Tory campaign chief throws down fall-election gauntlet

[nicky10013]

The elephant only exists in the minds of wishful opponents. The longer Harper stays as PM, the more comfortable Canadians will become (or not) with the path of the Conservatives. Conservatives will gladly take a few more minority governments. There hasn't been one squeak about Harper's leadership and as much as his antagonists try to paint him as a control freak, internally, there is very much a team at work. The "control freak" accusation is nothing more than party discipline that minimizes the media's ability to get their "gotcha" sensationalist headlines, try as they will. Staying "on message".

Wishful opponents? To actually claim that the longer Harper stays as PM the better people will like him is pretty damn naive. So really, who is being wishful here? After winning about 37% of the popular vote and getting up into the 40s in terms of polling, outlier polls aside after the second prorogation he can barely hit 32%. He's lost support, more and more moderate Canadians are ditching the CPC because low and behold, the stereotypes are turning out to be accurate.

Furthermore, the knives were out for Harper as soon as he allowed the Liberals and NDP and Bloc to form a coalition. There was wide speculation that maybe he isn't the tactician (he isn't) that he's purported to be. That and the right wing of the CPC are really not that happy with his middle of the road agenda. People talk about the Liberals being divided; funny considering the divisions between the PC and Reform members of the CPC caucus.

Edited July 9, 2010 by nicky10013

[ToadBrother]

I think it would be incredibly stupid for the Liberals to ditch Ignatieff without an election first. It would merely be a demonstration of even greater weakness.

It's hard to imagine the Liberals looking any weaker than they look right now.

[ToadBrother]

The elephant only exists in the minds of wishful opponents. The longer Harper stays as PM, the more comfortable Canadians will become (or not) with the path of the Conservatives. Conservatives will gladly take a few more minority governments. There hasn't been one squeak about Harper's leadership and as much as his antagonists try to paint him as a control freak, internally, there is very much a team at work. The "control freak" accusation is nothing more than party discipline that minimizes the media's ability to get their "gotcha" sensationalist headlines, try as they will. Staying "on message".

There were a lot of rumors floating around after the 2008 prorogation that some Tories, in high places even, were pretty ticked at Harper, but in general I think he's really the best they can hope for. Who can replace him? MacKay is viewed by some as too Red Tory, and the Afghan prisoner abuse scandal has knocked him down a few pegs.

But make no mistake, he's every bit the control freak that Chretien was. It may be astute party management, and probably is necessary particularly in a minority situation (one of Paul Martin's chief problems was his inability to keep his caucus under control and it made his minority government a mess), but I still don't like it. I don't vote for a Prime Minister, I vote for an MP, and an MP's first duty should be to his constituents, and not to the dictates of the PMO. Still, that didn't begin with Harper, and the slow degradation of MP's individual powers began decades ago, particularly under Trudeau.

I don't know if I could ever bring myself to vote Tory, not so much because of Harper these days (all in all, I think he's done a reasonably good job, we're the envy of the industrialized world right now), but because my local MP is a religious nut, and I intensely dislike him personally. If the riding association would trounce that pathetic bigot and put someone more pragmatic and rational in, I might be tempted, but unfortunately the riding association is dominated by septuagenarians that are tragically out of touch with the modern world.

What it boils down to me at this point is this. I look at the slate of leaders, and Harper is the only one that shows ability. Iggy is a disaster, and Layton, well, enough said on that point. I'm still leaning towards voting independent, however.

Edited July 9, 2010 by ToadBrother

[nicky10013]

It's hard to imagine the Liberals looking any weaker than they look right now.

I'm sure that was what was said after Mulroney won the largest majority in Canadian history. Indeed, that's what they were saying up until 1993. It looks tough for all parties right now.

[nicky10013]

There were a lot of rumors floating around after the 2008 prorogation that some Tories, in high places even, were pretty ticked at Harper, but in general I think he's really the best they can hope for. Who can replace him? MacKay is viewed by some as too Red Tory, and the Afghan prisoner abuse scandal has knocked him down a few pegs.

But make no mistake, he's every bit the control freak that Chretien was. It may be astute party management, and probably is necessary particularly in a minority situation (one of Paul Martin's chief problems was his inability to keep his caucus under control and it made his minority government a mess), but I still don't like it. I don't vote for a Prime Minister, I vote for an MP, and an MP's first duty should be to his constituents, and not to the dictates of the PMO. Still, that didn't begin with Harper, and the slow degradation of MP's individual powers began decades ago, particularly under Trudeau.

I agree but that wasn't really my point. He's a control freak and censors is caucus in public, but it isn't all roses and love for the dear leader behind the scenes and considering the split between the PCs and Reform, it could get ugly once Harper leaves or is pushed out.

Politically speaking, I think the only way the new CPC wins a majority is with a PC as leader, but it'll never happen because reform dominates the caucus.

[msdogfood]

Read this...

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/ottawa-notebook/tories-skeptical-of-their-own-10-point-lead/article1632934/

yes i found that Very interesting my self to!!.

[msdogfood]

August, you've missed the point. It doesn't matter if Rae looks better to Quebecers. He still looks AWFUL to those voters in Ontario!

Unless the day comes when a party only has to do well in Quebec to form the government the Liberals could never win with Bob Rare. If he got two seats in Ontario I would be amazed!

Bless your heart, you remind me of when Charest was still in the PCs, some years ago. I was working as a resident salesman for a big American distributor, answering to a sales office in Pointe Claire, Quebec. One summer week I was at an office party where the rest of the sales staff and I got the chance to drink beer and shoot the breeze. Talk turned to politics and how the PCs had been all but destroyed, with only Charest and another MP left. All the other salesfolk were francophone Quebecers and ALL of them loved Charest! However, NONE of them would vote for him! They saw their choices as Liberal or BQ, seulement!

So they figured that all of us in Anglo Canada should vote for him!

I love my Quebecois friends deeply but I find that they are so introverted they just are incapable of seeing the big picture across the country, outside of the borders of Quebec. You just did it yourself, thinking in terms of Bob being a more attractive choice for Quebec when the issue was his terrible legacy in Ontario. Your head is more than intelligent enough to understand things when they are pointed out, but your gut just seems to blind you from seeing such things on your own.

If Rae becomes the Liberal party leader Harper will treat his caucus to a 3 day shindig, complete with fireworks!

ALL very true!!

[Moonbox]

Politically speaking, I think the only way the new CPC wins a majority is with a PC as leader, but it'll never happen because reform dominates the caucus.

In this I disagree. The Reform knew that they were totally unpalatable in the East and, if anything, they've shown themselves to be pragmatic. Knowing that Ontario would never accept a bunch of wacko Bible-thumpers, they'll moderate and do what they can to keep the Liberals from forming a government again.

[Molly]

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/ottawa-notebook/tory-campaign-chief-throws-down-fall-election-gauntlet/article1633200/

The clauses the Conservatives are trying to include the budget bill are as follows:

open overseas mail delivery to privatization, weaken environmental assessment, and facilitate the selloff of power division of Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd

I can't see why any of them need to be in the budget and frankly I'm pretty appalled that the Conservatives would want to turn this into a confidence motion.

Typical Harper/CPC sleaze. They live within the letter of rules (most of the time), but smirkingly 'fart in the general direction of' the reasons behind those rules.

Incident after incident... I don't take crap like that from any other quarter of my universe, and don't respect it any place that it appears.

[Topaz]

The environmental assessment wouldn't be a good thing for the country. The Tories want to shortcut if so it would help the oilfields and that Detroit-Windsor bridge and other projects like it. The international mail, next its the national mail, they have been cutting rural mail service and this may not be a good thing for Canadians, if the whole Postal went private. Selling off the reactor to who? Who do you trust, the US, the British? As far as candidates, who do you think will be the next leader of the Tories? Baird? God I hope not!!!! The Liberal, I still favour Dominic Le Blanc, he'll get the French vote, nothing in his background for the Tories to use against him and he comes from a well-respected family. There's also Ken Dryen, and what about a woman in the Liberals or the Tories?

[Keepitsimple]

Typical Harper/CPC sleaze. They live within the letter of rules (most of the time), but smirkingly 'fart in the general direction of' the reasons behind those rules.

Incident after incident... I don't take crap like that from any other quarter of my universe, and don't respect it any place that it appears.

Although cynical by nature, I can view those three items with more of a "glass half full" attitiude. These are tough times and whatever we can do to help the economy, within reason, warrants serious consideration:

1) Opening overseas mail delivery to competition: this would help a lot of small business enterprises. Canada Post is the most frustrating service in Canada - you can't do anything but pay, pay, pay.....and all they do is raise their rates every year. Stamps go up by two cents? No big deal - but that's 4% - and it happens almost every year. But I digress - it helps small business - that's a good thing.

2) Although it's phrased as "weakening" environmental assessment - it's clear that they're trying to speed up the process....which is painfully slow. It's planned to eliminate duplication of efforts. If the actual "rigour" changes and steps are bypassed - I'll have a problem - but that's not the intent.

3) AECL - we spend hundreds of millions on taxpayers money on this antiquated crown corporation. If it can't be effectively modernized, let's have the flexibility to stop the bleeding.

If those three items are the "worst" that the opposition can point out, then the bill can't be that bad after all.

Edited July 12, 2010 by Keepitsimple

[Smallc]

1) Opening overseas mail delivery to competition: this would help a lot of small business enterprises. Canada Post is the most frustrating service in Canada - you can't do anything but pay, pay, pay.....and all they do is raise their rates every year. Stamps go up by two cents? No big deal - but that's 4% - and it happens almost every year.

And you think that's different than almost everything else, how?

[myata]

Our options reflect our aspirations. What would a strong, visionary leader do in political environment where even a minor trivial step forward takes decades if not centuries? Harper or Iggy is all the choice we merit today.

[dre]

Our options reflect our aspirations. What would a strong, visionary leader do in political environment where even a minor trivial step forward takes decades if not centuries? Harper or Iggy is all the choice we merit today.

Im happy that both parties have shitty leaders. If either party had a GOOD leader they might win a majority government, and I like minority government better because it seems to produce relatively centrist results.

[Mr.Canada]

I'm happy with an incompetent Liberal leader who will never be PM. Sure, we'll only keep a minority but we'll also be quietly stacking the Senate with Tories as well. Fine by me.

[Jack Weber]

I'm happy with an incompetent Liberal leader who will never be PM. Sure, we'll only keep a minority but we'll also be quietly stacking the Senate with Tories as well. Fine by me.

But what about the elected senate,Mr.Falange??

What about appointed senators being an afront to democracy???

Edited July 12, 2010 by Jack Weber

[ToadBrother]

But what about the elected senate,Mr.Falange??

What about appointed senators being an afront to democracy???

Mr. Canada isn't a Reformer, and he isn't really a reactionary. He's an obsessive personality who tends to worship his favorite leader with cult-like fervor. He's not interested in democracy, but merely in seeing his favorite leader gain unlimited capacity to set out a reactionary social and economic program that falls somewhere between Ayatollah-styled religious dictatorship and extreme Libertarianism. That his desires actually make no coherent sense at all does not matter.

[Jack Weber]

Mr. Canada isn't a Reformer, and he isn't really a reactionary. He's an obsessive personality who tends to worship his favorite leader with cult-like fervor. He's not interested in democracy, but merely in seeing his favorite leader gain unlimited capacity to set out a reactionary social and economic program that falls somewhere between Ayatollah-styled religious dictatorship and extreme Libertarianism. That his desires actually make no coherent sense at all does not matter.

Generally...I agree.His childlike worship of authoritarian and pseudo-authoritarian political figures is equal parts creepy,funny,and,belies a certain character weakness that tells me that he NEEDS to be lead around by the nose...

His two points of about a week and a half ago about how this country needs:

1.A Tea Party movement in this country that will foment a civil war to rid this country of the socialist traitors...

2.His advocation for a Francoesque leader who,in his estimation,is one of the greatest leaders of the last century...

...Are a glimpse into how his mind works...

[Borg]

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/ottawa-notebook/tory-campaign-chief-throws-down-fall-election-gauntlet/article1633200/

They're going to keep trying and trying until they get the majority. If it wasn't for Ignatief being such an unprincipled joke, I would say it's about time we got Harper out of office.

The clauses the Conservatives are trying to include the budget bill are as follows:

open overseas mail delivery to privatization, weaken environmental assessment, and facilitate the selloff of power division of Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd

I can't see why any of them need to be in the budget and frankly I'm pretty appalled that the Conservatives would want to turn this into a confidence motion. Here's why we need a Senate it seems.

Any more I am so pissed at the major parties that I might just have to vote green if only because the main stream folks have all turned into canuckleheads

I could careless about the "gauntlet" anymore

Borg

Edited July 13, 2010 by Borg

[Wild Bill]

Any more I am so pissed at the major parties that I might just have to vote green if only because the main stream folks have all turned into canuckleheads

I could careless about the "gauntlet" anymore

Borg

Some alternative! You rail against "canuckleheads" and then suggest Elizabeth May as an alternative?

[Molly]

Although cynical by nature, I can view those three items with more of a "glass half full" attitiude. These are tough times and whatever we can do to help the economy, within reason, warrants serious consideration:

....

If those three items are the "worst" that the opposition can point out, then the bill can't be that bad after all.

Each of those three deserves to be debated in the house, examined for its own merit. None of them belong in the the budget, buried and whipped.

The sleaze becomes suffocating even before one looks at the substance.

Edited July 13, 2010 by Molly

[myata]

Some alternative! You rail against "canuckleheads" and then suggest Elizabeth May as an alternative?

At least it's a choice. Between total control, total incapability and boredom, and a political whacko - all cheer for the best political system in the world!

[ToadBrother]

Some alternative! You rail against "canuckleheads" and then suggest Elizabeth May as an alternative?

It works, as long as you mean "alternative reality"/

[myata]

The only real choice is to stop playing the stupid game. If we have to tell something to the government, there're other legitimate ways, outside of pointless and meaningless election game that right from the song, does nothing but "degrade" our intelligence.

[Moonbox]

It's not the system that's to blame. The system would work perfectly if people weren't stupid and apathetic about it.

That's the whole reason the system works the way it does now. People are too dumb and too lazy to actually learn about individual candidates stand for and instead base their opinions on two minute commercials (from the parties themselves) while they're on the couch getting fat watching Survivor or something stupid like that.