Prime Minister Michael Ignatieff

[August1991]

I was thinking outside the box today.

The Liberal numbers are in the low 20s while the NDP numbers are in the high teens. They're bouncing around, within poll margins of error, but that's been the general idea. Meanwhile, the Conservatives are in the high 30s.

Based on past experience, the rule of thumb is that if one party gets around 40% in the popular vote, then it will likely win a majority government. The Conservatives are around that, but they also benefit from the split votes of the opposition.

Harper's coalition strategy in which Harper gets the MSM to talk endlessly about coalition is designed to make 1) Liberal voters sympathetic to the NDP follow their true heart and vote NDP and 2) Liberal voters who distrust the NDP/Layton switch to the Conservatives.

Well, I think Harper's strategy has been successful. The poll numbers that we are seeing reflect potential Liberal voters who have gone NDP (because a coalition means a vote for one is a vote for the other) and other potential Liberal voters who have switched to the Tories because they want nothing to do with the NDP.

The Liberals are suffering the cost of coalition but are enjoying none of the benefits.

-----

So, here is how Ignatieff can turn the tables on Harper. Let Ignatieff admit openly during the campaign that he will form a coalition with the NDP. The two parties should then work to share rather than split the anti-Harper, anti-Conservative vote across the country.

For example, the Liberals could encourage voters to support an NDP candidate in Northern Ontario and further west - excepting incumbent Liberal MPs. (There are about 5 Liberal MPs west of Sudbury.)

Similarly, the NDP could encourage its supporters east of Sudbury to vote for a Liberal candidate - excepting the few NDP incumbents it has in the east. (Layton and his wife are the sole NDP seats in the greater Toronto area.)

----

Quebec, as usual, is an interesting case. I think the Liberals should let the NDP keep Outremont (Cauchon could resign) while the NDP would lay off the Liberal held ridings.

But here's the astonishing move. The Liberal/NDP could officially recognize the Bloc as a partner without it being part of the coalition. For a federalist, the best strategy to deal with the Bloc is to co-opt it. By bringing the Bloc into a federalist coalition - even indirectly - it would for all intents turn it into a mainstream federalist organization.

----

This strategy would of course make Stephen Harper livid with anger. (Jacques Parizeau would be livid too!) The western pro-Conservative "rednecks" would cry about how they were once again denied power. But this strategy would be successful, democratic and it would have the support of people across Canada, in different regions and across the great language divide. It would make Michael Ignatieff PM of Canada, put NDP members into cabinet and include the Bloc indirectly in the federal government.

If the Liberals are going to suffer the costs now of harbouring secret desires to form a coalition, why not at least reap the coalition benefits also?

Edited March 30, 2011 by August1991

[Evening Star]

I always thought they should take this approach! It seems so wasteful for the LPC to put so much effort into e.g. contesting Outremont.

[Evening Star]

Especially now that the LPC has basically adopted quasi-NDP economic policy, this seems to make the most sense.

Ignatieff has more or less sworn off a coalition already though. Do you think people would swallow a flip-flop on this?

Edited March 30, 2011 by Evening Star

[August1991]

Especially now that the LPC has basically adopted quasi-NDP economic policy, this seems to make the most sense.

Ignatieff has more or less sworn off a coalition already though. Do you think people would swallow a flip-flop on this?

Ignatieff has one kick at the can. If the Liberal poll numbers stay where they are now for the next two weeks, Ignatieff is going to have think seriously about whether he goes for the brass ring (and changes Canada) or simply takes one for the team.

There is a tide in the affairs of men which if taken at the flood leads on to fortune,

Omitted, all the journeys of their life are bound in shallows and in misery.

[Saipan]

Prime Minister Michael Ignatieff

http://mrwriteon.files.wordpress.com/2009/11/iggy1.jpg

[cybercoma]

Not only has Ignatieff sworn off a coalition, he has made the first few stops of his campaign NDP territory and the Liberals are heavily contesting Olivia Chow's riding. Although it would be great to see the NDP and Liberals work together in some sort of capacity, Canadians are afraid of coalitions (even though every minority government has essentially been a coalition). Moreover, the ROC distrusts the Bloc and would not support their "partnership" even if they weren't part of the formal coalition.

[August1991]

Not only has Ignatieff sworn off a coalition... Canadians are afraid of coalitions...

Harper is about to win a majority even though he will have a smaller popular vote than the Liberals and NDP combined. (In this calculation, I'm ignoring the Bloc and Green votes.)

By talking of coalition, Harper has probably split off all the Liberal votes possible. This Harper coalition talk has also split the vote in several key Ontario/Quebec ridings so that the Tories and Bloc will gain seats.

Ignatieff can swear off a coalition but he is working under its burden now. Simply put, nothing Ignatieff says now will make potential Liberal voters believe that he won't do a coalition. Ignatieff can't bring Liberal voters back in the tent.

He's better to accept this fact and figure out how to live under its inevitability. At the same time, Ignatieff could co-opt the Bloc.

----

Than again. If I were in Ignatieff's retinue, I would only advise this as a radical measure if the polls stay the same for another week or so.

Edited March 30, 2011 by August1991

[August1991]

More thoughts.

I have often argued here that regionalism, not ideology, drives Canadian federal politics.

IMHO, Canada's federation works best when people are not forced to choose between their region/province/nation and the central government.

An explicit accord/coalition between the federal NDP/Liberals with the support of the Bloc is arguably a better, sustainable federal agreement - covering more parts of Canada - than anything Harper has on offer.

Edited March 30, 2011 by August1991

[Harry]

Liberals sure can announce a lot of programs with the rollback of these corporate tax cuts.

Ignatieff heads to Vancouver pharmacy to unveil another platform plank

The Liberals had also worried coming back to the Commons in January that Stephen Harper would cancel the $6-billion tax cuts, deciding the country just couldn’t afford them. It would deny the Liberals their big issue – and the spending envelope for their programs.

Their entire platform would have been in jeopardy had Mr. Harper changed his mind. “Our biggest fear coming back in the New Year was that he would think twice about the corporate tax cuts,” a senior Ignatieff official said Monday. “But he didn’t do that, he is stubborn, he is ideological and he didn’t do that.”

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/ottawa-notebook/ignatieff-heads-to-vancouver-pharmacy-to-unveil-another-platform-plank/article1962922/

[Oleg Bach]

If you can get a man to repeatedly lose his temper in public you could discredit him...people in Canada are condition to reject "angry men" - even though angry men usually make the best and most effective leaders...it's a conservative nation - with a girly liberal mindset...we want a father figure to run the show - but we have a young population that has been taught that fathers are bad...over bearing and brutal......hence the anger management industry...I say piss Harper off...If he gets angry - vote for him. Piss Iggy off and if he intellectualizes his anger and buffers it down to girly ville.....vote for him also...one way or another...the truth will emerge...that the quiet one is usually the one seething with rage...Harper should rant and show his temper...He would get the Muslim vote...but lose the feminist and gay vote....and who cares about those people anyway...they always falsify their numbers.

[Saipan]

The last main Liberal platform plank

was to "kill GST and NAFTA"

Then Red Book was changed three times.

[cybercoma]

we have a young population

While people may be against politicians that appear angry because they may seem unstable and irrational, it's not because we have a young population. We have an aging population, not a young one.

[Michael Hardner]

Liberals sure can announce a lot of programs with the rollback of these corporate tax cuts.

Thanks for posting an actual issue, rather than more campaign strategy board games, i.e. the OP.

The Liberals had also worried coming back to the Commons in January that Stephen Harper would cancel the $6-billion tax cuts, deciding the country just couldn’t afford them. It would deny the Liberals their big issue – and the spending envelope for their programs.

Their entire platform would have been in jeopardy had Mr. Harper changed his mind. “Our biggest fear coming back in the New Year was that he would think twice about the corporate tax cuts,” a senior Ignatieff official said Monday. “But he didn’t do that, he is stubborn, he is ideological and he didn’t do that.”

But... I can't believe that this is the central plank of the election we're talking about.

$6B in revenues

StatsCan

From this source we have $237B in federal revenue, so we're talking about %2.5.

How about the idea that we could invest in the government, and invest in Canadians to bring our expenditures down ? How about remodeling government to take advantage of the new ways to engage Canadians via the web ?

There are some great new opportunities now, but the Federal parties appear to be too risk averse to explore them.

[Moonbox]

If there was any real possibility of a coalition with the NDP, Liberal numbers would drop off a cliff. A huge portion of the Liberals' base is still the red conservative, particularly in urban/ethnic communities, who generally abhor the NDP platform.

The Liberals would lose the GTA overnight if Ignatieff did as the OP suggests.

[William Ashley]

Any normal person would be deemed mentally unstable if they illicited Stephen Harper's mindset -

Paranoia - talk of conspiracies, delusions of 'coalitions', obsession, maglomania, etc..

This is NOT the type of person Canadians need to run the country.

Ignatieff has made it clear he does not support a Coalition.

[capricorn]

In today's scrum with reporters, Prime Minister Ignatieff gave a fairly good impression of an angry pit bull.

[Shakeyhands]

In today's scrum with reporters, Prime Minister Ignatieff gave a fairly good impression of an angry pit bull.

Baird like?

[treehugger]

Any normal person would be deemed mentally unstable if they illicited Stephen Harper's mindset -

Paranoia - talk of conspiracies, delusions of 'coalitions', obsession, maglomania, etc..

This is NOT the type of person Canadians need to run the country.

Ignatieff has made it clear he does not support a Coalition.

You must read the Star.the Liberal. paper There was a mention of coalition by Ignatieff.I would say there already has been a coalition with the government falling. They all got together, don't kid yourself.

[cybercoma]

Yesterday, I couldn't see Michael Ignatieff as prime minister; however, today, I'm incredibly worried about Stephen Harper as prime minister. Admittedly, I supported Stephen Harper when he seemed to have more of a populist bend, but recently, something alarming has developed. Over the last couple days he has been repeating the mantra that the election is unnecessary.

Let that resonate for a minute. The man that was prime minister of the country and would like a majority government is calling the election unnecessary. Not only does this show contempt for our institution of parliamentary democracy (monarchy actually, but democratically elected parliament), but having the man who wants to lead the country call any election unnecessary is quite simply frightening and should concern everyone. Is this really the person you want running the government and making appointments? It really makes you wonder.

Edited March 30, 2011 by cybercoma

[William Ashley]

You must read the Star.the Liberal. paper There was a mention of coalition by Ignatieff.I would say there already has been a coalition with the government falling. They all got together, don't kid yourself.

I read about 1000 different newspapers.

GET IT THROUGH YOUR HEAD IGNATEIFF DOES NOT SUPPORT A COALITION, ARE YOU STUPID?

I SUGGESTED THE DAMN THING MYSELF TO THE PARTIES WHEN IT HIT THE BIGTIME. IGNATIEFF WAS THE LEAST SUPPORTIVE PERSON OF THE THING.

I emailed them to entice them to do what they did... sadly Harper shut down parliament to stop it, because he knew it was his end. So he had to use dictorial powers to prevent democracy.

"Response from the Jack Layton Campaign Re: JOINT CABINET with LIBERALS AND BL....."Sun, 10/19/08

amongst other communications

"If you would like to have a greater say in government you could try to form a coalition with the liberals and bloc."

etc..

BTW I still support a coalition as a better option to Harper CONMEN -- IGNATIEFF HOWEVER DOES NOT!

Edited March 30, 2011 by William Ashley

[capricorn]

Baird like?

Better than that. Conservative like.

[capricorn]

Yesterday, I couldn't see Michael Ignatieff as prime minister; however, today, I'm incredibly worried about Stephen Harper as prime minister.

Well then, your choice is clear.

Admittedly, I supported Stephen Harper when he seemed to have more of a populist bend, but recently, something alarming has developed.

Are you thinking he looks angry? That's alarming for a lot of people cause they thought he was a robot without emotion.

Over the last couple days he has been repeating the mantra that the election is unnecessary.

That seems to reflect the view of a lot of voters.

frightening and should concern everyone. Is this really the person you want running the government and making appointments? It really makes you wonder.

It's good that people wonder before voting and hopefully this fear you perceive will persuade more voters to get to the polls. I doubt though that the fear is rooted in the appointments he might make.

[Evening Star]

If there was any real possibility of a coalition with the NDP, Liberal numbers would drop off a cliff. A huge portion of the Liberals' base is still the red conservative, particularly in urban/ethnic communities, who generally abhor the NDP platform.

The Liberals would lose the GTA overnight if Ignatieff did as the OP suggests.

I'm not convinced of this, especially considering that a huge portion of the NDP's base is also in urban, ethnically diverse communities (e.g. the two Windsor ridings, Layton's and Chow's ridings, East Vancouver, ...) The two parties co-operated in the 60s and 70s and in ON in the 80s. (PET even offered the NDP a full coalition in 1980.)

[cybercoma]

I'm sorry, but the voters that complain about going to the polls ought to move to a country where they don't have elections if it bothers them so much. They're probably the same voters that show disdain for coalitions, yet are sick of the same results on election night. Parties need to start forming coalitions if we're going to get anywhere different from minorities and partisan bickering.

[Michael Hardner]

GET IT THROUGH YOUR HEAD IGNATEIFF DOES NOT SUPPORT A COALITION, ARE YOU STUPID?

Why don't you stop screaming and inciting name calling ? It would help your argument you know.