Conservatives pull ahead of Liberals in polls

[Ma Deuce]

Uh oh...

I'm concerned: For the first time I'm convinced that the federal election could easily go either way. The Conservatives are pushing forward, and the Liberals seem stalled and have adopted a left-leaning platform, something they usually reserve for times of trouble. Also, IIRC 47% of people in another survey said their opinion of Harper had improved while 32% said their opinion of Martin had decreased.

I hate both parties, but I'm sure everyone is familier with the phrase "the devil you know"...

But honestly, I can't decide which party is worse. The Conservatives are socially regressive knuckle draggers (who may or may not be fiscally responsible), and the Liberals are sleazy, corrupt, self-serving scumbags who think it is their right and priviledge to rule by default. I'd *gasp* vote for the Commun...err NDP before I vote for either party (hey, they're not going to win anyway, but then that's what everyone said about Bob Rae), or independant (if one is running in my riding).

Better yet, I could simply do what this sign tells me to:

[The Dude]

It worries me too, but only because a minority government of either stripe will be at the mercy of the fucktards in the NDP and Bloc.

[Col. Crackpot]

It worries me too, but only because a minority government of either stripe will be at the mercy of the fucktards in the NDP and Bloc.

Pardon my ignorance of Canadian politics, but would a plurality force one of the stronger parties to form a coalition govenment, or is that not allowed?

[Ma Deuce]

It worries me too, but only because a minority government of either stripe will be at the mercy of the fucktards in the NDP and Bloc.

Pardon my ignorance of Canadian politics, but would a plurality force one of the stronger parties to form a coalition govenment, or is that not allowed?

Nobody wants to form a coalition. Martin has given faint feelers that he might consider a coalition with the NDP (Liberal/NDP is the only coalition remotely posible this election) if the Liberals sink further, but NDP leader Jack Leyton will hear none of it. The platforms of all four parties are so diametrically opposed to each other, and the compromises necessary for a coalition to work are not going to be given by any of the parties.

So in short, there's no law against coalitions up here, but it's just not gonna to happen this election.

[Col. Crackpot]

It worries me too, but only because a minority government of either stripe will be at the mercy of the fucktards in the NDP and Bloc.

Pardon my ignorance of Canadian politics, but would a plurality force one of the stronger parties to form a coalition govenment, or is that not allowed?

Nobody wants to form a coalition. Martin has given faint feelers that he might consider a coalition with the NDP (Liberal/NDP is the only coalition remotely posible this election) if the Liberals sink further, but NDP leader Jack Leyton will hear none of it. The platforms of all four parties are so diametrically opposed to each other, and the compromises necessary for a coalition to work are not going to be given by any of the parties.

So in short, there's no law against coalitions up here, but it's just not gonna to happen this election.

hey, 4 parties, 4 agendas and no majority can be a good thing. no stupid laws would get passed and everyone would have to compromise to get anything done.

[The Dude]

Pardon my ignorance of Canadian politics, but would a plurality force one of the stronger parties to form a coalition govenment, or is that not allowed?

No, it does not force an alliance (see Joe Clark's 1980 Conservative government disaster). In fact, there have been eight minority governments since the last time there was a coalition gov't in Canada (during WWI).

Either way, though, the balance of power ends up in the hands of the fucktards.

[Ma Deuce]

hey, 4 parties, 4 agendas and no majority can be a good thing. no stupid laws would get passed and everyone would have to compromise to get anything done.

Theres the problem: Nobody will want to compromise very much, and thus nothing will get done in Parliament... Oh wait, nothing gets done in Parliament anyway, so yeah, maybe it can be a good thing .

[Col. Crackpot]

hey, 4 parties, 4 agendas and no majority can be a good thing. no stupid laws would get passed and everyone would have to compromise to get anything done.

Theres the problem: Nobody will want to compromise very much, and thus nothing will get done in Parliament... Oh wait, nothing gets done in Parliament anyway, so yeah, maybe it can be a good thing .

it seems that the best years in the States were when the govenment was so evenly balanced that no side could push an agenda. for example when Clinton and Gingrich cancelled each other out. When a government is gridlocked they can't fuck over the people with stupid laws... usually.

[Ma Deuce]

it seems that the best years in the States were when the govenment was so evenly balanced that no side could push an agenda. for example when Clinton and Gingrich cancelled each other out. When a government is gridlocked they can't fuck over the people with stupid laws... usually.

That's true, but the US has exactly two parties and two agendas, and it's easier for the Republicans and Democrats to compromise with each other than is the case with the Canadian parties. Although the Liberals or Conservatives each outweigh the Bloc and NDP combined (either going by popularity or parlimentary seat count), the Bloc and NDP are still large enough so they can't be ignored

[J]

Well...so much for legalized marijuana....

But honestly, I can't decide which party is worse. The Conservatives are socially regressive knuckle draggers (who may or may not be fiscally responsible),

Definitely not fiscally responsible, if you work out their proposed spending & taxation for various programs it comes up short by quite a few billion.

and the Liberals are sleazy, corrupt, self-serving scumbags who think it is their right and priviledge to rule by default.

The Chretian Liberals for sure, the Martin Liberals are an unknown at the moment. I admit I'm not really following the campaign coverage since it gives me a fucking headache.

I'd *gasp* vote for the Commun...err NDP before I vote for either party (hey, they're not going to win anyway, but then that's what everyone said about Bob Rae)

I'd move to a 3rd world country before I vote for the NDP, their proposed programs would leave an even bigger hole in the budget than the Conservatives. Based on early campaign promises, it worked out to something like a $20 billion shortfall and I get taxed silly, no thanks.

[Jalinth]

It worries me too, but only because a minority government of either stripe will be at the mercy of the fucktards in the NDP and Bloc.

Pardon my ignorance of Canadian politics, but would a plurality force one of the stronger parties to form a coalition govenment, or is that not allowed?

Unlike many other countries, we have a "first past the post" system - so each seat (geographic) is one by the person with the most votes - no majority required, no runoff allowed if the winner has <50% of the votes.

This system produces very few minority governments, so natural "coalitions" to co-govern don't exist. The major parties generally don't deal with each other - they are the main competitors and so much venom is thrown during elections that personal relationships are hard to estabish. Generally, the party with the most systems will try to deal with a small party and throw them a few bones (Cabinet seats, bills, etc...) to get their support. If this falls, it goes to the next biggest party. If this falls, then I'd assume that the largest party gets to run the show. But, defeat of certain bills (essentially anything involving budgets) is a "non-confidence vote" and forces a change in government. Generally, this also brings an election - but the Governor General can turn it over to the next largest party if they show they can govern.

Basically, a minority can be either liberating (producing innovative things like the Canadian medical system) or chaotic (Joe Clark). I'd expect chaotic this time around. Also, small parties have way too much power for their seat total - they hold the ability to defeat the government whenever they want.

As for the NDP - they've proven they lack the basic competence to run the country. I'd only vote for a Saskatchewan NDP leader since they seem to govern that province in a reasonable manner (probably because many of them are farmers, who are forced to face facts. Unlike Ivory Tower professors or Union leaders that are the main source of the NDP leadership). Every other NDP leader has been a disaster of one type or another. As for my own province, BC, we face the Lotus Land effect - lurch from right to left - never in the middle. The NDP had less competence than the current guys, but neither are stellar examples of competence in governing.

[Darth Wong]

Let's look at what the Conservatives say they're going to do:

1. $3 billion more health care
2. ~150% increase in military spending
3. Massive tax cuts
4. Balanced-budget legislation
5. Forced debt-repayment legislation

Can you say "doesn't add up?" And on the social front, we have:

1. Add an exception to the hate-speech law to specifically allow anti-gay hate speech.
2. Call for a "free vote" on abortion ("free vote" being their way of saying that their MPs vote, which means that they would push through their viewpoint if they had a majority government regardless of what the population thinks or what the law says). Conservative MPs have likened abortion to murder and terrorism during the campaign.
3. Call for a "free vote" on gay marriage (see above). Conservative MPs have made their views on gay marriage quite clear.
4. There's also his race-baiting: he once said "West of Winnipeg the ridings the Liberals hold are dominated by people who are either recent Asian immigrants or recent migrants from eastern Canada." What does the Asian racial background of an MP have to do with anything?

The problem here is a moribund Liberal party marketing machine. Their marketing apparatus has never been as proficient as people think; they have been buoyed in the past by media support, and that media support is not forthcoming in this election. They have failed to capitalize on some absolutely incredible statements by Conservative MPs and by Harper himself, and they keep trying to push some kind of touchy-feely message instead of attacking Harper's competence and apparent cloning of George W. Bush.

[Graeme Dice]

As for the NDP - they've proven they lack the basic competence to run the country. I'd only vote for a Saskatchewan NDP leader since they seem to govern that province in a reasonable manner (probably because many of them are farmers, who are forced to face facts.

Well, the NDP had Romanow at the same time as everybody was fed up with Devine's over-spending and corruption. Heck, half of the Conservative cabinet was in jail over fraud during one of the elections.

[Meest]

Let's look at what the Conservatives say they're going to do:They have failed to capitalize on some absolutely incredible statements by Conservative MPs and by Harper himself, and they keep trying to push some kind of touchy-feely message instead of attacking Harper's competence and apparent cloning of George W. Bush.

The Liberals new commercial does that somewhat, they try to say he's "anti-canadian" and imply getting chummy with the US.

The only thing I like about the NDP is their corporate tax proposals, which I think is a good sign if they can pull it off, but the rest of their ideas are wishfull thinking. If they made sense of their budget they are the only party I think I might lean towards. But it looks like its coming down to, I don't want the PCs to win so might have to just vote Liberal just to slow the PCs down, and I really dispise that's an option I'm considering.

My friend in Montreal is doing just that, vote Liberal just so the PQ don't win. Sad that it's come to that, vote for a party you don't like just so a party you like even less doesn't win.

[HemlockGrey]

That's true, but the US has exactly two parties and two agendas,

Only two parties, but dozens, if not hundreds, of agendas.

[The Dude]

My friend in Montreal is doing just that, vote Liberal just so the PQ don't win. Sad that it's come to that, vote for a party you don't like just so a party you like even less doesn't win.

I'm in exactly the same situation; I would prefer to vote Conservative but the possibility of the BQ taking ridings because of vote-splitting is just too intolerable.

The social backwardness of a potential Conservative gov't is grossly overblown (with the exception of gay marriage). The fundie loonie shit has been coming exclusively from the outer reaches of the back benches -Harper is actually oversensitive; e.g. he bounced his multiculturalism guy for making perfectly reasonable criticisms of state-enforced bilingualism.

The main problem with the Cons right now is that their caucus is not representative of the party membership. The caucus is something like 80% former Alliance, whereas the membership is 55-60% former PCs and right-leaning Libs. Come this year's election, the caucus will be heavily moderated by an influx of more centrist/libertarian MPs from the Maritimes, B.C. and Ontario.

[Darth Paul]

The irony to me is that since carrying Ontario remains key to winning the election, the Conservative party will invevitably shift back to a traditional "PC"-style demographic, which will in turn alienate the western provinces again. Under this situation, I don't see a lot of real challenge to the courts on social issues. The real problem is that they are running out of catchy names for breakaway conservative parties ... Rereform? Reformover maybe??

It looks the Conservative financial planners may have attended the Dalton McGuinty school of budget economics

[muse]

The problem here is a moribund Liberal party marketing machine. Their marketing apparatus has never been as proficient as people think; they have been buoyed in the past by media support, and that media support is not forthcoming in this election. They have failed to capitalize on some absolutely incredible statements by Conservative MPs and by Harper himself, and they keep trying to push some kind of touchy-feely message instead of attacking Harper's competence and apparent cloning of George W. Bush.

Considering that the same idiot who ran Dalton McGuinty's campaign is now the key advisor behind the federal Liberals' election campaign, well, I really don't know what to say and I have major doubts about the competance of the people running the Liberal party. To this day I still don't know what they were smoking when they called the election in the middle of a fucking unresolved scandal! Idiots!

[Montcalm]

The problem here is a moribund Liberal party marketing machine. Their marketing apparatus has never been as proficient as people think; they have been buoyed in the past by media support, and that media support is not forthcoming in this election. They have failed to capitalize on some absolutely incredible statements by Conservative MPs and by Harper himself, and they keep trying to push some kind of touchy-feely message instead of attacking Harper's competence and apparent cloning of George W. Bush.

Considering that the same idiot who ran Dalton McGuinty's campaign is now the key advisor behind the federal Liberals' election campaign, well, I really don't know what to say and I have major doubts about the competance of the people running the Liberal party. To this day I still don't know what they were smoking when they called the election in the middle of a fucking unresolved scandal! Idiots!

Just focusing Canadians attention on something else,as usual

[Darth Wong]

All I can say is that the Conservatives had better go to sleep every night thanking their God for Dalton McGuinty. If you have to point at a single reason why the Conservatives have a chance in this election, it's him.

One possible saving grace (as The Dude and Darth Paul pointed out) is that if the Conservatives do carry Ontario the conquerors might be assimilated by the conquered. A large block of Ontarian Conservative MPs might theoretically wrest the party away from its current redneck-biased path. But their apparent fiscal pie-in-the-sky thinking would put us on a whole different kind of path.

[President Sharky]

To see the Liberals ousted from their Toronto ridings would be a welcome change. In 11 years, we've have seen city violence escalate to appalling levels, and then there's that god-awful Gun Registry law. Ya, like a criminal is going to go register his fucking gun with the government.

Let's not forget the gutting of our once proud armed forces, who have been reduced to carrying forest camos in the fucking Afgan desert! The Liberals have screwed us over enough and the NDP is full of a bunch of lieing socialists. Here's a hope for a Conservative Canada.

[Meest]

To see the Liberals ousted from their Toronto ridings would be a welcome change. In 11 years, we've have seen city violence escalate to appalling levels, and then there's that god-awful Gun Registry law. Ya, like a criminal is going to go register his fucking gun with the government.

They also haven't fixed the waterfront dammit, was supposed to be a big movie studio planned there to.

Let's not forget the gutting of our once proud armed forces, who have been reduced to carrying forest camos in the fucking Afgan desert! The Liberals have screwed us over enough and the NDP is full of a bunch of lieing socialists. Here's a hope for a Conservative Canada.

http://www.cbc.ca/canadavotes/interactives/issues.html

Not sure if that's biased but after reading that, PCs scare me, they are vague on some points to the point of not really having a plan, also their psuedo-moderate stance. They will put gay marriage and anti-abortion laws up to a vote, but with them in power you know they'll gut the opposition. This is conspiracy theory level maybe, but PCs in power might help US-Canada relations, if they don't sell off all our freshwater first. :D

NDP makes the most sense to me if they can pull off a balanced budget with what they plan on doing. Corporate tax is a good step in that direction. Seems the only ones with the balls to do it.

[Meest]

http://www.oneworld.ca/external/?url=ht ... paypr.html

Not sure on the accuracy or bias of the site, but in general, why would you want PC's budget?

[tharkûn]

Meest: Take any budget prediction with a a bucket of salt. The budgetary actions of the state have a non-linear effect. If you increase taxes by x% you may have less than x% increase in revenue. Likewise if you cut taxes you may get a lower drop in total revenue than the percent the taxes go down by.

Conservatives hope and pray that their tax cuts will spur growth so that they actually make back more money than they spent and liberals hope that their social spending has a larger multiplier effect than the contractionary effect of higher taxes.

Besides, let's be honest, Canada's economy in large part is dictated from Washington DC. If DC dicks over the US economy any Canadian budget is shot to hell, if DC manages to pull off a miracle then good things happen in the great white north.

[Aaron]

Besides, let's be honest, Canada's economy in large part is dictated from Washington DC. If DC dicks over the US economy any Canadian budget is shot to hell, if DC manages to pull off a miracle then good things happen in the great white north.

How did you come to that conclusion? Our budgets seem'd to stay balanced regardless of the actions of the USA. I don't recall anything adverse happening when the softwood lumber dispute was on, or the BSE scare. It might be reaking havoc on the economy but the budget seems to stay on tract.