Think about it this way, why should middle-road Canadians “turn against” the Conservatives and give power back to the Libs? The Libs ruled for ~12 years (ten with an absolute majority); why shouldn’t the Tories be given a fair amount of time too?
Also, in concern about leadership. I think Ignatieff had parachuted into his position/country unlike Harper who seems to have worked very hard/long to be where he is today (the PM of Canada). However, those ads about Ignatieff (quoting him from 2002/whatever) are just silly; Harper would not look good if he was judged solely by what he said as opposition leader ~8 years ago. Remember when he was itchingto jump into Iraq?
I think they need to earn it. I just don’t see them really doing a good job earning it.
And I agree, for “those” Canadians there is no a real issue to think hard before switching their vote. Libs did try couple of things to see if they stick, but they don’t. The mood is against elections but as Jack Layton said the other day – any ruling party will say that it is not time for elections.
Personally, I think, Libs should – as a strategy – allow for Conservatives to obtain a majority and then sit and watch as they crumble as they always do.
The Liberal Party definitely has to lose this election for their own good; they’re adrift with an awful leader.
However, you can’t ask a party to TRY to lose. It’s a strategy that can’t sell, because you’re essentially asking people to give up their own shot. For hundreds, if not thousands, of people in the Liberal Party, losing the 2011 election is the end of their careers. Not just the candidates who will be booted, but party staffers, the candidate’s own teams, and the like. The campaign strategists will see their careers take a tumble. There’s always some folks who can stick around, but for a lot of them 2011 is the end of the line. I know people who’ve been working on getting nominated for over a year. Ted Hsu, who will be replacing Peter Milliken as the Liberal candidate in Kingston & the Islands, has put eighteen months of effort into this; if he loses that’s probably it for him, and a heartbreak for everyone who worked to get him there. His Conservative opponent, Alicia Gordon, has been toiling for years for this shot. Whomever loses isn’t getting another shot.
So you can’t ask a party to lose. But at the same time, it might be best for the Liberals to be stomped good.
The NDP, I think, needs to make some gains at Liberal expense, and there is some indication they could snap some seats away from the Liberals.
I meant it more in a way to do a much needed and thorough clean up in their ranks. Conservatives went through a number of incarnations during Chrétien’s years before they landed what they have now. So, when you clean up the house, so to speak, you put winning an election as a secondary – Chretien was winning, in part, because Cons were just bleak and disorganized.
Well, I’d like Libs to come back to that proper Center (social liberals-fiscal conservatives) and take some votes from Cons and some from NDP and come back to their given right - that being the ruling party of Canada.
Won’t happen in a while, though. They have Iggy AND Rae.
I don’t much like Iggy as a prospective PM (although, unlike the Conservatives, I see having some life experience in furrin parts as a *good *thing). Harper seems much more effective as PM, but that’s not a recommendation since he’s being effective in doing things I don’t want him to do.
My opinion hardly counts much, though, as my riding is apparently a hereditary McGuinty fiefdom.
I’m trying to figure out what you mean by this - that you’re serious, and think the Liberals should always rule Canada as their God-given right, or you’re joking. I think I’ll just assume you’re joking, because that makes a lot more sense. Ha ha, good one.
For the record, I think PM Harper and one of his best ministers, Flaherty, have done some good things in some very difficult times. (I think my sister and brother-in-law are actually in PM Harper’s riding.)
TBH, I think that Ibanez might be right going forward. I would assume that votes that used to vary between the Conservatives and Liberals in Quebec may now settle with the Bloc.
I feel that we are in for minority governments for a long while. It will have to a person of extreme charisma to win a majority, and nobody running now could be called ‘dynamic’.
So, we just had a mayoral election in Toronto, and now we have the Federal election coming in May to go along with the upcoming provincial elections…Voter fatigue anyone?
I am pretty sure I have to vote conservative for the Ontario election. The Liberal energy policy is so stupid as to be farce. And I don’t think I could ever bring myself to vote NDP*. As for the federal election, sad to say but I really don’t care. Is the Marijuana party still around?
*I would vote for Matt if I lived in his riding tho.
I disagree with your sentiment that “people in the rest of Canada view anything that’s bad for Quebec as good for them and for the country;” however I believe that it can seem that way for a Quebecker. Bottom line though, I still don’t think that it is true.
As for your stated reason for the Quebec people’s continuation of support for the Bloc… It’s complex. The Bloc does stand for the interests of Quebec (this is without question), however given the nature of being a ‘Bloc party’ for an entire province, they simply cannot represent all of the interests of all Quebeckers all the time. For example.
Remember the 2006 election? The Tories went from having 0 Quebec seats to 10 (8 of which they stole from the Bloc). All it took was the real prospect of having a true blue Conservative government in power and the Bloc immediately lost a large chunk of their conservative base. Harper could have stole the last chunk (and gotten his majority) if he didn’t mess up his Quebec chances in the 2008 elections.
Now look at the NDP, if they had a decent chance of… simply being the opposition. Do you think the Bloc would keep their left-wing intact? Maybe, but I have my doubts. Quebeckers do have competing political interests which can’t be solved by strictly voting in their closed regional interest.
You know, I’ll never understand why they stood up for Oda while Helena Guergis was tossed for doing absolutely nothing. If being married to an idiot was an expellable offense they should have banished Nina Grewal a long time ago.
This election will result in either a Conservative majority, which will be fantastic for the country, or it will result in a Conservative minority, after which the Liberals will attempt a coalition of losers. Although legal, I’m not sure how this would play out in public response. Either we blindly accept it or take to the streets. And I can’t see anyone in Canada taking to the streets, unless you’re part of the left-wing anti-corporation G8 protesting lunacy already.
I was listening to a local radio station. Its hourly news had two items, before moving on to sports. The first item was that there is going to be an election, probably in May. The second was that there will be a lot of army worms in a couple of years.
All in all, a slow news day, despite the fall of the government.
Good lord, Leaffan. If Stephen Harper shutting down Parliament at his whim doesn’t get Canadians taking to the streets, I can assure you that a coalition government certainly wouldn’t.
Regardless of the outcome, I was a bit surprised to see the coverage on C-SPAN, which was a re-broadcast of CBC who is always more pleasant to watch than US media outlets. (One of many things I miss about Seattle.)
And given all the turmoil around the world, particularly in Libya, it was very pleasant to watch a ‘regime change’ occur with so little drama. As **Muffin
** stated, it is just another blurb on the radio.
Reading and watching some of the commentary, I can believe that Harper allowed the election to be called so that he could aim for a majority government. Considering the worst of yours are nowhere near the worst of ours, it would likewise not be the worst of outcomes. (I’ll gladly trade you Harper for Walker - any takers?)
Canada also makes a good case study for what the future of US politics may look like in another generation. An quasi-nationalist bloc (Hispanics in our case, perhaps) and three major parties competing for the rest of the votes. Canada is also a refreshing look at how government can be partisan, but not at each others throats.
Of course, my hope is to see the NDP take some votes from the Liberals and become the primary opposition or coalition leader. Coalition governments are hardly the worst outcome either.
