Ignatieff and the Liberals

[punked]

And yet your party was prepared to support the Liberals as government.

Again we go with the what are you talking about question?

[punked]

Yeah it happens to be the reason we haven't had an election.

Go figure.

[Jerry J. Fortin]

Go figure.

Son't worry, Iggy will pull the plug if Harper doesn't.

[Keepitsimple]

I fully expect we will see policies coming in the fall.

The spot the Tories are most vulnerable on is a plan to end the deficit once the economy shows signs of improving.

I think the Liberals should start listing where they will reduce spending, improving the tax system and restoring some controls over the budget.

The Tories have had no control over their spending even when the economy was doing well.

Be careful what you wish for. First of all, the Liberals wanted the government to spend more on stimulus - you might argue semantics but that's how their approach has been framed by just about everyone because they constantly harped that the Conservatives were not doing enough.....and with regards to "listing" where they are going to reduce spending, every item on the list becomes a target for criticism and can be spun to imply that they will gut programs. Oddly, that's always what the Conservatives are accused of in that ficticious "hidden agenda". It seems that the Libs are now the owners of the Hidden Agenda. But seriously, if the economy really is turning around as the BOC says, it gives credibility to what the Conservatives have done and by extension, their plans for reducing and eliminating the deficit. As I said, without the ability to make grandiose promises (with no intention of keeping them of course), the Libs are having trouble coming up with a compelling platform.

[Moonbox]

Wow, a left winger accusing the Star of bias. Seems to me the Star is showing that it isn't any more biased than any other source.

The Star isn't biased left or right. The Star is biased in favour of the Liberal Party. When it comes to a Liberal bias, it's probably the HEAVIEST and most widely acknowledged hack Liberal newspaper in Canada. The support is almost unflinching. They were pretty much the only major newspaper in Canada that endorsed Dion last election.

Do you even read it? It's as joke. It's worse than the CBC.

Edited August 4, 2009 by Moonbox

[jdobbin]

Be careful what you wish for. First of all, the Liberals wanted the government to spend more on stimulus - you might argue semantics but that's how their approach has been framed by just about everyone because they constantly harped that the Conservatives were not doing enough.....a

And the Liberals criticized the spending from 2006 to 2008 and being geared to getting the Tories elected rather than the principles they ran on which was to keep spending limited to to the rate of inflation and population growth.

The Tories built no margin for their spending and now a deficit could be around for some time.

The stimulus didn't have to come from going into deficit as we have seen from some provinces.

nd with regards to "listing" where they are going to reduce spending, every item on the list becomes a target for criticism and can be spun to imply that they will gut programs.

By all means, make that criticism. We have seen Canadians will support ending deficits in the past. If the economy is improving, they will likely demand it.

Oddly, that's always what the Conservatives are accused of in that ficticious "hidden agenda". It seems that the Libs are now the owners of the Hidden Agenda. But seriously, if the economy really is turning around as the BOC says, it gives credibility to what the Conservatives have done and by extension, their plans for reducing and eliminating the deficit. As I said, without the ability to make grandiose promises (with no intention of keeping them of course), the Libs are having trouble coming up with a compelling platform.

Well, we have already seen doubts from many sources on ending the deficit. No matter what happens, the Tories will be forced to cut or tax.

I suppose they can run on more spending but even their base is likely to be queasy about that.

The Liberals are faced with the same question.

No one is talking about it this summer publicly. This whole idea that an election campaign should be run during the summer is rich considering the media specifically said it was a bad time to do something like that.

We'll be seeing more focus in the fall. We could be seeing an election in the fall if Harper sees an opportunity.

[jdobbin]

Again we go with the what are you talking about question?

Then coalition. Seems that should have been against your morals.

Edited August 4, 2009 by jdobbin

[Moonbox]

Seems to me that you did want to support a party that went against your morals. You'll have to make up your mind.

What are you talking about? That doesn't even make sense. The NDP hasn't supported the conservatives as far as I know. It was the Bloc for awhile and since then it has been the Liberals.

Don't mistake bringing voting against the Liberals as support for the Conservatives. You don't have to support either.

[jdobbin]

What are you talking about? That doesn't even make sense. The NDP hasn't supported the conservatives as far as I know. It was the Bloc for awhile and since then it has been the Liberals.

I was referring to the NDP supporting the Liberals. The reference was that they didn't fit with NDP morals.

Don't mistake bringing voting against the Liberals as support for the Conservatives. You don't have to support either.

I was saying that some in the NDP claimed to not support the Liberals based on morals but looked at jumping in with them as a coalition. As I said, they should make up their minds.

[Moonbox]

I was saying that some in the NDP claimed to not support the Liberals based on morals but looked at jumping in with them as a coalition. As I said, they should make up their minds.

That's a pretty good point. Sorry if I misunderstood.

[punked]

I was referring to the NDP supporting the Liberals. The reference was that they didn't fit with NDP morals.

I was saying that some in the NDP claimed to not support the Liberals based on morals but looked at jumping in with them as a coalition. As I said, they should make up their minds.

Yes we have dealt with the Liberals in the past. Like when we wrote that Martin budget and we supported that. When our party gets a say and gets to push the issue of the working people instead of voting with a party who is pushing big bisuness interests we will always be read to throw in with that kind of deal. If the Liberals did that there would be no need for the NDP.

[jdobbin]

Yes we have dealt with the Liberals in the past. Like when we wrote that Martin budget and we supported that. When our party gets a say and gets to push the issue of the working people instead of voting with a party who is pushing big bisuness interests we will always be read to throw in with that kind of deal. If the Liberals did that there would be no need for the NDP.

If the NDP had any morals, they would never deal with the Liberals. At least that is what a real NDPer would say.

[punked]

If the NDP had any morals, they would never deal with the Liberals. At least that is what a real NDPer would say.

Guess I am not an real NDPer then. I am for forcing through the agenda anyway possible. That includes the war Bill Blackie waged in the 80s on behalf of Healthcare. That includes making promises that the Liberals are forced to stole too look like they are being progressive, or dealing with them too keep the government running. Heck we tried to get their vote on the third reading of an EI bill on that last day before summer and they wouldn't show up too the vote because they want to get the credit for "fixing" EI. We just want it done, and fast not to have the credit. I mean you guys already stole the Bill of rights, Charter of rights and freedoms, Pension Plans, and Health Care from us.

[Moonbox]

If the NDP had any morals, they would never deal with the Liberals. At least that is what a real NDPer would say.

We know that's how far your political thinking goes in your blind support for the Liberals, but does that mean that other people shouldn't use their brains and be objective?

[jdobbin]

We know that's how far your political thinking goes in your blind support for the Liberals, but does that mean that other people shouldn't use their brains and be objective?

I was speaking to someone who said it was NDP morals that prevented them from supporting the Liberals but then keep coming back to them and supporting them in things like the coalition.

I wasn't speaking about people who vote in any election based on what they see in the person, the leader, the party and the policies.

[jdobbin]

Guess I am not an real NDPer then. I am for forcing through the agenda anyway possible.

I think you said that the NDP had morals preventing them from supporting the Liberals. Well, you routinely support the Liberals.

[punked]

I think you said that the NDP had morals preventing them from supporting the Liberals. Well, you routinely support the Liberals.

Yes when the Liberals are giving hand outs to the rich we try to say "hey wait there are a lot of people who need had outs."

[Moonbox]

I was speaking to someone who said it was NDP morals that prevented them from supporting the Liberals but then keep coming back to them and supporting them in things like the coalition.

I wasn't speaking about people who vote in any election based on what they see in the person, the leader, the party and the policies.

This was after he said that the NDP will get in dirty if they have a chance to push forward their agenda.

The coalition would have proven to every Canadian out there that it could actually get things done and influence policy. The Liberals intelligently saw it as a red tory nightmare waiting to happen and they distanced themselves from the idea, but that doesn't change the fact that the NDP would have probably secured cabinet positions and policy concessions from the Liberals.

[jdobbin]

This was after he said that the NDP will get in dirty if they have a chance to push forward their agenda.

I made the remark before he said that.

The coalition would have proven to every Canadian out there that it could actually get things done and influence policy. The Liberals intelligently saw it as a red tory nightmare waiting to happen and they distanced themselves from the idea, but that doesn't change the fact that the NDP would have probably secured cabinet positions and policy concessions from the Liberals.

It also showed that the moral argument some NDPers were making is flexible.

[madmax]

Why would the NDP vote against the Liberals knowing that the it would put the Tories in power? Or were so convinced of victory for yourselves as governess?

Hard Core Liberal supporter can never get over the fact that they essentially pulled the plug on their own government. Announced an election, and then tossed aside the only support they required in order to govern.

Not exactly the sharpest tools in the shed.

While one may blame the NDP for their own stupidity, the LPC needs to wonder why they allowed corruption and a civil war interfere with good governance. Then once having the coronation, followed by punitive efforts against the Only women with enough balls to make Martin Earn it, Martin goes on to call an unnecessary election and throw away his MAJORITY government for a Minority Government.

This guy burned his bridges and lost his government on his own.

Regardless, the LPC under Paul Martin had every opportunity to win the 2006 election. They blew this all on their own.

The over the top commercials and a campaign run on the same script as 2004. It required using the Harper Fear Factor early and then in the final days, Going after the NDP to crush their support.

Martin made his own bed..

Edited August 4, 2009 by madmax

[madmax]

Wow, a left winger accusing the Star of bias. Seems to me the Star is showing that it isn't any more biased than any other source.

The Star always returns to supporting the LPC unconditionally. That is no surprise.

[jdobbin]

Martin made his own bed..

Think I have already stated that Martin made some poor choices as prime minister.

[Moonbox]

I made the remark before he said that.

Fair enough but the point remains.

It also showed that the moral argument some NDPers were making is flexible.

In politics, like I've said 1000 times here, sometimes pragmatism must trump ideals, else your voice will never be heard.

Like you point out, however, you can't claim the moral high-ground if you're also going to play game. You're also an idiot if you don't play the game. Quite the conundrum

[Dave_ON]

3 provinces down, and really in Alberta the Liberals are the Conservatives so more then 3.

Yeah 3 of the least important provinces at that... only the Atlantic provinces are less significant in terms of vote share. The only way the Liberals are going anywhere is if an Ontario regional party is formed. Other than that, there's really no other choices for Ontarians other than the Lbis.

[Dave_ON]

Yes we have dealt with the Liberals in the past. Like when we wrote that Martin budget and we supported that. When our party gets a say and gets to push the issue of the working people instead of voting with a party who is pushing big bisuness interests we will always be read to throw in with that kind of deal. If the Liberals did that there would be no need for the NDP.

Considering how many of us "working people" work for big business I don't think it's a bad thing. There are many other workers in this country that aren't really represented by the NDP. NDP is largely supported by unions.

I really hate it when people from all political stripes target "big business" as if it were tantamount to the to the devil. Layton has a habit of targeting banks and other large corporations as if they are the cause of all the ills in our society. They're, not, big business employs a lot of Canadians and God help us all if the NDP ever do manage to get in and start meddling with what they can and cannot do even further. Business is sufficiently regulated; we don't need more government meddling in private sector affairs. We can't all work in the public sector or in a unionized environment, that's just not realistic.