Paul Martin doesn't deserve this...

[fellowtraveller]

Inefficient?

Can you just imagine the horrific layers of bureaucracy that will magically appear federally and provincially, never to disappear, with the Liberals day care plan?

[newbie]

Inefficient?

Can you just imagine the horrific layers of bureaucracy that will magically appear federally and provincially, never to disappear, with the Liberals day care plan?

If that's the case, I think accreditation and professional day care is worth it for our children.

[August1991]

Do you ever watch TV, August? On the fantasy-themed castaway TV show "Lost", there was a plot that reminded me a bit of the dilemna Canadian voters face. The castaways discovered some kind of underground bunker, staffed by a lone hermit.

Yes, I watch TV but rarely. I have heard of Lost but I haven't seen it. (To be honest, whenever people I admire and respect describe it to me, the whole premise strikes me as silly.)

The risk that Kinsella and Copps and that camp are taking is that Canadians will choose not to press the Big Red Button, and discover the consequences aren't so terrible after all. What if Harper gets elected, and all of the scary consequences people have been warned of just don't materialize? Fear of the unknown has worked for the Liberals for a long time, but they're giving Canadians a great chance to get really familiar with Harper. This might not work out as well for the Chretienite Liberals as they expect.

I recall the 1984 election and there was a palpable feeling that people were pushing the red button. This was particularly true in Quebec. When journalists talk about a "tipping point" in this election, I think this is what they are referring to. The point at which many people (in Ontario) collectively decide to take the plunge and go red.

How does the country "fundamentally shift" if the Liberals lose?

This election is not 1984 redux if only because of the Bloc. There has been a fundamental shift in Canadian politics, and the ongoing war within the Liberal Party is part of it.

The basic issue concerns how Quebec fits within Canada.

I was surprised to notice that in the recent Ekos poll (2000 sample size), the BQ was below 50% in Quebec because of the rise of Quebec Conservative support.

If the BQ gets less than 50% of the popular vote in Quebec on 23 January, pequistes will publicly say it was not a referendum election while privately, they'll admit that there is a message.

----

A poster named Stignasty has a signature with a Harper quote from a speech he gave in June 1997 to a group of American Christian fundamentalists in Montreal. You can read the whole speech here and it's an interesting read, in context. Here's a quote:

The party system that is developing here in Canada is a party system that replicates the antebellum period, the pre-Civil War period of the United States.

That's not to say – and I would never be quoted as saying – we're headed to a civil war. But we do have a major secession crisis, obviously of a very different nature than the secession crisis you had in the 1860s. But the dynamics, the political and partisan dynamics of this, are remarkably similar.

Preston Manning has made this comparison often (Harper refers to that fact in his speech) and I think the comparison is legimitate only in the sense that, faced with a secession movement or dissolution, any democratic country attempts various compromises and political parties split or reform.

[shoop]

Kimmy,

I haven't really followed much of what Sheila Copps has been saying, but you are pretty far off on Kinsella.

Kinsella's blog

It is clear that Kinsella despises the Martinites. He has been surprisingly cordial about the Conservative campaign to date. Praising Harper and the Conservative war room.

He definitely doesn't think Martin will resign quickly.

You know, I'd love to be able to turn down the anti-Dithers volume from 11, after Election Day. I really would. After a while, shooting fish in the proverbial barrel wearies even the most energetic firearms enthusiast. After a while, it doesn't seem sporting anymore. But my sense is Dithers won't resign, even when he loses. It will likely be in Harper's interest to keep the fallen Great Grit Hope around - just as Mulroney did with Turner. For the same reasons.

So the gritty, grimy civil war will continue.

Martin clinging to power is the best thing that could happen to a Conservative minority. It will give them a nice solid time to govern.

I suspect that Kinsella and Copps believe that if Harper wins, his reign will be a short one. I think they believe that if Harper wins, the Liberals will use the "time-out" to get their ship back in order, force an election, and take back power. (they could well be right.)

The timetable for all of this might be less than a year. Paul Martin would most likely resign immediately as Liberal leader if the Liberals lose this election. They could have a leadership convension this spring, a policy convention this summer, and force an election in the fall.

How does the country "fundamentally shift" if the Liberals lose?

The risk that Kinsella and Copps and that camp are taking is that Canadians will choose not to press the Big Red Button, and discover the consequences aren't so terrible after all. What if Harper gets elected, and all of the scary consequences people have been warned of just don't materialize? Fear of the unknown has worked for the Liberals for a long time, but they're giving Canadians a great chance to get really familiar with Harper. This might not work out as well for the Chretienite Liberals as they expect.

[mowich]

Stephen Harper is not winning this campaign, in any sense at all. Canadians are being dragged screaming to Harper. Harper is a last resort.

Rather, the Liberal Party is losing this campaign. Why? Because a whole host of (mostly English-Canadian) Chretien/Trudeau insiders have decided that they don't like Paul Martin. They don't like the way Martin exposed the way these insiders operated the country. The Liberal Party is committing suicide in a civil war.

Kinsella and Copps may feel happy on 23 January if Martin loses. But they will wake up to a country fundamentally shifted, just as a tectonic shift occurred in October 1995.

Kinsella and Copps are tacticians, with no understanding at all for strategy.

----

Paul Martin is trying to hold this leaky bag together, and he's getting no credit for his efforts.

Please tell me just who is "dragging" Canadians "screaming" to the Conservatives. From everything I read, hear and see a lot of us(Canadians) are simply choosing the only viable alternative to a party who like the CPC of the Mulroney era, need to be sent to the Hinterland for a complete make-over.

The Conservative party is ahead in the polls because they have stated their message and have stayed on track with the message.

The CPC is the first resort of thinking Canadians.

I agree completely that the liberals are losing this election. They are losing only because they lied to us, they cheated us and they have nothing but contempt for the Canadian electorate. How dare they.

Yes there will be a fundamental shift in the way this country is governed come January 24th, at least that is my fondest wish. The CPC actually believes that we Canadians have the ability to stand on our own two feet, are self-reliant and more than willing to work hard in order to contribute to a better Canada.

You don't have to be a strategist to understand that the way the liberals are handling themselves in this election is laughable. Kinsella for one is right on track in his blogs.

As for Mr. Martin, what goes around comes around, and I'm pretty sure that Mr. Chretien is watching this election and laughing his head off.

[tml12]

Agreed.

[fellowtraveller]

Inefficient?

Can you just imagine the horrific layers of bureaucracy that will magically appear federally and provincially, never to disappear, with the Liberals day care plan?

If that's the case, I think accreditation and professional day care is worth it for our children.

Neither accreditation or professionalism have anything to do with a solely state provided daycare system. Both are achievable within a system that provides choice by those responsible for the welfare of children. No, Paul Martin is not responsible for my kids. I am.

C'mon , admit it. You just love that Big Guvmint.

[mowich]

Harper's War in Iraq and Missile pseudo-Defence Shield would have cost Canada far more than any waste in Martin's govenment.

Martin has payed down the debt 8 years in a row. If Harper is elected he will follow Bush's lead in driving the country to the brink of bankruptcy (Like Mulroney did before him)

I wonder if anyone in this forum can check this river god person out?

#1) Harper has no personal army, let alone one active in Iraq.

#2) The CPC will work with the U.S. on the Missile Defence Shield while keeping the interests of Canada at the forefront of any negotiations.

#3) Martin had no choice but to start paying down the debt. The Mulroney government left Canada with it's financial back against the wall. He did so by cutting transfer payments to the provinces and we all know where that got us.

#4) A CPC government will immediately install measures whereby all ministries will be answerable to Parliament for budgets and any cost overruns. It will move to restore accountability and responsibility to the government.

If anyone has an agenda it is you and that being one of misguided, deluded, non-factual bullshit.

[fellowtraveller]

Martin had no choice but to start paying down the debt

And in 12 years, the Liberals have paid down what? $10 billion on a debt of over $500 billion?

They have managed to 'create a surplus', but not through any kind of good management. It is more a combo of lower interest rates, overtaxation, and offloading programs to the provinces.

Martin has payed down the debt 8 years in a row

River God, do you know the difference between debt and deficit?

[kimmy]

Yes, I watch TV but rarely. I have heard of Lost but I haven't seen it. (To be honest, whenever people I admire and respect describe it to me, the whole premise strikes me as silly.)

The premise is, indeed, silly. But with a superb cast, compelling characters, and strong writing, the show works. (or at least, the first season was superb; I haven't had the opportunity to see much of the new season.) Many of the best episodes focused on one character, exploring their background through flashbacks from their prior life (meaning prior to being marooned) and a situation that in some way defined the person they are-- mistakes they made, choices they regret, and so on. "Lost" refers to not just their geographic location, but also to some spiritual aspect of each character. In their struggles, they find themselves in parallel situations and, in some sense, have a chance to make the same choice again... or make a different one. It's not done in such a ham-handed manner as I've described it, it's done quite elegantly. Some of the best literature comes from a silly premise... what makes great literature is not the premise, but the ability to touch on themes that have broader appeal.

How does the country "fundamentally shift" if the Liberals lose?

This election is not 1984 redux if only because of the Bloc. There has been a fundamental shift in Canadian politics, and the ongoing war within the Liberal Party is part of it.

The basic issue concerns how Quebec fits within Canada.

I was surprised to notice that in the recent Ekos poll (2000 sample size), the BQ was below 50% in Quebec because of the rise of Quebec Conservative support.

If the BQ gets less than 50% of the popular vote in Quebec on 23 January, pequistes will publicly say it was not a referendum election while privately, they'll admit that there is a message.

I'm a little unwilling to accept that everything is about Quebec; maybe I'm just in denial. But I think that as long as Quebecers believe they have only 2 real choices-- go Liberal, or go separatist-- this country will in some sense be held hostage by the issue. I think that a Conservative victory in this election-- even if it's a minority, even if it's short-lived, even if there's not a single Quebec Conservative MP-- will challenge that view. I think that a Conservative victory in "the rest of Canada" would encourage some Quebec involvement in the party, allow the party to get stronger candidates and a stronger presense in the province (and likewise in Ontario, where I think the party is still largely viewed with suspicion.) I think that it is essential to this country's future that the Conservatives become a truly national party, and I think that a victory in this election would accelerate that process, spur central Canada to get involve and somewhat dilute the western influence in the party (which is not a bad thing). I think that if the Conservative party wins this election, the BQ will not be polling 50% when the next election rolls around.

-k

[fellowtraveller]

I think that if the Conservative party wins this election, the BQ will not be polling 50% when the next election rolls around.

But.....

The Cons will have to win a majority to have any effect on events in Quebec in the next couple of years. Same for the Libs really. A minority govt, Lib or Con, will be ideal for the Bloc as they really hold the balance of power federally(and really, what a comment on our system of governance is that?). And really, we have no more than a couple of years, or less , to act on Quebec.

The BQ and 50% may not matter at all in the next federal election - if it follows a PQ win in the next Quebec provincial election. The Bloc won't run candidates in a federal election in a country called Canada.....

[kimmy]

I think that if the Conservative party wins this election, the BQ will not be polling 50% when the next election rolls around.

But.....

The Cons will have to win a majority to have any effect on events in Quebec in the next couple of years. Same for the Libs really.

No, no. I don't believe a government forcing contentious issues through parliament is necessary to turn the tables. I think that just showing Quebecers that somebody other than the Liberals can form the government in this country will have a dramatic effect. August is more qualified to comment on this than me, but I strongly suspect that a fair chunk of the BQ's support is made up of people who vote BQ out of disgust for the Liberals. A Conservative win would alert those voters that they have other options. I also suspect that many people in Quebec who vote Liberal actually dislike the Liberals but vote Liberal because they dislike the BQ even more.

I think proving to Quebecers that there is another national alternative would make a far greater positive impact on national unity than any policy that either the Liberals or Conservatives could enact.

-k

[Guest eureka]

In the 1960s, kimmy, the Conservatives died in Quebec and Separatism was born. In the 1990s, the reborn Conservatives died in Quebec and the Bloc came to prominence.

It is not so simple.

[fellowtraveller]

I think that if the Conservative party wins this election, the BQ will not be polling 50% when the next election rolls around.

But.....

The Cons will have to win a majority to have any effect on events in Quebec in the next couple of years. Same for the Libs really.

No, no. I don't believe a government forcing contentious issues through parliament is necessary to turn the tables. I think that just showing Quebecers that somebody other than the Liberals can form the government in this country will have a dramatic effect. August is more qualified to comment on this than me, but I strongly suspect that a fair chunk of the BQ's support is made up of people who vote BQ out of disgust for the Liberals. A Conservative win would alert those voters that they have other options. I also suspect that many people in Quebec who vote Liberal actually dislike the Liberals but vote Liberal because they dislike the BQ even more.

I think proving to Quebecers that there is another national alternative would make a far greater positive impact on national unity than any policy that either the Liberals or Conservatives could enact.

-k

If only there were time to test your theory kimmy.

But there isn't.

The timeline isn't really driven by Ottawa, it is defined by the timing of the next provincial election in Quebec - in 2007.

What is needed - now- and only of course if you support the notion that Canada should make an effort to retain Quebec-is a strong foreceful federal government - a majority government. It is less important that it be Liberal or Conservative, just that it exist.

Do you really think Quebec will rally behind Martin, Pierre Pettigrew, McKenna, the ghost of Trudeau or Harper when none of those people can get get it done in the House of Commons? This is a bit premature, but Jean Charest may well end up being the spearcarrier for Canada in 2007.

And I don't think the support for the Bloc is lessening in Quebec, or that the new support for the Tories comes from the Bloc, but more likely from Liberals who are defecting from the sinking ship.