Harper's Calgary Convention Speech

[eyeball]

And yet despite all that loathing, not to mention his stated positions on appointments to the Senate, Harper appointed media personalities to the Senate.

Paranoid conspiracies notwithstanding this still rank high amongst some of the weirder phenomena occurring in the universe.

[PIK]

Trudeau sure bested Stansfield (sp) in 1968. I don't know if there were debates then.

Then again spawn is not quite as bright as Daddy.

The pic of stanfield dropping the ball sealed his fate, of course they did not print any of the 10 he caught.

[PIK]

And yet despite all that loathing, not to mention his stated positions on appointments to the Senate, Harper appointed media personalities to the Senate.

Paranoid conspiracies notwithstanding this still rank high amongst some of the weirder phenomena occurring in the universe.

It seems the media has missed that point, it is thier own kind that have been pigs at the trough.

[carepov]

Argus, you and I both know that this is an Internet forum so of course I cherish absolutes. Otherwise, what's a heaven for?

I tend to agree with you that the election is two years away and all that. But it remains that it will be difficult for Harper to make his numbers go north. He has 3 voters in 10 simply because these 3 hate the alternatives. But to win, he has to move 1 more voter into his column. (To be more accurate, he has to move voters in Ontario ridings to his side.)

Time will tell, but I reckon that Harper is damaged goods. Unlike Mulroney and Trudeau Snr who walked away when it was obvious that they had no chance, I suspect that Harper will be like Chrétien and Martin. Given his Calgary speech, he`ll duke it out even if it destroys the brand-name in the process.

For Stephen Harper, there is only one job in this world: Prime Minister of Canada. He won`t resign. Unfortunately for the Conservative Party, Harper lacks the political skills of Mackenzie King. It may seem strange to say this now but unlike King, Harper never bridged the linguistic/religious divide.

The CPC will need to weigh two options: Go with a "damaged" Harper or go with a new leader.

IMO, going with a new leader would be suicidal for the CPC in the next election.

First of all, it will give the impression to all voters that the scandal was actually a huge scandal and cause even more damage.

More importantly, it will mean that the "status quo" option will be taken away from voters. IMO, the "devil we know" vote is huge especially when the economy is in relatively decent shape - look at the Alberta and BC elections where, despite the polls, the "status quo" kicked ass.

2015 Prediction: Harper-led CPC majority (strong and stable), subject to no significant increase in unemployment.

[jbg]

Trudeau sure bested Stansfield (sp) in 1968. I don't know if there were debates then.

Then again spawn is not quite as bright as Daddy.

The pic of stanfield dropping the ball sealed his fate, of course they did not print any of the 10 he caught.

Wasn't that in the 1974 campaign? I don't know much about Canada so I'm not certain if that was 1968 or 1974.

I will say, from Stateside, that Gerald Ford partially blew his re-election by beaning both a golf partner and a tennis instructor with stray balls. I read his autobiography, where he pointed out, in covering those failed events, that he was the most athletic President in a long time, if not ever.

To my everlasting regret I voted for Carter and against Ford in 1976. I do remember, though, being about the only one in my high school who favored Ford's pardon of Nixon.

[August1991]

The CPC will need to weigh two options: Go with a "damaged" Harper or go with a new leader.

IMO, going with a new leader would be suicidal for the CPC in the next election.

First of all, it will give the impression to all voters that the scandal was actually a huge scandal and cause even more damage.

More importantly, it will mean that the "status quo" option will be taken away from voters. IMO, the "devil we know" vote is huge especially when the economy is in relatively decent shape - look at the Alberta and BC elections where, despite the polls, the "status quo" kicked ass.

2015 Prediction: Harper-led CPC majority (strong and stable), subject to no significant increase in unemployment.

Carepov, you make bad points (IMHO) but you nevertheless have a good point. As does Argus.

In 2 years, the only thing midstream voters will remember (if Harper has to explain) is that Harper fired those bad senators. In 2 years, the 1 undecided voter in 10 (in Ontario) will vote Conservative thinking that Harper is like Walmart: tough and cheap.

Harper is facing a divided opposition.

Nevertheless, Harper is no Mackenzie King. He has not bridged the fundamental linguistic/religious divides of Canada. I wonder about this scheme of Harper's for re-election.

Edited November 6, 2013 by August1991

[g_bambino]

...Harper fired those bad senators.

Did he?

[On Guard for Thee]

The CPC will need to weigh two options: Go with a "damaged" Harper or go with a new leader.

IMO, going with a new leader would be suicidal for the CPC in the next election.

First of all, it will give the impression to all voters that the scandal was actually a huge scandal and cause even more damage.

More importantly, it will mean that the "status quo" option will be taken away from voters. IMO, the "devil we know" vote is huge especially when the economy is in relatively decent shape - look at the Alberta and BC elections where, despite the polls, the "status quo" kicked ass.

2015 Prediction: Harper-led CPC majority (strong and stable), subject to no significant increase in unemployment.

God help us if that happens. Oh sorry, did I say God? I should have said CAMA, Harper's God. But I do concede, we don't seem to have a really solid chice from either of the other two. It's just such a mess right now, and I reckon a lot of Canadians are tugging at their forelocks.

[August1991]

God help us if that happens. Oh sorry, did I say God?

Religion, and language, matter in Canada. So does region. Ignorant so-called modern people call this stuff "God".

[Bonam]

The CPC will need to weigh two options: Go with a "damaged" Harper or go with a new leader.

IMO, going with a new leader would be suicidal for the CPC in the next election.

Harper pretty much is the CPC. Will Harper go with Harper? Hmm, that's a tough one...

[Topaz]

Don't you think that no matter who the person was, Harper or someone else, from the West, that the leader would still have the same amount of support? The West finally had a PM, so I don't think it has much to do with Harper himself but it will be interesting to see if the next Tory leader is from the West or the East.

[carepov]

In 2 years, the only thing midstream voters will remember (if Harper has to explain) is that Harper fired those bad senators. In 2 years, the 1 undecided voter in 10 (in Ontario) will vote Conservative thinking that Harper is like Walmart: tough and cheap.

Harper is facing a divided opposition.

Agreed.

Nevertheless, Harper is no Mackenzie King. He has not bridged the fundamental linguistic/religious divides of Canada. I wonder about this scheme of Harper's for re-election.

Starting from December 2008 (opposition coalition pact) right up to the eve of the 2011 election I thought it would be impossible for the CPC to form a majority the way that they were ostracising the Quebecois. The CPC proved us wrong, getting a strong, stable majority with only five seats in Quebec. Why would it be any different in 2015?

[carepov]

Don't you think that no matter who the person was, Harper or someone else, from the West, that the leader would still have the same amount of support?

Perhaps, but I strongly doubt it. Voters will be forced to select a "new guy" for PM. IMO, these days most voters prefer the status quo and if there is no status quo option they may as well go with Trudeau as the "new guy" - at least his last name is familiar.

The West finally had a PM, so I don't think it has much to do with Harper himself but it will be interesting to see if the next Tory leader is from the West or the East.

IMO, the next CPC leader will be Jason Kenney.

[August1991]

Starting from December 2008 (opposition coalition pact) right up to the eve of the 2011 election I thought it would be impossible for the CPC to form a majority the way that they were ostracising the Quebecois. The CPC proved us wrong, getting a strong, stable majority with only five seats in Quebec. Why would it be any different in 2015?

Carepov, here's one for you to think about: Harper is forgetting "God/Christianity". This will defeat him.

====

For well over 400 years, the history of Canada is not survival: it is compromise, forgiveness, accommodation.

Mackenzie King understood Canada better than Harper.

Edited November 8, 2013 by August1991

[carepov]

Carepov, here's one for you to think about: Harper is forgetting "God/Christianity". This will defeat him.

I'm thinking about it - but all I'm getting is this: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/4a/No._5%2C_1948.jpg

For well over 400 years, the history of Canada is not survival: it is compromise, forgiveness, accommodation.

Mackenzie King understood Canada better than Harper.

Ah yes, nothing demonstrates "Canada's accommodation" and "King's understanding" like the 1941 internment of Japanese Canadians!

[cybercoma]

For well over 400 years, the history of Canada is not survival: it is compromise, forgiveness, accommodation.

Whose history?

[bleeding heart]

Ah yes, nothing demonstrates "Canada's accommodation" and "King's understanding" like the 1941 internment of Japanese Canadians!

That's just it. The tendency to romanticize past leaders is a compelling one.

[carepov]

That's just it. The tendency to romanticize past leaders is a compelling one.

We do often romanticize the past - when you think about it society and our leaders have made huge improvements in the last 70 years.

[On Guard for Thee]

Harper pretty much is the CPC. Will Harper go with Harper? Hmm, that's a tough one...

That's a very good point. It has been reported that some of his own cabinet have referred to him as a "dictator". And his office apparently publishes some ridiculous number of "talking points" on a daily basis so the drones have answers for any question someone may ask. However it almost seems he didn't follow his own guidelines with his convention speech. It may have played well in the room but the "I couldn't care less what people think or say" is very telling, and will come back to haunt him.