Coalition: September 2004, December 2008 & Now

[Scotty]

Was it that much, Scotty? Geez Louise, they are good at walking way from hundreds of million dollar investments in military purchasing, aren't they? Like the EH-101 helicopters, they would cheerfully blow off that $200 million invested in the F-35 for purely partisan political purposes.

Don't they give a damn for how well our soldiers are equipped? May the bastards all be forced to commute in Sea King helicopters!

No, they don't. I think this issue was invented out of whole cloth, much like the EH-101 was. It was a chance to portray the Tories as being militaristic and of 'wasting' money on fancy toys for the military instead of (sob) helping the poor and sick.

There is no question in my mind - none - that if the Liberals had won the last election we would still have bought these fighters.

He's not even saying that we won't buy the things. He's saying he'll cancel the thing, then run up some expensive, time consuming dog and pony show to see whether we should buy them. Well, crap, shouldn't the Liberals have decided that before we poured all that money into developing them in the first place?

And even if we buy something else it's highly unlikely it's going to result in much, if any reduction in cost, especially given that we'd be looking at a multi year delay, with consequent increase in eventual price.

[capricorn]

For anyone who would like to view the 04 press conference by Harper/Layton/Duceppe, here's the link to CPAC's video.

http://www.cpac.ca/forms/index.asp?dsp=template&act=view3&pagetype=vod&hl=e&clipID=5288

The video follows a short CPAC intro.

[Keepitsimple]

For anyone who would like to view the 04 press conference by Harper/Layton/Duceppe, here's the link to CPAC's video.

http://www.cpac.ca/forms/index.asp?dsp=template&act=view3&pagetype=vod&hl=e&clipID=5288

The video follows a short CPAC intro.

Perfect.....and I hope that everyone has the patience to view it all. Very interesting on how things have evolved over the years. Watch it all because it really is interesting....but the answer that people are looking for is about 10 minutes in.....and it's stated in other ways throughout the press conference, especially around minute 31.

I made a mistake earlier that said the "letter" was sent 5 days later. I was wrong. It was sent the same day - September 9th....so what you see here reflects what's in the letter.

Edited March 29, 2011 by Keepitsimple

[Harry]

Really. Wow, what a guy.

Harper denies 2004 'plot' to become prime minister

http://www.canada.com/life/Harper+denies+2004+plot+become+prime+minister/4516742/story.html

Edited March 29, 2011 by Harry

[Harry]

That trust issue again folks.

Ex-adviser says Harper had coalition plan in 2004

A key adviser to Stephen Harper during his days as Opposition leader says the co-oppositionarrangement Mr. Harper negotiated with NDP leader Jack Layton and Bloc Quebecois leader Gilles Duceppe in September 2004 was seen by Conservatives at the time as a potential avenue to a Harper-led minority government without seeking Canadiansapproval in an election

http://www.nationalnewswatch.com/

Edited March 29, 2011 by Harry

[Jack Weber]

That trust issue again folks.

Wow...

Flanagan was mover and shaker in the CA...

That is a huge torpedo into Mr.Harper's stance that his was not a coaltion...

I'm thinkin' this one is going to be put on the backburner real soon because I notice that this 2004 coalition question keeps coming up in pressers and Harper seems to be getting a little flustered at having to come up with different excuses for why it was'nt a coaliton...

[Harry]

This coalition talk has now clearly backfired on Harper and he is starting to lose on this issue now.

Maybe Harper should be asked to take a lie-detector test.

Harper’s coalition fearmongering

“Their past betrays them,” he intones.

Well, so does Harper’s own past, and so do the facts. When he was opposition leader in 2004 he proposed to enter into the same kind of arrangement that he now casts as a devil’s bargain

http://www.montrealgazette.com/technology/Editorial+Harper+coalition+fearmongering/4517528/story.html

[August1991]

Here's the money quote:

Pollster Allan Gregg said the numbers show the Tory base is looking solid and strong, while the NDP is bleeding off traditional Liberal support, especially among women.

...

Gregg said he can't say for sure whether Prime Minister Stephen Harper's mantra that Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff has secret plans to strike a coalition with the NDP and Bloc has resonated among voters. Ignatieff has strongly denied he's interested in a coalition.

The pollster noted that the last time the Conservatives enjoyed a double digit lead in the polls was in late 2008, when then-Liberal leader Stephane Dion raised the possibility of a coalition with the two other opposition parties — an idea that proved wildly unpopular with the public.

Over the last two weeks, the poll showed that among women, the Conservatives lead the Liberals by a 32-27 margin.

"As long as I've been in the business, Liberals have always enjoyed a solid 10-point lead on the women," said Gregg.

The Conservative gains among women have been aided by NDP inroads that are bleeding off the traditional base of Liberal female supporters, especially in cities, he added.

CP

The Liberal losses to the NDP are only part of the story. The Liberals are also shedding voters to the Conservatives. This is the effect of Harper's coalition strategy. It only takes a few percentage points and it will be enough to cause voter splits in certain Ontario ridings that will give Harper his majority. Heck, the NDP is within a few percentage points of the Liberals in overall popular support. A rogue poll could show the NDP ahead of the Liberals.

Indeed, accusing Harper of attempting a coalition in 2004 just keeps the word in the news cycle for another day and cements the idea in people's minds. It does no damage to Conservative support.

There are still about five weeks to go though and alot more to happen.

[RNG]

Here's the money quote:CP

The Liberal losses to the NDP are only part of the story. The Liberals are also shedding voters to the Conservatives. This is the effect of Harper's coalition strategy. It only takes a few percentage points and it will be enough to cause voter splits in certain Ontario ridings that will give Harper his majority. Heck, the NDP is within a few percentage points of the Liberals in overall popular support. A rogue poll could show the NDP ahead of the Liberals.

Indeed, accusing Harper of attempting a coalition in 2004 just keeps the word in the news cycle for another day and cements the idea in people's minds. It does no damage to Conservative support.

There are still about five weeks to go though and alot more to happen.

As a card carrying small c conservative (subtle way to say Harper pisses me off) I love the Green Party. More lefty positions to split the vote. Go Green!!11!11!

Edited March 29, 2011 by RNG

[Oleg Bach]

When you can not win a fight..gang up and beat the crap out of the victor.

[Shwa]

Wow...

Flanagan was mover and shaker in the CA...

That is a huge torpedo into Mr.Harper's stance that his was not a coaltion...

I'm thinkin' this one is going to be put on the backburner real soon because I notice that this 2004 coalition question keeps coming up in pressers and Harper seems to be getting a little flustered at having to come up with different excuses for why it was'nt a coaliton...

Which raises another question that the pinko-press should be asking:

"Mr. Harper, if your party fails to win a majority, will you be forming a coalition with the Bloc like you wanted to in 2004?"

I think the CPC and the Bloc are a natural fit to form a coalition. They both have contempt for Canada...

[scribblet]

CPAC has the full video here, all you need to know

http://www.cpac.ca/forms/index.asp?dsp=template&act=view3&pagetype=vod&hl=e&clipID=5288

shorter version here

There was no coalition

Edited March 29, 2011 by scribblet

[Bryan]

Wow...

Flanagan was mover and shaker in the CA...

That is a huge torpedo into Mr.Harper's stance that his was not a coaltion...

I'm thinkin' this one is going to be put on the backburner real soon because I notice that this 2004 coalition question keeps coming up in pressers and Harper seems to be getting a little flustered at having to come up with different excuses for why it was'nt a coaliton...

Not at all. Harper wants the MSM to keep asking because he knows that the facts are on his side. There never was any coalition in 2004, no one claimed that there was, and anyone who says differently is lying. It's that simple. Why would the opposition want to be continually exposed as the liars they clearly are?

As for Flanagan, I wonder if you even read the linked article. The headline makes for nice sensationalism, but it doesn't match what Flanagan actually said in the interview:

“It didn’t go anywhere, but I think it’s a perfectly legitimate exercise. It’s different from forming a coalition,” said Mr. Flanagan

He also admits he wasn't actually there anyway.

[Harry]

It was 2 to 1 against Harper, and now it is 3 to 1 against Harper. Harper should quit while he is ahead on the coalition issue, or is he ahead any more. This definitely now does not look good for Harper.

Coalition comments worth a good look

"it smells like a dog, it looks like a dog, most probably it’s a dog,"

http://thechronicleherald.ca/Opinion/1235591.html

[Keepitsimple]

It was 2 to 1 against Harper, and now it is 3 to 1 against Harper. Harper should quit while he is ahead on the coalition issue, or is he ahead any more. This definitely now does not look good for Harper.

Have you watched the Press Conference or the shorter YouTube version? What do you actually think. I know it doesn't mattere - it's all how the media spins it - both ways. But what do you really think after watching these videos.

Edited March 29, 2011 by Keepitsimple

[Harry]

Have you watched the Press Conference or the shorter YouTube version? What do you actually think. I know it doesn't mattere - it's all how the media spins it - both ways. But what do you really think after watching these videos.

No one believes Harper any more on this file. Just about every journalist in Canada it seems is coming down on him hard. It's over, dead in the water, and it's backfired on Harper as some people here have said it would from the beginning.

Mr. Flanagan replied: “I can’t see what other point there would have been in writing the letter except to remind everybody that it was possible to change the government in that set of circumstances without an election.”

He added that “it could have been interpreted as a warning shot across the bow of Mr. Martin, but again, it’s not effective unless it’s alluding to a real possibility that this could happen.”

Stephen Harper didn’t bank on the rush of publicity surrounding the 2004 letter that he had signed, the one showing he was prepared to join other parties to form an alternative – though he wasn’t calling it a coalition – to the Paul Martin government. As a result, he’s been hit with the label “Harper the hypocrite.”

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/opinion/smoke-mirrors-and-a-harper-majority/article1960537/

Edited March 29, 2011 by Harry

[August1991]

Which raises another question that the pinko-press should be asking:

"Mr. Harper, if your party fails to win a majority, will you be forming a coalition with the Bloc like you wanted to in 2004?"

I think the CPC and the Bloc are a natural fit to form a coalition. They both have contempt for Canada...

That's gotta be the dumbest question that I've seen on the election yet. Harper has formed two minority governments since 2006 and has not entered into any kind of coalition or agenda-driven deal with any opposition party.

Too many people are treating this coalition issue as a "he said, she said" type argument. It's not. Who cares what Harper did or signed in 2004? Who even cares about Dion's deal in 2008?

The whole point of Harper's 2011 coalition strategy is to plant the idea of a LPC/NDP (w/ Bloc) coalition in people's minds and shave a few Liberal voters off: some will go to the Conservatives and some will go to the NDP. Given current polls and the chattering classes, the strategy seems to be working.

Even Flanagan's little foray into the campaign advances that strategy.

Edited March 29, 2011 by August1991

[Harry]

That's gotta be the dumbest question that I've seen on the election yet. Harper has formed two minority governments since 2006 and has not entered into any kind of coalition or agenda-driven deal with any opposition party.

Too many people are treating this coalition issue as a "he said, she said" type argument. It's not. Who cares what Harper did or signed in 2004? Who even cares about Dion's deal in 2008?

The whole point of Harper's 2011 coalition strategy is to plant the idea of a LPC/NDP (w/ Bloc) coalition in people's minds and shave a few Liberal voters off: some will go to the Conservatives and some will go to the NDP. Given current polls and the chattering classes, the strategy seems to be working.

Even Flanagan's little foray into the campaign advances that strategy.

The only thing that's worked is Harper has now been exposed as a hypocrite, and Duceppe has clearly been scoring points calling Harper a liar. It's that trust issue again and it will cost the Conservatives their chance for a majority.

[Jerry J. Fortin]

The only thing that's worked is Harper has now been exposed as a hypocrite, and Duceppe has clearly been scoring points calling Harper a liar. It's that trust issue again and it will cost the Conservatives their chance for a majority.

That is very likely the long and the short of it.

[August1991]

The only thing that's worked is Harper has now been exposed as a hypocrite, and Duceppe has clearly been scoring points calling Harper a liar.

So you don't like Harper and you're happy when someone calls him a liar/hypocrite. Wow! I'm shocked and appalled...

Politicians have been calling their opponents liars/hypocrites for as long as I have been following politics. The Liberals have tried the "trust" issue in previous elections (scary/hidden agenda). I think they'll get even less traction this time around.

Meanwhile, the coalition talk is hurting the Liberals directly. And aside from Harper, Duceppe and Layton both have an interst in keeping the idea alive.

----

In teh past, federal Liberal leaders used to say that a vote for the NDP was a wasted vote. Ignatieff is going to have to come out more strongly against the NDP:

“We have to squeeze down the vote,” said one Liberal party official.

NDP Leader Jack Layton scoffs at the strategy.

“This is the old attitude of ‘we’re the only game in town,’” he said at a news conference on Monday.

When asked about voters who will put their X beside the name of the Liberal candidate simply to stop Stephen Harper, Mr. Layton said: “The way to stop Stephen Harper from getting a majority is to take Conservative seats, one by one, and defeat the MPs who are there. That’s how you stop Mr. Harper from getting majority.”

G&M Edited March 29, 2011 by August1991

[Keepitsimple]

No one believes Harper any more on this file. Just about every journalist in Canada it seems is coming down on him hard. It's over, dead in the water, and it's backfired on Harper as some people here have said it would from the beginning.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/opinion/smoke-mirrors-and-a-harper-majority/article1960537/

All you have to do is watch this short video and you'll clearly see who the hypocrits and liars are - Duceppe and Layton.

[ToadBrother]

It was 2 to 1 against Harper, and now it is 3 to 1 against Harper. Harper should quit while he is ahead on the coalition issue, or is he ahead any more. This definitely now does not look good for Harper.

Yes, he should quit while his polling numbers are going up. What a great political strategy.

[capricorn]

The only thing that's worked is Harper has now been exposed as a hypocrite, and Duceppe has clearly been scoring points calling Harper a liar.

Outside Quebec and other than political junkies in the ROC, how many people bother with Mr. Duceppe's campaign? Odds are political junkies viewed the 04 press conference and heard Duceppe clearly say "no way we're a coalition". And let's not forget with today's social media, Duceppe can't hide from the comments he made in 04.

It's that trust issue again and it will cost the Conservatives their chance for a majority.

Perhaps. But for that to happen voters would have to trust Ignatieff more. According to most polls, Ignatieff trails Harper on the trust barometer.

"Michael Ignatieff is more of a polarizing figure in Canadian politics than Stephen Harper,"Gregg said. "That is, Conservatives dislike Ignatieff more than Liberals dislike Harper. That's highly unusual."

http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/canada/breakingnews/conservatives-lead-liberals-38-24-in-latest-canadian-press-harris-decima-poll-118799299.html

[Jack Weber]

Not at all. Harper wants the MSM to keep asking because he knows that the facts are on his side. There never was any coalition in 2004, no one claimed that there was, and anyone who says differently is lying. It's that simple. Why would the opposition want to be continually exposed as the liars they clearly are?

As for Flanagan, I wonder if you even read the linked article. The headline makes for nice sensationalism, but it doesn't match what Flanagan actually said in the interview:

He also admits he wasn't actually there anyway.

You're right!!!It's definately NOT a coalition...

It's a Coaliperation...er...Cooperative coaliption...er...Coopalition...er...

Anyhting but a coalition..It's definately not a coalition between the CA,NDP,and,The Bloc..

And the letter to the GG does'nt actually say anything about a coalition,so therefore,there's NO COALITION!!!

Even thought the letter does state that if the martin government did fall on a non-confidence motion that the three opposition leaders were constitutionally able to take power and the Governor General should understand that this was a possibility to avoid an election...

But it's NOT a coaliton at all!!!

Yeah,right...

[ToadBrother]

You're right!!!It's definately NOT a coalition...

It's a Coaliperation...er...Cooperative coaliption...er...Coopalition...er...

Anyhting but a coalition..It's definately not a coalition between the CA,NDP,and,The Bloc..

And the letter to the GG does'nt actually say anything about a coalition,so therefore,there's NO COALITION!!!

Even thought the letter does state that if the martin government did fall on a non-confidence motion that the three opposition leaders were constitutionally able to take power and the Governor General should understand that this was a possibility to avoid an election...

But it's NOT a coaliton at all!!!

Both sides are weaseling. Any political leader, faced with the possibility of a minority, will ponder a coalition of some kind. Maybe they'll still decide to do it alone at the end of the process, but if they're saying, and this counts both Iggy and Harper, "I won't do a coalition", they're lying. If they could figure out a way to make it work and be palatable to voters and to their caucus, they'd do it. Having control of a majority of seats in the house is a pretty juicy carrot.