who become liars and cheats once they get to Ottawa, then they are exactly who we deserve to get since we put up with them. If we elect politicians whose main purpose is to score points at every opportunity, then they are who we deserve. For us as a society to put up with these kinds of leaders is bad enough, but to suggest that this is acceptable or even the correct behavior is reprehensible.

Finally, until there is a game changer (merger of parties, rise of new party, etc.) it looks like there will most likely be minority governments for the foreseeable future. We need for our governments to carry out the will of our country, and not simply to do what is best for their respective political parties.

[Tinordi]

Originally Posted by flamesfever

I think Harper's biggest contribution is his handling of the economy during a very difficult and scary time. I also believe that his Finance Minister, Jim Flaherty has done an outstanding job, and is to the Conservatives what Paul Martin was to the Liberals. I believe that reducing taxes on corporations to stimulate employment is the correct way to go, contrary to what the other parties seem to think...especially the NDP. My biggest fear is that the Liberals will form a coalition with the NDP in order to gain power, and we'll all suffer for it...especially Ontario.

Things like the TFSA and allowing retired couples to average their income will be, and is, a huge benefit for Canadians.

Also I think the Conservatives steps to maintain our sovereignty over the North, and upgrading our military is necessary and well timed.

I remember being impressed by Harper when he came to my house as a young aspiring polititian many many years ago. When you consider all the things he has gone through since then to get where he is, I believe he has to be a truly amazing and gifted individual.

Please cite specific policies the Conservatives undertook to handle the recession.

This is one of the biggest myths in Canadian politics, that somehow the Conservatives are good at economic policy. They rode the strong regulatory framework implemented by the Liberals of all people to avoid the deep recession.

THe only things I can think of are the GST cut (bad policy), income trust (no real effect on the whole economy), revising CMHC rules (sure but done after the fact and there's still record levels of housing debt).

[Ark2]

Originally Posted by John Doe

I hope you are being sarcastic and I really hope that you are not actively involved in politics because this is wrong in so many ways.

First of all, any government (minority or not) should be about governing. There are many other countries in the world who have minority governments (e.g. England, Israel). Are you suggesting that their main focus should be to "score political points"?

Secondly, we get the government that we deserve. If we elect liars and cheats, then that is exactly who we deserve. If we elect good people who become liars and cheats once they get to Ottawa, then they are exactly who we deserve to get since we put up with them. If we elect politicians whose main purpose is to score points at every opportunity, then they are who we deserve. For us as a society to put up with these kinds of leaders is bad enough, but to suggest that this is acceptable or even the correct behavior is reprehensible.

Finally, until there is a game changer (merger of parties, rise of new party, etc.) it looks like there will most likely be minority governments for the foreseeable future. We need for our governments to carry out the will of our country, and not simply to do what is best for their respective political parties.

Good grief pal, of course I was being sarcastic. That being said, politicians that are more interested in scoring political points then they are in cooperating with each other is exactly what we currently have.

I will also say though, you are absolutely right about getting what we want when it comes to political leaders. People don't want honest politicians. In a debate, ask a politician a question that he isn't prepared for and he will give you some political speak that doesn't address the actual question asked. People will roll their eyes and say something like "that's a politician for you" and that will be the end of it. On the other hand, if a politician is asked a question that he isn't prepared for and he responds by saying that he doesn't know, well, that's the end of his political career right there. Ask a politician about his personal beliefs, and he'll likely lie and offer some response in an attempt to not make any waves and appeal to everyone. On the other hand, should he answer honestly and tell you what he truly believes in, people that don't agree with his personal beliefs will fear him. We want agreeable liars that tell us what we want to hear, regardless of whether or not we believe them, and that's exactly what we get.

[flamesfever]

Originally Posted by Cheese

Again, how can Harper be congratulated for how he handled the recession? The Conservatives werent going to do a damned thing until the other parties basically strong armed them into spending. Jim Flaherty is a pompous a$$ just like Harper.

Perhaps they may not have spent quite as much, without the pressure from other parties. However, as you are aware, the Conservatives were faced with sudden rapidly deteriorating world financial conditions, and as Canada was a member of the G7, and the Conservatives were the ruling party, they participated in stabilizing those conditions. Spending was a part of that effort, regardless of what was going on politically in Canada at the time.

I congratulate you people from Ontario for having such wisdom in electing your politicians over the years.

[flamesfever]

Originally Posted by Tinordi

Please cite specific policies the Conservatives undertook to handle the recession.

1. Canadian Skill and Transition Strategy - support for workers to find jobs

2. Tax credits and spending initiatives to stumulate housing construction

3. Infrastructure stimulus eg. Home Renovation Plan

4. Targeted support for the auto, forestry and manufacturing sectors

[mikey_the_redneck]

Be it the Liberals or Conservatives, I just want the fed's to chip away at the national debt.

As others have mentioned, I also like how Harper is interested in protecting and defining our northern territory, and trying to maintain sovereignty up there.

If there are large oil reserves under the north, it could come in handy to generate revenue and pay down the national debt, and provide stable energy in the decades to come.

[Cheese]

Originally Posted by flamesfever

Perhaps they may not have spent quite as much, without the pressure from other parties. However, as you are aware, the Conservatives were faced with sudden rapidly deteriorating world financial conditions, and as Canada was a member of the G7, and the Conservatives were the ruling party, they participated in stabilizing those conditions. Spending was a part of that effort, regardless of what was going on politically in Canada at the time.

I congratulate you people from Ontario for having such wisdom in electing your politicians over the years.

LOL...your right, we should simply close our eyes and blindly vote Conservative every election!

[flamesfever]

Originally Posted by Cheese

LOL...your right, we should simply close our eyes and blindly vote Conservative every election!

That appears to me what many people from Ontario are doing when it comes to voting for the Federal Liberals or the NDP.

The myth that Harper is a scary person that is going to change Canada into something dreadful has been dispelled.

[Blaster86]

Originally Posted by flamesfever

The myth that Harper is a scary person that is going to change Canada into something dreadful has been dispelled.

No. No it hasn't. Everyone (Harper included) realizes that he cannot do anything even remotely neo-conesque and unpopular while ruling with a minority. Canada is still afraid to give him a majority and there has been nothing to show that this has changed or that this will change. People do not trust him, and rightfully so and the moment he does anything he will be out of office very quickly.

[burn_this_city]

Troops with guns on our streets!

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Blaster86

No. No it hasn't. Everyone (Harper included) realizes that he cannot do anything even remotely neo-conesque and unpopular while ruling with a minority. Canada is still afraid to give him a majority and there has been nothing to show that this has changed or that this will change. People do not trust him, and rightfully so and the moment he does anything he will be out of office very quickly.

Please, I'm interested, I'd like to see proof of this neo conservative evil unpopular nazi agenda, and please compare it to the polls that were recently released that show that people have greater trust in Harper as a Prime Minister compared to Ignatief, and Layton.

I tend to think that this Harper is a boogie man theory is a really well crafted piece of fictional literature created by the Liberals and the truly desperate.

[Blaster86]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

Please, I'm interested, I'd like to see proof of this neo conservative evil unpopular nazi agenda,

I never said either evil or nazi. I implied he has an agenda similar to that of George W. Bush and I don't think you'd find many people who disagree with that or many Canadians that approve of that.

It's not like Harper has hid this fact either. Much like Day, it is something he campaigns on, and I think that is what keeps him out of a majority.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Blaster86

I never said either evil or nazi. I implied he has an agenda similar to that of George W. Bush and I don't think you'd find many people who disagree with that or many Canadians that approve of that.

It's not like Harper has hid this fact either. Much like Day, it is something he campaigns on, and I think that is what keeps him out of a majority.

Show me this agenda, compare it to George W Bush. Show me the proof of the execution of this agenda.

What has he campaigned on that shows this neo conservative agenda?

I'm just really interested, because I don't see it.

The only thing that you could really argue was that Harper wanted to join the war in Iraq, but then again you could accuse our esteemed Liberal leader of the same thing.

In fact, I tend to think that if we were scared of hidden agenda's we should probably look at Ignatieff who is campaigning as a completely different guy then he was when he lived in the states.

Frankly this whole conservative hidden agenda thing is the last gasp campaign strategy by the Liberal party that has nothing else to campaign on.

I don't see Harper taking away woman's rights, or bringing back the death penalty, or segregating and kicking out legal immigrants.

[Blaster86]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

Show me this agenda, compare it to George W Bush. Show me the proof of the execution of this agenda.

That's my point, he can't execute it without being voted out of office.

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

What has he campaigned on that shows this neo conservative agenda?

Campaigning against Gay marriage back in 2005, pushing for an extended term in Afghanistan, attempting to shut down the in-site.

After getting into office he backed off on two of those for reasons stated above imo.

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

The only thing that you could really argue was that Harper wanted to join the war in Iraq, but then again you could accuse our esteemed Liberal leader of the same thing.

Which one? Chretien said NO U

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

In fact, I tend to think that if we were scared of hidden agenda's we should probably look at Ignatieff who is campaigning as a completely different guy then he was when he lived in the states.

There's a reason people don't like Ignatieff. It's not like I am implying that Harper would suddenly change us over to a theocratic state by getting a Majority, but I do think his policies would deviate a lot further to the right.

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

Frankly this whole conservative hidden agenda thing is the last gasp campaign strategy by the Liberal party that has nothing else to campaign on.

I honestly don't even see it as a 'hidden' agenda. I see it as an agenda is quite open to the public and the public doesn't really like what it sees, but likes what Harper can do in a minority setting since he really is the best of the worst.

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

I don't see Harper taking away woman's rights, or bringing back the death penalty, or segregating and kicking out legal immigrants.

Neither do I, but I do see gay marriage being looked at again, and things like drug laws becoming more draconian and in-line with the US' war on drugs.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Blaster86

That's my point, he can't execute it without being voted out of office.

Even if he got a majority trying to enact those things would lead to the destruction of the Conservative Party for decades in the election.

Originally Posted by Blaster86

Campaigning against Gay marriage back in 2005, pushing for an extended term in Afghanistan, attempting to shut down the in-site.

I don't see the extension of the tour of Afghanistan as neo conservative agenda. Gay marriage sure, I can agree with that one, but he's even stated since then that its not something thats going to be re-opened for debate. Attempting to shut down in-site what?

Originally Posted by Blaster86

After getting into office he backed off on two of those for reasons stated above imo.

So he's a fair weather neo-con then? Is that what you're saying. First and foremost Harper is a politician so I doubt that he's going to move anything through thats going to destroy his party or its continued leadership of this country.

Originally Posted by Blaster86

Which one? Chretien said NO U

Ignatieff said yes he would have gone.

Originally Posted by Blaster86

There's a reason people don't like Ignatieff. It's not like I am implying that Harper would suddenly change us over to a theocratic state by getting a Majority, but I do think his policies would deviate a lot further to the right.

I don't see that, Harper at his nastiest would be slightly right of center in the grand scheme of things.

Originally Posted by Blaster86

I honestly don't even see it as a 'hidden' agenda. I see it as an agenda is quite open to the public and the public doesn't really like what it sees, but likes what Harper can do in a minority setting since he really is the best of the worst.

Yet recent polls show that you're wrong. At the moment he's hovering in majority territory, and in terms of individual leaders its not even close. Harper's road block to a majority resides with Quebec and its the same with the Libs as well as they are counter opposite to most Canadian's in terms of their political views.

And I have yet to see anything out in the open that screams radical right to me.

Originally Posted by Blaster86

Neither do I, but I do see gay marriage being looked at again, and things like drug laws becoming more draconian and in-line with the US' war on drugs.

I don't see Gay Marriage ever being opened up again, and I believe that Harper even plainly stated that after the last debate about it in commons. Just as he said he wouldn't re-open the death penalty debate again, but people didn't hear that because they were gasping when he would be in favor of executing special cases like Olson and Bernardo.

I don't see Canada's drug policy changing in terms of enacting a war on drugs like the U.S., A Harper knows we can't afford it, and B he knows that there would be a backlash that could cost him votes.

I do wish that they would soften on the grass issue, but there needs to be more study on the effectiveness on that first.

[MarchHare]

That appears to me what many people from Ontario are doing when it comes to voting for the Federal Liberals or the NDP.

It's a myth that Ontario blindly votes for the Liberals. Ontario is very much a "swing" province; in fact, currently Ontario has more Conservative MPs than Liberals, and the vote split in the last election was 39% CPC, 34% Lib, 18% NDP.

BTW, there was only one province where a single party garnered more than 60% of the vote. I'm pretty sure you don't need me to tell you which province and party that was.