Will there be a Federal Election in 2009?

[Topaz]

BTW, didn't Harper make October 9th election day in Canada? Iggy just helping keep that law.

[madmax]

I have no idea who did it.

Liberal did it getting ready for their campaign. Its goes along with the script and messaging they want to send the public.

Layton is probably misjudging the base of his party in regards to propping up the Tories. Many of them just don't think a few policies getting passed is enough according to what I was hearing ion radio this morning.

Well, the answer to that question is on babble. And the results have been, pure apathy. More talk on the Bryant Criminal

Negligence causing death, about 400 comments worth, compared to a handful here and virtually no talk of the election threat, or any of the posturing by political parties. Infact when I last check the only thread on the possibility of election had 8 comments.

They believe Harper has to be removed along with his party.

Red Sweep in Manitoba.

[jdobbin]

Liberal did it getting ready for their campaign. Its goes along with the script and messaging they want to send the public.

That the NDP will support the Tories? I think most people would be surprised by that.

Well, the answer to that question is on babble. And the results have been, pure apathy. More talk on the Bryant Criminal

Negligence causing death, about 400 comments worth, compared to a handful here and virtually no talk of the election threat, or any of the posturing by political parties. Infact when I last check the only thread on the possibility of election had 8 comments.

I have no idea about that forum since I don't read it. You think it is reflective of NDP mindset about propping up Harper? Apathy?

Red Sweep in Manitoba.

Doubtful. But I see one or two seats that will be competitive.

[madmax]

That the NDP will support the Tories? I think most people would be surprised by that.

That is the intent of the LPC propoganda machine, beginning with the LPC staffers a week ago. Taking a page from the Paul Martin Liberals, and the Chretian Liberals, the intent is to scoop up as many NDP swing voters as possible by attacking the NDP and throwing the shit against the fan to see what sticks.

I have no idea about that forum since I don't read it. You think it is reflective of NDP mindset about propping up Harper? Apathy?

I'm saying if the topic hasn't hit the NDP partisans on babble, then it's purely Liberal spin that has yet to spread out into the discussion forums and the mainstream. If they haven't gone all apeshit, and some here suggesting using the word Harper is enough to get banned from there, then really, what is happening is that the Liberals are blowing smoke.

Liberals are the ones pushing this, it appears to be part of the focus of the Liberal Campaign to smear the CPC/NDP together in order to get the monkey off their back.

Don't confuse reality with propoganda.

Doubtful. But I see one or two seats that will be competitive.

So much for the wave of hysteria.

I see a CPC sweep except for one seat based on your analysis of outrage.. LOL

Edited September 3, 2009 by madmax

[jdobbin]

That is the intent of the LPC propoganda machine, beginning with the LPC staffers a week ago. Taking a page from the Paul Martin Liberals, and the Chretian Liberals, the intent is to scoop up as many NDP swing voters as possible by attacking the NDP and throwing the shit against the fan to see what sticks.

And it will work because the NDP have been pretty clear that the problem is the Tories and Harper and Liberal support keeping them in place. They have played that hand since the beginning.

Now, if it is they that end up propping up the Tories, there will be questions among the base about what they really get out of it except more Harper.

I'm saying if the topic hasn't hit the NDP partisans on babble, then it's purely Liberal spin that has yet to spread out into the discussion forums and the mainstream. If they haven't gone all apeshit, and some here suggesting using the word Harper is enough to get banned from there, then really, what is happening is that the Liberals are blowing smoke.

I can't really comment on an NDP website that I don't read. Is it all NDPers like a staff member site?

Liberals are the ones pushing this, it appears to be part of the focus of the Liberal Campaign to smear the CPC/NDP together in order to get the monkey off their back.

Well, let's get your opinion on it: Do you think that the NDP should throw the Tories a lifeline? Are there certain minimums that you are willing to accept or do you believe that it isn't worth it given the history of Harper?

Don't confuse reality with propoganda.

And what is the reality? You wanted the Liberals to say they will vote non-confidence and actually oppose. Well, they are.

So much for the wave of hysteria.

I see a CPC sweep except for one seat based on your analysis of outrage.. LOL

You realize that means NDP lose seats in Manitoba as well.

Let's get this out in the open. Do you want an election? If not, why not?

And if an election were held, which party will you vote for?

Edited September 3, 2009 by jdobbin

[fellowtraveller]

Oh, I think it does. It doesn't help if it is 13 Tories. ha

I would not be too sure of that, Harper may or may not wish to see his govt fail at this time.

[jdobbin]

I would not be too sure of that, Harper may or may not wish to see his govt fail at this time.

He might. You have some inside poll information that has him winning big?

[August1991]

That the NDP will support the Tories? I think most people would be surprised by that.

What's surprising?

None of the leaders want an election now. None.

Ignatieff understands that it has defaulted to him (at least in perceptions) to keep the Tories in power. The Bloc and the NDP have had a free ride (in perceptions) and can appear to be "principled" and anti-Harper. Ignatieff is afraid that he'll get the same "softy" image that Dion got stuck with.

So, Ignatieff draws a line in the sand and then passes the baton over to Layton. I think Layton will blink - but whadda I know?

-----

As a Liberal strategy, I still think this is too smart by half. I think that it would have been better to play along with Harper and the Conservatives, support them, take the high road and give the impression that the Liberal Party will acquiesce while it gets its own house in order. (And let the Bloc and NDP yap away with their anti-Harper rhetoric.)

And then, when Harper and the Conservatives make the ham-fisted, tone-deaf mistake (that they are bound to make if they believe that can govern without worry), Ignatieff should pounce and vote no confidence.

But as I say, whadda I know?

[jdobbin]

What's surprising?

None of the leaders want an election now. None.

Why? Because there is a history of backlash for calling them early? No evidence of that from last election. No confidence vote there.

Ignatieff understands that it has defaulted to him (at least in perceptions) to keep the Tories in power. The Bloc and the NDP have had a free ride (in perceptions) and can appear to be "principled" and anti-Harper. Ignatieff is afraid that he'll get the same "softy" image that Dion got stuck with.

Certainly, all three other parties have had a free ride by making the argument that no one wants an election while acting like the need for cooperation was unnecessary.

So, Ignatieff draws a line in the sand and then passes the baton over to Layton. I think Layton will blink - but whadda I know?

Layton has blinked. I doubt Harper will. There is already discomfort on the part of the Tories who blame the Liberals for them not being real Conservatives.

As a Liberal strategy, I still think this is too smart by half. I think that it would have been better to play along with Harper and the Conservatives, support them, take the high road and give the impression that the Liberal Party will acquiesce while it gets its own house in order. (And let the Bloc and NDP yap away with their anti-Harper rhetoric.)

While your party shouts coward across the floor, runs new ad campaigns like it was an election and basically not cooperate by making everything a confidence motion. I think not.

And then, when Harper and the Conservatives make the ham-fisted, tone-deaf mistake (that they are bound to make if they believe that can govern without worry), Ignatieff should pounce and vote no confidence.

But as I say, whadda I know?

The hamfistedness has already happened when Harper ran his anti-Ignatieff campaign. Think that told Igntaieff loud and clear that there was no working with Harper.

[madmax]

I can't really comment on an NDP website that I don't read. Is it all NDPers like a staff member site?

Yes

Well, let's get your opinion on it: Do you think that the NDP should throw the Tories a lifeline? Are there certain minimums that you are willing to accept or do you believe that it isn't worth it given the history of Harper?

All parties have offered the CPC a lifeline. The LPC supported the CPC.

All parties have offered a minimum threshold.

The Lowest threshold has been the LPC from 2006 to 2009.

The LPC have offered that there is NO Negotiating for support. The free ride is over and they aren't offering a fare rate.

The NDP has a fare charge is lower then the current LPC UNOBTAINIUM now being offered but too rich a price for the CPC.

Neither Harpers history or Ignatieffs history offers any level of trust.

It's the CPC that have to budge, and with a No Negotiation policy from the LPC, and no desire to work with the opposition parties....................>

We are going to election alert.

The CPC are going to attempt to handle the LPC without dealing with the NDP or the BQ for that matter.

The LPC are going to have to vote against the Populart Home Renovation Program.

And what is the reality? You wanted the Liberals to say they will vote non-confidence and actually oppose. Well, they are.

Actually, I wanted the LPC to pass the EI reform bill, which wouldn't have brought down the government.

And I expect the LPC to oppose bills and amendbills that are bad. And if they choose not to, then they are responsible for those Bills as passed by them.

You realize that means NDP lose seats in Manitoba as well.

Yup.

Let's get this out in the open. Do you want an election? If not, why not?

1)No

2) Because I am one of 30 Million Canadians sick to death of posturing by parties to create phoney situations in order to call an election for their benefit not mine. I expect the government to govern and act responsibly. We didn't see that last September, and I am on record as being against that election rigging as well.

And if an election were held, which party will you vote for?

Fortin no Moonbox

Edited September 3, 2009 by madmax

[jdobbin]

Yes

I have seen internal political staff sites. They aren't exactly self critical about things like party policy.

A number of years ago, I looked at the site but it was so poorly set up that I had a hard time reading the posts. How it was displayed on the screen didn't make it seem worthwhile if it resulted in a headache. I have had problems here from time to time when people change fonts.

So I have no idea about the site or whether it accurately reflects membership views.

The NDP that I know personally have a visceral dislike of Harper and constantly said that if only the Liberals voted no confidence, we could get rid of him.

I reminded some of these people that it didn't help when the NDP fell back on blaming the Liberals for any resulting election as if they had nothing to do with it.

All parties have offered the CPC a lifeline. The LPC supported the CPC.

True. And Harper doesn't really offer anything for that support. It weakened the Liberals.

All parties have offered a minimum threshold.

The Lowest threshold has been the LPC from 2006 to 2009.

Which killed one leader and looked like it was going to same to another.

The LPC have offered that there is NO Negotiating for support. The free ride is over and they aren't offering a fare rate.

There isn't. We saw that this summer.

The NDP has a fare charge is lower then the current LPC UNOBTAINIUM now being offered but too rich a price for the CPC.

I believe Harper thinks that the NDP are negotiating from weakness. Just my impression.

Neither Harpers history or Ignatieffs history offers any level of trust.

It's the CPC that have to budge, and with a No Negotiation policy from the LPC, and no desire to work with the opposition parties....................>

We are going to election alert.

Liberals have a hard time trusting Layton as well. This free ride he has had on voting no had to stop.

The CPC are going to attempt to handle the LPC without dealing with the NDP or the BQ for that matter.

The LPC are going to have to vote against the Populart Home Renovation Program.

Which the Liberals have already said they will honour. The deadline is the end of the year so I don't see what the problem is.

Actually, I wanted the LPC to pass the EI reform bill, which wouldn't have brought down the government.

And then blame the Liberals for the election?

And I expect the LPC to oppose bills and amendbills that are bad. And if they choose not to, then they are responsible for those Bills as passed by them.

And Canadians expected Parliament to work. An attempt to topple the government was going to have all the parties sandbag the Liberals. As they are now.

Yup.

You'll have to show me where.

1)No

2) Because I am one of 30 Million Canadians sick to death of posturing by parties to create phoney situations in order to call an election for their benefit not mine. I expect the government to govern and act responsibly. We didn't see that last September, and I am on record as being against that election rigging as well.

If the Liberals oppose as you want, it is generally an election.

Fortin no Moonbox

If all the other parties suck, you can run yourself.

[madmax]

I have seen internal political staff sites. They aren't exactly self critical about things like party policy.

I was pulling your leg, but forgot the in this case.

True. And Harper doesn't really offer anything for that support. It weakened the Liberals.

Agreed.

I believe Harper thinks that the NDP are negotiating from weakness. Just my impression.

Considering that is the view Harper and the CPC held for the LPC and their leaders, it would come as no suprise that the CPC consider all opposition parties weak. Infact he isn't as worried about the election as he was when the Coalition was going to replace him in Government. If you recall correctly, I supported the coalition, and NOT the choice of Dion to head it up because I felt he was a useless twit who would blow it. Which he did.

Liberals have a hard time trusting Layton as well. This free ride he has had on voting no had to stop.

For the record, the LPC walked away from their signed deal to have a free ride voting with the CPC. There was a choice available and agreed upon which allowed the charade of LPC support to end. 9 Months later, we are heading into an election, which is likely to produce the similar results. The free ride the LPC took was with the CPC driving. If the NDP had a free ride at least they were driving their own car.

And then blame the Liberals for the election?

Supporting the bill would not have brought down the government. Shorten your next reply to WILL TOO, and I can say NO IT WON'T. LOL.

If the Liberals oppose as you want, it is generally an election.

An Election is what Liberals want when Liberals are orchestrating it. An Election is what Conservatives want when conservatives are orchestrating it.

The public wants government to DO SOMETHING.

[jdobbin]

I was pulling your leg, but forgot the in this case.

Ah, as I said, I don't know that forum at all or who the bulk of its posters are.

Agreed.

This summer could have shown some progress on EI if the two sides could have come to a compromise. I saw no evidence that Harper was interested.

Considering that is the view Harper and the CPC held for the LPC and their leaders, it would come as no suprise that the CPC consider all opposition parties weak. Infact he isn't as worried about the election as he was when the Coalition was going to replace him in Government. If you recall correctly, I supported the coalition, and NOT the choice of Dion to head it up because I felt he was a useless twit who would blow it. Which he did.

I believed he was not going to back down short of a threat of being replaced. Even if the Liberals had an interim leader, I suspect the Tories might have prorogued an entire year if necessary.

The Liberals were fully aware that the Tories were ready to call a snap election when it suited them so it hastened their choosing a leader. Sadly, they kept their policy convention to a number of advisory seminars to avoid giving the Tories or media a target.

My own view was the Liberals should have called for a policy discussion open to people both inside and outside the party.

For the record, the LPC walked away from their signed deal to have a free ride voting with the CPC. There was a choice available and agreed upon which allowed the charade of LPC support to end. 9 Months later, we are heading into an election, which is likely to produce the similar results. The free ride the LPC took was with the CPC driving. If the NDP had a free ride at least they were driving their own car.

I wonder if they would have been so belligerent with the knowledge that the Liberals would vote non-confidence on some legislation. Given what we are seeing now, the answer is no.

Supporting the bill would not have brought down the government. Shorten your next reply to WILL TOO, and I can say NO IT WON'T. LOL.

The Tories said it would result in an election. You think they were bluffing?

An Election is what Liberals want when Liberals are orchestrating it. An Election is what Conservatives want when conservatives are orchestrating it.

And an election when NDP don't want it is when NDP are orchestrating it?

The public wants government to DO SOMETHING.

We are. It is called election.

[capricorn]

The game of chicken is between two parties.

The LPC and the CPC.

Ignatieff may well lose this game. Too many things can work against him. Unless he comes up with something striking to differentiate the Liberals from the Conservatives, the electorate will wonder why change the government while we navigate through the remainder of the recession? Also, it will not be lost on Canadians that Ignatieff has been absent from Canada for 35 years. Sure, the wannabe PM being away so long won't bother some voters but those who cannot stomach it will far outnumber them. Then there's the whole issue that as election campaigns go, he is a neophyte. The Iggymania hoped for by the party brass simply did not materialize, as poll after poll has shown.

In spite of some bumbling, Harper's government has not been caught stealing from taxpayers, he is an experienced campaigner and the party's war chest isn't hurting. In his exchanges with the media he appears nonchalant about a possible looming election. As things stand, I think he's in a pretty good position.

I think for a lot of people the deciding factor will be who would be the best leader for this country. Of extreme importance for both men will be the campaign and the leaders' debates.

[Smallc]

As things stand, I think he's in a pretty good position.

I'm not sure where you get such an idea from. He has nowhere to go but down....the exact opposite of Ignatieff.

[capricorn]

I'm not sure where you get such an idea from. He has nowhere to go but down....the exact opposite of Ignatieff.

I got that idea from...my head. This article from this morning's sun pretty well sums up what I said yesterday.

So why will the Conservatives win the election?

For starters, the usual way new governments get elected is that old governments become despised. The knives were out when the Liberals tried to retain power by changing leaders from Trudeau to Turner for the 1984 election. Blood was in the water when Brian Mulroney passed the poisoned chalice of party leadership to Kim Campbell in 1992.

Today? The worst that Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff has said is that Harper has been mediocre — almost a compliment in a country that believes in the tall poppy theory. Political change is premised on strong emotions of the kind inspired by intense dislike of a leader or revulsion at public corruption. Being dull or semi-sneaky may make voters indifferent or slightly grumpy, but it doesn’t make them mad.

This is especially true when there are no burning policy differences between the two major parties. So how will the election be decided? By the ad campaigns, which will be waged on the public psyches of the two leaders: One dull and semi-sneaky, the other elitist and opportunistic.

Canadians are comfortable with mediocre and accept semi-sneaky as a necessary tool in politics. Elitism and self-aggrandizement, though once in vogue, are now associated with an establishment that has somehow ruined things for everyone.

By the time the Tories finish telling Canadians who Michael Ignatieff is, something he has failed utterly to do himself, don’t be surprised if it’s Timbits by the dozens over caviar pretending to be hotdogs.

http://www.ottawasun.com/comment/columnist...3/10738106.html

[Topaz]

The only we are goin to avoid an election is for Harper to make deals with NDP and the Bloc. Harper has already talk to Jack and there wasn't any agreement, so that leaves the Bloc. Since we know Harper doesn't nescessrily keep his word, if he truly doesn't want an election, the agreement will be with the Bloc. Like every other election, the Tories are throwing the money out. My riding couldn't get any money and when it was pointed out by the Lib on Tuesday,we have no money coming from the Tory MP, Wednesday, came promises of millions. One last thing, if the Tories are voted out it could save Canadians alot of money. Why? The ones not elected again won't recieve a pension because they haven't got the 6 years in, of course they would be the backbenchers mostly, but there are others with the same time.

[daniel]

According to Harper's own fixed term election law, 2009 is scheduled for an election anyways.

[Smallc]

[daniel]

The only we are goin to avoid an election is for Harper to make deals with NDP and the Bloc...

There's another - if Ignatieff talks with Layton and Duceppe and come to an agreement.

[Jack Weber]

There's another - if Ignatieff talks with Layton and Duceppe and come to an agreement.

Good grief...I can hear the Con's starting to howl now!I can see Tea Party Norths sprouting up all over the place!

[Wild Bill]

There's another - if Ignatieff talks with Layton and Duceppe and come to an agreement.

We've talked this out before, a year ago. Polls overwhelmingly showed that the vast majority of Canadians despised the very idea of a coalition.

It's the sort of thing that yes, legally the Opposition Parties might pull it off but they would pay a terrible price at the following election.

Why do you think Ignatieff moved so quickly to distance himself from the very idea almost as soon as he had become leader? Why do you think we haven't heard him start trumpeting the idea today?

Politics is like chess. You have to have the wit to think more than one move ahead. What good is it to capture a rook if 3 moves later you lose the game?

[Topaz]

We've talked this out before, a year ago. Polls overwhelmingly showed that the vast majority of Canadians despised the very idea of a coalition.

It's the sort of thing that yes, legally the Opposition Parties might pull it off but they would pay a terrible price at the following election.

Why do you think Ignatieff moved so quickly to distance himself from the very idea almost as soon as he had become leader? Why do you think we haven't heard him start trumpeting the idea today?

Politics is like chess. You have to have the wit to think more than one move ahead. What good is it to capture a rook if 3 moves later you lose the game?

So are you saying that when Harper and Jack and the bloc brought down the Libs, that it was a coalition? I say, no, it is just like it is today, if parties don't believe in the governement its their duty to bring on an election and that's what may happen here.

[madmax]

We've talked this out before, a year ago. Polls overwhelmingly showed that the vast majority of Canadians despised the very idea of a coalition.

It's the sort of thing that yes, legally the Opposition Parties might pull it off but they would pay a terrible price at the following election.

I disagree. Coalitions are infact popular with the public, but the CPC made an excellent attack against the coalition. People who have had Provinces that have held coalitions prefer them and their outcomes. Shortly after the coaliton ends, one of the parties in the coalition usually ends up with a Majority government.

And quite frankly, if parties stood up, and formed a coalition, that could last 2 years, and govern responsibly people would be happier and better off then the threat of elections everytime a poll goes up a point.

If you are facing a negative atmosphere but have the power to run a coalition, and govern effectively, it should never be overlooked as an option. Part of government is to cooperate and part is to lead, regardless of public opinion, because public opinion is often popular opinion which can change.

What you might have confused, is that the public was against "This coalition" which had Dion as the front man as the interim leader until the LPC could find one. That was a big flaw in the LPC decision to leave Dion in charge when he had years to prove himself capable and couldn't. Just about any Liberal could have pulled off the coalition and shut down the CPC attack strategy.

Alot of the public are now wondering why Harpered bothered with an election, or why the coalition was so bad, when they are now faced with another election.

Given the most recent outcomes of Minority governments, the public is going to accept a coalition of more of these posturing elections, that are being held every year.

While the CPC may have tarnished the word coalition, there will be little doubt that there will be a cooperative government should

another minority government be chosen.

The Joe Clark method of governing as if one has a majority while in minority is wearing thin on the public and the public doesn't trust any of the current parties or leaders to give any one group a majority government.

[jdobbin]

And quite frankly, if parties stood up, and formed a coalition, that could last 2 years, and govern responsibly people would be happier and better off then the threat of elections everytime a poll goes up a point.

I think it is quite possible that the Tories would whip people up so much that we could see a lot worse that just acrimony.

Even if there was an agreement to rule for two years, I believe there would be an attempt to bring the government down by any means.