Canadians will elect Bush-like prime minister.

CougTek

Hairy Aussie
Joined
Jan 21, 2002
Messages
8,726
Location
Québec, Québec
Forget Canada Merc. This country will also have a redneck leading it. Steven Harper, leader of the clueless farmer party (they call themselves "conservative"), should win the upcoming January 23rd election. He's for guns, plans to triple the size of the army and he's against Kyoto and any form of environmental protection measure that will cost even just a penny to his beloved Alberta oil industry (a province that will entirely vote for him). He wanted to send canucks troop to Irak when Bush asked for help (for a war that didn't concern the canayans at all). Bottom line : he's a complete moron and will be Bush's bottom cleaner.

I thought the loyalists who want to make me believe that they are part of the same country as I do would have learned the lesson by watching the disaster that happened to our southern neighbor when they placed a farm boy at the White House. I guess even I over-estimated them. When it's done, feel free to point and laugh.

I'm not part of that country.
 

Pradeep

Storage? I am Storage!
Joined
Jan 21, 2002
Messages
3,845
Location
Runny glass
CougTek said:
He's for guns,

Excellent. He may abandon the black hole that was the failed registration scheme. And make it easier for law-abiding American gun owners to visit Canada without 300 pieces of paperwork and a ton of fees.
 

paugie

Storage is cool
Joined
Dec 13, 2003
Messages
702
Location
Bulacan, Philippines
it doesn't matter

Hello Cougtek,
Just wanted to say, whoever will head Canada now, soon, or later, won't matter to the lot of Filipinos and and their families wishing to flee my country. IMO, we already have a head of state (some say she isn't the legitimate head of state because she cheated in the last elections) who's worse than what you might get.
 

CougTek

Hairy Aussie
Joined
Jan 21, 2002
Messages
8,726
Location
Québec, Québec
Platform said:
Excellent. Maybe I can finally go duck hunting on Hudson Bay this summer with my 155mm Howitzer.

155mm Howitzer :

lw155-2.jpg



Paugie,

I know the situation is hard in your country. You probably don't have the same definition of "civil rights" and freedom as we do here. I'm fighting to keep them and to stop morons from cutting them. I know I'm more fortunate than you are in your place of the world. But even if things are better, not everything is perfect here.

Worldwide trade is leveling everything by the bottom, even governments.
 

e_dawg

Storage Freak
Joined
Jul 19, 2002
Messages
1,903
Location
Toronto-ish, Canada
This country will never elect Harper as Prime Minister. This is what happened last time. He had a sliver of hope and people thought he could win. But when it came time to vote, people chickened out and voted for Martin instead. The same thing will happen again.

While people are disgusted with Paul Martin's slickness and corruption (I am one of those people), they are also frightened of how sketchy Stephen Harper is as a person, let alone as a politician (I am also one of those people).

I used to like the Conservative party's platform (private / two-tier health care, lower taxes, etc), but the increasing tendency towards "Little Bush / cowboy politics" has got me worried.

Nevertheless, I highly doubt Harper will get elected.
 

Sol

Storage is cool
Joined
Feb 10, 2002
Messages
960
Location
Cardiff (Wales)
So for duck hunting with the 150mm you would use flack shells?

It seems that more and more that we are being governed by corporations...

Well actually it seem that more and more America is being governed by corporations and Australia, and very likely Canada and a number of other countries are being governed by spineless politicians toadying up to America and selling off our civil liberties for free trade agreements and military treaties...

George Bush is not the only politician to have stolen an election but he's definately the one that effects me the most, and as funny as his idiocy is on occation his presence in the white house seems like somewhat of an embaresment for "the land of the free"... but perhaps Americans see it differently, some must anyway.
 

CougTek

Hairy Aussie
Joined
Jan 21, 2002
Messages
8,726
Location
Québec, Québec
e-dawg, if you want conservative politcies, there's always the green party. Harris, its leader, is a frmer conservative member from the 80's. If you're more a liberal, but too digusted to vote for Martin, the're's the NPD. Neither the Green Party or the NPD will win the election, but the greater their vote share is, the greater the attention they'll will get by the governing party for the politics they defend.

I'm tempted to vote Green, but I have no hope for Canada. I've given up on that country and I just don't want to be in any way related to it. Alberta has Texas-like mentality and Ontario is the third most polluting state/province in North America. That's almost half of Canada populated by people who couldn't care less for the environment. That's in total contradiction with my views. That's like living with someone you can't stand anymore. If you don't leave, you'll eventually kill it. While I would personally prefer to obliterate the corporations and politicians of those two states, the reasonable option is to leave. I'll vote for the Bloc.
 

iGary

Learning Storage Performance
Joined
Nov 22, 2002
Messages
236
Location
iLand
CougTek said:
...I've given up on that country and I just don't want to be in any way related to it.

So, what, it's back to the days of Fédération Québécoise?

By the way, what's the hell's deal with Nunavut (formerly called The Northwestern Territories)? I kinda missed out on what happened in the 1990s with its status. It seems like it operates as an autonomous region from the rest of Canada these days -- sort of the "Great Inuit Empire" or something like that.
 

sechs

Storage? I am Storage!
Joined
Feb 1, 2003
Messages
4,709
Location
Left Coast
Don't the Northwest Territories still exist?

Canada -- So big, we can create new provinces with hard to pronounce names -- and no one cares!
 

iGary

Learning Storage Performance
Joined
Nov 22, 2002
Messages
236
Location
iLand
sechs said:
Don't the Northwest Territories still exist?


Yes, but they are just a shard of their former selves -- a block of territory up against the Yukon Territories that probably should be merged with the Yukon.

But, there's probably some aboriginal (tribal) treaty in place that would not allow such.
 

CougTek

Hairy Aussie
Joined
Jan 21, 2002
Messages
8,726
Location
Québec, Québec
I think the Nunavut has been created in a chunk of the NWT. The NWT is now something like half of what it was before and all the north islands are now part of the Nunavut. It happened in the 90s, but I don't remember exactly when.
 

CityK

Storage Freak Apprentice
Joined
Sep 2, 2002
Messages
1,719
To provide some perspective on how big that shared of territory called the NWT still is: take Washington, Oregon, Idaho, Montana, & Wyoming and combine them in to one. Now find some miscellanous ~50,00KM^2 tract of land to fill in the rest of the space occupied by the NWT.

Or, for those unfamilar with the beauitful lands of the American Northwest, we can approximate the size by the following relationship:

2 x Texas = NWT + ~50,000KM^2

Anyways: Everything about Nunavut that you were afraid to ask, which is supplemented wonderfully by further readings suc as: So, your new neighbour is big, white, and licks his chops everytime he looks at you
 

zx

Learning Storage Performance
Joined
Nov 22, 2002
Messages
287
Location
Beauport, Québec, Canada
e_dawg said:
This country will never elect Harper as Prime Minister. This is what happened last time. He had a sliver of hope and people thought he could win. But when it came time to vote, people chickened out and voted for Martin instead. The same thing will happen again.

While people are disgusted with Paul Martin's slickness and corruption (I am one of those people), they are also frightened of how sketchy Stephen Harper is as a person, let alone as a politician (I am also one of those people).

I used to like the Conservative party's platform (private / two-tier health care, lower taxes, etc), but the increasing tendency towards "Little Bush / cowboy politics" has got me worried.

Nevertheless, I highly doubt Harper will get elected.

I really hope that you are right.

If the conservatives win with a minority government, it won't be that bad. The bloc, NPD and Liberals will keep Harper from imposing his right-wing agenda (Irak, Kyoto, the army). The bloc will probably agree with anything that gives more autonomy (+money) to the provinces (witch I think is a good thing). And we may get lucky and get lower taxes (a little help from the liberals maybe?)

But recent surveys put Harper and the conservatives in a majority government.... That could be bad.

I don't really know who i'll vote for. I don't like the conservatives. The liberal's don't really have a program that makes sense. I'm not a separatist so forget the bloc. Can't vote for the NDP because i'm a fiscal conservative. I think i'll vote green to send a message that the environment is an important issue.
 

e_dawg

Storage Freak
Joined
Jul 19, 2002
Messages
1,903
Location
Toronto-ish, Canada
zx said:
I really hope that you are right.

If the conservatives win with a minority government, it won't be that bad. The bloc, NPD and Liberals will keep Harper from imposing his right-wing agenda (Irak, Kyoto, the army). The bloc will probably agree with anything that gives more autonomy (+money) to the provinces (witch I think is a good thing). And we may get lucky and get lower taxes (a little help from the liberals maybe?)

But recent surveys put Harper and the conservatives in a majority government.... That could be bad.

I don't really know who i'll vote for. I don't like the conservatives. The liberal's don't really have a program that makes sense. I'm not a separatist so forget the bloc. Can't vote for the NDP because i'm a fiscal conservative. I think i'll vote green to send a message that the environment is an important issue.

If you don't believe me, look at the polls going into 2004's election. The Conservatives were neck and neck with the Liberals leading up to the election with the Conservatives pulling ahead in some polls. What was the end result of the election? The Liberals won with 7% to spare in the popular vote and 35 seats. It was a minority government, but it's not like it was a close race. The 2006 election results should be a lot closer, but even with the recent polls showing a Conservative victory, a good 6-8% of those votes will switch to Liberal on election day as they did in 2004. I'm projecting a Liberal victory by a 1% margin in the popular vote and 9 seats in the house :)

Honestly, voting for the Green Party is a total waste of a vote. No one cares if the Green Party got 4% or 8% (which would be a great result for them) of the vote. Some of us might be surprised if the Green Party gets 8% of the vote, but it doesn't send any message except "look, 5% of the country wasted their votes". They won't even win a seat. Well, they may win 1 seat due to some stroke of luck like all the other candidates in their riding dying of the plague the day before the election. What's the point?

Vote Liberal or Conservative. I don't care which one, but at least make your vote count for something.

If you vote Liberal, it says you're chicken shit and would rather get f...ed up the ass yet again by Paul Martin and his sleazeballs because you're afraid of the unknown. Afraid that Stephen Harper will f... you up the ass sooner or later and that it will hurt even more than when Paul Martin did it.

If you vote Conservative, it says you're a redneck cowboy who throws caution to the wind and will reject the tried and true masochistic pleasure of the Liberals in favour of not knowing if Stephen Harper will start f...ing you up the ass the way Paul Martin always did... you're excited at the prospects of change for the better despite the possibility of a whole new world of pain.

In 2004, I knew that I absolutely had enough of Paul Martin and his Liberal sadists, and I was willing to take a chance on Harper and the Conservatives for the hope of something better. Now I am asking myself if I am prepared to take a chance on Harper and the Conservatives again knowing now that Harper is a bit of an idiot (I didn't think he was in 2004).

Where the hell is a good leader when you need one? Someone like Trudeau. Not everyone may have agreed with his policies, but at least he could be respected for his intellect and vision.
 

Santilli

Hairy Aussie
Joined
Jan 27, 2002
Messages
5,078
CityK said:
To provide some perspective on how big that shared of territory called the NWT still is: take Washington, Oregon, Idaho, Montana, & Wyoming and combine them in to one. Now find some miscellanous ~50,00KM^2 tract of land to fill in the rest of the space occupied by the NWT.

Or, for those unfamilar with the beauitful lands of the American Northwest, we can approximate the size by the following relationship:

2 x Texas = NWT + ~50,000KM^2

Anyways: Everything about Nunavut that you were afraid to ask, which is supplemented wonderfully by further readings suc as: So, your new neighbour is big, white, and licks his chops everytime he looks at you

Love polar bears. Amazing animals. The concept of being able to swim 40-50 miles, at 4 miles an hour, in 30 degree, or lower water, to get out and enjoy a tropical 50 below wind storm, and, have cubs that can handle it...Well, as a wannabe norcal surfer, I'd love to be that immune to the cold. I'm seriously thinking of back to Hawaii, at this point, or, small waves, in San Diego...

gs
 

CityK

Storage Freak Apprentice
Joined
Sep 2, 2002
Messages
1,719
Santilli said:
Love polar bears. Amazing animals. The concept of being able to swim 40-50 miles, at 4 miles an hour, in 30 degree, or lower water, to get out and enjoy a tropical 50 below wind storm, and, have cubs that can handle it..
There was an article not too long ago in one of the papers about polar bears starting drown. I didn't read it, but scanning it, I gather the gist of it was: rising global temps = less polar ice = a lot further for bears to swim = some dead bears
 

CityK

Storage Freak Apprentice
Joined
Sep 2, 2002
Messages
1,719
Paul Martin dissapointed me. When he and JC had that big fall out a number of years back, and it was clear Martin was going to become the next leader of the Liberals, it seemed like he was actually going to be a pretty good leader. Although JC screwed him by sticking to his word of not retiring for another 15 months (thus taking some wind out of the Martin sails) and by essentially saddling Martin with the inheritence of several scandals that were perputrated on his JC's watch, nonetheless, Martin failed to materialize as much of a leader.

Jack Layton comes across to me as a little weasel. I think the NDP needs to dump him big time....and also get candidates who might appear as being affective at running a country, as opposed to just wasting everyone's tax dollars. Although to their credit, I do like their representative the most in my riding. Can't stand the current Liberal MPP.

Harper. What to say about Harper. I think he's intelligent, but I think his values / goals / agenda are severly out of whack with the majority of Canadians. He'll get elected just because people want some change, not because they believe in the same crap as this stiff (talk about a personality lacking charisma, he takes the cake).

Gilles D. Don't know much about him. Don't care either. Although, I think the bloc currently serves a useful purpose in the Canadian political arena. Eventually, however, Quebec has got to come to grips with themselves and decide wtf they want to do. They have a great infrastructure, time to use it.

Overall, I want a conservative miniority[/]. It would be the best thing for the prosperity of Canada right now. A minority would be great cause, being held in check by the other 3 major parties, the redneck faction in the conservative party is a whole lot less likely to try to get all uppiddy and do something stupid like declare war on Denmark.

Overall I envision a relatively prosperous Canada for the next few years ... until one or the other 800 pound gorrilas gets elected as a majority government....then all bets are off.
 

CougTek

Hairy Aussie
Joined
Jan 21, 2002
Messages
8,726
Location
Québec, Québec
e_dawg said:
Honestly, voting for the Green Party is a total waste of a vote. No one cares if the Green Party got 4% or 8% (which would be a great result for them) of the vote. Some of us might be surprised if the Green Party gets 8% of the vote, but it doesn't send any message except "look, 5% of the country wasted their votes". They won't even win a seat. Well, they may win 1 seat due to some stroke of luck like all the other candidates in their riding dying of the plague the day before the election. What's the point?
I'm in total disagreement of the above. There will never be progress is everyone would think like you do. People should vote for the party that better fits their own priorities and values. Take the NPD for instance. They started out of nothing and now they're participating to leaders' debates. They won't be leading the next government, but with their 20 seats, they've been able to negociate with the Liberals last years when the latter needed help not to be overthrown by the PC and BQ. The results has been that some of their politics were amended by the Liberals in exchange for their support in the Chamber.

More and more people care for the quality of the environment (except for Alberta). Leaders even had some games in the beginning of the campaign regarding who has the most polluting mean of transportation (it was Martin). Eventually, unless folks in Canada all think like e-dawg, the Green Party will have a more significant presence, perhaps even in the Chamber. Then they'll have their chance, like the NPD did, to pass some of their priorities or at least force the other leaders to talk about them.

A vote for the Green Party, if you still consider yourself Canadian, is far from a wasted vote.
 

zx

Learning Storage Performance
Joined
Nov 22, 2002
Messages
287
Location
Beauport, Québec, Canada
e_dawg said:
Honestly, voting for the Green Party is a total waste of a vote. No one cares if the Green Party got 4% or 8% (which would be a great result for them) of the vote. Some of us might be surprised if the Green Party gets 8% of the vote, but it doesn't send any message except "look, 5% of the country wasted their votes". They won't even win a seat. Well, they may win 1 seat due to some stroke of luck like all the other candidates in their riding dying of the plague the day before the election. What's the point?

In my riding, the bloc always wins. In that case, voting for the conservatives or the liberals in my riding is also a waste of my vote.

So either I vote for the bloc, who'll win anyways (and i'm not fond of separatism even if I voted for them last time), or I'll vote for one of the other four candidates that have no chance of winning (all other major parties + green).
 

e_dawg

Storage Freak
Joined
Jul 19, 2002
Messages
1,903
Location
Toronto-ish, Canada
CougTek said:
I'm in total disagreement of the above. There will never be progress is everyone would think like you do. People should vote for the party that better fits their own priorities and values.

That's not necessarily true. I like your example about the NDP, but a second-tier party like the NDP usually does not have enough political power to influence policy. You are talking about the ideal way of voting for change; I prefer to take a more practical, realistic approach. "A bird in hand is worth two in the bush".

Here are the facts:

1. Either the Conservatives or Liberals will win

2. The Green Party is not likely to win even a single seat

With that in mind, how is voting for the Green Party going to count for anything? They won't be able to influence anything the ruling party does in office.

More and more people care for the quality of the environment (except for Alberta). [...] Eventually, unless folks in Canada all think like e-dawg, the Green Party will have a more significant presence, perhaps even in the Chamber.

Sorry, but the environment is not an important issue when it comes to swinging votes. Canadians have so many more important issues to vote on. This is not my personal opinion, by the way... when they do a survey about what's important to Canadians, they find that jobs, unity, defecit, health care, and education are the top issues. That's the way it is every election. You may not like what I'm saying, but that's the reality of Canadian voters.
 

sechs

Storage? I am Storage!
Joined
Feb 1, 2003
Messages
4,709
Location
Left Coast
e_dawg said:
With that in mind, how is voting for the Green Party going to count for anything? They won't be able to influence anything the ruling party does in office.

Maybe not now, but, perhaps, later.

If a candidate with whom you do not agree is going to win anyway, why not vote for someone with whom you agree, simply to show where your opinion lies?

Obviously, if an election is close, and your second-choice candidate might win, you end up making a tactical vote; but that's a simply due to the weekness of the voting system.
 

e_dawg

Storage Freak
Joined
Jul 19, 2002
Messages
1,903
Location
Toronto-ish, Canada
sechs said:
Maybe not now, but, perhaps, later.

Well that's exactly my point. Later. Perhaps. Possibly. Maybe. Voting is all about who is going to be in office over the next 4 years.

Let's recap:

1. The ruling party and its opposition will directly affect your life over the next 4 years... and its legacy will affect your life after those 4 years have passed. That is an absolute certainty.

2. A third-tier party like the Green Party (that will likely have no seats) will not be able to influence policy over the next 4 years, and there is a slim chance that it will gain enough seats to have any influence 5-10 years from now.

Would you want to trade away control over something that will absolutely affect your life over the next 4+ years to make a weak statement that may have a remote possibility on affecting your life 5-10 years down the road?
 

Mercutio

Fatwah on Western Digital
Joined
Jan 17, 2002
Messages
21,651
Location
I am omnipresent
I managed to catch a CBC interview with Paul Martin last night on the way home from work. He sounded really weasel-y, qualifying practically everything he said. I can see how that would be unappealing.
One of the reasons conservatives (in the right wing sense) play well to idiots is that they are willing to do the intellectually dishonest thing of making overly simple blanket statements. That's what it seems like Harper is doing.
 

CougTek

Hairy Aussie
Joined
Jan 21, 2002
Messages
8,726
Location
Québec, Québec
The polls give them a majority government now. That's the worst thing that could happen. I can't understand how loyalists think. They'll give Bush's canayan offspring a majority government. Even Martin wouldn't be worst. No matter how much money the Liberals would redirect to their friends from the public founds, at least they wouldn't make deficits and involve their country into antagonist behaviors with moslem countries, making sure they'll have terrorist attacks in return.

No one's looking south it seems.
 

e_dawg

Storage Freak
Joined
Jul 19, 2002
Messages
1,903
Location
Toronto-ish, Canada
e_dawg said:
I'm projecting a Liberal victory by a 1% margin in the popular vote and 9 seats in the house :)

Wow, based on the polls for the last week, Conservatives have been pretty strong. There has been a weak shift from Conservative to Liberal over the past couple days and this should continue into the weekend and intensify on Election Day. Nevertheless, it looks like the Conservatives will win this election by a hair.

I am now predicting a Conservative victory by 1% in the popular vote and 7 seats in the house (!)

Conservatives 113
Liberals 106
BQ 58
NDP 30
 

CougTek

Hairy Aussie
Joined
Jan 21, 2002
Messages
8,726
Location
Québec, Québec
30 seats for the NPD seems like a lot. I wish them. I think the conservative will win more spots than you predicted. I can't understand how clueless people have to be to vote for them...even here. Bush is all smile when he sees the polls placing the polluting oil-loving religious freaks party in front of the liberals. By the way, Harper mentioned "God bless Canada" at the end of a speach this week. Doesn't that ring any alarm bells?
 

sechs

Storage? I am Storage!
Joined
Feb 1, 2003
Messages
4,709
Location
Left Coast
I think I'm behind the curve here. Don't you need over 150 form a government?
 

Tannin

Storage? I am Storage!
Joined
Jan 15, 2002
Messages
4,448
Location
Huon Valley, Tasmania
Website
www.redhill.net.au
Huh? Does Canada still use first past the post voting? Hoolie Doolie, I thought Canada was a civilised country, with something resembling a democracy in operation. Is this the Century of the Fruitbat, or what? Tell me you are not serious.
 

CougTek

Hairy Aussie
Joined
Jan 21, 2002
Messages
8,726
Location
Québec, Québec
Re. Sechs :

That's for a majority government (one that can do whatever it wants without having to fear to be overthrown by the opposition). I think the exact number is 152, but I'm not sure since it's not my country. The current government is a minority government. It means that the party that had the most deputies elected overall is the one ruling, but there are more combined deputies in the remaining parties in the opposition, so the government is walking on eggs.


Re. Tannin:

They are not civilised : they all have a photo of the Queen's ass and they kiss it every night before sleeping. And soon, they'll have one of G.W. Bush to kiss too after they'll have put Harper and the damn conservatives in power.

I am certainly NOT Canadian! Of course, I'm not civilised either...and I don't kiss any asses.
 

Tannin

Storage? I am Storage!
Joined
Jan 15, 2002
Messages
4,448
Location
Huon Valley, Tasmania
Website
www.redhill.net.au
Hmmm ..... On the whole, then, I'd go with Option A if faced with an either / or choice. At least the Quuen is a fundamentally decent human being. Not a stupid one either, though she strictly limits what she says in public. So, if it comes to arse-kissing time, that's the better of the two choices.
 

CityK

Storage Freak Apprentice
Joined
Sep 2, 2002
Messages
1,719
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_House_of_Commons

I have no idea what you guys are talking about.

Take a look at edawg's prediction. The result of which would be a Conservative government. A minority Conservative government. A very weak minority government.

Now contrast that to the current situation outlined in the wikipedia entry (which obviously will soon change). A very interesting situation: Lib + NDP = Bloc + Tories
Indpendents and everyone showing up for a vote is what inabled the Liberal government to last. Of course, there were occasions when the Bloc also voted with the Liberals, so the Tories were out of luck in trying to bring down the government via a non-confidence vote, and force an election.
The quasi allainces were all called off at the end of Nov, when pretty much everyone (except Liberals who wanted to hold off till end of Feb) wanted to call an election.

So, as I've stated above, I would like to see a minority conservative gov't. That way, on the drop of a dime (if the rednecks get out of hand) they'll get a non confidence vote and be forced to call another election.

But that won't happen, and here's why.

Right now, Stephen Harper, in this last week leading up to the election, is already deviating from the Conservative election campaign strategy of coming across as moderate and a change from the Liberals. In particular, his nonmoderate side is shinning through. And so, public opinion is swaying back towards a more balanced vote. But, aside from the mask coming off, be sure, the Conservatives will still win alone on the basis of being a "change from the Liberals" [I estimate 5-6% more seats then the Liberals].

But here's what's going to happen with the minority Conservative gov't (that will last ~2yrs):
- Stephen Harpers handlers are going to reel him in, slap him around, and then make sure he behaves like a good boy until they have a majority gov't.
- Conservatives will not push anything radical - if they did, public opinion would shift on a dime, the three other parties would vote them out in a non confidence and we'd likely see another Liberal minority gov't come up to bat again. The conservatives are also going to make some consessions to satisfy the other parties, when public opinion over issues is at risk.

- Now, as for the Libs, there not going to want to rush into defeating the conservatives -- they have to rebuild their own image, and have to wait for the opportune time (i.e when the redneck faction in the conservatives draw public opinion of the conservatives way down). Else, forcing an election too soon is likely just lead to a Conservative Majority or stronger minority gov't.
- The Bloc and NDP will both be aware of this and will tend to play ball, going along with the Conservatives for the most part...bidding their time...and squeezing them at more opportune times...and waiting for movement in the Liberal camp, before drawing up their own battle lines.

So, all in all, look to Canada to be fairly well managed for the next couple of years, and continued prosperity -- and a good deal of that will also be attributable to improved relations with the current American administration

Looking further down the road -- I actually don't think the Conservatives are going to fumble the ball while in power. I think we'll end up seeing the conservatives being the one's to end up calling the next election (riding the wave of a strong economy and public opinion polls...given the Liberals won't have finished cleaning house and rebuilding yet). Then I think the morons in the country will say "their doing pretty good, lets all vote for them". And so, a strong Tory majority gov't will ensue. It's at this point, when Harper has a five year lease on Sussex Ave., that I think we'll see all the right wing agenda unfold...the Canadian public (a duped bunch of fools) will not like what they see during the first 3-1/2 years...but they won't be able to do anything about it, nor will the other parties in parliment. The remaining 1.5 gaureented years of tenure will see the Tories try to take a softer/moderate policy stance (trying shore up the moron electorate votes before they call the next election). They will either be (a) successful (b) partially successful (largely depends on what global events occur) or (c) have so distanced themselves from the general public that we'll see the Liberals walk back into power for another 10years.

That's the way I see it....but hey, what do I know.
 

e_dawg

Storage Freak
Joined
Jul 19, 2002
Messages
1,903
Location
Toronto-ish, Canada
CougTek said:
30 seats for the NPD seems like a lot. I wish them.

Yes, I admit that 30 NDP seats could be too high -- higher than all of the polls predict. But polls do not account for voter behaviour on election day. Potential swing ridings like Hamilton Mountain and Trinity-Spadina (these are top of mind as I live in the GTA) which were formerly Liberal will probably vote NDP.

Hamilton Mountain will likely vote NDP because some of their constituents are former Stelco workers laid off when Stelco went bankrupt. Some people in Trinity-Spadina will vote NDP as a result of tactical voting -- i.e., they want to vote Conservative but will vote NDP to prevent the Liberals from winning this riding again.

I think the conservative will win more spots than you predicted. I can't understand how clueless people have to be to vote for them...even here.

In light of the latest Ipsos-Reid poll, the Conservatives seem to be holding on stronger than I thought. They could indeed win a few more seats, but still far less than the polls are predicting, IMO.

Bush is all smile when he sees the polls placing the polluting oil-loving religious freaks party in front of the liberals.

Yes, Bush would prefer the Conservative party over the Liberals. But the Conservatives are not as bad as you think. Don't believe the massive FUD campaign the Liberals are dumping on the Conservatives. Read the platforms and learn a bit about Stephen Harper before you blast them for being like Bush and the US Republican party.

By the way, Harper mentioned "God bless Canada" at the end of a speach this week. Doesn't that ring any alarm bells?

Not really. Regarding that "God Bless Canada" comment, Harper is not as evangelical as you think. He has lived in Calgary for a long time now and has picked up that habit to appeal to his western constituents back home. Ontarians and Quebecers don't really care about religion in politics, so they don't pay attention to it, but it makes the majority of Albertans warm and fuzzy to hear "God Bless _____" at the end of a speech.

Look, I'll admit to believing the FUD and thinking Harper was like a "Little Bush" too. But before I was going to cast my vote on Jan 23, I wanted to learn more about this guy that was portrayed as a scary extreme conservative with a hidden agenda by the Liberals and the media. Honestly, Harper is not nearly as bad as many people think. I have a much greater respect for him and am much less scared about him after doing some research:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/serv...4.wxibbitson0114/BNStory/specialDecision2006/

http://www.macleans.ca/culture/books/article.jsp?content=20060118_115305_3240

http://www.cbc.ca/canadavotes2004/leadersparties/leaders/prof_harper.html

But what I respect the most about Harper is his intelligence and his independence of thought. He has a Master in Economics and was working on his PhD before he left academia for good. He is by most accounts an intellectual and an independent, analytical thinker:

Globe and Mail said:
One person who has known the man for a long time and remains profoundly ambivalent about him (and who asked not to be named), argues that the key to figuring out Mr. Harper is to understand that he always believes he is the smartest person in the room. [...] To his friends, Mr. Harper's intellectual confidence is one of his greatest strengths. Someone who knows Mr. Harper very well believes that people don't understand that he asserts strong views in order to have them challenged. What he really wants, this person believes, is to be confronted by someone who is prepared to stand up and state an opposing case. If that case is compelling enough, Mr. Harper will modify his stand.

Finally, somebody with a mind of his own who has confidence in his own ideas and intellect. This is what Trudeau was like: an intellectual. A courageous and independent thinker. You may not always agree with his ideas, but at least you can respect his mind. Compared to Paul Martin, the slick, professional politician who will always say what you want to hear and promise that "this, too, is our priority"

Stephen Harper may have a bad image in the media, but you have to understand that he is not a professional politician. He does not like to play that PR game.

Globe and Mail said:
It was ideology, not love of the game, that Mr. Johnson believes pushed Mr. Harper into public life.

“One thing that I would say about him, with great conviction, is that he's a straight arrow,” Mr. Johnson believes. “What you see is what you get. He's not good at acting or pretending. He doesn't weep with widows and hug every orphan in sight, and he won't wear a hundred hearts on his sleeve. By character and by principle he opposes all the photo ops and false sentiments” that are part of political theatre.

(This has contributed to the ongoing tension, sometimes shading into mutual hostility, between Mr. Harper and the media, which he considers too often biased, ill-informed and lazy. It has been said that one of the great transformations of this election campaign is that Mr. Harper no longer displays open contempt for the press gallery. Now he hides his contempt.)

If anything, I would paint this guy as more like Trudeau without the charisma and interpersonal skills than "Bush, Jr.". A straight-shooter, intellectual, independent thinker with a love for economics and policy and a disdain for playing the political PR game? He's got my vote.
 

CougTek

Hairy Aussie
Joined
Jan 21, 2002
Messages
8,726
Location
Québec, Québec
He did and the NPD won almost as many seats as e-dawg first predicted. But the conservative party will have quite a headache to maintain itself in place. The only party that can mathematically help it to pass its rules is...the Bloc Québécois. However, the conservative party is the most right-wing party and the BQ is even more left-wing than the NPD. It's like if the American Republicans of G.W. Bush had to have Michael More's approbation on every law they would like to legilate. So Harper will really be walking on eggs. And Harper will have to act quickly because he has to produce a federal budget in about two months and he has to find a way to fill some of his electoral promises in it.

But on the other hand, the Liberals won't want to go in election too soon since the former chief (Martin) step down yesterday, so they will have to find another leader and that usually takes a few months.
 

e_dawg

Storage Freak
Joined
Jul 19, 2002
Messages
1,903
Location
Toronto-ish, Canada
Well, a Conservative Minority government will lead Canada for about 2-4 years. Looks like my initial seat count prediction was actually pretty good:

e_dawg's Jan 20 Prediction
Conservative 113
Liberal 106
BQ 58
NDP 30
Total Error = 22

I wasn't able to post on Monday due to the server problems, but before the election, I revised my prediction to:

e_dawg's Jan 22 Prediction
Conservative 116
Liberal 105
BQ 58
NDP 28
Total Error = 18

Not that it's a big deal (it is fun, though), but I did manage to predict the election results better than all the polls and prediction services except for the UBC Election Stock Market. As you can see, my only real mistake was expecting the Bloc to pick up more seats in Quebec. I felt the Bloc would pick up most of the lost Liberal seats, but it ended up going to the Conservatives instead (I can't believe Quebecers actually did that!).

Actual results
Conservative 124
Liberal 103
BQ 51
NDP 29


Compare that with all the polls and betting services:

Ipsos-Reid's Jan 21 Prediction
Conservative 157
Liberal 46
BQ 62
NDP 42
Total Error = 112

Strategic Counsel's Jan 22 Prediction
Conservative 149
Liberal 56
BQ 61
NDP 41
Total Error = 94

SES's Jan 22 Prediction
Conservative 134
Liberal 83
BQ 58
NDP 32
Total Error = 40

democraticSPACE.com's Jan 22 Prediction
Conservative 128
Liberal 94
BQ 56
NDP 29
Total Error = 18

UBC's Election Stock Market Jan 22 Prediction
Conservative 125.2
Liberal 95.5
BQ 53.4
NDP 32.6
Total Error = 15.0

LISPOP's Jan 22 Prediction
Conservative 140
Liberal 78
BQ 56
NDP 33
Total Error = 50
 
Top