Election time? - Go now or wait for Gomery?

[PuckChaser]

The GG probably will not dissolve parliament. That's bad press all over. There's some important motions coming up, as well as the Opposition period for putting motions forward at the end of the month. By refusing to step down, it just looks worse on the Liberals in my book. It'd be better press to put a positive step foward and say "Fine, we'll call an election."

Its not a matter of if the Liberals will get booted, but when. The same party in power for over 12 years is not good for a country.

 

[Edward Campbell]

I am inclined to agree that:

"¢ The GG should not dissolve parliament, or invite Harper to form a government, without the advice of her prime minister - the King-Byng Thing and all that;

"¢ There is much to be gained by pounding the Liberals - on national TV, with loads of well rehearsed Question Period 'sound bites' which will be coupled with images of a weak-looking Martin invoking long dead political scientists as justification for clinging to power;

"¢ There is much to be gained from continued testimony before Gomery about Liberal lies and theft; and

"¢ There is no need to, gratuitously, p!ss off Western voters by interfering with a Royal visit attached to their centennial of confederation celebrations.

It is probable that the Liberals will never get more than 152 votes - Cadman will, in all likelihood, stay home.

Martin will come under relentless pressure to, finally, allow his government to fall; being a ditherer by nature he will, unless he suddenly gets really smart, delay too long and the acknowledges popularity of his new, spend, Spend, SPEND budget will be dissipated and then challenged as the commentariat pronounces that he is being a spendthrift, forcing us back into deficits, etc while he tries to bribe us with our own money.   If the Tories are lucky Martin will dig his own grave sometime after 25 May - after he has tried to milk the Royal Visit for all it's worth.

If Martin is smart he will face the house this week - after he has his 152 votes lined up, and then say that he â ?respects democracyâ ? and he's sorry the Tories and separatists are depriving every group known to man of untold new benefits and dissing the Queen, Alberta and Saskatchewan in the process.   I doubt it will save him but that's the smart move.

I think there is a realistic, albeit slim, prospect of a Tory majority government if, Big IF Harper and Duceppe and the commentariat can convince Ontarians that the Liberals are the big threat to national unity and that the Tories can work with Québec nationalists and keep the country together.   Although it is usually unstated, Ontarians almost always vote against the party which, in their view, cannot or will not â ?keep Québec in its place.â ?   There are, I think, 70+ Liberal seats up for grabs in Ontario - only 20 to 25 are really, solid, rock-ribbed Liberal.   A Conservative majority needs:

"¢ 70 seats in the West (they got 68 in 2004);

"¢ 70 seats in Ontario (they only got 24 in 2004, the Liberal vote needs to collapse, partially under assault from the left (NDP and Greens), but stranger things have happened in e.g. '57 and '84); and

"¢ 15 seats East of the Ottawa River (they only got 7 in 2004 and a 100% gain in old Canada (as Michael Bliss calls it) may be harder than a 300% gain in Ontario).

 

[Reccesoldier]

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/1115789648558_43/?hub=TopStories

All is not lost. Looks like Ont, is prepared to reverse it's self imposed Cranial rectal inversion.

 

[a_majoor]

I am inclined to agree that:

"¢ The GG should not dissolve parliament, or invite Harper to form a government, without the advice of her prime minister - the King-Byng Thing and all that;

"¢ There is much to be gained by pounding the Liberals - on national TV, with loads of well rehearsed Question Period 'sound bites' which will be coupled with images of a weak-looking Martin invoking long dead political scientists as justification for clinging to power;

"¢ There is much to be gained from continued testimony before Gomery about Liberal lies and theft; and

"¢ There is no need to, gratuitously, p!ss off Western voters by interfering with a Royal visit attached to their centennial of confederation celebrations.

It is probable that the Liberals will never get more than 152 votes - Cadman will, in all likelihood, stay home.

Martin will come under relentless pressure to, finally, allow his government to fall; being a ditherer by nature he will, unless he suddenly gets really smart, delay too long and the acknowledges popularity of his new, spend, Spend, SPEND budget will be dissipated and then challenged as the commentariat pronounces that he is being a spendthrift, forcing us back into deficits, etc while he tries to bribe us with our own money.   If the Tories are lucky Martin will dig his own grave sometime after 25 May - after he has tried to milk the Royal Visit for all it's worth.

If Martin is smart he will face the house this week - after he has his 152 votes lined up, and then say that he â ?respects democracyâ ? and he's sorry the Tories and separatists are depriving every group known to man of untold new benefits and dissing the Queen, Alberta and Saskatchewan in the process.   I doubt it will save him but that's the smart move.

I think there is a realistic, albeit slim, prospect of a Tory majority government if, Big IF Harper and Duceppe and the commentariat can convince Ontarians that the Liberals are the big threat to national unity and that the Tories can work with Québec nationalists and keep the country together.   Although it is usually unstated, Ontarians almost always vote against the party which, in their view, cannot or will not â ?keep Québec in its place.â ?   There are, I think, 70+ Liberal seats up for grabs in Ontario - only 20 to 25 are really, solid, rock-ribbed Liberal.   A Conservative majority needs:

"¢ 70 seats in the West (they got 68 in 2004);

"¢ 70 seats in Ontario (they only got 24 in 2004, the Liberal vote needs to collapse, partially under assault from the left (NDP and Greens), but stranger things have happened in e.g. '57 and '84); and

"¢ 15 seats East of the Ottawa River (they only got 7 in 2004 and a 100% gain in old Canada (as Michael Bliss calls it) may be harder than a 300% gain in Ontario).

Allowing Mr Dithers to be hoist on his on petrard is a good strategy, but only one prong; the Conservatives have to throw off the cloaking device and actually put forth some well thought out IDEAS and give us an idea of what they intend to do if in power. Pandering or poll following will not work, and no matter what, I doubt any party could swing a majorety this time around, so some practical ideas on cleaning up the mess, curbing the PMO and some Parliamentry reform to prevent further recurrences of Shawinigate, Adscam, the Billion Dollar Boondoggle etc. should be sufficient for the new session of Parliament.

We are living in a nightmarish time for fans of constitutional government. Jack Layton has staged a coup and effectively became Prime Minister when he blackmailed Mr Martin into accepting an NDP budget, and now Mr Martin continues to cling to power despite having been deposed by a majorety in the house. All we need now is a Junta to close the House of Parliament and the cycle will be complete. (If that happens lets hope there is an "Oliver Cromwell" leading the Junta, as opposed to a Lenin or Franco).

 

[Cdn Blackshirt]

I am inclined to agree that:

"¢ The GG should not dissolve parliament, or invite Harper to form a government, without the advice of her prime minister - the King-Byng Thing and all that;

"¢ There is much to be gained by pounding the Liberals - on national TV, with loads of well rehearsed Question Period 'sound bites' which will be coupled with images of a weak-looking Martin invoking long dead political scientists as justification for clinging to power;

"¢ There is much to be gained from continued testimony before Gomery about Liberal lies and theft; and

"¢ There is no need to, gratuitously, p!ss off Western voters by interfering with a Royal visit attached to their centennial of confederation celebrations.

It is probable that the Liberals will never get more than 152 votes - Cadman will, in all likelihood, stay home.

Martin will come under relentless pressure to, finally, allow his government to fall; being a ditherer by nature he will, unless he suddenly gets really smart, delay too long and the acknowledges popularity of his new, spend, Spend, SPEND budget will be dissipated and then challenged as the commentariat pronounces that he is being a spendthrift, forcing us back into deficits, etc while he tries to bribe us with our own money.   If the Tories are lucky Martin will dig his own grave sometime after 25 May - after he has tried to milk the Royal Visit for all it's worth.

If Martin is smart he will face the house this week - after he has his 152 votes lined up, and then say that he â ?respects democracyâ ? and he's sorry the Tories and separatists are depriving every group known to man of untold new benefits and dissing the Queen, Alberta and Saskatchewan in the process.   I doubt it will save him but that's the smart move.

I think there is a realistic, albeit slim, prospect of a Tory majority government if, Big IF Harper and Duceppe and the commentariat can convince Ontarians that the Liberals are the big threat to national unity and that the Tories can work with Québec nationalists and keep the country together.   Although it is usually unstated, Ontarians almost always vote against the party which, in their view, cannot or will not â ?keep Québec in its place.â ?   There are, I think, 70+ Liberal seats up for grabs in Ontario - only 20 to 25 are really, solid, rock-ribbed Liberal.   A Conservative majority needs:

"¢ 70 seats in the West (they got 68 in 2004);

"¢ 70 seats in Ontario (they only got 24 in 2004, the Liberal vote needs to collapse, partially under assault from the left (NDP and Greens), but stranger things have happened in e.g. '57 and '84); and

"¢ 15 seats East of the Ottawa River (they only got 7 in 2004 and a 100% gain in old Canada (as Michael Bliss calls it) may be harder than a 300% gain in Ontario).

The only problem I see Edward is the longer this lasts, the more the Liberals are going to promise to handout and we all know in Canada that "buying votes" works....

And for anyone who has looked, the dollar took at 3/4 point hit this morning alone based on a combination of the above and the lower than expected Trade Surplus numbers.

Bottom Line:  This government doesn't have the mandate or the moral authority to lead so let's get on with an election.  Whoever is elected will have that mandate and we can get on with things.



Matthew.   

 

[camochick]

Bottom Line:  This government doesn't have the mandate or the moral authority to lead so let's get on with an election.  Whoever is elected will have that mandate and we can get on with things.

But what if the liberals are re-elected. Who is to say they can't win in another election. I for one can't bring myself to vote conservative, not when I know how they want to run things. I guess my only choices would be the green party or NDP and those choices don't seem too appealing to me either. I"m sure I wouldnt be the only one with this dilema. I could spoil my ballot like i'm sure a great number will do. I guess my point is that who is there really to vote for even if we do go to an election?

 

[Reccesoldier]

I for one can't bring myself to vote conservative, not when I know how they want to run things.

Just out of curiosity what about the CPC platform don't you agree with?

 

[PuckChaser]

That link for the CTV site shows the Conservatives in the lead.

There is no doubt that the next government will be a minority like this one, and if the polls keep with the current trend, the Conversatives will make the ruling party, and I see the NDP becoming the official opposition, if not the Bloc (They could quite possibly take most of Quebec and have the NDP/Liberals split the rest of the country).

 

[camochick]

I can't bring myself to vote for a group of people who want to tell me who I can and can't marry. I also don't want them telling me if i can have an abortion or not. I cannot support a group who would rely on the bible to rule the country. I prefer to keep religion and politics seperate.

 

[Cdn Blackshirt]

Just out of curiosity what about the CPC platform don't you agree with?

I was just going to ask the same thing.  As a social liberal and fiscal conservative, I've read their platform (after the great link provided by a_majoor yesterday) and was very impressed.  The other issue is that I actually trust Harper will deliver what he promises unlike Martin and unlike Dalton in Ontario.

My key assessment at this time is regardless of what the Liberal Party promises, they do it only to hold onto power and have no moral or ethical commitment to the cause.  That means ALL campaign promises are just matters of convenience and should they regain power they will be tossed aside as convenience dictates.

If you want to look at a great military example of this just check out the recent Sudan announcement.  Paul Martin needs the votes of the Independents.  David Kilgour has been complaining for years about non-intervention in Sudan.  Martin previously said that he would stand everyone down and get them rested.  He also said he would not deploy EVER with a UN Sanction.  Suddenly Paul Martin needs a single vote in the house and he turns his policy on its head.  He commits 150 soldiers to Sudan without a UN resolution and low & behold David Kilgour voted against the non-Confidence motion last night.  

Bottom Line:  Paul Martin is about the most unethical guy I've seen and I wouldn't trust him to carry my golf clubs.....



Matthew.  

P.S.  If you're interested, sometime look up what he did while Finance Minister when he closed all the tax havens, except the Bahamas where he happens to have Canadian Steamships located.  In essence, he made a decision affecting his own business that has resulted in $millions going directly into the pockets of he and his family instead of into Ottawa tax coffers.  How that didn't result in corruption charges I'll never understand.

 

[George Wallace]

But what if the liberals are re-elected. Who is to say they can't win in another election. I for one can't bring myself to vote conservative, not when I know how they want to run things. I guess my only choices would be the green party or NDP and those choices don't seem too appealing to me either. I"m sure I wouldnt be the only one with this dilema. I could spoil my ballot like i'm sure a great number will do. I guess my point is that who is there really to vote for even if we do go to an election?

Everything you have stated here is that you are in fact going to cast a vote for the Lieberals.  You don't feel comfortable in voting for the only legitimate Party that could defeat them.  You don't want to vote for the Lieberals.  You would rather vote for a minority party or spoil a ballot or not vote at all, which in turn allows the Lieberals to once again garner the majority of votes in a riding.  

Step up to the plate; make a "command decision" and make a decision to oust what you feel is an improper government by making a change to a credible opposition party that stands a chance of gaining a majority in Parliament on a National scale.  We all know the Green and NDP parties are not able to do that.  We know a spoiled ballot and not exercising your right to vote does no good.  Have the courage to invoke change.  Remember, if they don't do anything to benefit the Nation, we are still a democracy and they will loose big time in the next election.   I am sure that any responsible Party would be more conscious of how they govern.

Your Call

Your vote should count for something "credible".

{Edit:  Don't you just love Spell Check screwing up your post  ;D}

 

[Horse_Soldier]

I can't bring myself to vote for a group of people who want to tell me who I can and can't marry. I also don't want them telling me if i can have an abortion or not. I cannot support a group who would rely on the bible to rule the country. I prefer to keep religion and politics seperate.

This is an example of why corrupt clowns like the liberals get re-elected.  You've bought into the fear-mongering lies, distortion and mud-slinging liberals are good at.  You would be amazed to find out how many liberal MPs oppose abortion or gay marriage.  You'd also be surprised to find out how many conservative MPs support these two items.  Nowhere do I see in the conservative platform a roll-back of abortion rights, and the right to same-sex marriage is so controversial among canadians themselves that this discussion is far from over, even among conservatives.  Finally, saying that the conservatives would rely on the bible to rule the country is asinine in the extreme.  Yes, the conservatives have members who are more right wing than the rest, but they're a fringe, just like the wing-nuts in the liberal party, and would never be allowed to dictate party policy.  Sorry to say, but you've been hoodwinked by the liberals.

 

[Cdn Blackshirt]

I can't bring myself to vote for a group of people who want to tell me who I can and can't marry. I also don't want them telling me if i can have an abortion or not. I cannot support a group who would rely on the bible to rule the country. I prefer to keep religion and politics seperate.

You've fallen for the Liberal "branding"....of which I have to them credit, they're a very good at.

Seriously, read the new policy document.  They are moving strongly towards the centre and away from the previous socially conservative "Reform Party" policiies.



M. 

 

[Joe Blow]

I can't bring myself to vote for a group of people who want to tell me who I can and can't marry. I also don't want them telling me if i can have an abortion or not. I cannot support a group who would rely on the bible to rule the country. I prefer to keep religion and politics seperate.

As I understood it Harper stated at the policy convention that his government will bring forth no abortion legislation, and that the party policy concerning gay marriage is that civil unions should be recognized (along with all attendant spousal benefits).  (Pls correct me if I am wrong about these points.)

It also bears mentioning that the separation of church and state was meant to keep one institution our of another institution.  So that foreign and domestic policy would not be decided in Rome ...or by the archbishop of Canterbury ...that kind of thing.  It was not intended to keep religious people from governing or to keep them from doing so according to their conscience.

That said, if you ready for change and don't like Conservative platform (keeping the corrections above in mind), and you don't want to go so far left as the NDP (or the Greens), then I'll admit you have a problem there.. 

 

[camochick]

I'm not brainwashed by the liberals and I don't like the fact that people here are basically calling people who would vote liberal a bunch of brain washed idiots. I can guarantee anyone we put in there will have some sort of corruption, it's the nature of politics. When a party is in power, those who are against them  just dig a little deeper to find the wrong doings of the party. We all know that a party can say one thing and do another, even the conservatives. Civil unions, what a joke, let's deny a part of the population the rights of another. I can't and won't vote conservative. I've seen what the conservatives have done to NB, my home province and I would rather bludgeon myself to death with a spoon then vote for them. I am undecided as the where my vote will go or if I will even exercise my right to vote. To me the election is picking the lesser of a bunch of evils. Does the natural law party still run 

 

[George Wallace]

As I understood it Harper stated at the policy convention that his government will bring forth no abortion legislation, and that the party policy concerning gay marriage is that civil unions should be recognized (along with all attendant spousal benefits).   (Pls correct me if I am wrong about these points.)

It also bears mentioning that the separation of church and state was meant to keep one institution our of another institution.   So that foreign and domestic policy would not be decided in Rome ...or by the archbishop of Canterbury ...that kind of thing.   It was not intended to keep religious people from governing or to keep them from doing so according to their conscience.

On the point of separation of Church and State; it is this Lieberal Government who have crossed the lines.  They have interfered in the Catholic Churches policies on marriage.  They have instructed all CF Chaplains that they"WILL" conduct same sex marriages, even though their Religion may be against it.  They have insisted on the Chaplaincy Corps of the CF change their Cap Badge, due to their false impressions on the significance of the Maltese Cross.  They are the ones interferring in Church policies and politics.  The Conservatives are stating their personal beliefs, but not making them Party Policies.  I find it more honest to allow the Party members to vote on their personal morals and beliefs, rather than what the Lieberal Party policy or caucus dictates.  The corruption has been allowed to go for too long and now they believe they can do as they please.  

I don't know why NS voters think that the Conservatives are Bigots or Racists.  I have a brother in Halifax, who is like a fanatical Hockey Fan, who just despises the Conservatives from his feelings that the Reform Party were nothing but a bunch of Prairie Redneck Racists.  He wouldn't even investigate their platform or policies, falling for all the Lieberal lies and innuendo promulgated during press releases throughout the years.

 

[Kal]

Joe Blow and GW - Good posts

 

[Infanteer]

I'm not brainwashed by the liberals and I don't like the fact that people here are basically calling people who would vote liberal a bunch of brain washed idiots.

Well, judging by your branding of the CPC as a bunch of biblie-thumpers, I'd say you are.  Talk about painting with a broad-brush.

I can guarantee anyone we put in there will have some sort of corruption, it's the nature of politics. When a party is in power, those who are against them   just dig a little deeper to find the wrong doings of the party. We all know that a party can say one thing and do another, even the conservatives.

Yes, sure - but the bottom line is that the Liberals are wearing it now; I'm unsure of why people are willing to toss Peace, Order, and Good Government aside because they won't give the Opposition the chance.

Civil unions, what a joke, let's deny a part of the population the rights of another.

Yeah, I agree .  Bottom line is that gay people will be together before being permitted to marry and they'll be together after, so I don't see this as an issue vital to our health right now.

However, I'm NOT interested on seeing the 19-Seat NDP get a huge say in the budget and having my fellow soldiers sent to Sudan, with the possibility of loss of life, for the simple purpose of buying a single vote in Parliament.

I can't and won't vote conservative.

Don't then - it's a democracy.  But don't come on a debate forum, express your views, and expect everyone to let them go unchallenged.

I've seen what the conservatives have done to NB, my home province and I would rather bludgeon myself to death with a spoon then vote for them.

Don't confuse Provincial and Federal Parties - they are always different.  For example, the BC Liberals are actually a conservative party.

I am undecided as the where my vote will go or if I will even exercise my right to vote. To me the election is picking the lesser of a bunch of evils. Does the natural law party still run  

Well, it seems that people like you are who the CPC is relying on - so disgusted with the Liberals that they won't show up.

 

[Joe Blow]

Civil unions, what a joke, let's deny a part of the population the rights of another.

I'm not sure I understand how marriage is a right.  My understanding of it is as a social convention that many people are privileged to enjoy,, the defining nature of which is that it is between a man and a woman.

In my opinion there is no reason that other kinds of unions should not be recognized (with all attendant spousal benefits), but arguing that failing to artificially extend the word 'marriage' to cover other sorts of unions is an impingement of someone's rights ...well it rings a bit hollow for me.

That said however I think we're past the point of rational discourse here.

I would rather bludgeon myself to death with a spoon then vote for them.

:

 

[Astalos]

Does it really matter who wins the next election?  It will most likely be a minority (Conservative or Liberal), unless one party can pull off a majority which would be a long shot.  If the conservatives win they will still have to write up a budget and if it does not wet the tooth of the Bloc, Liberals, and the New Democrats, then there will most likely be another election.

I think that if the conservatives win the next election with a minority, we will face the same problems we are now.  Nothing will get done in the house of commons, it will just be petty bickering like the Judy Scrow exotic dancer scandal and the free pizza that was brought up every day for a month in question period (just an estimate I do not know if it was a complete month).  

They only party I have a real problem with is the Bloc.  Otherwise I doubt it really matters who is in charge.  Someone will always do something for someone and something else will get get the shaft, I just hope the military does not get it this time around.

I think the people of Canada should give the conservatives a shot at it, and if they miss it we will not be anyworse than what is going on in Parliament right now.