independent

There is no secret agenda. However there is a big difference between promises made and the direction that a Leader wants too push a country. Any leader has thoughts and dreams that differ from what the party stands for. Harper has a long history of political involvement that should give you an idea about which way Harper might Lean. In General when a party gets a majority the party will start too take on the personality of its leader. Harpers focus will go from what I MUST do to get elected to what I would like to do too make Canada a better place.(Leave a Legacy). That would apply too any Leader and it becomes stronger the longer they stay in power. What do you think Dion,May or Layton would do if they got a majority could be asked as well. The stronger the leader the more this becomes the case.

http://www40.statcan.ca/l01/cst01/govt49a.htm?sdi=revenue The amount of revenue from taxes as gone up ever year for the federal government. How do you figure the conservatives dropped their taxes. Just because a government reduces one tax it does not mean they will not get it some where else.

Key difference between Liberals and Harper. Both the Liberals and Harper have their list of what they feel is important. Harper is very focused on what he wants to get done and will overspend if need be too get there. The Liberals main focus has been on not overspending and prioritize spending according too what they feel has too be done. Previous governments have come to terms with the high cost of imprisonment and have found ways to control those costs. Harper will be much more intent at achieving his goal of being tough on crime(regardless of cost). (The way I see things) There is misconception that Harper's low priority on social programs means less spending. He wants to have a military presence in the North. His spending habits will just be focused on different priorities. Did Harper ever come out and say I am intent on making government smaller. The Liberals came in and were intent on controling spending. You should be comparing Harper too Mulroney style spending.

It will help manufacturing and our tourism industry. http://www.canada.com/reginaleaderpost/sto...a5d&k=32384 http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=206...;refer=currency Harper understood the problem the problem of the rising dollar and how it effects manufacturing but prefered too do nothing about it.

People who not recognize real danger vote. It is up to the government, media, intellectuals etc. too educate the public.

You must be one of Harpers speech writers.

(If you leave out all the exageration for effect) The article makes some good points. The Liberals have to concentrate at what they do best and let the NDP represent the Left which they do quite effectively.

Its all relative. compared too who's government. There is little different between the size of A Liberal controlled government and a conservative controlled government. The only difference would be in priorities.

What spending are we talking about?

You nailed the problems. The Liberals were not at all prepared to go to an election. The polles were not on their side. There election platform was a work in progress. It is best for the Liberals to maintain a central-central right position and wait in out.

The Liberals concentrated on bringing in balanced budgets and to start paying off the debt. They were being a responsible government. You will see Harper run the debt back up blaming everybody else instead of making the tough choices the Liberals were willing too make.

What goes on in the states has nothing too do with productivity in Canada.

http://www.alternatives.ca/article4079.html The Harper government has increased spending every year in power. I certainly hope you did not vote for him.

You are saying that the average guy on the street can impact the value of the Canadian dollar, interest rates, high taxes etc. You can not be serious. The lack of productivity is clearly in the hands of government. Too stay productive as a country you have too do what you do best. Governments have a huge impact on that. It may very well have been the policies of the Harper government that caused the problem as the article suggests.

Negative productivity gains is a serious problem. The Harper government needs too address the problem. It should not matter what party you support.

http://www.alternatives.ca/article4079.html Harper government first in Canada to oversee negative productivity gains since data gathered in 1961.

I agree. Conservatives like too call the Liberals leftist to discredit them. http://andrewcoyne.com/2006/01/harper-left-of-martin.php Above is a 2006 article that suggests that Harper was actually too the left of the Paul Martin liberals. The Liberals are very solid in the center and have some right leaning members. Calling them leftist is an attempt too make them sound like they are the same as the NDP. If you look at thier platforms you will see that is far from the truth.

Yes. Just not too the same extreme.

It will be crushing for Dion because he believed in it. You may yet lament its passing when harper pulls out his plan.

Both the Conservatives and the NDP are pushing for a two party system. I am not convinced that two parties that divergent is the best thing for Canada. I have always believed in moderation. It would leave a lot of people not voting because neither party fits there needs.

Clearly the conservatives seem too like his autocratic type of leader. It may even be necessary with all the divergent view points of his candidates. They are probably better keeping Harper because of the lack of alternates. Maybe someone should start a tread for possible replacements. I think they would come up empty.

The liberals do not have the finances. They could not respond to Harpers attacks because they were under financed. You can not run a leadership convention and then run in a federal election. The lose was a much about lack of funds as it is about Dion's leadership. wait for the numbers to come out comparing election expenses. Remember too include all the money Harper spent before the election that will not be included in election expenses. If there is another election in the next four years it will be because Harper calls one again or Harper does something extremely stupid that angers the voters.

Charest may be a exception too the rule.

Media are always bias. That is what sells. Harper did a better job of using that too his advantage.

Harper gained seats. NDP gain seats. Harpers adds making Dion look like some kind of monster worked. Now Harper has to do what he says he is going to do. Balanced budget Tough on crimes. lower taxes He promised to ruduce green house gas. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/09/science/.../09climate.html He has to deal with job losses. Harper was given the mandate but he is still on thin ice. Remember HARPER said the Liberals will run this country in too debt. He better deliver.