tml12 Posted February 1, 2006 Report Posted February 1, 2006 http://www.canada.com/topics/news/story.ht...fc5a585&k=99500 I also heard Bill Graham might be in the running... Quote "Those who stand for nothing fall for anything." -Alexander Hamilton
geoffrey Posted February 1, 2006 Report Posted February 1, 2006 http://www.canada.com/topics/news/story.ht...fc5a585&k=99500I also heard Bill Graham might be in the running... Bill Grahman isn't much of a leader. Kind of seems like a big baby in my opinion. Quote RealRisk.ca - (Latest Post: Prosecutors have no "Skin in the Game") --
tml12 Posted February 1, 2006 Author Report Posted February 1, 2006 http://www.canada.com/topics/news/story.ht...fc5a585&k=99500 I also heard Bill Graham might be in the running... Bill Grahman isn't much of a leader. Kind of seems like a big baby in my opinion. Bug hypocrite for sure but I would have to see his platform again... Quote "Those who stand for nothing fall for anything." -Alexander Hamilton
shoop Posted February 1, 2006 Report Posted February 1, 2006 Hey, that sorta talk will get you accused of being homophobic by some... Bill Grahman isn't much of a leader. Kind of seems like a big baby in my opinion. With McKenna, Manley, Tobin (and maybe Rock) out of the picture this is definitely going to be a race full of second-stringers. Quote
geoffrey Posted February 1, 2006 Report Posted February 1, 2006 Hey, that sorta talk will get you accused of being homophobic by some...Bill Grahman isn't much of a leader. Kind of seems like a big baby in my opinion. With McKenna, Manley, Tobin (and maybe Rock) out of the picture this is definitely going to be a race full of second-stringers. He's gay?? Quote RealRisk.ca - (Latest Post: Prosecutors have no "Skin in the Game") --
shoop Posted February 1, 2006 Report Posted February 1, 2006 Uhhh, yeah. Thought that one was common knowledge. Regardless of what happens the Liberals are going to be in for a real leadership race this go round. Kinda sad that, but at least it gives the CPC a good year to govern without much threat from them. He's gay?? Quote
tml12 Posted February 1, 2006 Author Report Posted February 1, 2006 Uhhh, yeah. Thought that one was common knowledge.Regardless of what happens the Liberals are going to be in for a real leadership race this go round. Kinda sad that, but at least it gives the CPC a good year to govern without much threat from them. He's gay?? I forgot that he was gay... I think that this will be a fun race... Quote "Those who stand for nothing fall for anything." -Alexander Hamilton
shoop Posted February 1, 2006 Report Posted February 1, 2006 It's going to be a fun race indeed. Will set things up nicely for the 2008 election. An experienced PM Harper going up against an untested Liberal leader. Could be time for a majority.... I think that this will be a fun race... Quote
tml12 Posted February 1, 2006 Author Report Posted February 1, 2006 It's going to be a fun race indeed. Will set things up nicely for the 2008 election.An experienced PM Harper going up against an untested Liberal leader. Could be time for a majority.... I think that this will be a fun race... We have to wait until 2008 for a CPC majority? :angry: I just hope Harper can balance government out between Quebec and Alberta. You live in Alberta, right Shoop? Do you think Harper can please both provinces? Quote "Those who stand for nothing fall for anything." -Alexander Hamilton
shoop Posted February 1, 2006 Report Posted February 1, 2006 I come from Alberta but I don't live there anymore. I honestly think Harper will be able to please both Alberta and Quebec. As long as he works towards rebuilding Federalism in Quebec while keeping his campaign promises he will be fine. I just hope Harper can balance government out between Quebec and Alberta. You live in Alberta, right Shoop? Do you think Harper can please both provinces? Quote
geoffrey Posted February 1, 2006 Report Posted February 1, 2006 It's going to be a fun race indeed. Will set things up nicely for the 2008 election. An experienced PM Harper going up against an untested Liberal leader. Could be time for a majority.... I think that this will be a fun race... We have to wait until 2008 for a CPC majority? :angry: I just hope Harper can balance government out between Quebec and Alberta. You live in Alberta, right Shoop? Do you think Harper can please both provinces? More Provincial autonomy its favourable to both Quebec and Alberta. If theres two provinces that you could please at once, suprisingly I'd say it is those two. Quote RealRisk.ca - (Latest Post: Prosecutors have no "Skin in the Game") --
shoop Posted February 1, 2006 Report Posted February 1, 2006 Tru, but are there any provinces that are *opposed* to more Provincial autoonomy? More Provincial autonomy its favourable to both Quebec and Alberta. If theres two provinces that you could please at once, suprisingly I'd say it is those two. Quote
geoffrey Posted February 1, 2006 Report Posted February 1, 2006 Tru, but are there any provinces that are *opposed* to more Provincial autoonomy?More Provincial autonomy its favourable to both Quebec and Alberta. If theres two provinces that you could please at once, suprisingly I'd say it is those two. Ontario... maybe the Maritimes if they see themselves losing the huge federal support they get. Quote RealRisk.ca - (Latest Post: Prosecutors have no "Skin in the Game") --
shoop Posted February 1, 2006 Report Posted February 1, 2006 It is far from that simple. Why would Ontario be oppposed to more autonomy? If the Conservatives offer more provincial autonomy, with support, no provinces will be opposed. The question will be what sort of deal the feds can strike with the provinces. Harper has to be firm, but fair, on the first set of negotiations. Remember that Martin got royally screwed on that *health fix for a generation* in the summer of 2004 (Is a generation really less than two years?) and the provinces are still clamouring for more cash. Ontario... maybe the Maritimes if they see themselves losing the huge federal support they get. Quote
fellowtraveller Posted February 1, 2006 Report Posted February 1, 2006 Why would Harper try hard to please Alberta? Don't lose sight of the longer view, which is the next election. In that election, Alberta is going to vote overwhelmingly for Harper anyway. Harper must focus on Ontario and Quebec. I put as much credence in Tobins 'withdrawal' as I do in McKennas - which is none at all. Keep in mind, the leadership convention will not be until late 2006 soonest, more likely in early 2007. It would be dumb to declare now, and risk losing aall momentum over the next several months of nothing happening. It's bad planning , and both of these guys know it. All they need to do publicly is wait until an opportune time to declare : " I have been overwhelmed by the urging of thousands of supporters that my country needs me now". In the meantime, they will have been working quietly getting support and money. That is how these things are done. That is what McKenna has been doing for a long time already, Tobin to a lesser degree. They will not and are not walking away from that effort- privately. Quote The government should do something.
fellowtraveller Posted February 1, 2006 Report Posted February 1, 2006 autonomy, schmautonomy. It's about the money. Quote The government should do something.
geoffrey Posted February 1, 2006 Report Posted February 1, 2006 autonomy, schmautonomy.It's about the money. For Alberta autonomy=money. Quote RealRisk.ca - (Latest Post: Prosecutors have no "Skin in the Game") --
fellowtraveller Posted February 1, 2006 Report Posted February 1, 2006 autonomy, schmautonomy. It's about the money. For Alberta autonomy=money. For every province, it's about the money. Nobody wants to leave Canada with the only just possibility of Quebec - they just want their share plus a bit more. When the Council of the Federation gets together, do you think they spend 10 seconds talking about the Charter, or governance or any of that? It may be on the agenda, but really it is all about carving up the pie. Certainly Martin was aware of this reality, and Harper no less so. Quote The government should do something.
shoop Posted February 1, 2006 Report Posted February 1, 2006 Why try hard to please Alberta? hmmmm, flash back to the Brian Mulroney government. Took Alberta for granted. Up popped the Reform Party, boom twelve-and-a-half years in the political wilderness. I think you are far too pessimistic about McKenna and Tobin's withdrawals. The language they used was far too straightforward if their aim was to just postpone for a while. While you think declaring now might be *dumb* there would be no reason for these guys to withdrawal from the race at this early stage. Do explain how withdrawing is better planning than just saying *I am thinking about it*... Why would Harper try hard to please Alberta? Don't lose sight of the longer view, which is the next election. In that election, Alberta is going to vote overwhelmingly for Harper anyway. Harper must focus on Ontario and Quebec.I put as much credence in Tobins 'withdrawal' as I do in McKennas - which is none at all. Keep in mind, the leadership convention will not be until late 2006 soonest, more likely in early 2007. It would be dumb to declare now, and risk losing aall momentum over the next several months of nothing happening. It's bad planning , and both of these guys know it. Quote
tml12 Posted February 2, 2006 Author Report Posted February 2, 2006 Why try hard to please Alberta? hmmmm, flash back to the Brian Mulroney government. Took Alberta for granted. Up popped the Reform Party, boom twelve-and-a-half years in the political wilderness. I think you are far too pessimistic about McKenna and Tobin's withdrawals. The language they used was far too straightforward if their aim was to just postpone for a while. While you think declaring now might be *dumb* there would be no reason for these guys to withdrawal from the race at this early stage. Do explain how withdrawing is better planning than just saying *I am thinking about it*... Why would Harper try hard to please Alberta? Don't lose sight of the longer view, which is the next election. In that election, Alberta is going to vote overwhelmingly for Harper anyway. Harper must focus on Ontario and Quebec.I put as much credence in Tobins 'withdrawal' as I do in McKennas - which is none at all. Keep in mind, the leadership convention will not be until late 2006 soonest, more likely in early 2007. It would be dumb to declare now, and risk losing aall momentum over the next several months of nothing happening. It's bad planning , and both of these guys know it. I do agree with Shoop and that is the reason why Harper needs to play such a fine line between Quebec and Alberta. If he is seen as pro-Alberta, the Bloc will again regain speed. If he is seen as pro-Quebec, a new Alberta federal party may not be long in the making. Quote "Those who stand for nothing fall for anything." -Alexander Hamilton
fellowtraveller Posted February 2, 2006 Report Posted February 2, 2006 While you think declaring now might be *dumb* there would be no reason for these guys to withdrawal from the race at this early stage. Do explain how withdrawing is better planning than just saying *I am thinking about it*... Sure. It gets the press off their backs for several months , and allows them to visit their pals and potential supporters without constant monitoring by the media. Which is exactly what McKana was doing before the election, and what he'l return to doing soon. Remember, the convention is likely one year from now. Politcis is like comedy, timing is everything. The only people that need a year in the spotlight are political unknowns, and neither McKenna or Tobin fit that description. They have zero to gain from a long long campaign, and much to lose. I do agree with Shoop and that is the reason why Harper needs to play such a fine line between Quebec and Alberta.If he is seen as pro-Alberta, the Bloc will again regain speed. If he is seen as pro-Quebec, a new Alberta federal party may not be long in the making. There is not a chance in the world that a "New Reform' will gain traction in Alberta. And there is not a chance that Harper will lose any significant support in AB by playing Prime Minister. In fact, he will gain support by doing so. Ask yourself, what does Harper need? Answer: he needs more seats. Q: Where will he get them? A: Not in Alberta! And so on.... Quote The government should do something.
shoop Posted February 2, 2006 Report Posted February 2, 2006 So much to take issue with. (Asides from the atrocious spelling) McKenna isn't running. Manley isn't running. Tobin isn't running. Time will only prove I am correct, but I definitely don't expect you to confirm your error when this proves to be true. About your ignorance to the fact of Alberta. Yes, Harper cannot get anymore seats in Alberta. He can *only* lose them. Regardless of how it happens, he needs to keep Alberta happy. Care to state why There is not a chance in the world that a "New Reform' will gain traction in Alberta.? Prior to 1993 nobody thought the PCs could be budged out of Alberta. Oh what a fateful election that was. Sure. It gets the press off their backs for several months , and allows them to visit their pals and potential supporters without constant monitoring by the media. Which is exactly what McKana was doing before the election, and what he'l return to doing soon. Remember, the convention is likely one year from now. Politcis is like comedy, timing is everything. The only people that need a year in the spotlight are political unknowns, and neither McKenna or Tobin fit that description. They have zero to gain from a long long campaign, and much to lose.There is not a chance in the world that a "New Reform' will gain traction in Alberta. And there is not a chance that Harper will lose any significant support in AB by playing Prime Minister. In fact, he will gain support by doing so. Ask yourself, what does Harper need? Answer: he needs more seats. Q: Where will he get them? A: Not in Alberta! And so on.... Quote
fellowtraveller Posted February 2, 2006 Report Posted February 2, 2006 Care to state why There is not a chance in the world that a "New Reform' will gain traction in Alberta.?Sure. It's because they just swept the province, again with a huge popular vote. Harper walks on water there. A bunch of his Cabinet will come from there. The province is filled with money and hope. None of those things were extant in 1993. For starters.(Asides from the atrocious spelling)It's impossible to prove, but I am an excellent speller and an inferior typist. I don't use a spellchecker. Be grateful you're not trying to read my handwriting.Time will only prove I am correct, but I definitely don't expect you to confirm your error when this proves to be true. I'll leave that to you. Diarize this thread. if I'm wrong, I don't mind admitting it.Prior to 1993 nobody thought the PCs could be budged out of Alberta. Oh what a fateful election that was A different world then too, $12 oil and a decade plus of Chretien in the wind.....Harper is on an extended holiday in Alberta. The only way he could ruin is would be to get caught in an intimate moment with Jarome Iginla. Quote The government should do something.
shoop Posted February 2, 2006 Report Posted February 2, 2006 In the 1984 election the PCs got 68.8% of the vote in Alberta and took every riding in the province. They took Albertan's support for granted. Two elections later the PCs got 14.6% of the vote in Alberta and *lost* every riding in the province. Things can change quickly in Alberta. Thankfully the CPC is much too shrewd to believe in *extended* holidays anywhere in the country. They will hold their vote in Alberta *if* they stay true to their principles and offer the change people are looking for. btw, oil was just under $16 a barrel (in 1993) dollars at the time of election. Oil price link Try using Google instead of pulling numbers outta your butt. My guess is there will be four cabinet ministers come out of Alberta tops... Harper is on an extended holiday in Alberta. The only way he could ruin is would be to get caught in an intimate moment with Jarome Iginla. Quote
Boru Posted February 2, 2006 Report Posted February 2, 2006 http://www.canada.com/topics/news/story.ht...fc5a585&k=99500 I also heard Bill Graham might be in the running... Bill Grahman isn't much of a leader. Kind of seems like a big baby in my opinion. Bug hypocrite for sure but I would have to see his platform again... Hypocrite...and harper isn't? His entire campaign..... never mind. No getting through to some people... Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.