Opposition want to make election about Harper.

[waldo]

Because it is fascinating to an American to find another nation devoid of such obvious home grown references to things in popular culture, language, literature, film, economics, politics, etc., choosing instead to go for the easy American example. I guess it goes back to very definition of the Canadian identity as being !American, yet embracing their culture anyway.

Strange.

Except that youre confused about all that stuff. Canada isnt devoid of any of those things.

The reality is you have an odd obsession with Canadians, and you obviously dont care much for them. Youre modus operandi is target what you pretend is some sort of national identity crisis. So you troll threads waiting for a canadian to mention the US, and when they do you pop up, stick your toungue out, and proclaim "I told ya so!".

And its getting worse. For example... tonight I posted a link to a good US site with information on earthquakes. And you were like "Yup! America made that site bitch!"... in a conversation that didnt having anything to do with the US at all.

I will gladly accept the 15 yard penalty for piling on...

LOL,

Maybe you should do a thesis on isolation, and how Americans see themselves as us and them. We Canadians learn from the history of the entire world. I can give you examples of the Soviet Union, Germany, your politics, our politics... there are no boundries as to where and how I find my examples.

uhhh, as you're somewhat new... someone really needs to let you in on MLW's running joke - the "guy" is really Rhasida from Regina, the ultimate wannabe merkin, the one-schtick pony, the "guy" who revels in "his" mindless obsession to feverishly point out and deride MLW members who dare to offer any reference to the 'land of the free - home of the whopper'... all the while glibly shouting, USA!, USA!, USA!. Those frequent gaps you notice around "his" replies reflect upon the prevalent usage of the MLW ignore feature. Your quote offers real insight... apparently, the one-schtick pony act has been in aid of a fantasy doctoral thesis, no less... good to realize an obsession has been so highly channeled!

[g_bambino]

Exactly, the set pattern is to beat up the protesters and arrest them.

This presumes protesters are inherently innocent. I don't assume such and, in fact, have seen plenty of evidence to the contrary.

[bush_cheney2004]

Except that youre confused about all that stuff. Canada isnt devoid of any of those things.

Of course...it's just that some Canadians prefer the American version?

The reality is you have an odd obsession with Canadians, and you obviously dont care much for them. Youre modus operandi is target what you pretend is some sort of national identity crisis. So you troll threads waiting for a canadian to mention the US, and when they do you pop up, stick your toungue out, and proclaim "I told ya so!".

This is by design....my annoying "obsession" is seemingly matched by millions in Canada. I have started to reward those who can formulate a cogent thought without any US references. But alas, some members (e.g. waldo) are so enamored with US data and institutions it will never be.

And its getting worse. For example... tonight I posted a link to a good US site with information on earthquakes. And you were like "Yup! America made that site bitch!"... in a conversation that didnt having anything to do with the US at all.

Hehe...yea...that was fun.

Somebody tried to link HAARP with earthquakes, so it was an easy decision to pull the trigger.

Edited March 14, 2011 by bush_cheney2004

[kimmy]

LOL,

You PC's crack me up. So yah, no need to worry about the people who do not vote for us. Their rights are not important. It's exactly that kind of stupidity that will lose you the election. LOL.

The question wasn't what's important. The question was: what should the opposition make the election about?

Assuming they want to win, they should pick issues that voters care about. If they want to lose, they should take your advice.

-k

[capricorn]

The question was: what should the opposition make the election about?

Yes, so continuing on this theme.

Assuming they want to win, they should pick issues that voters care about.

-k

Another issue is in the development stage that may factor in because it involves new spending, an issue voters most certainly care about. You recall the reaction to the idea that the Conservatives might fund a new arena in Quebec city? There was much opposition in the ROC to this funding and there were claims they were pandering for votes in Quebec. Then the word came down that the feds were staying out of it.

The federal Conservatives have wisely skated around a suggestion that the government send taxpayers’ money to Quebec City to help it to build a professional hockey arena. The government announced definitively this week that it will not financially help the $400 million arena. “We’re going to stay away from subsidizing professional sports,” Finance Minister Jim Flaherty said.

---

To be sure, the decision on funding is politically risky for the Conservatives because several Conservative MPs represent ridings in the Quebec area and a federal election could be coming this spring. Quebec’s mayor, Regis Labeaume, said the party had committed political suicide in the province. Perhaps he’s right.

The government, however, made the right decision. There is nothing in the Constitution that says the federal government must finance arenas for professional sports teams. A professional-level arena may be good for a city and a region, but it doesn’t really serve the national interest. It’s doubtful, for instance, that many taxpayers in Edmonton, Saskatoon or Cambridge would reap any personal benefits if their federal tax dollars were pumped into an arena in Quebec City.

http://www.therecord.com/opinion/editorial/article/496837--the-right-call-on-arena-funding

The above is a typical reaction found in the ROC, an opinion I share.

Flaherty made it official with this statement.

The federal budget, now set for March 22, will contain no spending for professional sports arenas in Quebec City or elsewhere, Finance Minister Jim Flaherty revealed.

He announced Wednesday the Conservatives have decided to steer clear of politically tricky funding for pro sports arenas. The Tories had been hinting about support for a new $400 million hockey rink in Quebec City, but backed away when it became clear that such funding could prompt similar demands across the country and spark a backlash from taxpayers.

“We’re going to stay away from subsidizing professional sports,” Flaherty said on CBC.

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/947261--budget-to-contain-no-spending-on-pro-sports-arenas?bn=1

Now here we have Ignatieff speaking in Quebec a couple of days ago, saying if elected, the Liberals would help fund such a venture.

Although the elections is a rumor that plane, the Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff is already in attack mode.

He deplores the way the Conservatives have handled the issue of financing the new arena in Quebec and the Bloc Quebecois says can not replace the Harper government in power.

If federal elections were called shortly, political parties will no doubt win the vote of voters in the Quebec area, waving the refusal of the Harper government to invest in a new Coliseum. The leader of the Liberal Party of Canada, Michael Ignatieff, has not missed an opportunity to seize the ball on Saturday on the sidelines of a brunch with party activists.

"Josee Verner and Harper have demonstrated incredible incompetence in this matter," said Mr. Ignatieff. "One day they say one thing, another day another. I said the same thing for 15 months with Mayor Régis Labeaume. If there is a business plan and participation of all levels of government and private sectors, we are stakeholders for active participation in this matter. (...) There is now a clear choice. If you want a federal involvement, we have to vote Liberal ", without explaining how his party would finance the project. The Liberal leader claims that "Quebecers are not able [to bear] Stephen Harper" and he offered an alternative. "When we have an election, we will have a clear choice," he predicted.

http://www.canoe.com/cgi-bin/imprimer.cgi?id=867208

Ignatieff's message? You want more federal money going into Quebec, then you must vote Liberal. If you're going to pander, do it right.

I've yet to see any coverage of or reaction to Ignatieff's campaign-style message to Quebecers in the ROC's MSM.

I doubt this issue would remain dormant during an election campaign.

[waldo]

Ignatieff's message? You want more federal money going into Quebec, then you must vote Liberal. If you're going to pander, do it right.

such broad extension there on your part, hey capricorn? Here I thought the target discussion point you highlighted reflected upon... just... the Quebec City arena. Whether one actually agrees with the idea of federal funding in this matter, it would appear there has been a long standing and consistent position/statement, one predicated on a business plan and like participation from provincial and municipal governments... as well as the private sector.

I said the same thing for 15 months with Mayor Régis Labeaume. If there is a business plan and participation of all levels of government and private sectors, we are stakeholders for active participation in this matter.

[Scotty]

I think you are missjudging the publics feelings on GOVERNMENT interfering with their lives. I think if this issues is spotlighted some more, there is nothing else out there that can get to your heat quicker than a kennell lockup on the streets of your own city.

Even if true, and I am one of those angry about it, the responsibility lies with the Toronto and Ontario governments, not with Harper. And I imagine the Ontario government will meet its fate this fall.

[Scotty]

Well, seeing as how there are more than 310,000,000 Americans from all over the world and only 35,000,000 Canadians, it is obvious who has been more "isolated".

That argument is inane, to say the least.

[bush_cheney2004]

That argument is inane, to say the least.

Numbers don't lie...you and millions of others are using the inventions of an "isolated" United States (Internet, search engine, social networking, operating system, CPU, etc.). LOL!

[Scotty]

Numbers don't lie...you and millions of others are using the inventions of an "isolated" United States (Internet, search engine, social networking, operating system, CPU, etc.). LOL!

The number of people within your borders has zero to do with whether you are or aren't isolated. Isolation is both a geographical and psychological fact of life for most Americans. You know little or nothing about other people around the world, and don't want to know. Like Sara I-know-Russia-I-saw-it-on-the-horizon-once Palin you are remarkably ignorant about the geopolitical and historical realities of the world beyond your shores because the goings on out there don't interest you.

[nicky10013]

Finally, somebody asks the magic question. Good for you, Shakey! Valuable kimmy-points will be credited to your account!

Should they make it about Harper? No. Making the election about Harper will just remind the voter of what the alternatives to Harper are... and most voters find the alternatives about as appealing as a case of genital warts.

Harper is easily the most recognizable figure of all the political leaders. The fact that his approval rating is at 26% says a lot. Ignatieff's is low but no one knows him. He has just as big an opportunity to move up as he does to stay where he is which is about as low as he can get. The bar is so low that he'd have to be crawling to trip over it. He's going to impress a lot of people by just being fluent.

Should they make it about Afghan detainees? I don't think Canadian voters actually care about Afghan detainees. I don't think there's many votes to win on that issue. (Ditto with Li'l Omar.)

Thumbing their nose at Parliamentary committees? I think most voters will just view that as typical partisan politics. Not something that's going to win votes.

Elections Canada and the "in-and-out" scheme? Can't hurt, but I don't think it's a major vote-getter either. That's not your major ammunition.

I can't disagree with most of this. I wish Canadians were engaged enough that it would be otherwise, yet I think this is true.

Jet fighters? For the Liberals that's a little risky because it will remind voters of the time we spent hundreds of millions of dollars cancelling helicopter contracts and didn't end up with any helicopters at all. You can raise the question of whether we're spending too much. You can ask why we didn't look at other suppliers. But don't even consider promising that you're going to scrap the purchase or you'll remind voters of the EH-101 fiasco.

Unsigned contract. No money lost. That and the replacement of the sea king was cancelled so long ago I doubt if the institutional memory is there for it to be a negative. If anyone were to vote against the Liberals for cancelling the Seaking it'll be the Conservatives that STILL don't vote for the Liberals because of Trudeau.

Should they make it about the G20 "police state"? I actually find that idea pretty funny. I think most Canadians feel that the G20 protesters were a bunch of morons who went looking for trouble. I think that Canadian voters will recall images of burning police cars and smashed storefronts and feel not an ounce of sympathy for the protesters.

You know, for the most part I agree with you. I think the term police state is ludicrous. I also think a lot of protestors knew what they were getting into. Yet, there were still serious abuses. For all the hooliganism, the videos of cops beating protestors is still very real and it shouldn't have happened. Steve Paikan himself was beaten and arrested despite the film crew he was with and the press pass he was holding. For all the over-reaction, there's still legitimate grievances.

What will resonate with voters: "Fake Lake". The $1 billion plus price-tag for G20. Remind voters how much that fiasco cost. Tell voters what could have been done with all that money instead. Then remind the voters about the budget deficit. (If you're the Liberals, also remind the voters that the last time you were in charge we had an annual budget surplus that was paying down the national debt and reducing our annual interest payments.) Point out some of the other Conservative financial decisions that have resulted in questionable results for Canada. Dig into the "stimulus package" and show Canadians what all that money really bought for us (and regardless of whether it was actually well spent or not, you can find a way to make it look like it was wasted. It's a winning strategy.)

That's where the Conservatives are really vulnerable. That's what the opposition should make the election about.

-k

I don't disagree. The problem on the economy is fighting perception, though. You see it with Wild Bill and Blueblood. Despite the citing of undisputable history, people refuse to believe that any party other than the CPC are fisaclly responsible.

Edited March 15, 2011 by nicky10013