Why Harper won't get a majority, and why it matters

[jdobbin]

Give credit where credit is due. Mulroney tried.

He fired up nationalist spirit in Quebec when it was at a low ebb. He alienated western Canadians by taking them for granted and he took Canada down the path of constitutional misadventure not once but twice.

The Conservatives have never, ever, in all their history chosen a truly Quebec leader. In 1976, the Conservatives avoided a Quebec Wagner and Mulroney to choose a Clark - their first Roman Catholic.

Mulroney was not a real Quebecer?

Is your code that a real Quebecer is a Francophone?

Canada is a country of region, not ideology. The federal Liberals understand this.

Canada is a federation. I think many conservatives know this but some seem to want to go back to provincial politics after transferring powers to the provinces.

[Argus]

On culture, the Tories have in fact increased spending and the cuts were simply normal housekeeping. But that's not the spin and the Tories didn't counteract it well enough. To use Richard Nixon's famous phrase, "The Conservatives gave the opposition a sword."

On youth crime, Duceppe was able to portray Harper as a guy who would send 14 year old boys into an adult male prison.

To understand in teh English Canadian context how these were gaffes, the 2008 election in Quebec was initially a replay of the 2006 election in English Canada. It was all about *scary, scary* Harper, the neo-con Bush about to destroy modern civilization as we know it. In English Canada, that meme failed in 2006 and is barely being used in 2008. In Quebec in 2008, the *scary, scary* Harper meme works - and Harper has only himself to blame.

What you're saying, August, is that Quebecers are simpletons, provincials, in the true sense of the word, who are easily gulled by a slick call to protect something ie, culture, which was never threatened. You admit that Harper actually increased spending for culture, and so presumably, that information is out there and easily accessible, but Quebecers are either too stupid to find it or too dumb to put that together with Duceppe's fearmongering about Harper destroying culture and realize he's conning them.

Sorry if I don't have much sympathy here. I think you should choose parties over real issues. Anyone who votes against the conservatives because of a housekeeping cut to a few of the thousands of culture programs, or because they fear - incredibly - that he's going to put 14 year olds into adult prison, is not someone whose intellect I can respect. Collectively, if you say this is what's influencing Quebecers, then to me, Quebecers are morons. There are major problems facing this country; economics and finance, health care, and international relations. Yet you're suggesting that Quebecers are so collectively stupid they've been managed like a herd of sheep over issues of no actual importance to most of them.

[Argus]

Its 75 seats may matter but given Harper's tactics in Quebec in this election, a federal PM doesn't get it - hence, it doesn't matter.

Apparently, Quebec is more confusing to an English Canadian federal politician than Puerto Rico is to a Democratic candidate seeking primary votes.

----

IOW, Harper has done more than throw away a chance at a majority; he's also thrown away a chance to make Canada whole

Why do you say that like it's a bad thing? You're a separatist, as am I. We both want Quebec out of Canada, though for different reasons.

The culture cuts and the youth offender changes were justified but heavy handed. In Quebec, these moves simply show that Harper and the Conservatives are not part of Quebec. They are foreigners. The federal Liberals would never make such mistakes.

Then they should separate. Then they could devote as much money as their bankrupt economy could allow to culture, and let all their teenage killers wander the streets unimpeded.

[Argus]

It means alot more than that.

Harper is a clueless anglo. People in Quebec may not vote for Dion this time but they know that the federal Liberals understand Quebecers.

As I say, let's see how this plays out. Canadian politics are not ideological; they are regional.

This is nonsense, of course. Of course they're ideological. Quebecers tend to be very socialist in their thinking, while western Canada and many parts of Ontario tend to be fairly conservative. The getting tough on teenage killers thing has played well here, even among Liberals I know who otherwise detest Harper. I don't know anyone who is actually against it, Liberal or Tory. What you seem to be suggesting is that the government should only impliment legislation that Quebecers approve of, and the hell with what the rest of Canada thinks.

The federal Liberal Party is successful because it understands Canada's regions:

Oh bullshit. The federal Liberal Party WAS successful because election after election it could count on getting virtually every seat from Quebec. And it got those seats by bribing Quebecers and making sure that their leaders were always Quebecers. But that alienated many Canadians in other parts of the country. And now that Quebecers have chosen the BQ as their great protectors the Liberals are rootless. Their only stronghold is among the immigrant communities in BC and Ontario, and the frightened Anglos in Montreal. This wasn't as obvious as long as the right was divided, but now that there's only one Tory party again it's become obvious.

Edited October 5, 2008 by Argus

[Slim MacSquinty]

Good points Argus, but I really think you are all applying way too much logic, look at NL for example, that wingnut Danny Williams has convinced, cajoled, or simply berated people into voting for the Liberals even though it will cut their own throats since it will tax the living hell out of their big new source of revenue OIL, thereby transferring even more money to the feds which is what he is telling them is their biggest fear. Even worse more people in the maritimes heat their homes with oil, the green shift would impoverish them. Now Williams is a smart guy and has to understand this but his pockets are already full, if he got what he asked for its only a matter of time until they tie him to something heavy and send him for a long walk off a short plank.

So it just goes to show that people will suspend logic if properly manipulated with emotions, this also explains the lingering traction of the scary Harper stuff the Liberals have been talking about for ten years, despite the complete lack of supporting evidence. Lots of pundits, here and elsewhere, will immendiately respond with a bunch of "evidence" but all of it will be tangential at best and most requires a least something of a leap of faith.

Relying on that strategy, the Liberals will go back to their default position, about values and their "love" for Canada and all others positions will call into question motives, concerns and values because simply they have no logical argument why the electorate should get behind them.

[blueblood]

You're saying Westerners are willing to play ball but that they'll never vote Liberal. You've got a strange definition for playing ball. And a strange way of deciding how to vote you're basing your decision on someone who's dead and someone who's no longer running.

You say Quebec is being selfish and screwing over Canada just because they're not voting the way you want them to but they could say the same about you. When will you stop being selfish and vote the way they want so that Canada doesn't get screwed by another of what you call minority government gongshow?

Instead of blaming voters why aren't you questioning the parties they're not voting for? It's not selfish to vote for what you want. That's probably what you're doing so why criticize others for the same thing.

Hell yeah we're willing to play ball, do you see two centre right parties fighting for seats in Western Canada??? There could just as easily be two centre right parties, but Westerners decided that our point was made and two parties are irrelevant.

Because of Trudeau and Chretien, the vast majority of Western Canadians will never vote Liberal, that is a fact. Same goes for Mulroney and the PC party. Harper has essentially made a new party, Westerners have bought in, Quebecers haven't. It's understandable if Quebecers would vote Liberal instead or for the NDP, but some fringe party that is irrelevant is beyond logic.

I can't vote for what Quebecers want because the bloc isn't a national party.

It's because of voters is why the PC's were sent into oblivion and why the Liberals got majority after majority with a divided right and strong Liberal leadership.

Having a fringe party to cause a logjam in parliament is the definition of selfishness, the Westerners gave that up, now it's Quebecers' turn.

[blueblood]

He fired up nationalist spirit in Quebec when it was at a low ebb. He alienated western Canadians by taking them for granted and he took Canada down the path of constitutional misadventure not once but twice.

Mulroney was not a real Quebecer?

Is your code that a real Quebecer is a Francophone?

Canada is a federation. I think many conservatives know this but some seem to want to go back to provincial politics after transferring powers to the provinces.

I agree.

[Argus]

So it just goes to show that people will suspend logic if properly manipulated with emotions,

Not all people. Mostly the ignorant ones. And there appear to be a lot of ignorant people in Quebec and Newfoundland.

[DrGreenthumb]

Not all people. Mostly the ignorant ones. And there appear to be a lot of ignorant people in Quebec and Newfoundland.

I think it would point to a lot more ignorance in the west where I live. Scaremongering crime policies, and distorting oppositon parties platforms while hiding their own platform under Harper's fuzzy sweater, are all conservative tactics. They have been running attack ads since the last election again showing a disregard for elections finance laws, and fairness in election. So the conservative policies are to manipulate voter's emotions with lies, and create public image falsities like the Harper in a sweater vest commercials and thinking they should have an unlimited budget to buy Canadian's votes. Other parties rely on their own platforms to appeal to the public, the conservatives hide most of their candidates and their platform and are the only party that consistantly refuses to show its platform with barely a week left in the campaign. I can only assume that they waited till after the debates to avoid having to answer unscripted questions about what they plan to do. Conservative policies are meant to appeal to emotion and not common sense and that is why they routinely ignore the opinions of experts when it goes against their "beliefs", like on environmental and criminal justice policies.

[Visionseeker]

The federal Liberal Party is successful because it understands Canada's regions: it joins French and English Canada. Is this bad? The greatest problem in this modern world is not ideology but region. Canadian federal Liberals bridge the impossible, and they have done this for over a century - since Laurier. Canadian federal Conservatives are still incapable of achieving this bridge.

Your emphasis on regionalism trumping ideology is true on balence, but ideology remains an important secondary influence.

Mulroney managed that bridge. But that strengthens the following theory I have about the Liberal and Conservative approaches to Quebec:

Conservatives try to find out want Quebec wants, Liberals look for what Quebec needs. The former engages in promises it cannot deliver, the latter soberly makes a case to govern.

Harper's third mistake in Quebec was to speak of "the steady hand". In Quebec, that's a Liberal trademark.

[Visionseeker]

If the Liberals had truly understood Quebec, they would not have selected Dion. He has been saddled with the Clarity Act and the issue won't go away.

With all due respect, this statement reveals that you don't understand Quebec. Dion's "fathering" the Clarity Act simply tells Quebeckers what they already knew: Dion is a federalist. What does that mean? It means he'll never get Pauline Marois or Gilles Duceppe's vote. Neither would Rae or Ignatieff for that matter.

Dion's task in Quebec is similar to what Chrétien encountered in 93. He needs to convince Quebec federalists that he's a genuine leader who has Quebec's interests at heart while running against an increasingly unpopular government. The main difference is that Chrétien had more time to make his case.

Dion will improve Liberal fortunes in Quebec on the 14th. 5 to 7 more seats are easily within reach. If instead he land 10 to 12 more, he will have done the most anyone could expect with the Liberal brand in Quebec.

The only thing that might reverse this trend would be the Conservative platform promising to re-open the Constitution. If that were to happen, Quebec could indeed go blue, but the rest of the country would probably go ape-shit crazy.

[jdobbin]

With all due respect, this statement reveals that you don't understand Quebec. Dion's "fathering" the Clarity Act simply tells Quebeckers what they already knew: Dion is a federalist. What does that mean? It means he'll never get Pauline Marois or Gilles Duceppe's vote. Neither would Rae or Ignatieff for that matter.

My conclusion comes from reading what Le Devoir and other Quebec press says about why Dion was rejected even by Quebec Liberals. The feeling was that Dion not only was the major force behind the Clarity Act but embarrassed Bouchard and this made him a target for francophone anger and distrust.

You think the Quebec press and political commentators are wrong? I didn't pull this out of thin air. I've never said I had any special knowledge of Quebec other than what I have read in the francophone press and what the polls were saying in regards to how Quebecers regarded Dion.

Dion's task in Quebec is similar to what Chrétien encountered in 93. He needs to convince Quebec federalists that he's a genuine leader who has Quebec's interests at heart while running against an increasingly unpopular government. The main difference is that Chrétien had more time to make his case.

Chretien ensured that he had a lock on a good number of seats in Quebec. Previous BQ leaders were as adept at countering Chretien as they seem to be with Harper.

When Dion was elected leader, I said it would be some feat if he could overcome that feelings the Clarity Act brought from parts of Quebec.

Dion will improve Liberal fortunes in Quebec on the 14th. 5 to 7 more seats are easily within reach. If instead he land 10 to 12 more, he will have done the most anyone could expect with the Liberal brand in Quebec.

I have heard of maybe two seats where the Liberals might have a steal.

The situation in Quebec is fluid.

The only thing that might reverse this trend would be the Conservative platform promising to re-open the Constitution. If that were to happen, Quebec could indeed go blue, but the rest of the country would probably go ape-shit crazy.

If he did say anything about the constitution, he will lose the election. It goes against the idea of a steady hand at government.

The economy is hammering Canada now. CTV reports tonight that Scotiabank forecasts a recession.

The economy seems to be hurting Harper more than he might have thought.

[Visionseeker]

This is nonsense, of course. Of course they're ideological. Quebecers tend to be very socialist in their thinking, while western Canada and many parts of Ontario tend to be fairly conservative. The getting tough on teenage killers thing has played well here, even among Liberals I know who otherwise detest Harper. I don't know anyone who is actually against it, Liberal or Tory. What you seem to be suggesting is that the government should only impliment legislation that Quebecers approve of, and the hell with what the rest of Canada thinks.

If I might bud-in... Ontario is NOT "fairly conservative". In 2006, the Conservatives managed 35% of the vote. That means that 65% of the electorate opted for a label other than a conservative one. Out west it is true that Alberta is conservative by majority, but everywhere else, only a plurality can be claimed.

Oh bullshit. The federal Liberal Party WAS successful because election after election it could count on getting virtually every seat from Quebec.

Up until 1984 they could. And you can blame conscription for that. but it has been a full 24 years since the Liberals won a majority of seats in Quebec.

And it got those seats by bribing Quebecers and making sure that their leaders were always Quebecers. But that alienated many Canadians in other parts of the country.

Wow! You really think that the Quebec seats under Chrétien were bought. That placing CANADA signs at cultural events and enriching a dozen ad men prompted millions of Quebecs to vote Liberal? No, you probably don't. You probably choose to simply "believe it" so that you can shroud more sinister beliefs.

And now that Quebecers have chosen the BQ as their great protectors the Liberals are rootless.

More historical disconnect. Mulroney created the Bloc (guess that makes you a big fan of Mulroney). The Liberals have been their only credible competition. It's democracy in action, unlike in Alberta where it's been one party all the time. Who's being politically obtuse?

Their only stronghold is among the immigrant communities in BC and Ontario, and the frightened Anglos in Montreal. This wasn't as obvious as long as the right was divided, but now that there's only one Tory party again it's become obvious.

You can add the Maritimes and NFLD to your list of strongholds. Your "one Tory party" may presently enjoy a small plurality. But ask yourself where your brand would stand if our electoral system demanded a majority via a run-off system. Uh-huh. So quit trying to project strength from weakness. The merger of the right does nothing to change the reality that the right is a minority in this country.

[Visionseeker]

Good points Argus, but I really think you are all applying way too much logic, look at NL for example, that wingnut Danny Williams has convinced, cajoled, or simply berated people into voting for the Liberals even though it will cut their own throats since it will tax the living hell out of their big new source of revenue OIL, thereby transferring even more money to the feds which is what he is telling them is their biggest fear. Even worse more people in the maritimes heat their homes with oil, the green shift would impoverish them. Now Williams is a smart guy and has to understand this but his pockets are already full, if he got what he asked for its only a matter of time until they tie him to something heavy and send him for a long walk off a short plank.

Willams is a smart guy. Smart enough to recognize that the price of oil is fickle and its age might soon be at an end. He'd like to believe that off shore drilling can save his province's economy, but he's not so stupid as to believe that his one basket of eggs can quickly become an omelette.

Now answer me this. If income taxes are relaxed in favour of consumption taxes, how can a voluntary taxation system tax someone "to the hilt"?

So it just goes to show that people will suspend logic if properly manipulated with emotions,

That's rich coming from a supporter of "put Harper in a sweater and make him appear with his and others kids to pull on the heart-strings of suburban women" or "throw teens into adult prisons because while they rarely kill people, they lead in the media when they do, so we can appeal to voter outrage".

this also explains the lingering traction of the scary Harper stuff the Liberals have been talking about for ten years, despite the complete lack of supporting evidence. Lots of pundits, here and elsewhere, will immendiately respond with a bunch of "evidence" but all of it will be tangential at best and most requires a least something of a leap of faith.

The scary Harper is the emotional manipulator we've seen. Harper is supported by "park your brain" people. And that is very scary.

Relying on that strategy, the Liberals will go back to their default position, about values and their "love" for Canada and all others positions will call into question motives, concerns and values because simply they have no logical argument why the electorate should get behind them.

All parties have logical positions which they advance to encourage electoral support. But the right wing always uses the bulk of logic defying, appeal to emotion, reality obfuscating tactics.

[TCCK]

The implication is that the only truly national party in Canada is the Liberal Party.

Yep the Liberals are the only party that can lie a different story in each province and totally brainwash the people they talk to whereas everyone else tries to sell their party using an old fashioned idea, TRUTH.

Don't drink the Liberal Kool-Aid, it'll kill you and the country!

[Argus]

If I might bud-in... Ontario is NOT "fairly conservative". In 2006, the Conservatives managed 35% of the vote.

I said "many parts of Ontario" and they will increase their popular vote this time around.

Wow! You really think that the Quebec seats under Chrétien were bought. That placing CANADA signs at cultural events and enriching a dozen ad men prompted millions of Quebecs to vote Liberal?

I wasn't referencing sponsorgate at all. Going back as far as Trudeau - which is as far back as I go - the Liberals have devoted an enormous amount of time and effort into bribing Quebecers. My family worked on the Hill for fifteen years in various capacities, and the list of program entitlements which crossed their desk every day earmarked towards Quebec was always vastly disproportionate. It still is. You can see it from time to time in the news, but for the most part you have to actually look at the federal budget. You'll find that, for example, cultural events in Quebec get more money on a per capita basis, than anywhere else in Canada. But so too do other programs. Quebec gets more for immigration settlement, more for airport construction and more in a wide variety of grants and programs. And always has. it's the case of a squeaky wheel getting the grease, and Quebec has always been the squeakiest wheel. Even when Mulroney was in it was just as important for him to bribe them as it was for Trudeau before him, and Quebec after him.

More historical disconnect. Mulroney created the Bloc (guess that makes you a big fan of Mulroney).

Not entirely honest of you. In fact, the initial leader of the BQ came from Mulroney's cabinet, but he could just as easily have come from the Liberals. Many Liberals flirt with separatism. The current Liberal leader was a separatist. The current BQ leader, btw, was a Communist.

You can add the Maritimes and NFLD to your list of strongholds.

I wouldn't exactly call them strongholds, but it is true that those in the east tend to vote for whomever can bribe them with more of Ontario and Alberta's money, and the Liberals have been seen for some time now as considerably more generous with other people's money than the Tories.

[PoliticalCitizen]

Yep the Liberals are the only party that can lie a different story in each province and totally brainwash the people they talk to whereas everyone else tries to sell their party using an old fashioned idea, TRUTH.

LOL

Everyone else, you say? Would that be the Marxist-Leninist party?

[Argus]

Now answer me this. If income taxes are relaxed in favour of consumption taxes, how can a voluntary taxation system tax someone "to the hilt"?

This is a joke, right? You're not seriously calling a tax on home heating oil, natural gas, electricity and gasoline as "voluntary"?

"Well yes, you can choose to freeze to death in the dark, and then you don't have to pay high taxes!"

Of course you'll still have to pay the higher prices for everything you consume because all those companies out there have to pay higher energy and transportation costs - so leave enough for us to get it off your estate!

That's rich coming from a supporter of "put Harper in a sweater and make him appear with his and others kids to pull on the heart-strings of suburban women"

This focus on Harper in the sweater is more than a by hypocritical. I haven't seen Layton or Dion in a suit and tie since the election began. They're trying to appear like "joe lunchpail" with their shirts open, their ties off, and shirt sleeves rolled up, as often as not.

Which is itself kind of rich given they're a couple of academic elitists who've spent much of their lives in the ivory tower.

or "throw teens into adult prisons because while they rarely kill people

There has never been a suggestion from anyone - except the left, that teens be thrown into adult prisons. As for them rarely killing people - think again. Youth violence has skyrocketed. And since the only occasions when the option for a judge to sentence them to adult sentences would only be in cases of extreme violence I don't know what the hell you're on about.

Except that, like much of the Left, you take positions based on emotions, and rarely actually bother to find out the facts about them.

The scary Harper is the

The product of your imagination, a creation of snickering spin doctors who cynically believe there's a sucker born every minute, and know how to herd the the dullards with fear.

[wulf42]

On youth crime, Duceppe was able to portray Harper as a guy who would send 14 year old boys into an adult male prison.

And that is exactly what should happen to these little bastards! they swarm little old ladies, punch their lights out and steal what little they have....destroy property knowing that nothing will happen to them (thanks to sqeamish liberals)..............this country has been way to soft on young offenders for way to long its time to end it for good...time to deal with these punks Texas style! and let these little punks who literally get away with murder (again thank the liberals for that!) pay for their crimes big time...they want to be "gangsta's" then treat them like "gangsta's"....and throw this worthless waste of skin in jail to play with the big boys and see how tough these little bastards are then...........another reason to vote Harper!!!!

Edited October 6, 2008 by wulf42

[betsy]

Well, something interesting was brought up on MDuffy today by the La Presse journalist. There's still hope in Quebec!

Apparently it's considered politically incorrect in Quebec to say you're voting for the Conservatives because of the pressure from the artist groups. Those who favor the Conservatives will tend to lie low and be quiet about it. This happened with the ADQ whose poll numbers prior to the election were low....but won with 5% more than the poll numbers actually showed.

Then there's this new book by Paul Martin who's laying the blame of the Liberal woes today right on Chretien's doorstep.

The book's supposed to be out at the end of October but La Presse got a leak on it. Excerpts will be featured in La Presse. It is said to be more vicious than the Coulliard book.

This book is a reminder of all the old stuff that's bad about the Liberals. So how will this play out among Quebecers?

All the Conservatives need do is to dig up bones - shawinigate, HRDC, sponsorship scandal.....

Edited October 6, 2008 by betsy

[Argus]

All the Conservatives need do is to dig up bones - shawinigate, HRDC, sponsorship scandal.....

No. The Conservatives need to make the point that they are managing the economy properly, with tax cuts for business to help stimulate the economy. They need to point out that Dion, Duceppe and Layton want to increase taxes on business at the worst possible time. And they need to ridicule Dion over the fact he opposed Kyoto when he was in Chretien's cabinet but named his dog Kyoto.

Edited October 7, 2008 by Argus

[capricorn]

Then there's this new book by Paul Martin who's laying the blame of the Liberal woes today right on Chretien's doorstep.

The book's supposed to be out at the end of October but La Presse got a leak on it. Excerpts will be featured in La Presse. It is said to be more vicious than the Coulliard book.

This book is a reminder of all the old stuff that's bad about the Liberals. So how will this play out among Quebecers?

All the Conservatives need do is to dig up bones - shawinigate, HRDC, sponsorship scandal.....

The ghosts of past Liberal sins will be resurrected quite nicely with the leaked Martin book, especially in Quebec where they applaud whenever politicians self-destruct, especially the Liberals.

I think a combination of attack ads against Dion's inept leadership and, repeating that slow and steady is the way to go on the economy. Repeat that it's not the time for grandiose, uncertain economic plans which is what the Liberals and the NDP are offering.

[capricorn]

The Conservatives need to make the point that they are managing the economy properly,

Argus this is very important especially at this time of the year. We're nearing the Christmas shopping season. Christmas sales are make or break for many small businesses. If Dion and Layton continue to spook consumers with their apocalyptic messages, consumers will sock away their money and cut down substantially on their spending. This spells disaster for the retail and related trade. That's one of the main reasons I think the opposition is sabotaging the economy with their fear mongering.

It's all about consumer confidence.

[DrGreenthumb]

Argus this is very important especially at this time of the year. We're nearing the Christmas shopping season. Christmas sales are make or break for many small businesses. If Dion and Layton continue to spook consumers with their apocalyptic messages, consumers will sock away their money and cut down substantially on their spending. This spells disaster for the retail and related trade. That's one of the main reasons I think the opposition is sabotaging the economy with their fear mongering.

It's all about consumer confidence.

Actually if Layton becomes prime minister he will give money to families in the mid to low income levels, and then they will spend that money in the small business and our economy will flourish. Giving money to people who have more than they can spend already is going to stimulate nothing except bigger inheritances for their spoiled little rich kids, who have no idea of the reality of living paycheck to paycheck like the rest of us have to. The rich can kiss my ass with their whining. Give the people their money and they will spend it, the money will still go to business, but the people will also get a piece of it and improve their standard of living. Where I live the business owners and farmers have a shitload more money, and assets than anyone who is a wage earner. They can cry all they want but the thick walls of their mansions make it kinda hard for me to hear them. Working people are putting in 50-60 hours a week and can still barely make ends meet. Look at the vehicles the business owners and farmers are driving and the houses they live in for a clue to how hard done by they are. Its time for the working men and women in this country to elect a prime minister who will put THEIR interests first.

[blueblood]

Actually if Layton becomes prime minister he will give money to families in the mid to low income levels, and then they will spend that money in the small business and our economy will flourish. Giving money to people who have more than they can spend already is going to stimulate nothing except bigger inheritances for their spoiled little rich kids, who have no idea of the reality of living paycheck to paycheck like the rest of us have to. The rich can kiss my ass with their whining. Give the people their money and they will spend it, the money will still go to business, but the people will also get a piece of it and improve their standard of living. Where I live the business owners and farmers have a shitload more money, and assets than anyone who is a wage earner. They can cry all they want but the thick walls of their mansions make it kinda hard for me to hear them. Working people are putting in 50-60 hours a week and can still barely make ends meet. Look at the vehicles the business owners and farmers are driving and the houses they live in for a clue to how hard done by they are. Its time for the working men and women in this country to elect a prime minister who will put THEIR interests first.

What your are seeing happening in the economy is exactly what happens when the rich suffer. When the business owners suffer they can't pay their workers and the problem cascades. What happened was because of democrats FORCING banks to give loans to poor people. If we'd have let the poor people live in apartments and cheap houses like they should, we wouldn't be in this mess.

Having Layton and Dion put more taxes on businesses will be the nail in the coffin. Businesses will leave. I hope the NDP has a plan for providing jobs in the civil service sector. The Chretien and Martin Liberals understand it, and if they weren't the Liberal party I'd consider voting for them as an alternative to the tories if they mess up.

The tories have made tax cut after tax cut which means more money in the pockets of everyone. Taking money from the rich and giving it to the poor is proposterous and a recipe for economic disaster. Why the NDP wants Canada to become Venezuela is beyond me. That country has a punish the rich attitude and look at the crap hole it turned out to be. If anything Layton is the biggest threat to Canada.