"If we do not win a majority government, this country will have a Liberal government propped up by socialists and separatists"

113 posts / 0 new
Last post
surfdoc surfdoc's picture
"If we do not win a majority government, this country will have a Liberal government propped up by socialists and separatists"

Stephen Harper was recently recorded saying this, as well as saying that they need to "make sure their little coalition never happens".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3MG049D7Zls

 

It sure is interesting to hear what he says behind closed doors, isn't it?

Stockholm

This is already getting saturation publicity in La Presse and apparently Tories in Quebec were already resigned to being reduced from 10 seats to 3 or 4 BEFORE this latest salvo.

KenS

Uneccessary thread proliferation, IMO. This has been metioned, maybe in a couple of the proliferating number of threads that cover the same ground.

surfdoc surfdoc's picture

Really? What are the threads that cover the same ground? I did see some links to an article about his speach in the Yes or No thread, but the article didn't mention this quote. I did look before posting, but didn't see any titles that seemed to be relevant, and not everyone reads every thread.

oldgoat

While we try to discourage and control thread proliferation around here, during election campaigns this place gets really busy.  So people, look if there's a somewhat similar topic for your post like surfdoc did, use your judgement, and we'll all just do our best.

I'd say that this is a fun little story though, and deserves it's own discussion.  I hope the other parties are able to make good use of it where it counts.  Seems like Harper is continuing to shoot himself in the foot in Quebec, and I don't see him making huge inroads in urban centres.  I'd find it hard to predict a majority at this point.

 

Buddy Kat

Well Harper can do all the stereotyping name calling he wants if his mouthpiece propaganda news services aren't on board it won't fly. Maybe the nDP should start with "tory times are tough times" slogan. Make people think a bit...jeez maybe there is something to that....as they wait for their insurance cheque or stand in line at the food bank.

flight from kamakura

you know, it's weird.  like the cpc has surely tested this message and found it to be salient, otherwise, they wouldn't be running with it, but still, it's a head scratcher of a strategy.  either they see that extra 3-4% for the majority as suasible with this line, or they're hoping that it'll hold off loses.  there's a lot about this election that's really puzzling.

yarg

Or maybe the majority of Canadians really don't like the idea of the pq having any say in the federal government, doesn't seem complicated, and as far as "tory time are tough times".., i'm sure that global rescession had nothing to do with it, nor the liberal dominated policies of the last 15 yrs..

 

I don't like harper either, he has as much charisma as the average potatoe, but really, if a guy thats spent half of his life outside of the country is the best the liberals can do, I think that says a lot about them.  The ndp have no shot, i'm not a big fan of layton either, so what are you left with, another minority no doubt.

Sean in Ottawa

If an opposition party wants to win it will need to provide a very detailed account of what it would do that the Cons are not doing-- otherwise providing justification for an election will be out of reach.

George Victor

This is just putting forward one scary image (socialists and separatists) for the older scary image (a George Bush neocon gutting and privatization of all social services). In this manner they would balance the budget.

Given Main Street's capacity for political analysis, this means the biggest propaganda budget, adjusted by twice-weekly polling to determine its effectiveness,  wins.

As Al Gore explains the process in The Assault on Reason, he was told in his run for the Senate in '84, "If you run this ad at this many 'points' (a measure of the size of the advertising buy), and if Ashe responds as we anticipate, and then we purchase this many points to air our response to his response, the net result after three weeks will be an increase of 8.5 per cent in your lead in the polls.

"Iauthorized the plan and was astonished when three weeks later my lead had increased by exactly 8.5 per cent. Though pleased...I had a senseof foreboding for what this revealed about our democracy. Clearly, at least to some degree, the 'consent of the governed' was becoming a commodity to be purchased by the highest bider...the role of reason began to diminish."

Fidel

The two private property parties are more interested in a power grab than running the country in a time of crisis.

Debater

surfdoc wrote:

Stephen Harper was recently recorded saying this, as well as saying that they need to "make sure their little coalition never happens".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3MG049D7Zls

 

It sure is interesting to hear what he says behind closed doors, isn't it?

Harper better be careful not to get too aggressive in his rhetoric, or his 4-5 point lead over the Liberals will evaporate.

Sean in Ottawa

Fidel wrote:

The two private property parties are more interested in a power grab than running the country in a time of crisis.

Very true-- It is important that voters become aware of this fact.

Although I would say this is as much about an economic power grab as a political one and the reason there is no daylight between those parties who serve the same constituency.

This is a good message because the real power grab is not the one people think it is in an election but an ongoing disenfranchisement of most Canadian's collective rights and collective property in favour of private property.

I am guessing this is what you meant, Fidel, but since usually we refer to power grabs in terms of political elections some may have missed the wider context of what power is being grabbed and by whom. I know better than to assume you would have missed this, however. This is the ongoing struggle over the resources of the nation and who gets to hold them and it goes far beyond partisan politics and the sham of competition between the two biggest parties who are on the same side.

mybabble

Sounds better to me than the options of a government committed to emptying the pockets of Canadians to fill the pockets of rich foreignors.  How does that work as the top 1% take all the gravy while Canadian families are forced to eat stale bread.

The HST is a killer, to the economy and to the pockets of Canadians and its 50 ways to lose a premier to set yourself free from the much hated HST and Harper of course  As although Libby from the get go says lining the pockets of coporations with money from the pockets of struggling Canadians is no way to treat a Canadian. 

According to Davies, New Democrats have been opposed to the HST from the beginning. "We voted against that [2009 federal] budget for a lot of reasons, including that," he said. "That last budget contained very regressive tax provisions where they shifted the tax burden from corporations on to consumers."

Lets Get the Opposition to Get Rid of the HST

mybabble

Debater wrote:

surfdoc wrote:

Stephen Harper was recently recorded saying this, as well as saying that they need to "make sure their little coalition never happens".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3MG049D7Zls

Harper has been campaigning all along as come now we have all heard the puts downs of Iggy from the Conservative camp as those advertisments are everywhere.  And all in all I would have to say it didn't win Harper much points and its now the Opposition turn to turn those points around.  Harper has a very, very good chance of losing this election and that is good news for Canadians.

 

It sure is interesting to hear what he says behind closed doors, isn't it?

Harper better be careful not to get too aggressive in his rhetoric, or his 4-5 point lead over the Liberals will evaporate.

Sean in Ottawa

The HST debate always needs a reminder that the increase in taxes through harmonization is not on goods (mostly imported) but on services which are domestically provided jobs. It is by far the absolutely stupidest tax change you could do during a recession-- a direct tax on jobs.

Too many people see the HST as a tax grab but fail to connect to what exactly is being taxed and what that means. This is a tax on domestic labour when the old provincial sales tax were a tax on goods that are mostly imported.

Most small businesses in Canada provide services not goods- or when they provide goods they have ITCs to cover the tax. Many very small businesses who supply services only are not even registered because they do not have enough ITCs to make it worthwhile. They are being hit with an effective 13% price increase for which they will only face a burden of accounting for their services-- Some fucking stimulus.

Make the Cons and every premier who complies wear this reality.

Patrick W. Walker

yarg wrote:

Or maybe the majority of Canadians really don't like the idea of the pq having any say in the federal government, doesn't seem complicated, and as far as "tory time are tough times".., i'm sure that global rescession had nothing to do with it, nor the liberal dominated policies of the last 15 yrs..

 

I don't like harper either, he has as much charisma as the average potatoe, but really, if a guy thats spent half of his life outside of the country is the best the liberals can do, I think that says a lot about them.  The ndp have no shot, i'm not a big fan of layton either, so what are you left with, another minority no doubt.

 

Hasn't the BQ always said they would never again be part of a federal-level government after the Mulrooney mess?  The BQ being part of the government in Ottawa would do damage to their credibility as well, though not as catastrophic as some might say.

Stockholm

I think the risk for Harper if he starts going on this line of attack is that he is basicaly saying that we should vote for him because he refuses to cooperate with anyone!

Sean in Ottawa

Stockholm wrote:

I think the risk for Harper if he starts going on this line of attack is that he is basicaly saying that we should vote for him because he refuses to cooperate with anyone!

Needs to be framed this way-- write ltter to the editor on this when the time comes

Michelle

Re: the thread title: sounds good to me!

Stockholm

Harper's off-the-record speech is getting very negative play in Quebec. Everytime he gets caught making derisive comments about "separatists" Tory support in Quebec goes off a cliff.

Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

cross-posted with the other thread: Stephen Harper: Unfit to govern

Ghislaine

I don't understand the point about making derisive comments about separatists. That is a valid political belief and I think that if Quebec wants to separate, go for it. It would really suck for us in the maritimes, but I am sure we could adjust.  I don't there will ever be another majority government again as long as the Bloc is still getting the majority of Quebec seats (which looks like the case until Quebec pop. declines and Western/Ontario pop. rise enough to lessen the weight of Quebec in parliament). I have a hard time understanding why one would vote for the Bloc federally and the Libs provincially (based on current numbers of MLAs and MPs). Wouldn't a separatist vote be more effective on the provincial level? If one wants an MP to vote in a left-wing fashion, why not just vote for more MPs like Mulclair? It is frustrating to be constantly fractured politically as a country due to 50-60 MPs belonging to a party with no interest or chance of forming a government - or in issues that affect any province but one.

ps: whether Harper thinks it is possible or not, there will be a majority or no one. My prediction if an election occurs is pretty much the exact same results, with a few Con seats lost to the Bloc.

Unionist

Ghislaine wrote:

I don't understand the point about making derisive comments about separatists.

Clearly - because you sympathize with it.

 

KenS

Apropos, something I noted in the polling thread:

KenS wrote:

 its pretty clear that was a [real] leak rather than a trial baloon about needing a majority. And as damaging as that could be with swing voters, I think this will be another lesson in how the Liberals can't make negatives stick on Harper. Whether that is true of course remains to be seen. But the fact that it is very likely itself shows how uneven the ground is between the Libs and Cons when it comes to 'investments' made, and the ability to put them into play during a campaign.

Just to be clear, thats just a pragmatic point... not a comment as to how sinister/dangerous/pernicious Harper Crew is/is not.

But for what its worth, a lot of the reason they are dangerous is because they do not behave as Bsbblers tend to think they do.

madmax

yarg wrote:
 The ndp have no shot, i'm not a big fan of layton either, so what are you left with, another minority no doubt.

No doubt, and I have read lots of criticism of Jack. But there are two things that people overlook. Jack Layton, IMHO, works harder then both Harper and Ignatieff. And for all the complaining about Jack from within, and without, he has brought the NDP seat count up higher with each election. Which means that the CPC and LPC will be shaking the tree to get at the NDP, in order to avoid another minority.

Harper is going to mobilize the base, they view things as 1 yard and 1 down left to a Majority.

madmax

mybabble wrote:

The HST is a killer, to the economy and to the pockets of Canadians and its 50 ways to lose a premier to set yourself free from the much hated HST and Harper of course  As although Libby from the get go says lining the pockets of coporations with money from the pockets of struggling Canadians is no way to treat a Canadian. 

Lets Get the Opposition to Get Rid of the HST

You may get the LPC to say they are against the HST. But if the LPC are elected, you will get the HST, unfortuneately.

Stockholm

How does the LPC go about making an issue of the HST - when the HST is being brought in by the LIBERAL Ontario government and the LIBERAL BC government???

Sean in Ottawa

Depends on who you ask-- I think they are often quite predictable-- and highly skilled. Going up against them with the lame skills of the opposition is often like watching a train wreck in slo-mo. We ought to know better and time and time again we don't.

On a related point-- even without Quebec it is possible to get a majority- that result would be devastating but it is possible and has been since the seat count moved to more than 300.

To be specific-- if the Cons got no seats in Quebec they would need to hold the NDP and the Liberals to no more than 78 seats *outside* Quebec. So if the NDP got, for example, 30 seats out of Quebec and the Liberals 48, the Greens nothing as usual, this would be a Con majority even if the NDP got a seat or two in Quebec and the Liberals got even upwards of 20. Or put in another way if the Liberals were held to 68 seats with 20 in Quebec and the NDP 31 with one in Quebec even if the Cons got a goose-egg there it would be a majority-- each seat they get in Quebec is one more seat the Liberals or NDP could get outside so if the Cons managed to hang on to half their seats the Liberals or NDP would need to get 5 more out of the province to avoid a majority. These are bad numbers but hardly impossible. The Cons got 143 in the last election-- this was 12 short of a majority. If they managed a recovery in Atlantic Canada and picked up 5 there, plus 5 more in Ontario, plus the Alberta seat they lost last time and 5 more in BC they could afford to lose 4 in Quebec and have a majority.

Also Quebec can be fluid and unpredictable- it is not impossible for the Liberals to screw up there and have the Cons actually come up with ten seats from that province after all.

Stockholm

Of course anything is possible. I could construct a scenario where there is a Liberal majority as well. But I still think that its very hard to imagine any scenario where the Liberals do WORSE this year under Iggy than they did last year under Dion. Even if Ignatieff commits several gaffes and performs poorly - at least unlike Dion he isn't trying to sell the hated Green Shit and at least he is coherent (sort of) in English. At the very least, the Liberals will get a dead cat bounce compared to last year.

Sean in Ottawa

Stockholm, I totally disagree. There are many people who consider both the NDP and the Liberals and support the Liberals because they are winners and sound progressive. If Ignatief does not look like a winner and is leaning to the right this is a problem. Put another way-- if Ignatieff moves to the right to get Con votes which it looks like he is doing there will be a price on the left where he will lose votes. He almost certainly will lose some voters who were in favour of the carbon tax to either the NDP or the Greens who will in fact still run on one. If Ignatief can not recoup the votes he will lose to the Greens because he is no longer environmentally as friendly as Dion, to the NDP because he does not sound as progressive as Dion did, to anywhere because of the fact that some think he is not committed to Canada, and to anywhere because he is arrogant, then he will have a net loss. I think there is a reasonable chance he may pick up some votes from the Cons but I am not yet prepared that he will in fact pick up more than he will lose.

Some people are forgetting that while there were many who did not vote Liberal because of Dion there were some who did and they could move so Ignatief has to make gains just to tread water-- any new leader does. That the Liberals were weak is not entirely about Dion-- some of that is chronic.

Frankly, with the Greens being the only party now with a carbon tax I suspect they will take some votes from the Liberals-- they may also lose an equal number to the NDP on account of their failure last time to get a seat when they hyped that so much.

I would not bet the Liberals will actually get more votes than last year. Ignatief is less sympathetic than Dion in some respects. Unless he can win a debate he will have a net loss. another variable is the NDP-- if the NDP gets its shit together and mounts a very strong campaign on the right issues pointing out that the Liberals cannot be trusted to oppose the government it could recover the 5 points or so that it has lost in the polls-- much of that would come from voters parking with the Liberals. If the Greens campaign on the Liberals no longer being environmentally sensible then they could go up a couple points. If Harper hammers Ignatieff successfully for the forced election and for being no different-- you could see Ignatief make Dion look good. I am putting "ifs" that are no less plausible than those that would result in the Liberals increasing their totals. Bluntly I think it is total Liberal arrogance to assume that Dion's low water mark is as low as they possibly can go. Ignatieff is untested and a lot of poeple will be gunning for him. He is also one *small* screwup from losing his bounce in Quebec. Look at the polls closely-- he is not much ahead of where Dion was in most parts of the country. If he loses his Quebec gains he is back under 30% and flirting with the Dion disaster of 26.24%. The Liberal brand cannot keep polling under 30% and have any credibility as a contending party on account of just being a contender-- they will have to actually provide something to vote for and Ignatieff has not done anything other than declare emphatically that he is not Harper.

remind remind's picture

Quote:
Ignatieff has not done anything other than declare emphatically that he is not Harper.

While behaving like he is.

Sean in Ottawa

remind wrote:
Quote:
Ignatieff has not done anything other than declare emphatically that he is not Harper.
While behaving like he is.

Yep-- and this is not good enough to fool anybody that is not already a Liberal.

 

Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

Harper against coalitions? Baloney.
 
Harper sought to govern with support of BQ and NDP in 2004
 
excerpt:
 
Signed joint letter with Duceppe and Layton
excerpt:
Ottawa (2 Dec. 2008) - As Opposition Leader in 2004, Stephen Harper sent a letter to the Governor General asking her to consider letting him govern - supported by the Bloc Quebecois and NDP - should the minority Liberal government of Paul Martin lose the confidence of the House of Commons.

Mr. Harper's proposal then was similar to what is being proposed now by the Liberal-NDP coalition - with support from the Bloc.

remind remind's picture

ya well we all know the Cons are liars, it seems no body cares.

mybabble

Fidel wrote:

The two private property parties are more interested in a power grab than running the country in a time of crisis.

You could be right, and it depends what Iggy has to say as Harper says the recession is over thanks to him.

Since when, as the only real gains made were part-time retail clerk jobs and who really wants those dead end jobs except women as thousands of and thousands immigrants help create the demand for part-time clerks who receive no benefits other than a lowly cheque.  And of course there has been the largest job creation in small enterprises but its these self employed individuals that will be the hardest hit  with added tax and many will go under.

 According to Davies, New Democrats have been opposed to the HST from the beginning. "We voted against that [2009 federal] budget for a lot of reasons, including that," he said. "That last budget contained very regressive tax provisions where they shifted the tax burden from corporations on to consumers."

Conservative MP John Cummins (Delta-Richmond East) confirmed that the federal government has as large a role as the provincial government does in bringing in the HST.  Actually Cummins got it wrong the Federal government has a larger role because its Harper's much Hated Sales Tax, the HST.  Isn't that funny how the harmony and hate all seem to fit in?

Fidel

mybabble wrote:

Fidel wrote:

The two private property parties are more interested in a power grab than running the country in a time of crisis.

You could be right, and it depends what Iggy has to say as Harper says the recession is over thanks to him.

Since when, as the only real gains made were part-time retail clerk jobs and who really wants those dead end jobs except women as thousands of and thousands immigrants help create the demand for part-time clerks who receive no benefits other than a lowly cheque. ..

 

Good post. And it appears that [url=http://www.financialpost.com/story.html?id=1958416]the Harpers aren't being straight up about the economy[/url] either. Canada's economy is the ugly duckling of the G7 as is typical. And Canada''s Liberals were the guiding hand over the ugliest capitalist economy during the decade of the 90's. I think Canadians are growing weary of being ugly ducklings in a developed world.

 

Ghislaine

Unionist wrote:

Ghislaine wrote:

I don't understand the point about making derisive comments about separatists.

Clearly - because you sympathize with it.

 

 

I don't sympathize with separatists - I just said that I don't think their point of view should be demonized. It is a perfectly valid political viewpoint.

Cueball Cueball's picture

What I don't get is where the idea comes from that there would be "Socilaists" involved in this coalition. There are no socialist parties in Canada.

janfromthebruce

I linked to your link and burst out laughing after reading the final statement:

Meanwhile, Warren Jestin, chief economist at Bank of Nova Scotia, said in a report he was upgrading his forecast for Canada in 2010, suggesting the economy would grow 2.8%, up from his previous 2.5%. And in contrast to the OECD, he expects 2.5% expansion in the third quarter and 3.5% growth in the following three months.

Financial Post

Oh, would those chief economists such as with this bank but others too who said back in Dec that Canada would not go into recession? Are these the same economists who said "nada" about an upcoming recession.

Right and we trust them - not.

 

Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

Cueball wrote:

What I don't get is where the idea comes from that there would be "Socilaists" involved in this coalition. There are no socialist parties in Canada.

It's an old trick, demonizing the opposition. But, if you look at the link I posted above, Harper was perfectly content to work with them in 2004.

janfromthebruce

the red scare - boo! We would like to have a govt like Sweden - is there something wrong with that?

janfromthebruce

Update and link to the supposed leak of the Harper talking to the party faithful.

"I have always been a proud Young Liberal, and have never hidden that fact from anyone," Tetreault told us tonight. "I was invited to the event by Josh Pringle, the Conservative riding president, who knows I am a Liberal."

Ok, so I am sure if the conservatives didn't want Harper's speech to be listened to and taped, the pres of the association wouldn't have purposely invited a young plant from the liberals.

you know if you wanted to get your national message out but not look like you are reaching to the past than what better way than to invite a fox into the henhouse and let him openly tape the proceedings.

The liberals literally delivered the cons with free nation-wide address to ensure the topic of economic update tha sucks doesn't get top billing.

And maybe this works for the libs too on another level, because holy batman, the libs are as much responsible for this - they propped them up - or is way to deep thinking in their camp.

 

Ghislaine

Very interesting observations there, jan. I agree that it just doesn't seem like a leak, something seemed fishy. If Iggy could come up with any reason at all for us to think he would do anything differently than Harper it would seem a lot less fishy.

 

If we do have an election, I really hope the NDP has some hard-hitting ads against Ignatieff, which point out his pro-torture, pro-Iraq war views. Obviously the Cons cannot bring this stuff up. I think the NDP does have a chance of making gains in that regard...but they have got to start mentioning this stuff very strongly!

remind remind's picture

Josh Pringle any relation to valerie? :D

KenS

There's also the possibility the speech is just the simple thing that it appears to be:

Red meat for the base, whose maximum motivation is VERY important right now. And not something you want widely circulated, but not bothered enough by the prospect to forgo the desire to motivate the base.

They definitely wanted this to circulate amog the base- it wasn't just said for that particular audience. And circulation means you can count on it being heard beyond the target audience. With the election still a ways away, and the Liberals without a capacity to build negative themes, now would be the time to have that circulation with minimized risk.

Bottom line: just because they were ready to see the speech circulated does not mean that the target audience is everyone. And doesn't mean this is going to be a message for the big public stage.

Wilf Day

yarg wrote:
I don't like harper either, he has as much charisma as the average potato.

Margaret says "that's an insult to potatoes everywhere." Being Irish, she has 78 recipes for potatoes, every one of which is far more exciting than Harper.

Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

CBC's The National tonight carried coverage of Harper's cozying up to the socialists and separatists in 2004.Laughing

janfromthebruce

remind wrote:
Josh Pringle any relation to valerie? :D
She is married to Andy pringle who is

previous Chairman of Upper Canada College's Board of Governors. see wiki

However, there is some relationship there, as Valerie Pringle supported Flaherty's wife in the Ontario PC prov leadership race. Perhaps her husband is a brother of the pres of the local Con riding association.

Debater

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

Also Quebec can be fluid and unpredictable- it is not impossible for the Liberals to screw up there and have the Cons actually come up with ten seats from that province after all.

Quebec can certainly be unpredictable as Quebecers are very fickle voters and change their allegiances very quickly.  The BQ has learned this as well when it has often underperformed to expectations.

If the Conservatives keep 10 seats in Quebec, it will probably not come from a Liberal "screw up" as much as from a BQ underperformance.  Most of the Conservative seats are not seats the Liberals can win - they are seats the BQ can win.  The Liberals are targeting mainly BQ seats (apart from Outremont and Pontiac) - it is the BQ who is mainly targeting the Conservative seats.

Therefore, in a sense it is the BQ's "responsibility" to take away the Conservative seats as they are the ones best positioned to do so.

Stockholm

THat's true, but part of what can help the BQ to win sme of those Conservative seats is if Liberal support rises at the expense of the Conservatives and BQ candidates come up the middle. Last election, the Tories won most of the seats in Quebec City. Most Quebec polls show that the BQ is now in first place in QC with the Tories and Liberals tied for second place.

Pages