As I watched what appeared to be a panicked Stephen LeDrew on CP24 ask anyone who would accept a microphone in their face if they considered a potential Fantino victory in Vaughan to be a “Fantino Victory” or a “Conservative Victory” I knew that the spin was going to be in full effect on Tuesday regardless of the result.
I like Stephen LeDrew, however when it comes to him reporting on politics it’s hard for me to forget for a moment that he was President of the Liberal Party of Canada for many years, and his coverage of the Vaughan By-Election was just another reminder.
Perhaps I am naïve, but any victory regardless of whom the victory is attributed to that adds another seat to the government side of the aisle is a Conservative Victory.
I found it very confusing and odd that Liberal strategist spent the better part of Tuesday mocking the small margin of victory that Fantino enjoyed in Vaughan, and that left me scratching my head.
Vaughan was pretty well the safest non-416 or 514 riding the Liberals have, it was a riding that the leader of the party could stop into once on his way to a battleground riding knowing that it was in the bag, the sort of ridings that parties that hope to govern need.
It has been won by the Liberals with 50-60% of the popular vote since the merger of the two Conservative Parties. Perhaps once again I am naïve but when you win a riding that is considered to be a Liberal Stronghold by even a single vote that is considered a huge victory, especially considering that Vaughan wouldn’t have normally entered the discussion for the potential top 50 ridings the CPC would be targeting in the context of an election.
What is also interesting is that in what is about as close to a head to head Liberal and Conservative battle (as the NDP was a non-factor) the Liberals still lost, and that really does take away much of the creditability associated with the argument that the NDP is stealing the Liberals votes.
In a head to head battle between the Tories and the Liberals,
New Democrats stay home.
On October 15th 2008 the Conservative Party of Canada was 12 seats away from a majority government; since that time they have added 3 Conservative MP’s at the expense of the opposition side of the floor in by-elections
I think most Conservative supporters could easily list off the 9 or 10 ridings needed for a majority which could very easily go blue in the next election; I would be interested to see if Liberal supporters can list off the 70+ seats they need.
Now of course as is always the case after by-elections we hear every analysis defending their party of choice with the words “Voter Turnout”.
Well my friends let be very clear,
Voter Turnout excuses are the mating call of the loser.
Where was the discussion of voter turnout when the Liberals retained a pair of ridings with less then 30% voter turnout in 2008?
Wasn’t a factor, because the Liberals won.
Willowdale was retained in by-election by the Liberals with 24.4% voter turnout, and they had no issue retaining the seat in an election later that year.
As a matter of fact, every single riding that has been won in a by-election since 2004 by a party has retained that riding in the next general election.
The Liberals winning Winnipeg North may have changed the story, but it doesn’t change the political reality the Liberals are facing.
They had an easy and safe riding in the 905 belt;
They lost it because the Conservatives were able to run the right candidate. The Conservatives are also +3 (having won 4 of 7) in By-Elections whereas the Bloc is -1, the NDP is -1, and the Liberals are sitting at neutral.
If the Liberals cannot pull out a victory in a riding that Paul Martin and Stephane Dion where able to retain by simply flying over it on the way to other ridings during General Elections in a by-election where all they needed to do was focus on three ridings,
What’s going to happen under this leader when the Liberals who are 1/7 under Iggy have to contest 308 ridings at once?
Showing posts with label Michael Ignatieff. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Michael Ignatieff. Show all posts
Wednesday, December 1, 2010
Thursday, September 30, 2010
Sorry Jack, The Trap Wasn’t Meant For You…
Within this very blog I have praised Jack Layton for his leadership of the NDP since 2003. While I may not agree with his policies or stances more often then not I can respect someone who has been so successful within the political arena.
Only the Conservatives and the NDP have seen consistent growth in terms of seats and popular vote since the 2004 election.
The NDP in 2004 was a party of cities, Toronto, Hamilton, Windsor, Halifax, Winnipeg, and Vancouver with a few sprinkles of rural and suburban ridings mixed into the equation. They were a party of 19 seats.
As of the 2008 election the NDP was a party of 37 seats. (36 currently due to the current vacant state of Winnipeg North) Where has this growth come from?
We often hear about the great growth in Ontario and the nearly legendary tale of Thomas Mulcair winning an honest to goodness seat for the NDP in the 514. What we don’t seem to hear about is Sudbury, Thunder Bay, Kapuskasing, Timmins, Northern British Columbia, Newfoundland, Northern Canada.
These are the areas that have vaulted in NDP from a party of 19 seats to one of 37.
Early this week an Ipsos poll was released that showed NDP support had fallen to 12% nationally. I am of the mindset that one poll can be wrong, or that one pollster can have a method of data collection that at some times can show either unrealistic drops or gains to particular parties so I didn’t think much of it.
However today’s EKO’s poll shows there may very well be some reality in that 12% as they have shown the NDP support to be @ 13.5%.
What I find off however is how this is being reported, an implication that the drop in support is due to Jack Layton allowing a free vote among his MP’s as it pertained to the long gun registry and how that somehow alienated urban voters?
I hate to say it;
But when it comes to the long gun registry urban voters don’t really give a poop. I mean they do, any issue where you can stick it to Harper is painted as a life and death struggle to snatch away power from the evil right wing overlord currently running the country…
However, the importance of that struggle only lasts a newscycle.
The Liberals threw a party to celebrate that Micheal Ignatieff was able to whip his MP’s into voting party lines and for once the entire party actually listened, heck they should have thrown a parade.
Yet no one in Urban Canada cares anymore, the vote is over, the registry is saved, and now they can fake outrage over the next “evil” Conservative plot.
However, in rural Canada where this issue actually affects the day to day lives of those Canadians they have had it.
The Conservatives had promised to do something about this long gun registry since 2003, and when they finally got into power in 2006 it only took them about 3 and a half years but FINALLY the time had come to get rid of this utterly useless long gun registry once and for all.
The NDP’s growth in Rural Canada came from a very simple principal from the old CCF, and that is respect your constituents wishes and represent them when you take your seat in Ottawa.
When a series of rural NDP MP’s opted to change their vote as it pertained to getting rid of the long gun registry all it did was reinforce a mentality that the NDP is run by the 416 for the 416.
I don’t envy Jack Layton,
The Conservative’s baited a trap for the Liberals, and sadly it was the NDP that got caught within it.
Should be interesting to see how Mr. Layton will attempt to get out of this one.
Only the Conservatives and the NDP have seen consistent growth in terms of seats and popular vote since the 2004 election.
The NDP in 2004 was a party of cities, Toronto, Hamilton, Windsor, Halifax, Winnipeg, and Vancouver with a few sprinkles of rural and suburban ridings mixed into the equation. They were a party of 19 seats.
As of the 2008 election the NDP was a party of 37 seats. (36 currently due to the current vacant state of Winnipeg North) Where has this growth come from?
We often hear about the great growth in Ontario and the nearly legendary tale of Thomas Mulcair winning an honest to goodness seat for the NDP in the 514. What we don’t seem to hear about is Sudbury, Thunder Bay, Kapuskasing, Timmins, Northern British Columbia, Newfoundland, Northern Canada.
These are the areas that have vaulted in NDP from a party of 19 seats to one of 37.
Early this week an Ipsos poll was released that showed NDP support had fallen to 12% nationally. I am of the mindset that one poll can be wrong, or that one pollster can have a method of data collection that at some times can show either unrealistic drops or gains to particular parties so I didn’t think much of it.
However today’s EKO’s poll shows there may very well be some reality in that 12% as they have shown the NDP support to be @ 13.5%.
What I find off however is how this is being reported, an implication that the drop in support is due to Jack Layton allowing a free vote among his MP’s as it pertained to the long gun registry and how that somehow alienated urban voters?
I hate to say it;
But when it comes to the long gun registry urban voters don’t really give a poop. I mean they do, any issue where you can stick it to Harper is painted as a life and death struggle to snatch away power from the evil right wing overlord currently running the country…
However, the importance of that struggle only lasts a newscycle.
The Liberals threw a party to celebrate that Micheal Ignatieff was able to whip his MP’s into voting party lines and for once the entire party actually listened, heck they should have thrown a parade.
Yet no one in Urban Canada cares anymore, the vote is over, the registry is saved, and now they can fake outrage over the next “evil” Conservative plot.
However, in rural Canada where this issue actually affects the day to day lives of those Canadians they have had it.
The Conservatives had promised to do something about this long gun registry since 2003, and when they finally got into power in 2006 it only took them about 3 and a half years but FINALLY the time had come to get rid of this utterly useless long gun registry once and for all.
The NDP’s growth in Rural Canada came from a very simple principal from the old CCF, and that is respect your constituents wishes and represent them when you take your seat in Ottawa.
When a series of rural NDP MP’s opted to change their vote as it pertained to getting rid of the long gun registry all it did was reinforce a mentality that the NDP is run by the 416 for the 416.
I don’t envy Jack Layton,
The Conservative’s baited a trap for the Liberals, and sadly it was the NDP that got caught within it.
Should be interesting to see how Mr. Layton will attempt to get out of this one.
Tuesday, August 31, 2010
Forget Your Damn Principals, Iggy Wants to Form a Government.
“Ignatieff said the Liberals share the objectives of the Greens and the NDP on the environment but insisted that voting for those parties meant Canadians will get "four more years of Stephen Harper."”
Source:
The above is something that I have seen implied, danced around, and other wise discussed but not discussed by Liberal supporters since 2006.
When a political party basically comes out and implies that you need to sell out your principals and go with us because we are the lesser evil you have reached a point where you as a party are simply out of ideas.
As I have mentioned on this blog, the NDP has seen growth in terms of seats and popular support in every election from 2004 onward, the Liberals on the other hand have seen retraction in both seats and popular vote in every election from 2004 onward.
I find it a little pompous, arrogant, and generally silly that the party that has “abstained” the Conservatives into a defacto majority government since late 2007 can imply that they are the party that can “stand up” to the Conservatives.
As I have said repeatedly in the past, I liked Paul Martin (pre-minority government) I thought he was a good leader who had clear ideas and the 2003 Liberals under Paul Martin was the last time I as a voter had any idea what the Liberal Party of Canada stood for.
Michael Ignatieff has been on a tour all summer long, meeting voters, talking policy, and trying to get Canadians to vote Liberals.
Yet here we are at the tail end of summer and I still have no idea what the Liberals stand for in terms of Economic Policy, Social Spending, Health Care, Afghanistan, Arctic Sovereignty, or Taxation.
All I know after a summer long bus tour is:
Conservatives = Bad
Liberals = Good
NDP + Green = Conservatives = Bad
This isn’t an election for student council president in high school, yet the simplicity of the message leads me to believe that the Liberals either have no policy or that they think I as a voter am far to stupid to actually understand whatever policy they may have.
What’s worse is that all summer I have watched Liberal MP after Liberal MP imply that Harper is a bully, yet here we are leading into the fall session of Parliament and the leader of the Liberal Party is basically attempting to bully loyal Green/NDP supporters into voting Liberal because they are the “only way to stop Harper”.
That coupled with forcing rural MP’s to vote party lines rather then constituents desires on Bill C-391 which appears that it will pass even without any support from the Liberals is just playing out the same image that the Liberals have been trying to distance themselves from since Ignatieff was appointed leader.
We are the party that knows better then you.
Considering they have had zero influence on policy over the last four years, and the country is still standing maybe Canada can exist without the Liberals?
Perhaps its time the Liberals realized that and starting asking Canadians for supporter rather then bullying them into it.
Just a thought.
Source:
The above is something that I have seen implied, danced around, and other wise discussed but not discussed by Liberal supporters since 2006.
When a political party basically comes out and implies that you need to sell out your principals and go with us because we are the lesser evil you have reached a point where you as a party are simply out of ideas.
As I have mentioned on this blog, the NDP has seen growth in terms of seats and popular support in every election from 2004 onward, the Liberals on the other hand have seen retraction in both seats and popular vote in every election from 2004 onward.
I find it a little pompous, arrogant, and generally silly that the party that has “abstained” the Conservatives into a defacto majority government since late 2007 can imply that they are the party that can “stand up” to the Conservatives.
As I have said repeatedly in the past, I liked Paul Martin (pre-minority government) I thought he was a good leader who had clear ideas and the 2003 Liberals under Paul Martin was the last time I as a voter had any idea what the Liberal Party of Canada stood for.
Michael Ignatieff has been on a tour all summer long, meeting voters, talking policy, and trying to get Canadians to vote Liberals.
Yet here we are at the tail end of summer and I still have no idea what the Liberals stand for in terms of Economic Policy, Social Spending, Health Care, Afghanistan, Arctic Sovereignty, or Taxation.
All I know after a summer long bus tour is:
Conservatives = Bad
Liberals = Good
NDP + Green = Conservatives = Bad
This isn’t an election for student council president in high school, yet the simplicity of the message leads me to believe that the Liberals either have no policy or that they think I as a voter am far to stupid to actually understand whatever policy they may have.
What’s worse is that all summer I have watched Liberal MP after Liberal MP imply that Harper is a bully, yet here we are leading into the fall session of Parliament and the leader of the Liberal Party is basically attempting to bully loyal Green/NDP supporters into voting Liberal because they are the “only way to stop Harper”.
That coupled with forcing rural MP’s to vote party lines rather then constituents desires on Bill C-391 which appears that it will pass even without any support from the Liberals is just playing out the same image that the Liberals have been trying to distance themselves from since Ignatieff was appointed leader.
We are the party that knows better then you.
Considering they have had zero influence on policy over the last four years, and the country is still standing maybe Canada can exist without the Liberals?
Perhaps its time the Liberals realized that and starting asking Canadians for supporter rather then bullying them into it.
Just a thought.
Thursday, June 10, 2010
Why Card Carrying Liberals Hate Me
I am a mercenary politically;
This idea of blind faith towards the actions of a party simply because you have their logo on a card laminated within your wallet is utterly silly to me.
I think Harper is doing the best job out of those who could potentially have the job, and I think that Tim Hudak may get me to vote Liberal in Ontario for the first time.
It’s all about policy to me,
I already know I am a bad Canadian because I approach every party’s platform with the approach of “what is best for my family” rather then “what is best for Canada”.
Talks of a merger between the NDP/Liberals is one subject I wasn’t going to comment on, simply because I am sure thousands of people who voted Martin in 2004 are making the same sorts of comments I would.
Unless all of a sudden the NDP moved hard center and dumped half their policy and caucus I would find it hard to see a situation where I would support them within the context of an election.
Layton has done perhaps the best job of any of the opposition leaders in their role as opposition to be vocal and against legislation tabled by the Government.
As the leader of the 3rd Opposition Party he has served his role well.
However, as a Minister of Finance or Foreign Affairs in the context of a merged Liberal/NDP party…
Scary stuff.
The NDP with power is something that we cannot afford as a nation, I look at Greece and the mess they are in because of a social safety net so expensive it collapsed their nation and I envision what could happen to Canada if we opted to move forward with even 20% of the NDP’s platform.
However I read an interesting article on CBC’s website which simply left me stunned
“He said Apps told him the NDP would have to comply with three conditions: renouncing socialism and embracing a mixed-market economy; accepting Michael Ignatieff as leader; and having senior party "saints" such as former federal NDP leader Ed Broadbent and past Saskatchewan NDP leader Roy Romanow promote the merger.”
Source
Maybe I am missing something here,
Perhaps the Liberal Party of Canada has some sort of dirt on the senior folks at the NDP but after reading that my first thought was:
“Are the Liberals delusional?”
Let’s have a look at the support of both parties over the last four elections:
NDP Support:
2000: 13 Seats, 8.51% Popular Vote
2004: 19 Seats, 11% Popular Vote
2006: 29 Seats, 17.48% Popular Vote
2008: 37 Seats, 18.18% Popular Vote
Liberal Support:
2000: 172 Seats, 41% Popular Vote
2004: 135 Seats, 36.73% Popular Vote
2006: 103 Seats, 30.23% Popular Vote
2008: 77 Seats, 26.26% Popular Vote
Do you see that pattern?
The Liberals had about 32% more support then the NDP in 2000,
Now it’s an 8.08% difference between both parties as of 2008.
Some polls show the NDP just outside the Margin of Error of the Liberals in terms of national support.
Maybe I am naïve here, but shouldn’t the NDP be dictating the terms of this agreement to the Liberals?
Because I hate to say it, the Liberals need the NDP a lot more then the NDP needs the Liberals.
Don’t get me wrong, the idea that the terms of a merger are basically along the lines of the NDP having to give up everything that makes it the NDP has some appeal to me, whenever you eliminate a left of center party you reduce the likelihood of left of center policy.
I just don’t see the reasoning behind this for the New Democrats.
An NDP/Green merger makes more logical sense.
That combine force based on the “second choice” polling could potentially leapfrog the Liberals.
Based on the Globe and Mail Article breaking down the Numbers the NDP/Liberal Party could potentially lead to a Conservative Majority.
Source
Which is all fine and good, but I really would like someone from the NDP to discuss this in the same manner in which “insiders” of the Liberal Party have been.
There is no love loss between me and the NDP, and the idea of them dissolving themselves into Liberals is interesting,
But where is the pros for the New Democrats?
This idea of blind faith towards the actions of a party simply because you have their logo on a card laminated within your wallet is utterly silly to me.
I think Harper is doing the best job out of those who could potentially have the job, and I think that Tim Hudak may get me to vote Liberal in Ontario for the first time.
It’s all about policy to me,
I already know I am a bad Canadian because I approach every party’s platform with the approach of “what is best for my family” rather then “what is best for Canada”.
Talks of a merger between the NDP/Liberals is one subject I wasn’t going to comment on, simply because I am sure thousands of people who voted Martin in 2004 are making the same sorts of comments I would.
Unless all of a sudden the NDP moved hard center and dumped half their policy and caucus I would find it hard to see a situation where I would support them within the context of an election.
Layton has done perhaps the best job of any of the opposition leaders in their role as opposition to be vocal and against legislation tabled by the Government.
As the leader of the 3rd Opposition Party he has served his role well.
However, as a Minister of Finance or Foreign Affairs in the context of a merged Liberal/NDP party…
Scary stuff.
The NDP with power is something that we cannot afford as a nation, I look at Greece and the mess they are in because of a social safety net so expensive it collapsed their nation and I envision what could happen to Canada if we opted to move forward with even 20% of the NDP’s platform.
However I read an interesting article on CBC’s website which simply left me stunned
“He said Apps told him the NDP would have to comply with three conditions: renouncing socialism and embracing a mixed-market economy; accepting Michael Ignatieff as leader; and having senior party "saints" such as former federal NDP leader Ed Broadbent and past Saskatchewan NDP leader Roy Romanow promote the merger.”
Source
Maybe I am missing something here,
Perhaps the Liberal Party of Canada has some sort of dirt on the senior folks at the NDP but after reading that my first thought was:
“Are the Liberals delusional?”
Let’s have a look at the support of both parties over the last four elections:
NDP Support:
2000: 13 Seats, 8.51% Popular Vote
2004: 19 Seats, 11% Popular Vote
2006: 29 Seats, 17.48% Popular Vote
2008: 37 Seats, 18.18% Popular Vote
Liberal Support:
2000: 172 Seats, 41% Popular Vote
2004: 135 Seats, 36.73% Popular Vote
2006: 103 Seats, 30.23% Popular Vote
2008: 77 Seats, 26.26% Popular Vote
Do you see that pattern?
The Liberals had about 32% more support then the NDP in 2000,
Now it’s an 8.08% difference between both parties as of 2008.
Some polls show the NDP just outside the Margin of Error of the Liberals in terms of national support.
Maybe I am naïve here, but shouldn’t the NDP be dictating the terms of this agreement to the Liberals?
Because I hate to say it, the Liberals need the NDP a lot more then the NDP needs the Liberals.
Don’t get me wrong, the idea that the terms of a merger are basically along the lines of the NDP having to give up everything that makes it the NDP has some appeal to me, whenever you eliminate a left of center party you reduce the likelihood of left of center policy.
I just don’t see the reasoning behind this for the New Democrats.
An NDP/Green merger makes more logical sense.
That combine force based on the “second choice” polling could potentially leapfrog the Liberals.
Based on the Globe and Mail Article breaking down the Numbers the NDP/Liberal Party could potentially lead to a Conservative Majority.
Source
Which is all fine and good, but I really would like someone from the NDP to discuss this in the same manner in which “insiders” of the Liberal Party have been.
There is no love loss between me and the NDP, and the idea of them dissolving themselves into Liberals is interesting,
But where is the pros for the New Democrats?
Tuesday, February 23, 2010
Damn You, and Your “Responsible” Budget!
Let me be clear, I don’t have anything against the Liberal Party of Canada.
Historically they have done some pretty interesting things, and had some very interesting leaders, who have benefited this country for electing them.
However, this incarnation of the Liberal Party of Canada just gives me the creeps.
I hate appointed leaders, nothing makes me more angry then party brass around a board room table anointing the leader of a political party that is suppose to represent Canadians especially when that leader shouldn’t buy the support of other leadership hopefuls in 2006.
I wasn’t thrilled when Harper ran in 2003, as a merged party shouldn’t have either of the former parties’ leaders running the show,
I wasn’t thrilled at the 11 month delay in 2006 which basically gave the Conservatives an unelected majority government while the Liberals samples eight potential leaders
And I wasn’t thrilled that Ignatieff was anointed rather then elected.
But in the first two cases, at least the unwashed masses got to have some input into selecting their leader, and the problem with men in smoke filled rooms selecting a leader is that those men rarely if ever understand the plight of the working class stiffs like me.
Last year was like watching a tennis match at the US open when it came to where the Liberals stood on issues.
March 2009 – We will support this reckless spending the government is putting forth, but we want them to submit reports as to where the money is going…
You know, do what a government is legally required to do anyway when it comes to spending tax payer money…
They even went as far as to create a cute “onprobation.ca” website to show us how they were like vigilant hawks who would strike down at anyone who abused us minions as we toiled in the fields.
But of course they lost interest in actually doing the job of the opposition party of Canada, and went back to whining that being in opposition is beneath Canada’s natural Governing Party, as the website now simply re-directs to the Liberal Party home page and has down so for several months…
So much for that….
September 2009 – They voted against legislation that would have made the Home Renovation Credit Law,
Yeah, you know that credit they supported in March that most of us spent when it was warm in summer so we could do the work on our “honey do” lists like replace tiles, have the roof fixes, finish the basement…basically all the stuff that most sane Canadians don’t wait till Fall to get started on when the credit is set to expire in February.
Because now, they are against reckless spending…
Yet they are not interested in keeping the Conservative accountable for this reckless spending they are now against, which they were for in March when they were in favor of the reckless spending in the first place…
Get all that?
As I sat there within thousands of dollars of renovation materials receipts in my hands for the first time in a long time I actually cheer the NDP as they did the right thing and supported passing the legislation the Liberals should have passed in the first place.
I wrote my MP, and I tend to never do that because writing my MP is like going into Best Buy and complaining to the guy who sells TV’s that I am unhappy with the quality of company XYZ’s TV’s, he may smile and nod, he may even show some apathy for my situation, but at the end of the day he/she has no real power to make any real choices because they have to pull the party line anyway.
My Liberal MP replied to my frantic “Ummmm dude? I spent a few grand doing work around the house under the promise I would write some of it off, and you supported that in March, and now you are punking me?? Really? REALLY???”
His response was basically;
The legislation has passed, and the reno credit is law.
When in reality,
The legislation had passed despite his party not supporting it, and had the legislation been voted down we would have hit the polls, and I may have never seen my credit ever again.
I may vote Liberal in the future, but never ever ever again will I vote for him.
Taking bread out of my mouth is one thing,
Offering me bread, putting butter on it, handing it to me, and trying to slap it out of my hand as I put it in my mouth is another.
Now here we are in February 2010;
The Conservatives have leaked parts of their budget.
No Tax Cuts
No New Spending
While I am disappointed that the Reagan approach to cut taxes to stimulate spending which historically increases government revenue anyway (also used successfully in Ontario by Mike Harris)
I am pleased that spending is under control,
But of course, that is terrible.
It’s being called a do nothing budget…
This is the problem with the opposition parties,
There is no right answer.
And in a minority government that creates a real legislative quagmire.
We have been in election mode since the day after the 2004 election, every political party wasting time in Parliament hoping for a soundbyte they can use in a election which could happen any day…
This of course at the expense of governing.
The Liberals are now against restraint,
The same fiscal restraint they were for when they opted to stop supporting the budget they supported in March in September.
They want to spend billions on daycare, they feel that not spending money that we don’t have is “doing nothing”,
As a normal Canadian who actually has to work for a living at a honest to goodness job, I call not spending money that I don’t have something very different,
I call it “reality”.
But what do I know?
Historically they have done some pretty interesting things, and had some very interesting leaders, who have benefited this country for electing them.
However, this incarnation of the Liberal Party of Canada just gives me the creeps.
I hate appointed leaders, nothing makes me more angry then party brass around a board room table anointing the leader of a political party that is suppose to represent Canadians especially when that leader shouldn’t buy the support of other leadership hopefuls in 2006.
I wasn’t thrilled when Harper ran in 2003, as a merged party shouldn’t have either of the former parties’ leaders running the show,
I wasn’t thrilled at the 11 month delay in 2006 which basically gave the Conservatives an unelected majority government while the Liberals samples eight potential leaders
And I wasn’t thrilled that Ignatieff was anointed rather then elected.
But in the first two cases, at least the unwashed masses got to have some input into selecting their leader, and the problem with men in smoke filled rooms selecting a leader is that those men rarely if ever understand the plight of the working class stiffs like me.
Last year was like watching a tennis match at the US open when it came to where the Liberals stood on issues.
March 2009 – We will support this reckless spending the government is putting forth, but we want them to submit reports as to where the money is going…
You know, do what a government is legally required to do anyway when it comes to spending tax payer money…
They even went as far as to create a cute “onprobation.ca” website to show us how they were like vigilant hawks who would strike down at anyone who abused us minions as we toiled in the fields.
But of course they lost interest in actually doing the job of the opposition party of Canada, and went back to whining that being in opposition is beneath Canada’s natural Governing Party, as the website now simply re-directs to the Liberal Party home page and has down so for several months…
So much for that….
September 2009 – They voted against legislation that would have made the Home Renovation Credit Law,
Yeah, you know that credit they supported in March that most of us spent when it was warm in summer so we could do the work on our “honey do” lists like replace tiles, have the roof fixes, finish the basement…basically all the stuff that most sane Canadians don’t wait till Fall to get started on when the credit is set to expire in February.
Because now, they are against reckless spending…
Yet they are not interested in keeping the Conservative accountable for this reckless spending they are now against, which they were for in March when they were in favor of the reckless spending in the first place…
Get all that?
As I sat there within thousands of dollars of renovation materials receipts in my hands for the first time in a long time I actually cheer the NDP as they did the right thing and supported passing the legislation the Liberals should have passed in the first place.
I wrote my MP, and I tend to never do that because writing my MP is like going into Best Buy and complaining to the guy who sells TV’s that I am unhappy with the quality of company XYZ’s TV’s, he may smile and nod, he may even show some apathy for my situation, but at the end of the day he/she has no real power to make any real choices because they have to pull the party line anyway.
My Liberal MP replied to my frantic “Ummmm dude? I spent a few grand doing work around the house under the promise I would write some of it off, and you supported that in March, and now you are punking me?? Really? REALLY???”
His response was basically;
The legislation has passed, and the reno credit is law.
When in reality,
The legislation had passed despite his party not supporting it, and had the legislation been voted down we would have hit the polls, and I may have never seen my credit ever again.
I may vote Liberal in the future, but never ever ever again will I vote for him.
Taking bread out of my mouth is one thing,
Offering me bread, putting butter on it, handing it to me, and trying to slap it out of my hand as I put it in my mouth is another.
Now here we are in February 2010;
The Conservatives have leaked parts of their budget.
No Tax Cuts
No New Spending
While I am disappointed that the Reagan approach to cut taxes to stimulate spending which historically increases government revenue anyway (also used successfully in Ontario by Mike Harris)
I am pleased that spending is under control,
But of course, that is terrible.
It’s being called a do nothing budget…
This is the problem with the opposition parties,
There is no right answer.
And in a minority government that creates a real legislative quagmire.
We have been in election mode since the day after the 2004 election, every political party wasting time in Parliament hoping for a soundbyte they can use in a election which could happen any day…
This of course at the expense of governing.
The Liberals are now against restraint,
The same fiscal restraint they were for when they opted to stop supporting the budget they supported in March in September.
They want to spend billions on daycare, they feel that not spending money that we don’t have is “doing nothing”,
As a normal Canadian who actually has to work for a living at a honest to goodness job, I call not spending money that I don’t have something very different,
I call it “reality”.
But what do I know?
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
