2011 Canadian Election Thread

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by Slava

Fair enough, but 5 weeks of "beware the coalition" is going to old pretty fast. Already at a presser this morning he was being asked about 2004...so you have to wonder when they change the strategy into something that actually matters?

For those who say that the Liberals have no plan or vision could you just enlighten me as to the plan/vision of Harper and his cronies? A 5 year majority based on a few tax credits for kids in art doesn't capture my imagination for some reason...

I'd say that the Cons can campaign on the economy just fine...as Canada weathered it much better than everyone else in the G8 as an example.

What does Ignatieff have? Lemme guess...."enough is enough"?

[Iowa_Flames_Fan]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

As I said, Harper has consistently outmaneuvered the opposition. I agree that he wanted the election, but he wanted the opposition to force it. He got what he wanted, so the anger of Canadians who don't want to trudge to the polls works in his favour. The opposition's attempts to set this up as an ethics debate has been undermined by the coalition spectre (for now, at least), and as CC notes, Harper can paint the picture that it was the opposition who wasn't willing to work to work with him.

Say what you will about his policies, Harper knows his politics.

You're bang on. And as FlamesAddiction says, I suppose I should hate the player and not the game. Harper is operating several levels above any of his opponents right now, which is frustrating to see.

[Slava]

Well for starters the reason that we got a stimulus package was because of the oppoisition. Harper said he wouldn't run a deficit at all, so who's the real economic steward?

More importantly though, I hope this link works. Pretty much game, set, match!

http://bit.ly/hUrP2T

[McG]

Originally Posted by Slava

Fair enough, but 5 weeks of "beware the coalition" is going to old pretty fast. Already at a presser this morning he was being asked about 2004...so you have to wonder when they change the strategy into something that actually matters?

For those who say that the Liberals have no plan or vision could you just enlighten me as to the plan/vision of Harper and his cronies? A 5 year majority based on a few tax credits for kids in art doesn't capture my imagination for some reason...

http://www.budget.gc.ca/2011/home-accueil-eng.html

they are the government party. they have to deliver in fact, not fiction or even policy concepts. but realistically, i have to believe that you understand economic issues better than reducing recovery from global recession to a sound bite about tax credits for kids in art.

in fact, imo one of the really good tax credits on many levels is the tax credit for children in sporting activities. great plan and i wish it was higher than $500.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Slava

Fair enough, but 5 weeks of "beware the coalition" is going to old pretty fast. Already at a presser this morning he was being asked about 2004...so you have to wonder when they change the strategy into something that actually matters?

For those who say that the Liberals have no plan or vision could you just enlighten me as to the plan/vision of Harper and his cronies? A 5 year majority based on a few tax credits for kids in art doesn't capture my imagination for some reason...

We're 2 days into the campaign, and the opening salvo that the Conservatives were going to use was the threat of a coalition, today Harper I thought fairly effectively talked about 2004 and put Duceppe on the spot a bit.

I've had a lot of problems with the contempt of parliament issue. If you go back to the Liberal government under Chretien where he did similar things, tried to hide his scandals like Shawnigate and regularly canceled opposition days, the only reason why things like a contempt charge weren't bought about was because the Liberal's had a majority government.

Sadly whatever party is going to run the government your going to get the same kind of scandals, the same kind of bs hiding of project and policy information costs and the same kind of external attempts at influence peddling. In terms of this on the latest charges against the Lawyer and the escort Harper bought in the RCMP to investigate it which we and he knew would bring it into the open. Harper can point to that one and a couple of other RCMP investigations during this election as illustrations of attempting to shut down illicit influence peddling and lobbying.

In the weeks to come Harper is going to roll out a number of things to attack the Liberals and NDP

1) He's going to go to the budget and attack Layton because whether it was a strategy or as someone weirdly pointed out an undemocratic move to control parliament, the Conservatives did embed NDP wishes into the budget, so whether it was an attempt to gently force an election is irrelevant on the campaign trail.

2) We know that Harper is going to attack the BPO over their calculations on the F35 program and the tough on crime costs.

3) Harper is starting to go after Ducceppe over his roll and supposed changing story in 2004.

4) They will attack Ignatieff for refusing to work with the minority government and again point to the fact that they were willing to negotiate on the budget as they did with the NDP.

5) They will go after the Bloc's attempted blackmail of Canada with the demand for cash and show that the conservatives were willing to lose power instead of folding to the bloc.

6) They will go after Ignatieff over his stupid promise of a hockey arena in Quebec in exchange for votes.

7) They'll go after Ignatieff on his statements about taxation

8) They'll go after the Liberals about forcing another wasteful election.

Its great that Ignatieff is all relaxed and looks comfortable on day 2. But he is still a very experienced guy, he's not saying anything thats concrete about why a Liberal government needs to be elected, he's falling into the same trap that the two previous liberal leaders have utilized to failure, in the whole vote for us because the Conservatives are scary, and I don't know if that strategy will do well for the Liberal's because I think voters will be pissed that an election was called because the government was scary.

While Harper needs to attack on the above, he has a balancing act that he has to do, he has to attack, while using the economy as his defense, and thats the toughest thing during the two debates.

I've said it before, I'm looking forward to seeing Harper brawling with Ignatieff in the debates.

But Ignatieff has another problem, he is going to be attacked by the NDP heavily as Layton knows that he needs the Liberal seats as much as Harper does.

On another note, please please please lets leave Elizabeth May at home during the debates, she was a waste of skin in the last one.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Slava

Well for starters the reason that we got a stimulus package was because of the oppoisition. Harper said he wouldn't run a deficit at all, so who's the real economic steward?

More importantly though, I hope this link works. Pretty much game, set, match!

http://bit.ly/hUrP2T

I would vote for Palpatine today if it would get rid of elections every 2 years.

And what your pointing out is a slight poison pill for the opposition, as Harper can point to that as working with the opposition.

As an addon, the left should love Palpatine

He removed religion from the public by destroying the Jedi, their constant interference in government and their baby snatching

He removed the corrupt old system where the trade federation was influencing public policy through blackmail

He bought efficiency to government

He found away to grow the military without an impact on the human cost by using clones.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by Slava

Well for starters the reason that we got a stimulus package was because of the oppoisition. Harper said he wouldn't run a deficit at all, so who's the real economic steward?

More importantly though, I hope this link works. Pretty much game, set, match!

http://bit.ly/hUrP2T

So they push for it, and as a result there's a deficit which they bang him on. So do they want to take partial credit or use it as a negative point? They can't do both, and as a result of crying about the deficit they forfeit their rights to any credit for the stimulus imo.

[nik-]

Well Jack Layton is definitely making "Tim Horton's Healthcare" his buzzword for this campaign. At least it's more effective than last election when he kept bringing up the sweaters that Stephen Harper apparently always wears.

[CaptainCrunch]

I think Harper should wear a cape and Superman underoos on this election campain

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Iowa_Flames_Fan

You're bang on. And as FlamesAddiction says, I suppose I should hate the player and not the game. Harper is operating several levels above any of his opponents right now, which is frustrating to see.

Even for someone who likes Harper and will generally vote Conservative it is frustrating to see because there is no real valid opposition.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by nik-

So they push for it, and as a result there's a deficit which they bang him on. So do they want to take partial credit or use it as a negative point? They can't do both, and as a result of crying about the deficit they forfeit their rights to any credit for the stimulus imo.

Sure they can...and will. That's politicking at it core.

But it also brings me back to the whole "the Conservatives wont work with the opposition" thing that has become the clamor for the left. Its simply untrue as evidenced by that^^ and the recently tabled budget.

Working with and compromising takes two or more to give in to something and doesnt mean give everything to whoever wants it. Right now I would sure like to see what it is the Liberals or the NDP have done in the compromising department....other than try to form a government with seperatists calling the some of the shots to do so.

[Reggie Dunlop]

19 political parties to choose from

These guys de-registered

[transplant99]

political parties that lost their eligibility to become registered

• national alternative party of canada (section 369(2))
• the ontario party of canada (section 369(2))
• absolutely absurd party (section 367, withdrawal of application)

lol!!

[flames_1987]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

How would you change Harper to be more charismatic? How would he need to change? How is Layton more charismatic and likeable when every time he talks I want to put a brick through my tv?

I'm not sure who your Layton argument was aimed at, just because I believe Stephen Harper lacks charisma among other things, it does not equal a resounding endorsement for Jack Layton. I'm pretty sure on your charisma measuring, that Jack Layton too also goes to hockey games and maybe plays a musical instrument.

Charisma to me is leading a country, and not falling into the trap of big business, party rhetoric, mind numbing politics that have destroyed our political system.

[peter12]

I'll probably end up voting Conservative for the first time. Someone needs a majority, and it's probably best if it's the Conservatives as Harper is the only leader out of the bunch that seems remotely Prime Minister material.

[John Doe]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

We're 2 days into the campaign, and the opening salvo that the Conservatives were going to use was the threat of a coalition, today Harper I thought fairly effectively talked about 2004 and put Duceppe on the spot a bit.

Really? I thought he looked really bad by not answering the question, and from his remarks back to the journalists (I couldn't hear what they were saying), they weren't buying it. Harper is taking a big risk by using most of his speeches (so far at least) on the coalition as Duceppe is using it against him. If Layton backs Duceppe, the coalition issue could hurt Harper more than help him

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

I've had a lot of problems with the contempt of parliament issue. If you go back to the Liberal government under Chretien where he did similar things, tried to hide his scandals like Shawnigate and regularly canceled opposition days, the only reason why things like a contempt charge weren't bought about was because the Liberal's had a majority government.

That is the fact of the matter when you have a majority government. I don't condone some of the questionable actions of the Liberal party under Chretien, but I don't see how that is an excuse for what the Conservatives under Harper have done either. If Harper is stupid enough to be in contempt of Parliament with a minority government, then he deserves to be found so.

What I have a problem with is that the Conservatives dismiss the charge by saying that it was just a vote by Liberals, NDPers and BQ's. Well sorry, but that is Parliament, which just happens to be the highest court in the land. I find is puzzling that the Conservatives try to portray themselves as the "law and order" party, yet will not accept rulings from the highest court in the land!

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

Sadly whatever party is going to run the government your going to get the same kind of scandals, the same kind of bs hiding of project and policy information costs...

I may be wrong, but I am pretty sure that withholding costs as the Conservatives have done by claiming them to be "cabinet confidence" is ground-breaking.

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

...and the same kind of external attempts at influence peddling. In terms of this on the latest charges against the Lawyer and the escort Harper bought in the RCMP to investigate it which we and he knew would bring it into the open. Harper can point to that one and a couple of other RCMP investigations during this election as illustrations of attempting to shut down illicit influence peddling and lobbying.

Harper brought in the RCMP to get ahead of the game as he knows how potentially damaging Carson can be to him. The damage to Harper will be that the opposition will use Carson as an example of the type of people that Harper surrounds himself with.

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

In the weeks to come Harper is going to roll out a number of things to attack the Liberals and NDP

1) He's going to go to the budget and attack Layton because whether it was a strategy or as someone weirdly pointed out an undemocratic move to control parliament, the Conservatives did embed NDP wishes into the budget, so whether it was an attempt to gently force an election is irrelevant on the campaign trail.

Who is this going to help? If anything, I would think that it would hurt the Conservatives as they continually ridicule the NDP for their fiscal views, yet were willing to take advise from them to create the budget?

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

2) We know that Harper is going to attack the BPO over their calculations on the F35 program and the tough on crime costs.

Again, how will this help him? He created the PBO (I believe this is what you are talking about) and appointed Kevin Page, who has been more accurate in the past than the government has been with their predictions. If he attacks the PBO, it will further enforce the already existing view that he is very heavy-handed with independent government watchdogs who don't agree with him.

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

3) Harper is starting to go after Ducceppe over his roll and supposed changing story in 2004.

Harper is strictly on the defense here and there is no offensive maneuvering for him on this file. Nothing he can do on this issue will hurt Duceppe, yet there are some potential huge risks for Harper here.

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

4) They will attack Ignatieff for refusing to work with the minority government and again point to the fact that they were willing to negotiate on the budget as they did with the NDP.

But how can they use this argument when they only contacted the NDP and wouldn't call the Liberals?

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

5) They will go after the Bloc's attempted blackmail of Canada with the demand for cash and show that the conservatives were willing to lose power instead of folding to the bloc.

This will help the Bloc in Quebec more than it will help the Conservatives. It may help the Conservatives outside of Quebec, but will it help them in this case more than it will hurt them in Quebec?

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

6) They will go after Ignatieff over his stupid promise of a hockey arena in Quebec in exchange for votes.

This is what they should do. This was a stupid decision by Ignatieff.

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

7) They'll go after Ignatieff on his statements about taxation

About the reinstatement of corporate taxes to 2010 levels? They had better be careful about that as polling suggests that most people agree with this.

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

8) They'll go after the Liberals about forcing another wasteful election.

They are going to try this, but will it stick? This is pretty tough to do when you have just lost confidence of the house by being the first government in parliamentary history to be found in contempt of parliament.

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

Its great that Ignatieff is all relaxed and looks comfortable on day 2. But he is still a very experienced guy, he's not saying anything thats concrete about why a Liberal government needs to be elected, he's falling into the same trap that the two previous liberal leaders have utilized to failure, in the whole vote for us because the Conservatives are scary, and I don't know if that strategy will do well for the Liberal's because I think voters will be pissed that an election was called because the government was scary.

While Harper needs to attack on the above, he has a balancing act that he has to do, he has to attack, while using the economy as his defense, and thats the toughest thing during the two debates.

I've said it before, I'm looking forward to seeing Harper brawling with Ignatieff in the debates.

The Conservative narrative over the last three years has been an all-out attack on Ignatieff. They need this negative portrayal to stick, as people will be paying more attention to him during the election period. If Ignatieff can change peoples perceptions of him during the election, it could significantly affect the results. I have always wondered why the Conservatives attacked Ignatieff so relentlessly from the git-go. I have come to the conclusion that they are afraid of him.

As for the bolded part, I to am looking forward to the debates.

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

But Ignatieff has another problem, he is going to be attacked by the NDP heavily as Layton knows that he needs the Liberal seats as much as Harper does.

I don't think the NDP will attack the Liberals as much as they attack the Conservatives. They are the existing government, and are further from the NDP values than the Liberals are. As of right now, the NDP are concentrating on Conservative ridings (according to "Question Period" from this morning).

Something else you should consider is that as of now, each party has spending limits. That means for every attack ad the Conservatives run, the Liberals, NDP and BQ will each be able to run one themselves, and from what I have read each party will spend to the limit. This advantage that the Conservatives have enjoyed for the last few years has now become a disadvantage.

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

On another note, please please please lets leave Elizabeth May at home during the debates, she was a waste of skin in the last one.

Agreed! I would actually like to see a debate between Harper and Ignatieff only, but I doubt very much that will happen.

[John Doe]

Originally Posted by nik-

So they push for it, and as a result there's a deficit which they bang him on. So do they want to take partial credit or use it as a negative point? They can't do both, and as a result of crying about the deficit they forfeit their rights to any credit for the stimulus imo.

They can blame him for creating a structural deficit BEFORE the recession hit. They can claim they are poor predictors of the economy as they repeatedly said that there would be neither a recession (while ALL of the other leaders said there would be one during the election) nor a deficit (while, I repeat, we were already in a structural deficit BEFORE the recession).

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by John Doe

Really? I thought he looked really bad by not answering the question, and from his remarks back to the journalists (I couldn't hear what they were saying), they weren't buying it.

The Conservative supporter says he did fine, the Liberal says he did not. Politics at its finest!

Harper is taking a big risk by using most of his speeches (so far at least) on the coalition as Duceppe is using it against him. If Layton backs Duceppe, the coalition issue could hurt Harper more than help him

Not really. If Layton backs Duceppe, Harper points to that as evidence the opposition is working on a coalition now. The three opposition parties pretty much have to avoid being seen as working together on the campaign trail, or it plays into Harper's hands.

[John Doe]

Originally Posted by transplant99

Sure they can...and will. That's politicking at it core.

But it also brings me back to the whole "the Conservatives wont work with the opposition" thing that has become the clamor for the left. Its simply untrue as evidenced by that^^ and the recently tabled budget.

Excuse me?! They withhold costs of programs that they want to impliment, they prorogue parliament (three times, twice to specifically avoid answering to parliament, they write and distribute booklets on how to disrupt committees, etc., and you can actually say it isn't true? Unbelievable!

Originally Posted by transplant99

Working with and compromising takes two or more to give in to something and doesnt mean give everything to whoever wants it. Right now I would sure like to see what it is the Liberals or the NDP have done in the compromising department....other than try to form a government with seperatists calling the some of the shots to do so.

The NDP and Liberals did say what they wanted to see in the budget. What they got was not acceptable to them. The Conservatives made token concessions to the NDP and ZERO concessions to the Liberals. I ask you to name any that they have made besides the stimulus spending (which the Conservatives have taken credit for) in the five years that they have been in government.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Reggie Dunlop

19 political parties to choose from

These guys de-registered

Animal Alliance Environment Voters Party of Canada?

And I love the Western Bloc Party's logo.