Support for Tories up amid House crisis,

[Wild Bill]

I see it as a enraged misinformed public that no one is giving information to.

Of course emotion of the public who are uneducated on our democracy is going to flock to the only people telling them what democracy is (which is a lie in this case). In this case being the conservatives.

I think if the media actually attempted to inform the public on what is going on things would look different.

But it seems like the CBC at least is just attempting to make news worthy stories for viewers.. and no focussing on the facts.

If I understand you correctly, the only reason people would support Harper is if they were stupid, ignorant and/or gullible.

Aren't you being the teesiest bit elitist and patronizing? How about someone being smart, well-informed and shrewd, but they simply don't feel the opposing argument has merit?

You aren't the ONLY intelligent being in the Universe, you know!

Sheesh...you even got BCchick to take your attitude and that's not like her at all.

[HistoryBuff44]

Are you surprised?

Of course, ordinary people are ignorant or easily influenced by money. Democracy is a good idea as long as rich people can't influence the ignorant masses - the masses need to know their interests.

Link

I love how so many people come on here and start bashing people who vote different than they about how dumb, gullable and average they are. i dont recall reading how you have cured cancer or solved world hunger or anything remotely close that would classify you as extraordinary. pretty sure that makes you ordinary, just like me. I am mostly informed, so are most people, they are allowed to vote their conscience same as you. why is your view so much more correct than theirs or mine?

I happen to think, as i did from the start of it, that the coalition was a rookie move. it was too soon from when canadians almost gave the cons a majority, it doesnt take a genious to realise people will be pissed about having their decisions overturned. everyone knows the pace of government makes a snail look like a jack rabbit, 5 weeks simply wasnt enough time to give the government a chance. this doesnt make people stupid or dumb, it makes them canadian.

[Argus]

It's so true about our right-wingers too. Harper's plans don't really benefit anyone but corporations and the rich... what else does he have to win people over other than fear?

First, the opposition have been wildly exaggerating the economic scenarios in order to frighten Canadians since Bear Stearns went under. Dion in particular has been running around like a headless chicken. Now they've tried to bring down the government with the justification that things are in such a crisis we can't wait a month to actually plan how to spend the tens of billions in incentives they want to lavish on - uhm, business.

Second, you don't even know what Harper's plans are yet so how can you say they're only to benefit the rich? Paranoia? Knee-jerk reactionary drivel?

[Argus]

And how many large businesses that will be getting tax cuts will also be getting a chunk of the inevitable stimulus package(s)?

That sort of thing is why you plan and consult rather carefully before you finalize your plan - as opposed to spraying money around with a firehose, which I gather the Libs/NDP/BQ intended.

As Harper said, you shouldn't expect a government which was sworn in 2 weeks ago to already have all the details of a multi-billion dollar subsidy program inked and ready to explain.

[Argus]

I can understand how people are afraid to tell the truth in the face of Dictator Harper and his band of thugish goons.

You're quite the strange fellow, aren't you.

[M.Dancer]

hmm...........

Hope that helps

Yeah..although it was a lawyer's question...meaning I already knew the answer

[BC Viking]

I love how so many people come on here and start bashing people who vote different than they about how dumb, gullable and average they are. i dont recall reading how you have cured cancer or solved world hunger or anything remotely close that would classify you as extraordinary. pretty sure that makes you ordinary, just like me. I am mostly informed, so are most people, they are allowed to vote their conscience same as you. why is your view so much more correct than theirs or mine?

I happen to think, as i did from the start of it, that the coalition was a rookie move. it was too soon from when canadians almost gave the cons a majority, it doesnt take a genious to realise people will be pissed about having their decisions overturned. everyone knows the pace of government makes a snail look like a jack rabbit, 5 weeks simply wasnt enough time to give the government a chance. this doesnt make people stupid or dumb, it makes them canadian.

Let me start by saying that I'm new to this forum, but by know means new to prognosticating on all things political. I would be greatful if you could please explain how 37% constitutes almost a majority? I would also like to know if anybody else here is of the same mind as I, when I say that perhaps the conservatives pander to the uneducated, ignorant, masses when using fear mongering in order to push through 'reform' style legislation? Is it not a fact that the majority of the seats held by Harper's conservatives are rural seats? Do we as a country want these ridings cramming their extremist religious ideology down our throats? Furthermore is it not fact that this proroging tactic is not dis-similar to tactics emplyed by fascist regimes throughout history?

[HistoryBuff44]

Let me start by saying that I'm new to this forum, but by know means new to prognosticating on all things political. I would be greatful if you could please explain how 37% constitutes almost a majority? I would also like to know if anybody else here is of the same mind as I, when I say that perhaps the conservatives pander to the uneducated, ignorant, masses when using fear mongering in order to push through 'reform' style legislation? Is it not a fact that the majority of the seats held by Harper's conservatives are rural seats? Do we as a country want these ridings cramming their extremist religious ideology down our throats? Furthermore is it not fact that this proroging tactic is not dis-similar to tactics emplyed by fascist regimes throughout history?

wow.. where to begin. about the "almost a majority", the statement is referring to the fact that the cons are a few seats short of a majority. as for the population, statistics is how we can infer that roughly the same result would have occured had 100% of the population voted. for those who i know will remark on this i say again roughly. thats how statistics works.

as for the last statement... did you honestly just compare the quiet rural areas of the west to fascist germany??? give your head a shake.... wow.

[White Doors]

Let me start by saying that I'm new to this forum, but by know means new to prognosticating on all things political. I would be greatful if you could please explain how 37% constitutes almost a majority? I would also like to know if anybody else here is of the same mind as I, when I say that perhaps the conservatives pander to the uneducated, ignorant, masses when using fear mongering in order to push through 'reform' style legislation? Is it not a fact that the majority of the seats held by Harper's conservatives are rural seats? Do we as a country want these ridings cramming their extremist religious ideology down our throats? Furthermore is it not fact that this proroging tactic is not dis-similar to tactics emplyed by fascist regimes throughout history?

How can you call the 'masses' ignorant when you write things like this?

but by know means

I mean, that is not a typo, that is not knowing the difference between 'no' and 'know' because they sound similar.

Almost a majority? They were something like 12 seats shy of having a majority of the seats in the Parliament, meaning that they would not need opposition support in order to pass legislation.

There, that help?

Signed, the uneducated, ignorant masses.

[fellowtraveller]

The Libs now have 7 weeks to dump Dion.

Very unlikely, the caucus are in semi-chaos and semi-revolt now and very very unlikely that any of the leadership candidates will defer to another and anoint a new leader that soon. Besides, Dion still has fantasies of becoming PM himself and he will not abandon that readily.

Finally, how likely is it that Duceppe and Layton will accept anybody else? Of course, they have lashed themselves to a 24 carat loser in Dion, so anything is possible.

[kimmy]

Kimmy, I wasn't talking about the coalition per se, I was talking about Harper's tactics. He seems to have taken a page out of the Republican handbook where he knows his policies can't appeal to the majority of the people, so all he does is smear. This last example of him playing the separatism card instead of brining up the issues demonstrated exactly that. He could've garnered sympathy by painting them as bullies who continued even after he changed his mind. But no, not one to seem like a bullying flip-flopper, all he did throughout the whole speech last night was go on with a bunch of untruths about an unholy alliance which is bringing into question the whole idea of our democracy. In a nutshell, it was all BS.

...

This point is interesting. From a strategic perspective... The CPC did a fantastic job of smearing Dion during the election and certainly did a fantastic job now. I think this 'coalition' did themselves no favours with still having Dion around. He should have stepped dpown immediately after the election and someone else should have stepped in. This would have killed comments like kimmys.

Between that and the cries (untrue of course) of seperatist coalition, it was enough.

If they had been at least a little honest they would have focused on the practicalities of installing a gov't where the bloc would have been involved in day to day, foreign policy, trade etc...

It's easier to default to the lowest common denominator for the great unwashed though it seems.

You guys are upset about a political leader in Canada attacking his opponents based on an unpopular leader and vague allegations about their agenda and their associates instead of putting forward a positive message about policies?

Holy cow, what party have you guys been supporting for the past decade?

-k

[Topaz]

Have any of you on here that is saying the untruths about Quebec read the agreement??? The only part that the Bloc signed was for the economic of Canada, which includes the people of Quebec to help the people who are losing or loss their jobs, just like it would be for ALL Canadians. There is NOTHING there about the constitution in the agreement for the Bloc. The NDP and the Libs , also have a separate agreement from the Bloc. So when the Cons started to call all the 3 parties name and using the word treason it was just to get people worked up for their sake.

[Martin Chriton]

Let me start by saying that I'm new to this forum, but by know means new to prognosticating on all things political. I would be greatful if you could please explain how 37% constitutes almost a majority? I would also like to know if anybody else here is of the same mind as I,

As other have already said Harper was close to winning half the seats. As a reminder Chretien got a majority in the 90's with 38% of the popular vote.

when I say that perhaps the conservatives pander to the uneducated, ignorant, masses when using fear mongering in order to push through 'reform' style legislation?

I think all political parties are guilty of using fear mongering at times. The left is just a guilty, e.g.: some of the most ignorant try to compare Harper to historical figures such as Hitler.

[Wilber]

Chretien never got more than 42% of the popular vote in any of his majorities. He got one majority with 38%. The Cons may have got 37.6% of the vote but they got 46% of the seats. That's how our system works. The amount of popular vote a party receives is a minor factor in how many seats they get, how those votes are distributed is more important. One reason why so many out west are pissed at this Dion, Layton, Duceppe coalition idea.

Our electoral system

[Keepitsimple]

Very unlikely, the caucus are in semi-chaos and semi-revolt now and very very unlikely that any of the leadership candidates will defer to another and anoint a new leader that soon. Besides, Dion still has fantasies of becoming PM himself and he will not abandon that readily.

Finally, how likely is it that Duceppe and Layton will accept anybody else? Of course, they have lashed themselves to a 24 carat loser in Dion, so anything is possible.

That's a good point....Layton probably was thinking that he would end up with a lot of airtime because Dion was so weak.....but now Rae is speaking out so Jack is still in the background. Jack doesn't like to be in the background. He likes to tak..and talk...and talk. On a personal note, I'd like to chop off a few of Jack's little fingers. When he speaks he makes a habit of counting on his fingers when he's making points like first, secondly and finally....all the while bending the fingers on his quite tiny hands. Glad I got that off my chest - it's been a constant irritant.

Edited December 5, 2008 by Keepitsimple

[madmax]

Yeah..although it was a lawyer's question...meaning I already knew the answer

There you go again......

Edited December 5, 2008 by madmax

[wulf42]

Hopefully the Liberals keep Dion...lol, he is Harpers best chance of getting a majority!

[August1991]

I love how so many people come on here and start bashing people who vote different than they about how dumb, gullable and average they are. i dont recall reading how you have cured cancer or solved world hunger or anything remotely close that would classify you as extraordinary. pretty sure that makes you ordinary, just like me. I am mostly informed, so are most people, they are allowed to vote their conscience same as you. why is your view so much more correct than theirs or mine?

HistoryBuff, I have been told that the Internet does not do irony well. I don't think you understood that my post was tongue in cheek.

The CPC polling numbers are up, but they can't use them, because only 16% of people are interested in an election. That is the lowest number I have ever witnessed. Going to the polls with numbers like this in the foreseeable future will result in unpredictable election results, possibly radical ones.

...

If you are wondering where the problem is... Dion destroyed a coalition in 3 short days, a couple incomprehensible speeches and a failed Television Network Address. It doesn't get worse then that.

Madmax, polls show that most Canadians want an election if the government falls.

I also note that the coalition supporters are now blaming Dion for the coalition's lack of popularity. Sorry, you're wrong again. The coalition is unpopular because Liberal voters do not want the NDP in a cabinet and they do not want a Liberal government beholden to the Bloc for every critical vote.

-----

IMHO, this little political drama has made fools of many commentators who gave any credence to this colaition project. It shows how far these commentators are from the basic common sense of ordinary people. (As others have noted above in this thread, we have leftists bemoaning the ignorance of the gullible little people whom the same leftists claim to represent! Talk about being patronizing.)

Stephane Dion has now put an unsavoury twist on the end of his career. He will be shunned by his fellow Liberals for what he did. Bob Rae has destroyed any chance he had of becoming Liberal leader. Gilles Duceppe, the same guy who was a candidate for PQ leader for all of 24 hours, has shown about the same acumen in this coalition imbroglio. Even Jack Layton may lose among his supporters because he put power before protest.

The Tories are now polling over 50%.

Yet, the chattering classes drone on, blame Dion for this fiasco or claim that Harper has stirred up the Quebec sovereignists. Huh? Jean Charest is well placed to win a strong majority with support across Quebec. Even Mario Dumont is slightly up from his low position of two weeks ago.

-----

There's one little footnote to this whole sorry, coalition episode. A majority of English Canadians (and a strong minority of Quebecers) support Harper's original proposal to cut public funding of political parties - the proposal that provoked this mini-crisis. (The Bloc depends on the $1.95/vote subsidy for over 85% of its funding.)

A clear majority of Canadians believe that political parties should not be funded by the public purse, according to a new poll that suggests Prime Minister Stephen Harper was on the right track when he eliminated the subsidy, sparking outrage from the opposition parties.

Sixty-one per cent of voters said they oppose federal political parties securing $1.95 annually for each vote, which is a major source of party funding.

...

The strongest opposition to public financing of political parties is in Alberta, where 75 per cent of adults said it should not exist. On the other end of the spectrum, 52 per cent of Quebecers support the subsidy.

CanWest

[Canadian Blue]

"If you tell the people 'I'm going to give tax-cuts to the rich and outsource your job, vote for me!' they wouldn't. You have to find something else that will make everyday people vote for you, and that's why they play on fear."

As compared to playing to economic nationalism, which apparently is so much better. It's ironic that he stated the right plays on fears about social issues, yet then he proceeds to prey on fears about the Mexicans or some other poor third world workers taking American jobs.

It's so true about our right-wingers too. Harper's plans don't really benefit anyone but corporations and the rich... what else does he have to win people over other than fear?

Exactly, the last thing this country needs is a government that has this delusion that businessman are better able to run their business than bureaucrats. Everyone knows that our country would be much more efficient if one man out of Ottawa was to ensure all of our needs were met.

Of course emotion of the public who are uneducated on our democracy is going to flock to the only people telling them what democracy is (which is a lie in this case). In this case being the conservatives.

I think if the media actually attempted to inform the public on what is going on things would look different.

I'm sure if the newsmedia were to tell everyone that the only real reason for this coalition was the opposition losing taxpayer subsidies, most of the public would be on the side of the government.

I would also like to know if anybody else here is of the same mind as I, when I say that perhaps the conservatives pander to the uneducated, ignorant, masses when using fear mongering in order to push through 'reform' style legislation?

Awe yes, just because someone doesn't believe in a massive nanny state bureaucracy they are automatically assumed to be uneducated and ignorant. Bravo!!!

Is it not a fact that the majority of the seats held by Harper's conservatives are rural seats? Do we as a country want these ridings cramming their extremist religious ideology down our throats?

Aka, if you're not from Toronto your views aren't welcome. By the way from my time living in a rural riding I can't recall religious extremism, it seems that most people in my area want government to butt out of our lives. You know, they believe in being more independent from the government and think they're better managers of their money then some faceless bureaucrat, is that an example of our version of the Taliban?

But then again most of the people who make these absurd assumptions about people tend to live sheltered lives out at the local cafe where they talk about how superior they are to everyone else for using recycled toilet paper.

Furthermore is it not fact that this proroging tactic is not dis-similar to tactics emplyed by fascist regimes throughout history?

No, it's not. Pick up a history book. If what Harper did is fascist, then our entire Parliamentary system is fascist. But I'm sure that when Hitler had his COALITION government in place, he prorogued the Reichstag in the hopes that the Commies would burn it to the ground. Holy crap, if Hitler had a coalition, and the opposition wants a coalition, does that mean Stephane Dion is secretly Adolf Hitler. Their are way too many parallels, and it's not "dis-similar." I just blew this conspiracy wide open and will immediately be calling Alex Jones with the news.

Edited December 6, 2008 by Canadian Blue

[-VMG-]

The conservatives are attempting to tell the public that what the coalition is doing is not democracy... when it is.

The fact that the cons took those things off the bill and they still are going is saying that it's the principle of the matter... The idea that Harper is going too far, and he needs to be replaced.

If people actually knew what was going on in Ottawa they would understand why this is happening.

First it's a minority government... the conservatives do not have any more right to rule than any other party. They just need less support from everybody else than the others would to gain a majority on a bill.

Also Harper is forcing the opposition to vote for bills by making many of them confidence votes, playing into the "the opposition forced us into ANOTHER election, only a few months after the last" when the reality is the conservatives are forcing them to vote for bills that they don't agree with because it will hurt their reputation with Canadians.

And finally if Canadians were informed that this is one of the balances of power in our democracy, and that it is perfectly legal, there would be less people talking about how it's undemocratic and how it is a "coup" against the government.... this coincides with the whole minority government deal.

That is what i meant by uneducated... as in uneducated politically. The conservatives are playing their game perfectly... it's up to the media and the coalition to dispel their misinformation and fear tactics.

I personally think that both sides are playing games, and they need to stop being selfish and try to figure out what is best for the country in the current state of the economy. Not that i think anything can actually be done considering there is too much international influence on our economy for us to really make a difference.

[Riverwind]

First it's a minority government... the conservatives do not have any more right to rule than any other party. They just need less support from everybody else than the others would to gain a majority on a bill.

This bun fight reminds me up of the uproar over David Emerson when he crossed the floor. In our system we elect people to represent the ridings - we do not vote for parties. This meant there was absolutely nothing wrong with Emerson crossing the floor the day after the election yet we heard a lot of Liberals screaming about how democracy was denied.

[scribblet]

Don't know who wrote this so can't give credit, but it's good:

T’was three weeks before Christmas, when all through the house

The opposition was stirring, even Layton - the louse.

The dealings were waved in front of noses in the air,

In hopes that a Coalition soon would be there.

The Blocs were nestled all snug in their beds,

While visions of separatism danced in their heads.

And Jack in his ‘kerchief, and Stéphane - the sap,

Had just settled down for a long winter’s nap.

When all across the country there arose such a clatter,

Dion insisted, it didn’t really matter.

Away out the window, he threw with a flash,

The results of the election, amid the backlash.

The moon on the breast of Elizabeth May,

Suggested she might still be able to play.

When, what to her wondering eyes should appear,

But a weasely Frenchman with promises dear.

With a little old driver, so lively and quick,

I knew in a moment it was Jack Layton, the dick.

More rapid than eagles his coursers they came,

And he whistled, and shouted, and called them by name!

"Now Dion! now, Duceppe! Now May - you vixen!

Let’s get together, It’s time to Listen!

To the top of the porch! to the top of the wall!

Let’s unite! Let’s unite! Separatists and all!"

And then, in a twinkling, they heard on the roof

The prancing and pawing of Canadians, not aloof.

They drew in their heads, and turned around,

And down the chimney St Harper came with a bound.

He was dressed all in gold, from his head to his feet,

Letting them know he wouldn’t be easy to defeat.

A bundle of Tories he had flung on his back,

And he looked like a King, with nothing to lack.

His eyes-how they glared! his fists, how clenched!

He stands for democracy, and won’t see it trenched!

His droll little mouth was drawn up in a sneer,

For the governor-general soon would appear..

The promise of dissolving he held tight in his teeth,

And the smoke it caused encircled his head like a wreath.

He had a stern face and a little round belly,

And wanted to bury Dion in a bowlful of jelly!

Harper was elected by Canadians, voted in fair,

Not a Weasel, not a Separatist, not the guy with no hair!

With them getting together, it will have to be said,

Canadians will face the future with dread.

Harper spoke not a word, but went straight to his work,

Shook his head in disgust, then turned to the jerk.

And laying his middle finger aside of his nose,

And giving a nod, up the chimney he rose!

He sprang to his sleigh, to his team gave a shout,

Trying to teach Canadians, what this is about.

And I heard him exclaim, ‘ere he drove out of sight,

"This is the end of democracy, C’mon lets fight!"

[jdobbin]

This meant there was absolutely nothing wrong with Emerson crossing the floor the day after the election yet we heard a lot of Liberals screaming about how democracy was denied.

Some certainly did. I have never made an issue of crossing the floor.

I pointed out it was hypocritical of the Tories to criticize it when they accepted it themselves.

[Long]

Awe yes, just because someone doesn't believe in a massive nanny state bureaucracy they are automatically assumed to be uneducated and ignorant. Bravo!!!

As far as I could tell, that is technically not an insult. Although clarification is required. Not everyone with a full-time job has the time to follow politics. It is even safe to assume a majority are "uneducated and ignorant" to a great deal of facts readily available to them. A widely used political tool in the US is controlling the different headlines in newspapers to create misinformation and mislead the general population. We can see this happening when Harper is referring to the missing flags in the signing of the coalition.

[bush_cheney2004]

.....A widely used political tool in the US is controlling the different headlines in newspapers to create misinformation and mislead the general population. We can see this happening when Harper is referring to the missing flags in the signing of the coalition.

Strawman + false association = flawed conclusion

Works like this:

1) Fabricate or reinforce held notions from the US to add credibility with a partisan audience

2) Declare that the US "general population" has been so victimized

...and the payoff

3) Associate this idea with the domestic political target