The coalition that the liberals don't want
Congrats liberals.
If Jack gets his way he'll be in the drivers seat in a coalition.
Here's the rub that none of you guys had the cognizance to understand.
See if the liberals are not in the drivers seat, that coalition isn't happening.
All Harper has to do is convince enough liberals to support his throne speech if he gets another minority.
This observation comes down to this.
Conservatives consider another minority win, a win, end of statement.
So if Harper increases his seat count but, doesn't get his majority, the house is still his.
Is Jack going to try to sieze power if he comes in second place, or will he be satisfied being leader of the opposition for a couple of years while the liberals tear themselves to pieces in yet another leadership race.
Point two.
The conservative base also understands that the talk of Harper being gone if he doesn't win a majority, is talk coming from folks that will never vote conservative.
Meaning, they want Harper gone because they can't defeat a known quantity with an unknown. We know that if its a minority the opposition would force a nonconfidence vote the moment the conservatives selected a new leader, we won't be letting that happen.
Here's how a coalition under Jack Layton would fare.
He won't have the seats even with the liberals to take power, he will need the support of the Bloc. And that my friends will make any coalition DOA.
By the way, those promises Jack made to the closet/separatists to reopen the consititution are going to sink his ship when Mulclair tries to oust him.
The basis of that observation is that Mulroney did the same thing when he convinced Bouchard to run as a PC and a bevy of closet separatists to gain his majority. It backfired when Mulroney realized after the second attempt at constitutional reform teh ROC wasn't in the mood to give the closet separatists what they wanted, constitutional recognition that Quebec get 50% control of Canada. The same bevy of closet separatists are running in Quebec for the NDP now.
Here's the problem they can't seem to grasp. The ROC knows its a ruse, the separation threat that is, and we know that as an empty threat, its purpose had nothing to do with the stated intent, and everything to do with leveraging more cash out of Ottawa.
See, we in the ROC understand that if you spend more money than you have, things will fall apart. Quebecers seem to have a hard time understanding that the reason their infrastructure is falling apart, is because 1- they didn't have good oversight over the costs, and 2 - they've spread their tax base so thin (to fund all the goodies they want to have) they can't fund the needs.
Their solution is that they want to "opt out" of federal standards, meaning they want the cash, but not the oversight that comes with it.
But I digress.
With this bunch in the NDP caucus, you can already feel the divide runing through Quebec.
If Jack gets his coaliton, bet money on it the life span of it will be 2 weeks before we are into another election.
Labels: free advice for Ignatieff, Quebec politics
Talkng point - election campaign (door knocking)
Before I go further I'd like to state that there are two items I want to see as platform.
- A pledge to eliminate Chretien's vote subsidy.
- Reform or remove the HRC's.
Now then, as to the subject matter. Should one of the candidates come knocking at my door be sure that my questions will be to find out what you want to do if your party forms a government. Not grand idea's and vague generalities, I want specifics.
Also know this, especially if you're a liberal candidate. I'll be asking which piece of legislation that the Harper government has passed, or was pending, that your party is opposed to. Do not say all of it, I'll remind you that the NDP and the Bloc where more than willing to vote against the government many times, but all those times you're party allowed those laws (which you say you oppose) to pass. So I'll ask again, please be specific, on which one of those laws you want to reverse that you think are so bad.
Is it raising the age of consent?
The GST cut, so you'll want to raise the GST then?
Elected Senators? You either want reform to be a big constitutional package like Charlottetown, or you like it just the way it is....so all that noise about Harper's senate appointments was just more flatulance?
I think you get the point.
BTW
One more thing I'd like to see in the next election. Is if Harper indicates that he is only willing to debate one representative of the opposition....and they can figure out which one gets to go head to head with him. Oh I can hear the accusations of divisive already. Here's the phsycological two by four that you'll get hit with. If you guys where willing to go into a coalition in the fall and have one leader speak for all of you, whats the problem now? If it happened I can just imagine the opposition tearing each other apart if Harper refused to relent. Want a bet the liberals will be hard pressed to justify to Bloc voters that they should speak for them.
The beauty of a suggestion like this is that the leaders debate is not held by law, its a tradition that the leaders have agreed to participate in. Thats the catch, they agree to be there, but they don't have to be there. The thing is run by the broadcasting consortium, and they negotiate with the leaders to arrange a debate.
Last time when Lizzie May demanded a spot, Harper almost refused. This time with the justification that only one representative of the coalition be present so that the odds are fair will have the opposition foaming at the mouth. What it could also do is cut off attempts by the liberals doing what they always do when the campaign comes apart at the seams and plead with the NDP to lead them their vote. It would definitely harden up the NDP base and not allow the liberals to raid it.
But hey, I'm just speculating. No truth in anything I've posted. Not one word.
Labels: beer and popcorn, May's little green monster, Quebec politics, the free lunch crowd at it again, useful idiots
Ignatieff's far rightwing views?
No I don't believe for a minute the guy is really right wing, matter of fact I don't think he's ever held fast to any belief. Any resemblance to a show of belief or statement made to express same by Squidward is either coincidence or done for show to keep on side with his audience.
But I digress.
Iggy wants to "show" he's a centrist.
Oh goody....
Please explain then as leader of the liberal party what rightwing policies you agree with and a plan to impliment them.
Here's the to do list for Iggy:
- Eliminate the gun registry.
- Bring in a triple E senate.
- Return the definition of marriage to its traditional meaning of one man one woman.
- Get the federal government out of provincial jurisdiction, start with health care.
- Speaking of Prov-Fed jurisdiction, end the shell game of transfer payments.
- Rescind Canada's signature from the Kyoto Accord.
- Pledge to equip Canada's Navy with nuclear subs so they can operate year round in the Arctic.
- Make the CBC a private corporation.
- Ban the Bloc from sitting in the HoC.
- Lastly, reveal the names of the Quebec ridings that got the Adscam money, have the perps arrested and then have them stand trial.
This is just a start. However, because it requires Squidward to actually come out with a plan I doubt this will even come up on the radar of something "big". I do expect that if he wants the LPC to shift to the right this should remind us all what that path entails.
And frankly I don't think he has the onions to even suggest some of this stuff.
Labels: May's little green monster, Quebec politics, senate reform, the free lunch crowd at it again
Who would promise special status for Quebec
The question is as follows:
What kind of an aspirant for the job of Prime Minister of Canada be most likely offer to enshrine in the constitution special status for Quebec?
Would Stephen Harper?
Would Jack Layton?
How about Mikey Ignatieff?
Seems his poll numbers have gone up in Quebec, and the media really haven't done a good job of keeping track of what he says....or at least reporting and pointing out the disparities depending on what time zone he's speaking in.
Considering Iggy is willing on any given day to offer governing interest in exchange for power, I'll submit that the propability he would offer "meat on the bone" to the closet separatists in Quebec is quite high.
The equation works like this MSM.
The ROC gets to pay for all the patronage going to Quebec (higher taxes), Quebecers are then brainwashed that the ROC owes it to them (bigger government in Ottawa and Quebec)....because well, they have Quebec institutions that are critical to something or other that are darn well neccessary that without them....the country will just not be the same without....or something like that.
I wonder when the media is going to figure this out?
Trudeau did it, Chretien did it, hell even Mulroney did it and figured out too late whats so bad about it when Bouchard double crossed him.
MSM do your job.
Labels: Quebec politics
How to get rid of the Bloc.
I'd be interested to know how far this idea would go.
Here's the plan:
- Get enough people in riding's outside of Quebec to form a Bloc riding association. The executive of the party will no doubt balk at the attempt and hopefully even deny the application. If/when that happens the HRC could be used to do some good work for a change and a charge should be brought against the Bloc for their refusal to allow admittance based on ethnicity. That's the first strike.
- The groups that are now denied access, still organize to run under an independent banner. It doesn't matter what, just as long as its clear that the idea is let the Bloc know its under threat of a takeover from the ROC. That's the second strike.
- If (and this is the tricky part) enough support can be generated to get enough ROC to generate enough members, let the Quebec membership know in no uncertain terms that when the next convention comes up the majority will be delegates from outside of Quebec and they will be making sure the party is unelectable inside of Quebec by voting to get Quebec's signature on the constitution. That's the big if, but it would certainly help push them off the national stage.
Part of the scenario that may help it along is the first stage. The HRC hasn't really been much use of late and mostly I believe its the principle of idle hands do the devils work. Give them something useful to do and they will forget about editorial writers and magazine publishers. This would be real meat that any civil rights activist would give their hind teeth to get at. Imagine the optics, here's a political party that wants to destroy the country by electing members for federal representation....all on the premise of freedom from supposed tyranny of Ottawa, and they turn around and deny the right of Canadians to freely belong to their party. That's not democratic now is it, heck that could even be construed as racist. Now suppose the Bloc doesn't want the media attention and relents at that point to allow riding associations to form outside of Quebec? Oh the mischief that could be played, nominating candidates that not only advocate for Quebec to separate, but also blurting out how it would be okay for the rest of Canada to take what is rightfully theirs. You can guess how well that would go over in Quebec when the leader has to explain to those soft nationalists how they shouldn't take it serious, not what was meant, etc. you get the picture. But it would also put the leader in a spot trying to say one thing to calm the fair weather federalists while at the same time not looking less of a separatist to the hardcore party base in the bloc than that wonky candidate over in Ontario. The strategy is however based on the premise that no separatist can by law deny entry to their party under the laws of this country, and they need to be put on a crash course with the courts.
The second point is an interesting strategy, in that baring the outcome of the first, the ROC should be able to create more than 75 riding associations to out vote the ones in Quebec. I know its a cheap and dirty trick to subvert their vote, but is it really fair that a party that only campaigns in one province makes it nearly impossible for a majority government to form? All they have been successful at is muddying the waters, its time as Preston Manning once said, to get in for the long haul. Its not 1760 anymore, the British decamped generations ago, and there is a new reality that says grow up and stop acting like a colony of France. Digressing a bit, the point isn't to actually do the takeover, but to let Quebec know that we can do it if we want to. Sort of like how Teddy Roosevelt let the world understand the connection of soft talk and big sticks.
The last part, although difficult to do until you get enough of a membership outside of la belle province, would be the sweetest. You could have a detrimental effect on the party by getting a leader nominated that was unelectable in Quebec, or changing the party constitution to abandon the separation option, or even better disbanding the party for good.
Now I am not of any delusions that this will happen, but what I have done is offer up some solution to this old canker sore. My hope is that anyone that happens to come across this little screed will plagiarize some or all of it and take it to the next step. Because frankly I'm tired of seeing the federal government being manipulated by a bunch of socialists posing as freedom fighters with no agenda other than extracting a pound of flesh from the ROC.
Labels: Quebec politics
Dumont threatening an election?
Gotta admire the way this guy is operating.
While the whole debate on "reasonable accomodation" rages on, he throws out an issue that causes the government to defend the status quo, which is support a school board system that no one cares enough to vote (4% turnout?) and has disparingly poor attendance and frighteningly high drop out rates. Seems there is no mushy middle. So while the PQ is setting off its own traps by race-baiting and Charet can't seem to get ahead, Dumont decides to table a confidence motion.
But here's the thing.
I don't think his intention is to trigger an election.
What I think he wants to do is force the other parties to chicken out and show fear in the face of an electorate.
Think about it. Which Quebec provincial party actually stands the best chance of election right now?
The liberal brand is doa, and the PQ well I believe folks look at them and see a party that is inhabited by the separatist elitists, and communist kook fringe. That leaves the ADQ in striking distance.
But again its not about forcing an election, its about showing up the other guys as not ready to fight one.
I'll give a clue how this works.
Remember the last federal election when Martin said he would debate for Canada anytime, and then Duceppe took him up on it? Then when Martin backed down Harper said he would do it if the current PM wouldn't? But then the nail went in the coffin when Duceppe backed down on Harpers challenge leaving Harper on the high moral ground.
Something like that.
Labels: Quebec politics
