Liberal Election Strategy

[August1991]

Mr. Herle said, too, that the Martin Liberals have to keep the Conservatives "marginalized on the right," an insider said.

The Liberals also need to be solid on economic issues and keep the social conservatives in a "box," the source said. He said they also must play to the "10 per cent of the centre left" who swing between the Liberals and the NDP.

G & M

This softwood lumber dispute is the start. I think we can expect more of the same as we go into the fall in preparation for the election.

The NDP obtained 2 million votes in the last election but only 19 seats. If the Liberals can entice those "centre-left" NDP voters to vote Liberal, then many close ridings will go Liberal.

Expect to see an anti-American, pro-public sector Liberal Party.

It's a smart strategy. It may even work.

[scribblet]

Mr. Herle said, too, that the Martin Liberals have to keep the Conservatives "marginalized on the right," an insider said.

Expect to see an anti-American, pro-public sector Liberal Party.

It's a smart strategy. It may even work.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Too bad they have to resort to anti Americanism as part of their platform to win. I guess they figure thats what it takes to keep the corruption and scandals on the back burner. Doesn't say much for the average voter who falls for it does it.

[hiti]

It's not anti-american to want to protect Canada for a change instead of bending over every time the USA decides to steal from us. $5 billion in softwood lumber might not seem like much to some but to the lumber companies in Canada it is a fair piece of change.

As for the corruption charges, that's just rhetoric without any proof. If there was proof, there would be jail time. And if you want to know the top ten scandals, check out which party made the list the most here.

[Argus]

It's not anti-american to want to protect Canada for a change instead of bending over every time the USA decides to steal from us. $5 billion in softwood lumber might not seem like much to some but to the lumber companies in Canada it is a fair piece of change.

It is anti-Americanism which is in large part responsible for the softwood dispute. the US administration sees no reason whatever to reign in its protectionists on behalf of an obnoxious, anti-American regime in Canada.

As for the corruption charges, that's just rhetoric without any proof.

There is FAR more proof of Liberal corruption than there is of corruption involving the Bush administration, but I bet you take THEIR corruption as an absolute article of faith.

[kimmy]

Mr. Herle said, too, that the Martin Liberals have to keep the Conservatives "marginalized on the right," an insider said.

The Liberals also need to be solid on economic issues and keep the social conservatives in a "box," the source said. He said they also must play to the "10 per cent of the centre left" who swing between the Liberals and the NDP.

G & M

This softwood lumber dispute is the start. I think we can expect more of the same as we go into the fall in preparation for the election.

The NDP obtained 2 million votes in the last election but only 19 seats. If the Liberals can entice those "centre-left" NDP voters to vote Liberal, then many close ridings will go Liberal.

Expect to see an anti-American, pro-public sector Liberal Party.

It's a smart strategy. It may even work.

But what of word that the Liberals see the West as the place they can gain ground?

I wouldn't see a pro-public sector, anti-American stance as being such a smart idea, if that is the case. Though, looking aggressive on soft-wood should help them in BC. They have a fine line to walk.

-k

[newbie]

[Melanie_]

the US administration sees no reason whatever to reign in its protectionists on behalf of an obnoxious, anti-American regime in Canada.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That's why we have rulings from impartial NAFTA panels; petty bickering should have no bearing on respecting international trade agreements. We shouldn't have to pander to them for them to honour their commitments.

[Montgomery Burns]

[Montgomery Burns]

The Liberals will use an anti-American strategy. It worked for Gerhard Schroder and it will likely work for the liberals. Anything that Harper wants to do will be called "American" by the Liberals and Canada's liberal media.

Eg, I was watching Global TV a couple of weeks back and they had a feature on about extreme weather. They showed footage of floods, tornados, etc. Then a voice-over asked what was responsible for these conditions. They then showed footage of Bush at a meeting and the voice-over said that the fault of extreme weather is the current US administration for not signing Kyoto.

The frightening thing is that Global is the most balanced of the 3 networks.

I expect Paul Martin and the Librano$ to use tactics such as the above.

[newbie]

[August1991]

But what of word that the Liberals see the West as the place they can gain ground?

I wouldn't see a pro-public sector, anti-American stance as being such a smart idea, if that is the case. Though, looking aggressive on soft-wood should help them in BC. They have a fine line to walk.

I think the Liberals have to hold what they have and add about 25 or more seats. If they manage to shift about 200,000 or so NDP voters into voting Liberal, then they may well get those seats - in Ontario and BC, and perhaps Sask and Man - although I haven't looked at specific ridings. (I'm sure Herle has.)

Whether in Ontario or the West or the Maritimes, these are voters who instinctively dislike the US and think we need a strong central government to stand up to Americans. Too many of them voted NDP last time out and Herle wants them back.

The Liberals are playing this softwood lumber dispute like a good bridge player plays off the dummy.

BTW, I suspect Harper's response will not work with these voters. They do not blame bad communications for our cross-border problems; they blame US politicians.

[Argus]

As for the corruption charges, that's just rhetoric without any proof.

There is FAR more proof of Liberal corruption than there is of corruption involving the Bush administration, but I bet you take THEIR corruption as an absolute article of faith.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Uh, couldn't let this go. This is my short list of American administration corruption under George Bush:

- 2002 election (people not allowed to vote, Floridagate)

- Haliburton

- Enron

- Karl Rove

- Iraq invasion based on lies

- Breaking international law by invading Iraq

- Bush/Saudi connection

Have fun.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You have no "proof" of legal wrongdoing by the government in anything above, therefore, by the standards set by the previous poster, it's nothing but hot air and rhetoric. Otherwise, like, there'd be charges, you know.

[Guest Warwick Green]

You have no "proof" of legal wrongdoing by the government in anything above, therefore, by the standards set by the previous poster, it's nothing but hot air and rhetoric. Otherwise, like, there'd be charges, you know.

I don't think it's so much breaking the law as pandering to their buddies. Invading Iraq knowing the big winner would be corporate America and Bush kowtowing to the religious right any chance he has.

[mcqueen625]

Blind Liberal supporters here are forgetting that many people are still pissed about Bill C-38 and although they have voted Liberal in the past they will support them again due to the SSM legislation, and let's not forget the Sponsorship Scandal, HRDC, etc. This government has simply not changed the way they do business and they have no intentions of changing. Many of the same individuals who sat in Jean Chretien's corrupt Cabinet also sit in Martin's. Martin himself was the Finance Minister when these misappropriations of taxpayer's money were being perpetrated, and if he didn't know it was going on, he should have. If he did know, shame on him, he is a disgrace and should not be PM.

This is a Prime Minister who himself publically stated that he is willing to allow an appointed, unaccountable judiciary to be "The final word in this country." I was always led to believe that the buck stops with our elected officials and that it up to them to make decisions for Canadian's, not some political hacks who were appointed to judgeships because of Party loyalty, and as a reward for services rendered. It is our elected officials who are supposed to make decisions of social policy not these unaccountable individuals. The reason elected officials are supposed to be the one's making those types of decisions is so they can then be held accountable by the people for those decisions at election time.

In a democracy you cannot have virtual dictator's (Supreme Court judges) telling our elected officials what laws they are to make and how they are to be worded. To have a scenario such as we now have in Canada is hardly a democracy.

[Leader Circle]

I think with the soaring gas prices and the Liberal government's refusal to help with tax cuts is gong to piss off alot of Liberal voters.

This is going to be a rough election for the Liberals. Might look like the '84 election when it's all said & done!

[I Miss Trudeau]

Expect to see an anti-American, pro-public sector Liberal Party.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That only works because the main alternative party to the Liberals in english Canada seems to constantly imply that we should just be happy that the Americans are sticking it in our butts instead of someone elses.