Liberal hold on power

[Bro]

I've often wondered how this has been possible for so long.Maybe, I thought, my fellow Canadians are just not very intelligent,but I keep hearing how superior we are compared to other nations,especially the US.

So here are some reasons why maybe folks support the liberals, even though the greatest scandal in our history shows the liberals very much at the controls.

Arrogance of the upper middle class income group,perhaps.

Apathy by the middle class,the most heavily taxed group,perhaps.

And finally fear by the lower income classes,instilled in them by the liberals.Perhaps.

[Argus]

I've often wondered how this has been possible for so long.

Don't probe too deeply. The answer is fairly obvious:

Personality and charisma.

The Tories have had two leaders in the last fifty years with personality and charisma. Both won huge majorities. The rest of their leaders were dull, boring, and couldn't inspire paint to dry.

It's really that simple.

Look at the US. You'll see all those democratic hand-wringers trying to figure out why the Republicans keep winning. Gee, could it be because the Democrats keep nominating horse faced men who could put insomniacs to sleep? A whopping number of people will vote for a guy who can communicate with them on a seemingly personal level, and none of the tory leaders have been able to do that since Diefenbaker with the exception of Mulroney.

If Belinda Stronach can learn to handle herself on her feet and to deal with questions and make speeches better than she did in her rookie run for power she WILL be prime minister. Guaranteed. She has the looks, the mannerisms and the voice. If she can learn to speak naturally to an audience and to the cameras she'll be almost unbeatable.

[Bro]

Maybe it is that simple, doesn't say much about the intelligence of the electorate though.

[August1991]

Personality and charisma.

WTF?

Mackenzie King, a real charmer, that guy. Mr. Personality. And such charisma!

Argus, the Liberal hold on power in Canada is a little more complicated than the leader's "personality and charisma". *Chuckle, chuckle*

[The Terrible Sweal]

I've often wondered how this has been possible for so long.Maybe, I thought, my fellow Canadians are just not very intelligent,but I keep hearing how superior we are compared to other nations,especially the US.

So here are some reasons why maybe folks support the liberals, even  though the greatest scandal in our history shows the liberals very much at the controls.

Arrogance of the upper middle class income group,perhaps.

Apathy by the middle class,the most heavily taxed group,perhaps.

And finally fear by the lower income classes,instilled in them by the liberals.Perhaps.

What a steaming pile of self-regarding, condescending, vapidity.

Try this on for size. The Liberal Party has been successful politically because it is better at politics. That is, in the free market of democratic leadership, the Liberals have offered the better product.

You right wiggers who prattle endlessly about how 'stupid' the people are, are forgetting the basic reality of the 'free market' distortion you idolize: Marketting.

Apply the concept of 'perceived value' to our political process, and you'll begin to see why, election for election, the Liberals have lead the Tories.

Make no mistake, the Liberal party is a machiavellian machine of exquisite ruthlessness. To some extent, the degree to which the Canadian people and our institutions have harnessed and utilized this resource, may be measured in the success or lack thereof of Canada as a country.

[Argus]

Maybe it is that simple, doesn't say much about the intelligence of the electorate though.

No, it doesn't. But I've never had much respect for the intelligence of the electorate.

[Argus]

Personality and charisma.

WTF?

Mackenzie King, a real charmer, that guy. Mr. Personality. And such charisma!

You are going too far back, August, to the days before television, when speeches were printed verbatum in the newspapers and only a very, very few ever saw or heard the leaders.

Nowadays it's about charm and telegenics. Oh not entirely, of course, but it's a huge factor. Why did Trudeau inspire a generation to vote for him instead of Robert Stanfield? Stanfield was in every way more qualified; a thoughtful, intelligent, good-humoured and faultlessly honest man. This country would be quite different if Stanfield had won instead of Trudeau. But Trudeau had the looks and the charm.

Argus, the Liberal hold on power in Canada is a little more complicated than the leader's "personality and charisma".  *Chuckle, chuckle*

Yes, there are other factors, but this is a major one. Perhaps THE major one.

[Bro]

Try this on for size. The Liberal Party has been successful politically because it is better at politics. That is, in the free market of democratic leadership, the Liberals have offered the better product.

You right wiggers who prattle endlessly about how 'stupid' the people are,

You are correct in stating they are better at politics,but that said,being able to govern for what is best for Canadians is not the same. Politics is about keeping power,the liberals only game, but governing is a whole other issue.

LOL,what is a wigger,and I already said the people are not stupid,perhaps grossly uninformed.

[August1991]

You are going too far back, August, to the days before television, when speeches were printed verbatum in the newspapers and only a very, very few ever saw or heard the leaders.

It was the same game, Argus. Sophistication and a cynical view of human behaviour didn't suddenly appear in 1965.

Try this on for size. The Liberal Party has been successful politically because it is better at politics. That is, in the free market of democratic leadership, the Liberals have offered the better product.

You right wiggers who prattle endlessly about how 'stupid' the people are, are forgetting the basic reality of the 'free market' distortion you idolize: Marketting.

Huh? The right wing is wrong about the free market because free markets are subject to manipulation through "marketing"? The Liberals are successful because they are better at marketing?

Do I read you right?

----

The "great" prime ministers of Canada were Macdonald, Laurier, King and Trudeau. Three of the four were Liberal. In fact, since Macdonald, the Conservatives have not had a successful PM (successful in the sense of longevity).

A better question to ask is why the Conservatives have been so unsuccessful. A corollary question, of course, is to ask why, for almost 40 years, our PMs come from Quebec.

The answer to the first question is that the Conservatives, starting with Macdonald but then on through Borden, abandoned French Canada. The Liberal Party became the only party capable of uniting Canada's two linguistic (previously religious) groups. The Tories were Protestant and the Liberals were Catholic.

The answer to the second question is that Canada has been caught up in a severe crisis (similar to the American crisis from about 1830 leading to the US Civil War). In the US, this was a period of constant compromises that became more and more complex.

In Canada, the primary result is that many people in Ontario vote Liberal, perceiving it to be the way to ensure National Unity and defend Canada.

The exception was Mulroney, a PM with genuine support in Quebec but who got the support by trying to offer a different Canada.

[The Terrible Sweal]

You are correct in stating they are better at politics,but that said,being able to govern for what is best for Canadians is not the same. Politics is about keeping power,the liberals only game, but governing is a whole other issue.

I guess I didn't make my point clearly. In marketting terms (percieved value, etc.) winning elections is the proof of the expectation you will govern "well". This expectation is based on perception of characteristics including past performance.

[Bro]

LOL,this leaves out all the current scandals of course.So what you are really saying is,they can screw the average canadian and only the elites such as yourself will notice that and approve their actions anyway by voting for them again.

Keep corruption in government,vote the Liberal party in.

[August1991]

In marketting terms (percieved value, etc.) winning elections is the proof of the expectation you will govern "well". This expectation is based on perception of characteristics including past performance.

In marketing terms, the signal must be credible. The Liberals are failing now. PM PM is not delivering.

[Newfie Canadian]

Politics, as I've said before, is all about perception. What the electorate perceives to be true or better, or worse.

The Liberals, through their politics and slight of hand, are perceived to be a government type party.

Perhaps more so however, it's not the perception of the Liberal party as much as it's about the perception of the CPC. They are perceived as a party with hidden agendas and severe right wing policies and the like. And it is a perception they haven't yet been able to shed according to a new poll (which I've linked to in another thread).

Unless or until the CPC can shed those perceptions, particularly in Ontario, the Liberals will hold onto government.

[The Terrible Sweal]

LOL,this leaves out all the current scandals of course.So what you are really saying is,they can screw the average canadian and only the elites such as yourself will notice that and approve their actions anyway by voting for them again.

Keep corruption in government,vote the Liberal party in.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Since you obviously have no idea what I am 'really saying', you would appear less foolish if you did not pretend that you do.

[The Terrible Sweal]

In marketting terms (percieved value, etc.) winning elections is the proof of the expectation you will govern "well". This expectation is based on perception of characteristics including past performance.

In marketing terms, the signal must be credible. The Liberals are failing now. PM PM is not delivering.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

In marketting terms the signal need not be credible (though that is usually advantageous). The signal simple needs to be effective. Whatever the voter's choice, it is based on her percieved value. If she values social progressiveness more than probity, she might decide to vote Liberal. Conservative supporters who insist on denigrating this choice are burying their heads in the sand.

[The Terrible Sweal]

Huh?  The right wing is wrong about the free market because free markets are subject to manipulation through "marketing"?

My point was not that the right wing is wrong about markets (though they are, in some ways). Let me try to be precise. RIght wingers worship the concept of the 'free market', although in reality and in concept, the market is distorted. Nevertheless, the market includes marketting, so it is ironic to me that right wingers, who worship the market, don't appreciate the significance of marketting in politics.

The Liberals are successful because they are better at marketing?

The Liberals have been more effective in marketting (delivering product with percieved value), which amounts to being successful. If we unravely 'perceived value' we will find that it means the Liberals have done a better job in the eyes of their customers, the electorate.

If we consider the present Conservative pitch, what do we see:

'Dear voters/owners of a carrot patch,

You are so stupid you support a party that steals half your carrots! Don't take it anymore! Elect us and we will pave your carrot patch and no-one will steal your carrots anymore.'

[Army Guy]

What is it that the Liberals have done for this country in the last 8 years that you or for that matter anyone would want to hold on to this belief that we should re elect the liberals..

I think Canadians vote liberal because they always vote liberal....not because there platform is better....

How many liberal scandals does the Canadian tax payer have to live with....because the list is huge...

[Bro]

Since you obviously have no idea what I am 'really saying', you would appear less foolish if you did not pretend that you do.

It's all about perception, that the liberals are more apt to govern properly.Yes,only a fool would not see this now!Call me foolish,but I will park my vote elsewhere,and the NDP just lost their chance by sleeping with them,so it will be one of two other parties.

As if there ever was a doubt!

[August1991]

The following article, printed in the Toronto Star, was written by someone from the Dominion Institute. The article argues that we need an election so that the government can spend money:

In a majority Parliament, votes on supplementary estimates are a routine housekeeping matter. However, in a minority, these votes, by virtue of being on "money bills," represent votes of confidence in the government.

So, before any of the new money pledged in this budget could actually be spent, the bureaucracy would have to wait to receive final spending approval from Parliament within the very period that an election call would be triggered by the Prime Minister's own Gomery-plus-30-day pledge. Even if the budget somehow miraculously passes in the coming days, the votes on the supplementary estimates will either die a quiet death in the post-Gomery rush to the polls or become the bills whose defeat will trigger an election.

Talk to any number of senior civil servants and they will tell you their departments will not spend billions of dollars of hypothetical money to implement budget promises with little more to go on than blind faith that an embattled minority Parliament, months hence, will release these funds.

Ottawa is at a standstill. The only tool we have left to remove the political uncertainty paralyzing the machinery of government from now through to the release of Gomery's report in late autumn is, alas, an election.

The point however is that the Dominion Institute is one of the recipients of the money! The Dominion Institute received $273,813 in 2004 according to Public Worksdocuments. You may have to do a search of that document - but just browsing through it is an education.

This is how the Liberal Party stays in power. The federal government hands out literally billions of dollars to thousands of groups each year. Then, when there is any fear of the tap being turned off, those groups complain.

You can expect to see more articles and commentary about the need for an election because Stephen Harper is obstructing the government and its ability to finance those things that are essential to being Canadian.

I have no knowledge of the Dominion Institute. Maybe they do good things. I wonder whether they need government money to do those good things but maybe they do. But I can see a clear conflict of interest here.

[paranoid joe]

Personality and charisma.

whatever anyone else might say that IS the reason.

the average voter, is looking for the candidate that 'connects' with them. once they find one, they will start and continue voting in that party until there is someone in the other party who 'connects'

like it or not that is how mass politics works, if there isnt a new 'connecter' in an entire generation, the parents will teach their 'politics' to their children. my parents were conservative, i am conservative. it all connects.