takeanumber

Wow. I am impressed. Nah, Flannagan never gave me an F. Nah, Morton never gave me an F, either. Yes, Flannagan is Harper's, and Morton was Day's. Alright, I'll write a brief little piece on the subject. If anybody has ever read "Game Theory and Canadian Politics", University of Toronto Press, 1997 (or 1998), there's a chapter in there on the central voter theorem. Now that alone isn't too impressive, because you can find similar works in other books. But he applies it specifically to the Reform Party's 'invasion from the right', which is relevant. One thing you gotta understand with Flannagan is that he really believes, in spite of his own work, that you can have a 'principled' right win party in Canada. The keyword here is 'principled', and you can see this word echoed by other MP's in recent months. Now the first time I heard the term 'principled' in this context, it was in context to the median voter theorem, and it was, as I recall, in response to a question from one of the many Conservative prime minister types (panties completely drenched in goo over the prospect) and it was with respect to social conservative values. Fast forward to 2004. In a study done by Carty Cross and Young (it's probably been published...I actually got the book before it was published), they ploted out the differences between the party elite and the grassroots. What was neat to see was that the Liberal elite and the Liberal Grassroots shared the exact same ideological space. The Conservatives? Nowhere close. Whereas the PC mainstream was far more centrist, with elites which were slightly more rightist, the Alliance grassroots were miles away from the PC's on one axis, and right together on another. The Alliance Elite were way, way off to the far right. The Party Elite of the alliance believes that it does not have to comprimise. This is evident in the policy papers, and academe that's pushed out from the University of Calgary each year. For the Elite, it's not so much arrogance or a matter of hiding their true feelings, rather, they're convinced that deep inside every mainstream Canadian, there's this mean little bastard that wants a socially conservative country. Yet, the party Elite, in SPITE of empirical data that points otherwise, including the Carty Cross and Young study, continue to deny that this is the fact. The split between the PC's and the Alliance wings are very deep, and worse, they can be measured. So long as the socially conservative elites remain unpurged from the party, the party will never be able to moderate in the way that the Liberals have been able to. There's a disconnect there in the transmission of power, and that's what's really important here. On that basis, it's not only Harper that should resign, but the whole lot of them ought to be sidelined in the party. Anyway, you can dismiss what I've just said, but you know, I used a lot of that material to predict the election correctly, so, that should be enough to bolster my cred. Regards, Takeanumber.

Well, this was the only attempt to answer my question about who was Harper's chief strategist advisor. Rod Love was indeed one of Day's advisors. Good job. I was looking for the chief strategist though. Since nobody here can answer the either question correctly, little though read any of their books, nor are familiar with their general ideological disposition (or the research that was done by Carty Cross and Young on elite-mainstream party dispositions), there's no point in me wasting my efforts on the likes of such ignorant conservatives. All the more gauling when you consider that it's these same conservatives who think they know everything about their own positions and party. If you can answer the question, then I'll write the essay. If nobody here can, then screw it. Regards, Takeanumber.

I'd be in favour of Prop. Rep. The Bloc might not be. But I believe in one person, one vote. The smaller regions and Quebec are always more than adequately represented in cabinet.

The electorate have forced the to change. Just one whiff of the old ways, and the Electorate will freak. The Eleoctorate also wants to see if the Cons can purge themselves of the radical elements in their party...which will mean that Harper himself will have to go. It'd prefer a real moderate alternative that won't force people to conform to their religion as soon as they get into power. But you know, that might be too much to ask for.

Noticed how McKay was like "oh, he should stay". Harper is a lot like an Indian (india) politician. Just waiting to see who steps out to challege him, and then he'll come back and crush them. It's predictable.

Hardcore. Bravo.

The fact that NDP and Bloc vote shares really rallied and the Cons and Libs faultered (with the Cons taking the worst hit) suggests that the real alternative is in third parties. Not the stogy old ones.

Therein lies the problem. Calgarians were in Cabinet during the disasterous Mulroney government. I don't think most Canadians have forgiven the last set of Cons. Unless Alberta can learn how to play with the other Children in the sandbox, nobody is going to eve try to meet them halfway.

Got an issue? Here's a tissue.

No wonder 2/3 of Ontarians don't like Cons, with attitudes like that.. What does that say about cons? That they'd rather elect corrupt liars to keep con ppl out. lol.

Jeeebbus Alright. Who is Harper's Advisor? If you can answer me that basic question, I will list two books for you to read that he authored (which are just good samples), and I will provide to you some notes that I took from that lecture. And then we can go from there and discuss the situation with the Social Cons. Alright? Can you name Harper's strategic advisor? While you're at it, name Stockwell Day's strat advisor during his leadership too.

No, it isn't Argus. I shouldn't have to teach you basic economics, and the difference between a public good and a private good. Would you please, you know, take a course or something? Because I just don't have the patience to sit here and explain something fundamental to you. And if you don't understand the fundamentals, then you have no hope of understanding a cogent arguement, and therefore, you'll get mad and call me a commie, even though I'm really more free market than you are (recall, I'm centre-right Libertarian). So, look me up when you do some research.

If Quebec leaves, Canada goes on. Maybe we can actually get a constitution and senate reform that way. That would be cool. And we'd have actual elections again. Now if Alberta leaves, lol, well, I think Canada would be worse off. But Canada would go on. you should suck it up because Canada decided. 2 in 3 said 'no' to your party. I'm happy that you're not insulting the people of Ontario like ppl in Calgary are, so that's nice to see. It's their vote too.

It's a lot more than just 9/99, I just named the most prolific. If you'd like me to go through and identify the anti-libertarian elements of the Con party, I can. There's also a problem with the school of thought that Harper is from with respect to the Charter. I can write a book on the topic. I don't agree with them on a bevy of issues, mainly social. I don't think it's right for them to say "get out of the way of the individual" and then to go about and restrict people's choices, and general respect for equality. But they got a few economic holes too. They were tough enough on the debt. They were too generous with the tax cuts. They didn't talk at all about farm reform, which, if the West wants in so bad, it should have been talked about. He should resign. The Libs defeated themselves. And Harper couldn't capitalize. (even when he went negative from the get go.)

Ontario women should be afraid of the socially conservatives. The Burqua goes back in the closet. Whew!

Yeh. And the Pro-Aparteid Anders got more than 53 percent. But meh. My voted didn't matter. And I'm sucking it up. But anyway. I'm happy with the overall result. And you know, the rural areas are already grossly overrepresented. (And I can point you to any number of journals on that topic).

The Majority has spoken. Suck it up cupcake. If you want to seperate, move to the US or Austria. Don't take the country with you.

You say that White's opinions, that Gallant's opinions, that Harper's opinions, and Reynolds, That Monte's, that Albozy's and Kenny's...that ANDERS, that Thompson and Ramsey (!) That all of these people, all of their opinions are all their own. Well then: In absense OF A POLICY CONVENTION, what I am to think? In ABSENSE of a coherent SOCIAL POLICY period... What I am to think of the outcome of that policy convention? Sorry Mr. Harper, No Blank Check for you.

THE MAJORITY SAID 'NO' TO HARPER. THAT IS DEMOCRACY. Besides, the NDP got 16% of the popular vote, 7% of the seats. I suppose you'd call that Democracy too. Face it. The West refused to compromise. And with that attitude, the Maritimes, Quebec, Ontario, Winnepeg, and BC wern't going to bend. Why should Alberta be allowed to dictate how the rest of the country should live? Last time I checked, Ontario had 108 seats. 25 of them said yes to the Cons (I'll leave the vote splitting issue behind), the rest said no. Suck it up.

It's an allusion. Christian social conservatism has a lot in common with islamic social conservatism. More than you'd like to admit. So that's the Burqua illusion. Whether it's restricting a woman's right to choose, or generally just rolling back women's rights (as Randy White implied), the social Conservative element of the CPC's have a lot in common with islamic social conservatives. (and in some parts, they're synomous.)

Harper went negative from day one. The Libs were trying to go positive. That's why their campaign sucked the first two weeks. Then they found their balls, played negative, responded, and recovered. Saying that the liberals won only because they went negative, and infering that that is a bad thing, is you know, a lot like calling the kettle back. As for the calls for seperation. Now you're sounding like a BQ Biatch. Seriously. The majority of Canadians have spoken. They want a left leaning minority government. They saw what harper had in store. They said 'No!!!", plain and simple. So, don't play this "if we can have things our way, we're taking our ball and leaving" game, because it's already getting thin.

It's called vote splitting. In case you didn't notice, but the Con vote, if you added the PC vote and the Alliance vote from the last election, they didn't equate. In fact: it was way down. Where did the red tory vote go? The Cons lost. It was their election to win. And they couldn't do it. Face it. Now, go home, wrap yourself up in victimhood. Women of Eastern Canada: Good news: The Burqua stays off for another 2 years!

The independant might take it on. Maybe even an NDP'er. Jeebus, the Cons are already wet for another spanking. Get off on that sorta stuff do ya? Getting your butts spanked by centrist Canadians. Looks good on yah. I think another election is probably 2 years off. The parties need to collect money from the public system so they can pay off their bank loans and maybe build up a bit of a war chest. The dynamics are different. And I think there will be serious consequences for the Cons if they send Canadians to the polls too early.

The vast majority of Canadians are not social conservative. If women in Alberta want to wear the Burqa, they can. But people in Urban BC, saskatchewan, manitoba, urban ontario, quebec, and most of Atlantic Canada, do not feel the need to be told how to live, and don't want their brand of morality legislated. Unless social conservatives acknowledge that they too have compromise in this country, then they'll get nowhere, and will forever be wraping themselves in the wet blanket of victimization. Personally, I think most social Conservatives get off on the whole victimization thing. I know a lot of Albertans do.

You lost the election Bro. Time to suck it up. It's not just Harper who's extreme. It's 3/4 of the party, mainly the alliance rump, that's too extreme. Red Tories just arn't going to vote them. Myron Thompson told them (red tories) to get out of the party. And they did. So -- moderates extended their hand to the Harperites, and what did they do? They spat in it. So...the red tories spat back. It's as simple as that.