Conservative attack ads

[Michael Bluth]

They want an election ASAP, the Cons have much to gain by getting to the polls right now. Waiting for spring is filled with risk for them, and allows a reeling Liberal party some time to somehow get their act together.

The Conservatives would definitely prefer an election now, but I don't think they believe they will get one.

How could the Liberals get their act together? The only thing they are hoping for is something nasty to happen to the Conservatives.

A real possibility is that Dion may abruptly resign, which means the Cons will be obliged to wait, and lose huge momentum, and face a leader that will be far more formidable than Dion. (which means nearly anybody. except Joe Volpe).

I really, really don't see Dion resigning. But if he does he has to do so in the next three or four months. Else he leaves the new leader very little time to get organized before the fixed election date.

They want an election now, and are engineering just that in my opinion. The only change lately is that Layton is now actively involved in making that happen.

The Conservatives undoubtedly want an election. Barring a big issue they think they can win on they will not force an early election because that will become the big issue of the election.

[Shakeyhands]

Does you 'fact' apply to those "Soldiers in our streets. With guns. We aren't making this up." ads from the last election?

Is lack of intelligence on the part of the electorate the reason the Liberals got booted from office in the last election?

Yup, that ad was a poor decision and was pulled very quickly.

Talking of condescension, have you looked at what Steve has done lately all on his own?

[Michael Bluth]

Talking of condescension, have you looked at what Steve has done lately all on his own?

You haven't answered the question.

Is lack of intelligence on the part of the electorate the reason the Liberals got booted from office in the last election?

Exactly what has Steve done on his own recently?

[old_bold&cold]

Harper has been smug about many things lately, but only because he see that his main opposition has been so busy stabbing each other that they have forgot that the public is watching and the Liberals are really being shown down to their lowest form possible, and Harper did not have to do any thing for this to happen. So yes smug is something that some especially Liberal supporters will say is not a good grace, but how can one not be just a little smug when your opposition are stabbing each other in the back.

As I said Harper did this ads mostly to shine a light on all this and making sure the voters see this as it happens, as yes it really does make it so there really is only one party in the next election, as the Liberals really are broken and fragmented in many issues and the people running the party behind the scenes are now being outed slowly but surely. If Harper did nothing else but just sit there and watched, he would still come out way ahead, but he is not one to sit and not do things, so he has planned a good agenda and will make sure it is delivered in a timely manner.

[Shakeyhands]

You haven't answered the question.

Is lack of intelligence on the part of the electorate the reason the Liberals got booted from office in the last election?

Exactly what has Steve done on his own recently?

The ONLY reason that the CPC has a minority gov't was the actions of a few bad apples within the Liberal Paryt in QC. That and a smear attack on the Min of Finance that was baseless.

Steve has abandoned the principles of the majority of Canadians around standing up against capital punishment and snubbed their noses at the UN by not co-sponsoring the Anti Death Penalty resolution, again against the majority of Canadians beliefs. We won't even get in to his bullying tactics with his own democratically chosen representatives...

But by all means, keep these things up. The stupid will always appreciate that 2% GST cut.

[Michael Bluth]

The ONLY reason that the CPC has a minority gov't was the actions of a few bad apples within the Liberal Paryt in QC. That and a smear attack on the Min of Finance that was baseless.

Steve has abandoned the principles of the majority of Canadians around standing up against capital punishment and snubbed their noses at the UN by not co-sponsoring the Anti Death Penalty resolution, again against the majority of Canadians beliefs. We won't even get in to his bullying tactics with his own democratically chosen representatives...

But by all means, keep these things up. The stupid will always appreciate that 2% GST cut.

It's condescending by not agreeing with the Liberal Party of Canada line on capital punishment?

A lot of people would consider calling people stupid for appreciating a tax cut condescending.

I think stupid would apply to those people who voted for the Liberals in 1993 when they made their promise to eliminate the GST.

[JerrySeinfeld]

There is a minority government, I think it's pretty smart of the conservatives to keep on top of their opponents because as we all know, the opposition as a group could bring down the government in short order. It's a political strategy.

Whats wrong with that?

[Shakeyhands]

It's condescending by not agreeing with the Liberal Party of Canada line on capital punishment?

A lot of people would consider calling people stupid for appreciating a tax cut condescending.

I think stupid would apply to those people who voted for the Liberals in 1993 when they made their promise to eliminate the GST.

Its condescending and arrogant to go against the wishes of the majority of Canadians where it pertains to Capital Punishment, this has nothing to do with the LPOC.

Edited November 8, 2007 by Shakeyhands

[Michael Bluth]

Its condescending and arrogant to go against the wishes of the majority of Canadians where it pertains to Capital Punishment, this has nothing to do with the LPOC.

Do the majority of Canadians support sanctioning Canadian murderers breaking the laws of civilized countries?

Any proof or evidence for that?

But calling people stupid isn't condescending or arrogant?

[guyser]

Do the majority of Canadians support sanctioning Canadian murderers breaking the laws of civilized countries?

Any proof or evidence for that?

But calling people stupid isn't condescending or arrogant?

Sanction?

[Michael Bluth]

Sanction?

Definition: to authorize, approve, or allow: an expression now sanctioned by educated usage.

The penalty for murder in some countries is death. By arguing that the laws of other countries should not apply to Canadian citizens it follows that people such as Shakey are arguing that our government should be sanctioning the behaviour of those criminals abroad.

[guyser]

Definition: to authorize, approve, or allow: an expression now sanctioned by educated usage.

The penalty for murder in some countries is death. By arguing that the laws of other countries should not apply to Canadian citizens it follows that people such as Shakey are arguing that our government should be sanctioning the behaviour of those criminals abroad.

Nobody is arguing that the laws of other countries should not apply. Where did that come from?

[Black Dog]

There is a minority government, I think it's pretty smart of the conservatives to keep on top of their opponents because as we all know, the opposition as a group could bring down the government in short order. It's a political strategy.

Whats wrong with that?

It's bad taste. Gutter tactics.

And I must say, defending these ads on the grounds that the Liberals pulled similar crap when in power (though they didn't, at least outside of the context of an election campaign) isn't what I'd call a winning argument. Unless one sees the fact that the Cons are on the same moral plane as the crooks they displaced as a plus.

Edited November 8, 2007 by Black Dog

[ScottSA]

It's bad taste. Gutter tactics.

And I must say, defending these ads on the grounds that the Liberals pulled similar crap when in power (though they didn't, at least outside of the context of an election campaign) isn't what I'd call a winning argument. Unless one sees the fact that the Cons are on the same moral plane as the crooks they displaced as a plus.

I'm sure you were as vocally opposed to the Liberal line of 'scary scary' over the past 15 years.

[Michael Bluth]

Nobody is arguing that the laws of other countries should not apply. Where did that come from?

Capital punishment is the law in the United States.

I'm sure you were as vocally opposed to the Liberal line of 'scary scary' over the past 15 years.

I somehow doubt it.

Preston Manning took the high road in the 1997 election. If he hadn't Chretien would have only won a minority and we would have had Paul Martin's dithering four or five years earlier which would have lead to the Liberals losing power.

Taking the high road, as defined by your opponents, is a sure recipe for losing in electoral politics.

Edited November 8, 2007 by Michael Bluth

[JerrySeinfeld]

It's bad taste. Gutter tactics.

And I must say, defending these ads on the grounds that the Liberals pulled similar crap when in power (though they didn't, at least outside of the context of an election campaign) isn't what I'd call a winning argument. Unless one sees the fact that the Cons are on the same moral plane as the crooks they displaced as a plus.

Attack ads? Bad taste? WHat...kind of like loud furniture ads or annoying car-dealer spots?

Gee. Bad taste advertising. What a concept. Again, only interesting if those evil cons are doing it. Nothing new here.

Besides, what exactly is bad taste about talking about your political opponent's bad points.

[Black Dog]

ScottSA

I'm sure you were as vocally opposed to the Liberal line of 'scary scary' over the past 15 years.

I don't recall any ads to that effect when Parliament was in session. And again: you're taking the moral position previously occupied by the Liberals. You must be very proud.

JerryS

Gee. Bad taste advertising. What a concept. Again, only interesting if those evil cons are doing it. Nothing new here.

Attack ads being run outside of an election campaign is new.

Besides, what exactly is bad taste about talking about your political opponent's bad points.

Sigh. I don't know how much simpler I can make this. I understand attack ads are part of the toolbox for political parties these days. Apparently, now attack ads are a-o.k outside the context of a heated election campaigns. I understand all of this. I don't have to like it, though.

[guyser]

Capital punishment is the law in the United States.

Thanks for that. I knew that and everyone else does too.

I guess then you were making it up. Ok. Thanks

[Shakeyhands]

Do the majority of Canadians support sanctioning Canadian murderers breaking the laws of civilized countries?

Any proof or evidence for that?

But calling people stupid isn't condescending or arrogant?

Why would you post such a stupid response? You know very well thats not what is being argued.

Twist away Bluth, its what you guys do best.

[guyser]

Why would you post such a stupid response? You know very well thats not what is being argued.

Twist away Bluth, its what you guys do best.

...........crickets................

[old_bold&cold]

I have said before that I am probably of the mind where I wish that CPC had not used these ads at this time, but that being aside, just what in those ads that is not very apparent to those who actually watch politics ona daily basis? I think that Harper did this so as to shine the light of day on what really is a bad leader, so everyone can see this even outside an election.

Could he have done this in a better way ? I think thta no matter how Harper did this, it would always be seen as kicking a person when they are down, but if everyone waiting for Dion to get up on his feet, we would all die of old age. I feel that Harper will lose a point or two on this now, but later when it becomes an issue in an eection he will gain many more points and not have to say much of anything again on this. So yes, it has an up and down side, and I think Harper made the right decission for a later time.

There is nothing in this ad that is not very true and it really is not stretching anything in any of it. So is it really an attack ad or is it a truthful rendition of what is really going on.

[Shakeyhands]

by playing a soundbite out of context over and over again? Its weak and it reflects poorly on the CPC.

[Fortunata]

What they seem to be saying is that it is ok to have attack ads outside of election time if you have money.

What should be said is that these ads probably appeal to those who vote cpc anyways because they are the ones that think low class politics is fine. It goes along with the slovenly low-class leader.

[JerrySeinfeld]

ScottSA

I don't recall any ads to that effect when Parliament was in session. And again: you're taking the moral position previously occupied by the Liberals. You must be very proud.

JerryS

Attack ads being run outside of an election campaign is new.

Sigh. I don't know how much simpler I can make this. I understand attack ads are part of the toolbox for political parties these days. Apparently, now attack ads are a-o.k outside the context of a heated election campaigns. I understand all of this. I don't have to like it, though.

It's a minority government which can topple at a moments notice - hence the ads makes perfect sense in the absence of an "actual" election.

On your second point, you're right you don't have to like it. My questyion: do we care?

[capricorn]

It goes along with the slovenly low-class leader.

I can just imagine the type of attack ad you would come up. Ads about a slovenly and low-class Harper would not sit well with Canadians no matter their political beliefs. But here, it's OK to denigrate the Prime Minister. Keep it up as it provides an outlet and you can vent your frustrations.

I think the Conservatives ad about Dion is mild given his poor personal attributes as party leader that could have been underlined.