Cons, do you still have faith in Canada?

[I miss Reagan]

The Libs are back up ahead in the polls over the good guys. You had to know it would happen. I think on this board I have always been more cynical of the Canadian people compared to the other righties on the board. So now I want to ask my fellow conservatives and libertarians: How can you have faith in a country that is so unbelievable tolerant of corruption? A country which is intent on taxing you out of most of your hard earned money. A country which is more democratically inline with Russia than our closest allies. What will be your reaction when the Canadian people choose the Liberals yet again?

If Canadians actually saw [Harper] and his party as a credible alternative to the Liberals, they’d already be in government. Why? Because before the last election, Canadians already assumed the worst about the sponsorship scandal. Canadians basically figured that the Liberals were a crooked bunch of mobsters--and still voted for them over Harper’s Conservatives. Unless the inquiry finds that the Prime Minister was snorting lines of coke off his desk, or that a dead hooker rolled out of his closet, it’s going to be an uphill haul for Harper.

article

[fellowtraveller]

Yep, I now think that the Liberals are going to get away with it. The campaign core for them will be 'a vote for Conservatives is a vote for separatism'.

Millions of Canadians have proven themselves entirely willing to swallow this BS whole, no reason at all to think anything has changed.

A rumour, persistent one too, is that David Kilgour, one of the important 'Independent' votes is going to be appointed either a Senator or Ambassador in return for not voting which will greatly help the Liberals. Patronage and corruption, it is sadly what we have come to expect.

Carolyn Parrish will vote Liberal, Chuck Cadman may not vote - and there are two very ill Tory MPs.

So, the math favours the Liberals and NDP, assuming the NDP stay bought. At a cost of $250 million in taxpayers money per NDP vote, it should ensure some loyalty.

[fracan]

No, I really don't have any faith left in my fellow Canadians. It's too bad really, but I've already started making plans to become part of the "brain drain". Luckily my mother is American so I should have less problems getting American citizenship...

[I miss Reagan]

No, I really don't have any faith left in my fellow Canadians.  It's too bad really, but I've already started making plans to become part of the "brain drain".  Luckily my mother is American so I should have less problems getting American citizenship...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Well it's good to know I'm not alone. I think it's in the Canadian blood to just take it. We are after all the legacy of the UEL's, willing to take it up the @$$ from the King. What really get's me is that here in Alberta after the libs win again people will be outraged for about a week, threatening this and that but won't actually do anything about it. At least Quebecers are willing to stand for something. Pretty shameful.

Yep, I now think that the Liberals are going to get away with it. The campaign core for them will be 'a vote for Conservatives is a vote for separatism'.

The funny part about that is putting the libs back in power will put Quebec on the brink. That's not necessarily a bad thing. It might be exactly what this country needs to reform itself.

[fracan]

Funny you should mention the United Empire Loyalists, because my Dad's family were UELs from Vermont. I'm sitting here on the family farm which is on King's land.

[August1991]

What the recent polls show is that Harper and Martin are about equal. Some (Paul Wells) interpret this to mean that Martin's TV speech succeeded. I sort of disagree.

The Liberals have collapsed in French Quebec. The Liberals will get, at best, a few urban seats west of the Ontario/Manitoba border but they may well be entirely shut out. The 25% Liberal support is now in Ontario, Atlantic Canada and English Quebec. This amounts to about 110 seats - largely from Ontario.

The Conservatives will get some seats from Atlantic Canada and a few in rural Ontario. The bulk of their seats will be from Western Canada. It will amount to about 120 seats. The BQ will get about 65 seats. The NDP the remainder.

Fundamentally, Ontario and Quebec will not vote for Stephen Harper.

Canadian federal politics have become extremely regionalized. The Liberals represent English Central Canada. The BQ represents French Quebec. The Conservatives represent Western Canada.

The malaise is deeper. The socialistic, tax-and-spend policies of the Liberals/NDP are unsustainable because, eventually, they will run out of "other people's money".

Andrew Coyne had the following statistics:

Number of people drawing Employment Insurance in Quebec and the four Atlantic provinces (combined population: 9.9 million): 286,000.

Number drawing EI in Ontario and the four Western provinces (combined population: 22 million): 236,000.

The so-called fiscal imbalance is another example.

In all of this, no one in Canada, west or east, English or French, wants to face these facts. It's what in French is called l'inconscience.

The country is gravely divided with a government transfer regime that cannot continue. Mulroney's coalition collapsed with the refusal of Meech Lake. Adscam has lead to the collapse of the Trudeau/Liberal coalition. Canada seems to have become ungovernable.

Would things be different if the Tories had a different leader? (eg. Bernard Lord?) I somehow doubt it.

Canada has had too many patches. Martin's speech is just the latest patch. It's another way for some voters to put off the inevitable.

[I miss Reagan]

Statistically equal yes. But given the publicized hype about liberal corruption they should be no where near the conservatives.

The malaise is deeper. The socialistic, tax-and-spend policies of the Liberals/NDP are unsustainable because, eventually, they will run out of "other people's money".

So when will Canada hit rock bottom and have an Irish catharsis? We've lasted so long because we have so many resources and the US next door. Sweden is still surviving with it's Robinhood mentality. Canadians are stupid. They keep a PM in power who uses private health care and keeps his money off shore safe from taxes. Yet it's the Conservatives who are "pro-corporation" and "anti-healthcare". It's hopeless. If Canadians don't choose the Cons now, they never will.

[Black Dog]

Canadian federal politics have become extremely regionalized. The Liberals represent English Central Canada. The BQ represents French Quebec. The Conservatives represent Western Canada.

As was discussed in the thread on proportional representation after the last federal election, the "regionalization" phenomenon is a bogus result of the "winner take all" electoral system. For example, the Conservatives in 2004 received just 52 per cent of the vote in the Parairies (Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba) yet took 82 per cent of the seats. By the same token, 300,000 Conservative voters in Qubec were unable to elect a single MP, yet 178,000 fellow Conservatives in Saskatchewan who elected 13 MPs. All because of FPTP. Any analysis that fails to take the system itself into account is, frankly, bullshit.

But what I really really love about this thread is the utter disdain the Con partisans here have for the choices of Canadians. I'll remembe rthat next time I hear a Con talk of how theirs is the party of the people.

No, I really don't have any faith left in my fellow Canadians. It's too bad really, but I've already started making plans to become part of the "brain drain". Luckily my mother is American so I should have less problems getting American citizenship...

Don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out.

[August1991]

BD, that's the point.

The Tories will get over 50% of the vote in the Prairies and the BQ will get over 50% of the vote in Quebec. The Liberals will get a plurality of votes in Ontario (and over 50% of urban Ontario) - despite the fact that sitting members will be under investigation for fraud.

If we had PR, we would turn into Belgium where all governments are explicit coalitions along linguistic divides. PR wouldn't change the regional nature of our federal politics. It would probably exacerbate it.

As a side point, the NDP should be the natural, left-wing English Canadian alternative to the Liberals. So why don't we see a rise in NDP poll numbers?

[Argus]

As a side point, the NDP should be the natural, left-wing English Canadian alternative to the Liberals.  So why don't we see a rise in NDP poll numbers?

Image. While the tories continue to labour under the hate and fearmongering campaigns of the past which portrayed them as Ghengis Khan and his hoarde (with the enthusiastic support of the media), the NDP is still seen in most parts of the country as ideologues and spendthrifts who are the enemies of the middle class and want to take away the money and profits of productive people to give it to unproductive people.

Not that this is exactly a mistaken impression, of course.

[Black Dog]

The Tories will get over 50% of the vote in the Prairies and the BQ will get over 50% of the vote in Quebec. The Liberals will get a plurality of votes in Ontario (and over 50% of urban Ontario) - despite the fact that sitting members will be under investigation for fraud.

Your original pioint was that Canada is sharply divided along regional lines. The data doesn't support that. What we have is a fairly healthy plurality of political alignemnts from coast to coast, a reality which is obscured by an outdated electoral system. The "regionalization" of the Canadian electorate is not, as you imply, a new phenomenon, but one that has been excrabated by a system that allows regional parties to dominate at the expense of other voices within the same region.

If we had PR, we would turn into Belgium where all governments are explicit coalitions along linguistic divides. PR wouldn't change the regional nature of our federal politics. It would probably exacerbate it

If the preceived regional nature is a product of the electoral system, how would changing the system to make it more representative of the realities of vote preference emake things worse?

As a side point, the NDP should be the natural, left-wing English Canadian alternative to the Liberals. So why don't we see a rise in NDP poll numbers?

Lots of reasons. Because the phony system, as well as the media environment have basically convinced people that we only two viable options. After years and years of fearmongering about the NDP, we have two main parties elbowing each other for room on the centre-right, one of which is at least clever enough to cloak its policies with the the same people-friendly rhetoric used by the NDP. I wonder, too, if the NDP's stagnation is not a byproduct of the demonization of all things left wafting from the south. I dunno. I do know the NDP have longh had a bum rap and, give the realities of FPTP, even people who would ordinarily consider voting ND would be loath to for fear of splitting the left vote and allowing a Con win (Ik know many ND's who did that last June). Another problem with winner take all: it promotes strategic voting.

...and just as I post, along comes Argus to add his two cents.

Image. While the tories continue to labour under the hate and fearmongering campaigns of the past which portrayed them as Ghengis Khan and his hoarde (with the enthusiastic support of the media), the NDP is still seen in most parts of the country as ideologues and spendthrifts who are the enemies of the middle class and want to take away the money and profits of productive people to give it to unproductive people.

Not that this is exactly a mistaken impression, of course.

Funny how the second someone trots out, say homophobic remarks by a Con MP to show the Cons are a party of bigots or cites Harper's NCC affiliation as evidence of a hidden agenda on healthcare, the whining from the righty-tighties grows so shrill that dogs scamper in to see what the fuss is about. Conservatives hate slurs based on hard evidence. They prefer speculation and innuendo to smear their foes.

[I miss Reagan]

even people who would ordinarily consider voting ND would be loath to for fear of splitting the left vote and allowing a Con win

Splitting the left vote? Didn't you just say that the Liberals were center-right?

People don't vote for the NDP because Canadian's are still smart enough to realize that socialism doesn't work (although it seems they're getting dumber by the day) and that you can't tax yourself into prosperity. They've seen how the NDP has destroyed the economies of both BC and Saskatchewan. Compared to a prosperous Alberta.

How's the ol' Churchill gem go... "We contend that for a nation to try to tax itself into prosperity is like a man standing in a bucket and trying to lift himself up by the handle. "

[Black Dog]

Splitting the left vote? Didn't you just say that the Liberals were center-right?

They are. But the Libs have a tendancy to campaign left and govern right. meanwhile, for many centre leftists (read: the majority of Canadians), the prospect of a Con government is intolerable, so they vote Liberal, assuming that they are never going to be as bad as the alternative.

People don't vote for the NDP because Canadian's are still smart enough to realize that socialism doesn't work (although it seems they're getting dumber by the day) and that you can't tax yourself into prosperity. They've seen how the NDP has destroyed the economies of both BC and Saskatchewan. Compared to a prosperous Alberta.

And oil had nothing to do with it, eh? You obviously never heard of Grant Devine, have you? And look what the NDP did to Sakatchewan since: they turned it into a "have" province!

[fracan]

Canadian federal politics have become extremely regionalized. The Liberals represent English Central Canada. The BQ represents French Quebec. The Conservatives represent Western Canada.

As was discussed in the thread on proportional representation after the last federal election, the "regionalization" phenomenon is a bogus result of the "winner take all" electoral system. For example, the Conservatives in 2004 received just 52 per cent of the vote in the Parairies (Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba) yet took 82 per cent of the seats. By the same token, 300,000 Conservative voters in Qubec were unable to elect a single MP, yet 178,000 fellow Conservatives in Saskatchewan who elected 13 MPs. All because of FPTP. Any analysis that fails to take the system itself into account is, frankly, bullshit.

But what I really really love about this thread is the utter disdain the Con partisans here have for the choices of Canadians. I'll remembe rthat next time I hear a Con talk of how theirs is the party of the people.

No, I really don't have any faith left in my fellow Canadians. It's too bad really, but I've already started making plans to become part of the "brain drain". Luckily my mother is American so I should have less problems getting American citizenship...

Don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Wow, I didn't expect a reaction like that... Sure, the iron's hot right now and my sentiment might wane in the next few weeks or months. I'm certainly in no position right now to leave the country. Who knows what'll happen in a few years time. But I know I'm not alone in feeling this way, and it's not even about Adscam itself anymore -- it's more about the polls showing strong support continuing for the Liberals, and the feeling that people have fallen for Martin's plea last Thursday.

Edit: OK, seems the conversation left me for the hour I was gone watching Politics. lol...

[cybercoma]

This is fantastic news! It confirms that I'm smarter than over 50% of Canada. I feel great!

[BQSupporter]

I think this is wonderful news. With the Liberal returned to power once again b/c of Ontario we in Quebec will know once and for all that Canadian does not work and we no longer want any part of the regime.

A victory for the Liberals will mean the death of Canada both in Quebec and out West and I think this is a good thing.

Finally put a nail in the coffin on this "country"

[Black Dog]

Wow, I didn't expect a reaction like that...  Sure, the iron's hot right now and my sentiment might wane in the next few weeks or months. I'm certainly in no position right now to leave the country. Who knows what'll happen in a few years time. But I know I'm not alone in feeling this way, and it's not even about Adscam itself anymore -- it's more about the polls showing strong support continuing for the Liberals, and the feeling that people have fallen for Martin's plea last Thursday.

Okay, I apolgize for the snark. But to me, I can't for the life of me figure out why so many people who have so much animosity towards this country and its people bother sticking around.

I am genuinely puzzled by the reaction. People talk of the "left" as elitist, but I've seen more condecension ooze from Conservative supporters, now and back in June, than I've ever heard from a Dipper or a USian Democrat. Ask yourselves this: why are people sticking with the Liberals? What do you suppose the alternative is?

This is fantastic news! It confirms that I'm smarter than over 50% of Canada. I feel great!

*

*+/- 50 per cent margin of error

I think this is wonderful news. With the Liberal returned to power once again b/c of Ontario we in Quebec will know once and for all that Canadian does not work and we no longer want any part of the regime.

A victory for the Liberals will mean the death of Canada both in Quebec and out West and I think this is a good thing.

Finally put a nail in the coffin on this "country"

Yeah, good luck with that "independant country" thing. You're gonna need it. Bye bye transfer payments. Bye bye federal government largesse. Bye bye mon cowboy.

[fracan]

Yeah, good luck with that "independant country" thing. You're gonna need it. Bye bye transfer payments. Bye bye federal government largesse. Bye bye mon cowboy.

I agree on that. Sovereignty will come at a very high price for Quebec. I will be the first protesting in the streets if it comes with an "economic and political partnership with the rest of Canada", too. It's all or nothing.

[PocketRocket]

I think this is wonderful news. With the Liberal returned to power once again b/c of Ontario we in Quebec will know once and for all that Canadian does not work and we no longer want any part of the regime. 

Hey, pal, if "Canadian" doesn't work for you, try drinking Laurentide. It's even made in Quebec so that should make you happy.

  A victory for the Liberals will mean the death of Canada both in Quebec and out West and I think this is a good thing. 

Yeah, and Bouchard said that his being elected would be the death of Canada, and Perry-Zoe said his armpits would be the death of Canada, and you guys just keep on predicting the death of Canada, all the while each of you dream of being the new Dictator Francais.

News flash, the day Quebec separates is the day Bush starts rubbing his hands together and thinking about how long it'll take him to acquire this new territory. You'll end up just like Puerto Rico, if not becoming outright the 51st state.

I wonder how much the USA will care about helping you to maintain your proud French culture???

Finally put a nail in the coffin on this "country"

Uh-huh. Go suckle a bit more at the teats of Francophone insecurity.

The inferiority complex of the Quebec francophone community is beyond compare.

[Guest eureka]

IMR:

What kind of hardwood is your head made from? No matter how many times it is demonstrated to you that Canada is not a highly taxed country in comparison, you still spout the same old line.

[August1991]

I am genuinely puzzled by the reaction. People talk of the "left" as elitist, but I've seen more condecension ooze from Conservative supporters, now and back in June, than I've ever heard from a Dipper or a USian Democrat. Ask yourselves this: why are people sticking with the Liberals? What do you suppose the alternative is?

The only people who will vote for the Liberals in the next election will be Ontarians, and a few in the Maritimes. Yes, I know that our current system exaggerates regional support for minority parties - but the fact is the BQ will get no votes in Alberta and the Conservatives will get almost no votes in Quebec. We have three parties with regional bases.

Conservatives are naturally frustrated to see a corrupt party get re-elected simply because one region (Ontario) refuses to vote for a leader (Harper) from another region.

Your original pioint was that Canada is sharply divided along regional lines. The data doesn't support that. What we have is a fairly healthy plurality of political alignemnts from coast to coast, a reality which is obscured by an outdated electoral system. The "regionalization" of the Canadian electorate is not, as you imply, a new phenomenon, but one that has been excrabated by a system that allows regional parties to dominate at the expense of other voices within the same region.

This is where you and I disagree, BD. Yes, there are Conservative voters in Chicoutimi, and Liberal voters in Camrose. There just ain't many of them.

Moreover, the parties are less ideologically divided than regionally divided. The Liberal Party speaks for Ontario.

Yeah, and Bouchard said that his being elected would be the death of Canada, and Perry-Zoe said his armpits would be the death of Canada, and you guys just keep on predicting the death of Canada, all the while each of you dream of being the new Dictator Francais.

Quebecers have made a point of seeking independence through democratic means. How long did it take Ireland to become independent?

News flash, the day Quebec separates is the day Bush starts rubbing his hands together and thinking about how long it'll take him to acquire this new territory.

So, the sole reason Canada exists is to prevent Ontario becoming American?

Sovereignty will come at a very high price for Quebec. I will be the first protesting in the streets if it comes with an "economic and political partnership with the rest of Canada", too. It's all or nothing.

Any sane person would realize that a simple solution exists here: Let Quebec become sovereign or autonomous but let Canada exist as a united country with Quebec. We we were moving towards this solution in the 1960s until Trudeau arrived with his Cartesian theories.

As a side point, the NDP should be the natural, left-wing English Canadian alternative to the Liberals. So why don't we see a rise in NDP poll numbers?

Lots of reasons. Because the phony system, as well as the media environment have basically convinced people that we only two viable options. After years and years of fearmongering about the NDP, we have two main parties elbowing each other for room on the centre-right, one of which is at least clever enough to cloak its policies with the the same people-friendly rhetoric used by the NDP. I wonder, too, if the NDP's stagnation is not a byproduct of the demonization of all things left wafting from the south. I dunno. I do know the NDP have longh had a bum rap and, give the realities of FPTP, even people who would ordinarily consider voting ND would be loath to for fear of splitting the left vote and allowing a Con win (Ik know many ND's who did that last June). Another problem with winner take all: it promotes strategic voting.

...and just as I post, along comes Argus to add his two cents.

Image. While the tories continue to labour under the hate and fearmongering campaigns of the past which portrayed them as Ghengis Khan and his hoarde (with the enthusiastic support of the media), the NDP is still seen in most parts of the country as ideologues and spendthrifts who are the enemies of the middle class and want to take away the money and profits of productive people to give it to unproductive people.

Argus, BD. I hate this "shoot the messenger", "corporate MSM", "sheeple" type argument.

Hugo said it best a post or two ago: No advertising campaign will ever convince people to stop using microwave ovens and cell phones. The Soviets had a complete monopoly over all forms of propaganda and advertising and they didn't succeed in convincing people of something obviously false.

Advertising does succeed in one way: advertising shows that the advertiser has the money and organization to advertise.

In general, people in Ontario do not want to buy the NDP or Harper salad. Advertise all you want, write whatever articles you want, control whatever newspapers you want. Ontarians have decided that Harper is from Calgary and the NDP are socialists.

[The Terrible Sweal]

Conservatives are naturally frustrated to see a corrupt party get re-elected simply because one region (Ontario) refuses to vote for a leader (Harper) from another region.

Ah, so many points to challenge, where to begin...

'a corrupt party' is an unwarranted assumption. There is no evidence so far of any participation by either a majority of party grassroots members, party MPs, or the formal party heirarchy.

'one region (Ontario) refuses to vote' is a fallacy of composition. Regions do not vote, voters vote. Ballots force voters to vote 'for' someone, even if their choices are sparse, not against someone. Ontario is not 'refusing' Harper because of his region, but because of his perceived deficits of utility for their (individually evaluated) objectives.

I continue to see the regional analysis propagated as an explanation for the failures of various political movements and leaders, chiefly by apologists on the losing side(s). An ironic vicious cycle, perhaps.

Anyway, voting is fundamentally an economic excercise. Each voter asks himself that classic defy-at-your-peril question: What's In It For Me? No party has the power to change or evade this question. Any party that doesn't have a good answer for this question is doomed.

Any sane person would realize that a simple solution exists here: Let Quebec become sovereign or autonomous but let Canada exist as a united country with Quebec. 

Sane? I'm sorry, but I don't have any idea how that sentence can mean anything whatsoever. Sovereign or autonomous but also not? I don't get it. Do you mean like federated? Like ... now?

What's In It For Who?

[Pateris]

And oil had nothing to do with it, eh? You obviously never heard of Grant Devine, have you? And look what the NDP did to Sakatchewan since: they turned it into a "have" province!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The primary reasons Saskatchewan is a "have" province have NOTHING to do with anything positive the NDP has done. Government revenue is up because of OIL (just like Alberta), URANIUM and POTASH prices. Saskatchewan's unemployment rate is 5% ONLY BECAUSE the unemployed MOVED to Alberta and found jobs there.

So don't give credit where credit not due.

[kimmy]

Before anybody gets overly excited or overly depressed about the poll results, spend a moment considering the situation.

The present support for the Liberals comes after two weeks of frantic election speculation has completely overshadowed Gomery in the news. Angling for an election is not an issue that plays well for Conservative support. But once the election is called, corruption will be back in the spotlight, both as a central campaign issue and through the ongoing inquiry.

-kimmy

[Black Dog]

This is where you and I disagree, BD. Yes, there are Conservative voters in Chicoutimi, and Liberal voters in Camrose. There just ain't many of them.

There's enough. There were nearly 30,000 Liberal voters in Alberta last election. Add in the NDP's numbers, you total 40,000. Admittedly, that's still approximately less than half of what the Cons got, but the point is that those 40,000+ Albertans recieve almost no representation in Parliment. Yes, there are regional parties and regionaldifferences, but not anything close to what the electoral situation would lead one to believe.

Hugo said it best a post or two ago: No advertising campaign will ever convince people to stop using microwave ovens and cell phones. The Soviets had a complete monopoly over all forms of propaganda and advertising and they didn't succeed in convincing people of something obviously false.

Advertising does succeed in one way: advertising shows that the advertiser has the money and organization to advertise.

In general, people in Ontario do not want to buy the NDP or Harper salad. Advertise all you want, write whatever articles you want, control whatever newspapers you want. Ontarians have decided that Harper is from Calgary and the NDP are socialists.

You fal to understand the actual purpose of advertising and its cousin, "spin". The ide ais not, as Soviet propaganda was, to convince people of soemthing that is objectiovely false, but to shape perceptions and re-enforce existing attitudes. Advertising doesn't attempt to strong arm the consumer into making choices against their will. It's a lot more subtle than that, hence its effectiveness.