The Ipsos poll is bunk..

Ekos poll has Harper at 35%.

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/tory-lead-suggests-another-minority-ekos-20110325-142119-129.html

Christ Bill..IPSOS?

Everyone of his polls are skewed and election numbers always tighten up as the campaign goes on.

And Harpers tax cut 5 years from now for families just killed any chance he had.

[OFFENSIVE COMMENT REMOVED. -MODERATOR.]

The Farewell Tour

Gotta give Iggy credit. Instead of just throwing in the towel he opted to embark on a farewell tour, take his election lumps and hive off to academe or what-have-you. Jack was of course happy to help out--nothing for him to lose and maybe even something to gain. Hopefully we'll all have the opportunity to enjoy Iggy live in concert during the campaign.
Keep us posted on B.C. appearances, Bill.

Harper

More Reasons To Oust Harper

-G28/20 Police State
-Bev Oda's knotty , naughty not
-F 35's
-Corporate tax cuts
-Judicial interference in BC Rail trial by allowing judge shopping by BC Lieberal party
-Carson appointments to deceive truth about TAR sands
-Prorogue of parliament
-Effed Up ideology
-Financial 'aid' to oil companies
-John Baird
-Tony Clement
-Vic Toews
-Paradis
-Jason Kenney
-In % Out scheme
-Lousy treatment of Helen Guergis and women in general
-Senate appointments
-New World Order & 'Global' Economics
-RCMP & CSIS meddling
-actually this list is virtually endless....

Enough Was Enough

In some ways I agree with Tielman . . . strategicaly, it was a poor time to oust the government. However, it boils down to "Enough is Enough!" Harper has been acting like the typical schoolyard bully for 5 years now, and finally, someone had to stand up to him.

Contempt of Parliment is not something to be taken lightly, and it wasn't. Serious thought went into it, and I do not believe that it was done for "political purposes". With Harper leading in all the polls his arrogance was becoming more and more obvious, and finally, something had to be done.

Just like every movie we see, or every book we read, someone finally said, I cannot take this bullying anymore, and win or lose, I have to stand up to the bully. Enough is enough.

I'm enclosing an interesting

I'm enclosing an interesting article on the US situation, because of the incredible public ignorance. Unfortunately,much of the same is happening, going on and believed in here.

If Harper gets a majority, ignorance will be the main reason.

Harper has no hidden agenda, as it can all be found in his speeches and the policies advocated by the Fraser Inst:

No taxes on corporations.
No unions.
No CBC.
Privatized medicare.'
The sale of public services.
The sale of Crown lands
More military spending while selling off the country.
More "free trade" to destroy democracy.
Growing poverty and foodbank lines
Etc. that could easily end up in major disturbances and violence the US is heading for and may cross the border with the growth of the dictatorship by the multinational corporate mafia.

When I first saw Harper wearing glasses, it was quite obvious that their main purpose is cosmetic PR, to cover his eyes . His numbers went up immediately. They have the best PR hacks and mind benders, working for them, much of it paid for by the corporate mafia, as hidden donations, and the public laps it up

Ed Deak.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/mar/27/obama-no-credible-republican-challenger

The American right is trapped in a hyperbolic and dysfunctional world

Harper was engineer of up-coming election

Harper got exactly what he wanted and had been orchestrating for many months for. He has behind him some of the best stategists on the continent and no conscience when it comes to getting what he wants.

Harper knew that he could be facing contempt charges for many of his actions and he welcomed them. As his polling numbers were strong and his opposition were at a huge disadvantage he had very little to lose and much to gain by getting either an election or being excused for his blatant contempt for Parliament.

Harper got a jump start on campaigning, much on the taxpayer's bill, indicating that he knew full well that the opposition were quickly being forced into a corner.

No matter what the outcome the Conservatives had the advantage. The Liberals, Bloc and NDP had to vote to uphold the law and against a pre-planned campaign budget or call an election and hope the public would see through Harper's charade.

It is now up to us to ensure Harper never gets his much coveted majority and hopefully bring him down many pegs.

Karen.... I fully agree.

Karen.... I fully agree. This has been planned by his backer/owners for a long time, because his numbers were high and they knew that this was his last chance to grab power for them, on their way to world dictatorship, called "globalization".

The opposition had no chance to ignore the corruption, but now also has nobody with the talents to wake people up to the simple fact that they're being robbed blind and enslaved by the worst crooks, posing as "prominent business leaders".

Ed Deak.

Not a big surprise - remember the STV?

From a pundit who doesn't like the idea of 'increasing' democracy and accountability with some kind of proportional voting system.

All the dinosaurs aren't in the museum apparently.

Still, Bill is consistent, he opposed the coalition effort to throttle Harper too.

But, you know what they say about consistency!

Good points, Bill. I

Good points, Bill. I thought that Harper played his cards perfectly, giving the NDP just enough that he could avoid blame for the election, all the while spending millions in preparation for an election that he probably wanted.

A vindictive Tory majority would almost certainly do the things it tried to do in 2008, before an inconvenient Recession got in the way.

wow

What a great read. I never thought I'd see an analysis like this on the Tyee -- much less under Bill's byline. Having fun, are you?

And the totally predictable foaming-at-the-mouth demonization that followed in the comments just added to the entertainment value. Highest marks for that go to Seth -- that was breathtaking!

Good on ya, guys and gals.

Think for a Change

Gawd I'm tired of politicians and political pundits who substitute poll results for critical thought.

Barryeng is right, Bill

"Just like every movie we see, or every book we read, someone finally said, I cannot take this bullying anymore, and win or lose, I have to stand up to the bully. Enough is enough." - Barryeng

You are absolutely right, Barryeng. Harper is a bully who uses his power to get more power. Let's elect a leader who will look after the needs of the 96.2% of Canadians that own but 1/3 of its capital/property. I've had enough of Harper's looking after the needs of the wealthy.

Election Financing

The sooner the Canadian taxpayers stop financing a regional, myopic, separatist political party that has very little financial support from anyone else, THE BETTER !

"But Ignatieff does clearly lead in one leadership attribute: which leader has a hidden agenda."
Which is pretty damned funny considering the ongoing Liberal campaign of "Harper's Hidden Agenda", "Harper's Secret Plan", "Harper's Secret Association with the American Radical Right Wing-nuts", blah, blah, blah.
Just a thought: IF the Cons do get a majority, wouldn't that defeat the Bloc's ability to blackmail any of the parties for "support" ?
AND, having studied the proposed "Budget", what exactly is wrong with paying down the debt in order to provide more funding for social programs when we don't have to "service the debt" with millions of dollars in interest payments? Isn't that what everyone does? The Chretien/Martin governments just downloaded the provinces with social program costs, in order to pay down their debt.

Ipsos?

Results from better pollsters. "Better" meaning pollsters whose numbers, election after election, are closer to the actual election results.

Con Lib NDP Grn
ARS 39 25 19 7
Leger 39 23 19 7
Decima 34 28 17 9
Nanos 38 27 20 4

One could as easily go with Decima instead of Ipsos and find the "Harper government of Canada" is a long way from a majority. And you'd be smart to do so since Decima was one of the best last election and Ipsos wasn't.

Clearly Canadians aren't as enamoured with the "Harper government of Canada" as Bill and Steve are.

Other that that, as GWest said, Bill opposes coalitions and electoral reform and now apparently also opposes elections triggered by a government being in contempt of parliament.

Perhaps he wanted the opposition to wait until the economy was doing better and the budget was balanced and the Conservatives were shovelling goodies off the back of a truck? What a great strategy that would be.

Just vote the same as last time.

We'll get rid of all three of them as they all will have failed.

An Offensive Government . . .

I'm sickened by watching a government that thinks and acts as though anything they can get away with - is good enough. This is a mean-sprirted government by any measure.

Canadians are being asked, once again, to do a leadership review.

So how is it that the Conservative Party, which would presume to act for all things Canadian - every person, rock and tree - isn't also investing in the process of a leadership review?

Is the Conservative party so morally bankrupt that no one will stand up and ask the question - is Stephen Harper fit to lead the party, much less the country?

This entire situation could be a form of black comedy except that the health and future of an entire nation is on the block.

Who are these people? How did we get them, and what do we need to do to get them out of our lives?

A Certain Inevitability I...

"The Conservatives have pledged to end public subsidies of political parties if they win this election. That would mean disaster for most of the other parties, whose own fundraising efforts pale by comparison to the Tory money machine." Bill

Which is of course intended to return democracy, parallel with the neo-liberal economic agenda and the Conservative/fascist political one, back to the good old days when Big Money Wealth, even more firmly than at present, fully controlled the entire electoral outcome process. It still pretty much does, but they want Money to completely control the high ground on the field. (A situation, when it existed before, the Liberal Party largely benefited from historically... in this country.)

In any case, there is no doubt, that the timing of this election has placed the country in an extremely dangerous situation, from a progressive perspective. From which, if the ruling class media gets fully on board... And the early signs are that it is, in hammering away relentlessly at the danger of coalitions, regardless who says what. ...and backs the Conservative narrative, that they will pull of their majority. Though it is also possible, I think, that both the fascists and the ruling class have serious miscalculated. Possible. Just possible.

Though, in the larger picture, it is entirely likely, even if the worst happens, an outright Conservative majority will drive the polarization of politics to further extremes, at some point finally setting the stage for the emergence of a new dynamic on the serious Left. For what is now there that passes for it, clearly does not measure up to the task. Which is the really big problem with the politics of the country. There is no serious and aggressive Left.

One, it MAY just be that additional economic pain does have to be further applied to the working class mass, to fully awaken it to a new attitude. Who knows? Certainly it is something, right now, that progressives and radicals do not control anyway.

Two, there is no doubt in my own mind at all, that the wimp-ass factor on what passes for the Left in this country, does need to be exposed and lose credibility... dramatically. And we may be finally entering into the period where this actually happens. So that a new serious Left dynamic can emerge.

continued next post...

A Certain Inevitability II...

continuing from previous post...

In any case, regardless the outcome, again I read from the empirical evidence of what has gone on since the late 1970s anyway, whether or not it is a Conservative majority or another minority dominated by the current stakeholders, the socio-economic deterioration going on within capitalism continues. It is merely that with a Conservative majority, it will be of greater likelihood to proceed deeper, faster. That is all.

The country, its very independent existence, and the welfare/needs of the people are deteriorating and in growing extreme danger anyway.

None of the above measures up to the task. A new dynamic, arising out of a renewed serious Left, with some actual real testicles and ovaries, needs to occur first... before this neo-conservative/fascist period can yet be turned around.

There is a certain inevitability to what is about to happen here... a continuation of the deterioration or worse. There will be no improvement, regardless of who wins... with these players to the status quo.

Yes, depressing, I know. But truth is not always pleasant, and the good guys and gals do not always win... over the short haul anyway.

cboo

What's wrong with Quebec voters funding the party they vote for?

As for Duceppe, I think he's more pro-Canadian than Harper is judging by the nice things he always says about Canada.

Whereas Harper is on record as calling Canada a second-rate welfare state.

cboo....There's no need for

cboo....There's no need for any Canadian government to be in debt, because the monies our idiot politicians borrow already belongs to the government/public.... by law.

Governments borrow back and pay interest for their own money to please the aristocracy.

The biggest racket in history. Especially in Canada, where we "welcome foreign investment" we don't need, because it brings nothing to the country, but steals us blind, while the foodbank lines and the executive salaries grow by the day.

Ed Deak.

Don't Get Mired down in the Polls

I'm not an expert on the analysis of polling data but I do know three things. Harper has been systematically dismantling the Canada I immigrated to 43 years ago, he has never governed with more than 37% support of those who voted, and for the past five years we have had an opposition who have not done their duty to educate Canadians on the necessity of a coalition. Perhaps we have too many campaign advisers from south of the border where a formal coalition would be irrelevant.

@ Frank...

Exactly, the time is right for an election..You are 100% correct...What fools would wait for the economy to recover(if it does) to call an election...

And what the hell is the point of Bill T`s last 2 pathetic posts...The election has been called, that genie can`t be put back in the bottle.

It appears Bill T merely wants to hear his own words in print,(does that make sense).

Never-the-less.....Bill T...Did you really have to place a link to Wikipedia explaining what lemmings are?

Gawd is that an insult.

what choice

What real choice did the opposition parties have? Ignore the contempt of parliament?

As for fear of a Conservative majority, don't we already have it, when the Liberals support virtually all gov't initiatives.

Some may fear what Harper is capable of if he has a true majority of seats. Maybe it's time to put our hand in the fire & see how it feels.

Even though most of what

Even though most of what Bill says makes sense, there are other factors to consider. Every campaign has that golden moment, when the unspeakable is spoken (A campaign is no time for serious talk - Kim Campbell) or that undefendable, illogical policy is given voice. We may have seen it already, with promises of tax breaks that will bear fruit when families are no longer families and school kids are paying off student loans - this old facebook paradise wants instant results - heck, we want results before the problem is enunciated and some Tory genius is promising us the light at the end of the tunnel!

If this isnt' the time, Bill- - just how much anti-democratic manipulation of institutions and outright lying do we have to stomach before pulling the plug?

What constitutes 'enough'?

so old fashioned it is almost...

... cute. But it also makes me want to cry and or scream: Trot out some polls, talk only about the male leaders, and hit send.

And then The Tyee puts it at the top of its page, with a sad illustration, and a bunch of Harper-demonizing commenters insult the writer, and here we go again, down the same old roads.

Imagine something different happening in this election. Please, try. Because this sad old stuff is why turnout is in a nosedive.

Duceppe...

"As for Duceppe, I think he's more pro-Canadian than Harper is judging by the nice things he always says about Canada." Frank

I must say, I much prefer Duceppe to any of the crew we have "representing" Anglo-Canada. He has more real fire in his belly, a better analysis of Canadian economic and political realities, and a much deeper grasp of Anglo sensibilities tan certainly most do this side of the divide, of Quebec. (Even though he is still a part of the status quo, and represents no real challenge to it. He is another bourgeois serving politician.)

He's a more interesting showman, and for that alone, the Canadian electorate frequently expresses that they wise "we" had him.

Harper leads in the polls as someone you can trust

How could that be true?
Harper can't be trusted, and neither can the polls, apparently. And the prime minister orchestrating the controversay, hardly. Harper wants a majority, true. Harper wanted contempt charges, not true. Harper wants a minority, not likely it will cost him his job if that is the best he can pull off.
Harper has a minority government because he dosen't have the trust of Canadians to give him his majority government. And Harper has done nothing to change the opinions of voters but make a mockery of parliament and the democracy, so hardly true.

How were these polls conducted?

Most people have other modes of communications now. Was this poll conducted over the landline-phone? If some strange number showed up on my call display, I'd probably not answer it. How accurate is a political sample of the Canadian people if it relies on archaic methods?

SpiritLifter

I had that information but didn't keep it, sorry.

A few polling companies use phones while others such as ARS and Leger use online samples.

Just one more reason not to trust a single company's results.

For-profit Polls?

Why is Bill giving so much credibility to a vulnerable, for-profit polling system, without finding out who paid for that poll and how skewed were the questions.
We need a non-partisan, non-profit, democratically runed polling system. See a prototype of this at www.nowpolling.ca

The Prophet

Thanks, seems like a no-brainer to me that its better to call an election before the other side gets stronger and when you have issues on your side that you believe people will respond to.

Guess that's why I'm not a paid strategist.

Eric Grenier at 308 has today started posting about the NDP rising in the polls, titled "NDP on the rise in new projection"

http://threehundredeight.blogspot.com/2011/03/ndp-on-rise-in-new-projection.html

The Conservatives are not getting the jump out of the gate they were hoping for and their coalition scaremongering isn't working.

Polls can be warped very

Polls can be warped very easily by picking the phone numbers according to locations.

The big problem of polls is, and I think, they should be banned during campaigns, that many people, who don't have a clue about what is going on, are voting for the leaders in polls, trusting that they lead because they're good.

And this is why they should be banned, or at least their publication should be, during election campaigns.

Ed Deak.

The lemmings expert

If Tieleman controlled the writ, he would have Canadians and the country bent over and screwed by Harper for another excruciating couple of years based on a speculative pre-election poll. I say to Tieleman, stick to topics you don't know about - lemmings - rather than other topics you don't know about - federal election strategy and political principle.

I think G West's comment nails it.

Let's get to work on defeating this corrupt gov't rather than arguing over last week's polls. 'Nuff said.

au contraire

flakeherty said there would be no amendments allowed
i will ^NOT stand by and allow my government to make that purchase of military stupidity
toys for boys is what it really is

Subsidies to Parties and candidates

The elimination of the $2/vote subsidy would be a tragedy for democracy as opposed to plutocracy. Without some sort of subsidy, only the well-off will control the government through their donations.

Let us not ignore the other two ways that political parties are subsidized:
1.Donors to political parties receive a 75% non-refundable income tax credit for donations up to $400. This tax credit is of no use to those of us who have no taxable income but make political contributions anyway. This practice is open to gaming as a party can issue a tax receipt for a $400 donation, the donor gets $300; the party can then turn around and pay that donor $200 to stuff envelopes. Net gain to donor--$100; to party--$200 plus value of donor’s work.
2.Candidates can claim reimbursement of 60% on their ‘qualified’ expenses; parties can claim 50%. This encouragement to candidates to spend other peoples’ money recklessly is good training for government—NOT. This scam can also be gamed—can you spell ‘in-and-out’?
The combination of these two could allow 100 donors at a net cost of $100 each to finance a $100,000 campaign, 90% paid by taxpayers whether or not they support the candidate or her or his party. At least with the $2/vote subsidy, if you don’t like the BQ, you will give it nothing if you don’t vote for it.

Boring

I haven't come across anyone in the real world that was interested in going through another election. I therefore hope that the participation rate goes down again. It's the only meanigful message we can send to the political class.

How can any of the

How can any of the opposition parties in anyway support a budget (or any legislation)when the ruling party has been held in contempt of parliament? The Conservatives knew they were likely going to be defeated on the contempt charges and created a budget for their political campaign.

Bill

Good article.

Tom Flanagan had a good line about the Liberals and the NDP voting the government down;

"It's like turkeys voting for Christmas".

FEAR

http://www.vancouversun.com/news/Canadians+wary+Harper+border+talks/4314647/story.html

Harper sees democracy as a distraction from economic prosperity. And the polls can go any which way. It depends on the sample and on the questions and how they are laid out and if the questions are biased or not.
On-line polls are fluff, and polls that are conducted over the phone start from 1 to 10 with #1 I strongly disagree to #10 I not sure of anything. Companies use polls a great deal to check if the organizations strategies are working and to see what improvements can be made. The polls where not designed to pick the next governing party but media and its polls are backing Harper, who would of thought?

Would that be the same Tom Flanagan?

Would that be the same Tom Flanagan who suggested assassinating Julian Assange?

Another absolutely worthless and offensive suggestion from a transplanted American academic who can’t stop meddling and inserting his Catholic fundamentalism and exceptionalism into Canadian politics.

I think we can safely ignore anything he says and discount the value of the contributions of anyone who quotes him appreciatively.

I understand why they

I understand why they brought the government down and in a normal world it would make sense with all the conservative shenanigans but what concerns me is none of it seems to stick and the lame stream media seems to be following Harpers agenda or playing right into it...

Poll alert

I like polls because a lot of Canadians only start tuning in to politics when there's an election on so I like to watch the early polls and get a sense of where things are going.

According to a new poll released today by Harris-Decima the NDP is now within 5% of the Liberals nationally.

It appears Liberal support might be falling and the NDP are benefiting. Perhaps there's lots of people out there who didn't think much of Ignatieff saying he wanted no part of a Coalition? Just saying..

In Quebec the NDP are now tied with the Liberals, never thought I'd live long enough to see that.

Even in Ontario the NDP is up, to 20%. The Cons have 38% and the Libs have 32%.

But its in BC where things are really going well. Con support has been up and down and is currently at 35% whereas the NDP are only a few steps back at 29%. The Libs are down to 20%. (Sorry Luke!)

Can the Libs recover if they bleed like this election after election? Who's the next leader? Justin Trudeau? Or is the NDP on the verge of becoming the Official Opposition?

The Defeat of the Left

I agree with Bill. The cause is lost; the right wing are playing power tactics that work and their chance of winning a majority is greater than ever. So few vote, and those that do, think conservatism is a good thing. The rich don't need government so they vote for less and the poor are afraid of government so they vote for less. Both factions are hungry for less taxation and care little for the welfare of the public institutions. This is a world wide event and like during the WWII the corporate fascist will rise to power fast, cause huge amounts of damage, and then there will be war, famine and crimes against humanity, then maybe the left will have a chance. It's a shame our memories have become so shallow because we have been down this road before.

Polls and such

I think that some of the posters here, who have commented on the validity (or not)of polls, have it right, for with the range of choices people have now, I believe there is a correlation between what kind of media people prefer to use, and how they use them, and where they are on the political spectrum. Having lived in the same place for thirty-odd years, and having the same phone number, I would, if I picked up the phone for every call identified as either no clear agent, or something something research or services, spend more than half of my waking hours spilling my guts to someone in Timbuktoo about my preferences in everything from feminine hygiene to roofing material. So, yes, I believe you are right. Those of greater cunning and with something useful to do aren't included in most polls. Besides, I would never answer a question on intention to vote truthfully to begin with. As it if was their damn business.

Being less dogmatic,

Libs have always come in by some coincidence of everybody loathing everybody else sufficiently. They do carry this unshakable liability of smacking a little of 'elitism', or insisting on the best, sometimes to the detriment of the achievable.

I am nevertheless surprised that you ask the question, considering that Conservative had their luck down to two seats in parliament, from which they actually recovered. Grant you, it was partially through making dirty deals in several layers, but nevertheless. So, I am sure Libs have at least equal Phoenician (as in the bird) properties. This time around, barring a major screw-up from Taliban Jack's side, I predict that the everybody-but-Harper people would go there...unless they just can't stomach even the palest shade of pink...

Disagreeing with the mindset that says things have to get bad

I realize people here and elsewhere always say that things have to get worse before people move to the Left but is that true? Do they not also move to the Right?

I think history shows that the worse things get the better the Right does. The Left seems to do better electorally when times are good.

I realize that's exactly the opposite of what many believe, that things have to get real bad, like a 1930's style Depression, before the Left does well but I don't think history backs that up. Sure, some people were mobilized to move to the Left but a lot more were mobilized to move to the Right.

The Left did well in western countries during periods like the 50s, 60s and 70s. the Right did extremely well between the world wars and during the Great Depression.

As the post-war system has been getting dismantled the Right has become stronger and the Left weaker. Which is the worrisome part of this election. If Harper gets his majority and the post-war system is completely dismantled "good times" might not come again and the Left will be destroyed.

So those of you hoping for a Harper majority so that people will "wake up" should realize there's little historical evidence that such a result would take place.

NDP takes on HST

The polls show that the NDP are right on when it comes to abolishing the HST in BC.
And in Montreal things are heating up for the Liberals and the Bloc who has a billion dollar issue with the HST. The Liberals and Bloc are divided when it comes to voter support in the province with the Conservatives losing out. Will the HST be a deciding factor when it comes to picking the ruling (minority) party? Canada's last party to enjoy three consecutive majority wins was the Liberals but then Martin got in the way. It certainly looks like the HST is paying off for the NDP.

Cummins' Announcement

http://www.straight.com/article-383836/vancouver/john-cummins-announces-http://www.straight.com/article-383836/vancouver/john-cummins-announces-bc-conservative-leadership-bid

Where was the Tyee when this happened? Not to be overly critical, but the Tyee should be just a bit more up to the minute with this kind of item, which is the best bit of news the Left has received in a long time and was hardly unexpected.

It would be interesting to

It would be interesting to learn how the over half million (so far) respondents to the CBC compass poll are voting.
On a related point, it is interesting to note how the content analysis of party statement (which underlies the categorization of voters) places the conservatives in their own quadrant while the others are much closer together.

"Less" dogmatic?

...and then to use the construction 'Taliban Jack' - Seems a strange dichotomy to me.

Interesting.

We live in a democracy and pride ourselves that we are more democratic than our neighbors to the south. Elections are an expensive part of a democracy. Democracy was not intended to be cheap. So now wea re whining about going to the polls. We are whining about having our voices heard and woe be those who insisted on letting us be heard. It is insane.

On the other side a few people have already mentioned that it was Harper, knowing he had a minority, knowing his days were numbered, pushed a budget where corporate tax cuts were the focus and anything else was just fluff to cover the gift. He thought we were all too stupid to see through the charade.

So this is democracy. You vote and the privilege cost a bundle. They all had a stake in getting you here so they are all guilty and Bill you of all people should be clever enough to understand that. So if you are angry then vote the same way as last time, produce the same result and get rid of all the culprits. Otherwise vote for the best person in your riding or whatever you do. .

Stewart... The article

Stewart... The article didn't come through, at least for me?

All the so called "left" has to prove, which is the easiest thing to do:

"Wealth can not be created, only taken from others, the environment and future generations" (First law of thermodynamics)

There's absolutely no way the so called "right" can break this, or prove it wrong, with millions of proofs and examples all around.

The main reason for the propaganda for more "competition" is to steal most from the most and justify it as "competitiveness".

Ed Deak.

the idea we need to cower in the face of polls

only fees the bank accounts of well-past their due date oundits like Bill, still living in the last century.

Fight on brave Parliamentarians of Liberal, NDP and Bloc stripes, fight on in the face of this NDP-Conservative coalition that says we did not need an election.

NDP and Cons are two faces of the same thing based upon Bill's and the Conservative pundits both saying the same things.

Run in West Point Grey against Christy, Bill, or have you conveniently forgotten that old, doddering fool boast of yours?

But of course far easier to just make up articles that kill any spirit of defense of democracy than actually you know, appreciate and promote democracy.

Time to go Bill, you are not the fount of wisdom BC needs today. As a matter fact both Bills, Good and Tielman are increasingly difficult to tell apart but for the beard and hair colour. And both appear to need to go for the good of us all.

A person of great analyses, knowledge, wisdom and synthesis such as myself can write rings around the stale and dated words and opinions that get shoved down our throats in Canada by media owners and managers who are interested in having their egos and peccadillos stroked than giving intelligent direction to their readers.

Hey.

so says Chris B.....

Boring
I haven't come across anyone in the real world that was interested in going through another election. I therefore hope that the participation rate goes down again. It's the only meanigful message we can send to the political class.

________________________________________________________

Looks like the mindbending corporate class have succeeded in their goals and now the population is ripe for an easy takedown. Open your wallets Canadians, let go of your benefits and lifestyle and prepare to be fleeced by the ruling class.

crh....It is not "fleecing",

crh....It is not "fleecing", but "wealth creation", people have been falling for for a millions years.

Let's have a poll right here:

"Do you think that humanity will ever realize that wealth can not be created, only taken ?

Ed Deak.

O come on people

Elections aren't actually that expensive. There are almost 34 million people in this country - just do the math.

$300 million spread over 34 million folks is considerably less than $10 a head.

You think democracy isn't important enough to spend $10 a person every so often?

Give your heads a shake - this is a big country with 34,000,000 people in it - spending a bit of cash now and then on the electoral process is cheap...pretending that the pittance we actually expend on the exercise is a waste of money is, frankly, stupid.

Election costs

We can have 3.5 elections for the cost of building one fake lake when hosting a G20 summit.

The Left... Cast In Stone I...

"...because we have been down this road before.
Indeed Blake, we have. A point which Ed, I think correcvtly, often makes.

The drift towards another world war is also palpable in the events taking shape... another clash of the major capitalist powers, and their lebensraum imperial ambitions/needs. This time likely including China, getting its nose pushed out of Libyan oil by NATO (France & England), and under pressure from US imperialism elsewhere, and, of course, the most aggressive western Anglo-American Empire powers (which includes France, odd as that may seem. It will be Russia, in all likelihood, who stands with China.

In any case, back to the drift towards fascism in this country. I actually agree with Frank, when he says that it is actually not written in stone that a move toward the Left in the country, be driven by deteriorating economic circumstances. And the evidence he points to is absolutely correct, IF, again IF we are talking about a "social democratic left". Indeed their chances do improve with the prosperity of capitalism... first because they are a party of capitalism, hence not really "Left", and people turn to them in "improving conditions" to secure a greater share. (Though last time around "the Liberals" stole their thunder. :-) Essentially though, he is absolutely right. Errr, correct. :-)

Except, of course, that is NOT what is happening now. Capitalism IS not prospering. It is in decline. And when that happens, historical experience says, not stone, that social democracy retreats before fascism and seeks to make deals, as it did in Germany, in the early events leading to WW2. (Witness the Layton deal making that went on with the Conservatives... which failed likewise.)

It is a quite different "Left" that is in fact requires to stand up to capitalism in its "deep Conservative/fascist" phase during economic and poltical crises. The historical evidence, again not stone, is what demonstrates this greater, more complex truth.

continued next post...

The Left... Cast In Stone II

from previous post...

And indeed, it is complex, the kind of a period we are in. And there are no simplistic or trite/quick fixes. Everything at least "seems" to have to run its course... and the "prosperity times" as might favour Social Democracy, are not likely about to return, at least anytime soon. If ever.

Of greater likelihood, again based upon the historical "empirical" evidence, if we have indeed been this way, more or less before, is that another world war between all the major powers to capitalism is going to sooner than the arrival of "prosperity", overwhelm all this bourgeois politics currently going on.

Dorothy, like Ed sometimes, though he is often entirely correct on many things, bleats about the evils of ideology... yet if anyone is paying serious attention to her, it is always from the positions of her own "Liberal" ideology.

Ideolody is but the ideas sets, or the individual and collective analyses that we all have. Some carry labels attached to them, while others do not... and are merely declared "non-ideological" indeology. If you have an analysis at all, that is articulatable, it is your ideology, especially the more highly developed it is... right or wrong.

Just to add one more thing..

..if any of you, who are so convinced we didn't need an election, think that the dollars saved would have somehow trickled down to you by Harper, while the other parties were to afraid to pull the pin for fear of the masses not wanting an election, you are suffering from illusions of importance in Harper's Canada. The money saved would have gone to more corporate tax cuts with a few crumbs thrown your way to keep you pacified.

Jerry....All ideologies and

Jerry....All ideologies and religions, even the most beautiful ones, can be and have been twisted around by the mind benders of special interests to become the wealth creating murder machines of millions.

When Hitler came to power in 1933 in depression ridden, starving Germany, the whole country started booming within months and became the envy of Europe. We were flooded by German tourists in brand new cars and on motorcycles we could even dream of in the rest of the continent. There were whole new towns and huge systems of superhighways built, the 1946 Berlin Olympics were a propaganda marvel for the nazis, with nazi parties blossoming all over, and ethnic German communities, some up to 700 years living in other parts, registering themselves as German citizens.

When it ended, millions were dead, cities flattened and in ruins with 3 million homeless, East European refugees, ourselves included, who never had anything to do with any politics, starving and living under the most atrocious conditions.

Shall I describe life in the Marxist Workers' Paradise, with cattlecars filled with prisoners dragging their human cargo East into the gulags ?

So much for ideologies. To hell with them all.

This is why we have to set economic systems on unbreakable physical laws. It can be done and it would solve all environmental and poverty problems

Ed Deak.

I think Harper will win the election....

with another minority and hopefully the Tories will say "that's enough Steve! You're not capable of winning a majority so we need to replace you".....

sunshine coast girl

What will happen to Jack and Iggy?

sunshine coast girl

Iggy replaced by Justin Trudeau and Jack by Mulcair?

With Gilles then three federal leaders from Québec? How will that go down in the west?

Ed's Ideology...

"So much for ideologies. To hell with them all." Ed.

To which you respond Ed, with your own unique, quite recognizable to us all, "anti-ideology" ideology. And frequently, though not always, you are correct with it.

And that's really it, isn't it? One's, or a movement's more formalized "ideology" is either right or wrong, seldom in whole, but possibly, in part. The key is, for one's ideology, yours included, to remain adaptive and subject to change, where and as it is proven wrong by real life events.

If one has a point of view, one carries an ideology, even if it is entirely or largely, or in part one's own.

I respect you brother. This is just one of those points we disagree on. :-)

And I concede that I have my own ideology, which includes many of the ideas of Marx... in part, as modified and adapted by myself and real life. Which, I think, was the essence of Marx. The other thing about ideologies is, especially large, highly formalized ones, is that after the originator dies, it is frequently subject to various right or wrong interpretations... even distortions. And Marx, like Jesus I expect, has been and is frequently interpreted incorrectly, including by the likes of me. :-) Certainly, I think, by Lenin and Stalin.

Intellectually speaking, I simply try to stay light on my feet, discarding analyses aspects when I'm proven wrong by real life, changing as ever called for by same, and remaining adaptive. I try to hang firm to being scientific, always, again changing and adapting as real nature does... never ridid or fixed forever, once proven wrong.

Peace.

Jerry.... I have no problem

Jerry.... I have no problem with people believing in anything, as long as they keep their minds open and ready to admit that that their beliefs were wrong.

And most of all, as long as they're not forcing their beliefs on, or brainwashing others with them, with thousands of historical and present examples.

Which includes all the various economic theories that ruled and destroyed the world for past 200 years.

Of course, Marx was right on many points, especially when he used logic based on human rights and physical realities, even before they were discovered. It turns me off when I recall all the crimes committed in his name.

In any case, he's way outdated as are the rest, like Smith, Ricardo, Friedman etc. Dead and gone, forget them and all the other ideological and economic prophets of history and start living in the real world, for a change.

All economic activities are based on physical laws, and not on ideologies, therefore economic theories must also be based on the same facts and not on faith, beginning with our monetary values that mean absolutely nothing at the present time.

Yet the lives of billions are destroyed by those imaginary values, while setting up dictatorial rules of enslavement into the hands of a criminal class in charge of money creation to be used as weapons of colonization and enslavement.

Or shall we say "wealth creation"?

Ed Deak.

Question For Jerry Munro -

- is it "peace" or is it "resignation"? I'm old enough to know there is a difference between the two attitudes and I have experienced both, being currently resigned to a certain acceptance of Harper's requirement for "adaptation" in order to cope with life's exigencies while mourning the loss of life's opportunities.

Ed Deak is a craftsman, who, I would believe, takes ordinary common objects (paint brush, pigments, and easel) and transforms them into works of art. They are also works of creation. He believes in "carpe diem" in a personal way as fervently as Herr Hitler did in a national way. But he does not "seize" anything from any other person in the way that Herr Hitler did. Or that Herr Harper could do in transferring power from government to private enterprise in the same manner that Hitler did.

The trick lies in getting the proportionate balance correct in any vote. We humans are simian in nature and seem to always want 100% of everything to be directed "My Way."

Harper's continuing campaign against the reckless coalition

of socialists and separatists -
What will this do to perceptions of his trustworthiness or stability?

Des....I have trained as an

Des....I have trained as an artist, but when we came to Vancouver in 1955, there was nothing in it and so I have learned custom furniture making and later other trades, to become self sufficient, in an environmentally and human friendly way, as much as possible. We succeeded and live very well at very low monetary and physical costs.

What Hitler has done was nothing more than what other, especially European, countries have been doing for hundreds of years: colonization. Including the occupation of our present Americas, while killing an estimated 80 million natives in North America alone and never mind how many more on other continents.

Hitler and the other colonizers have done it with arms, mass murder by smallpox and religion, while today's colonizers are colonizing the colonies with the perceived power of non existing, imaginary money, created from the air by computers, killing and destroying far more than all the old colonizers before them, while calling themselves "conservatives" and their crimes a "wealth creation."

Ed Deak.

You're right if they win...

And wrong if the Tories lose. And another minority should mean the end of Harper. Keep your hopes up!
I do have faith in the good sense of a majority of Canadians.

And what are we supposed to call it

When the bonehead's gov implodes?
I sit here and look at "Harper's Canada" or whatever we are about to call it and my gut says:
"Barf!"
'Course it is a bit rumbly with Ignatief as well.
Layton, while I don't mind him too much, simply has not "reached out" and got my vote.
Sorry - I just watched "Shake Hands With The Devil"

Well, perhaps

.. there was a good point in this article. It certainly started out OK challenging traditional reasons for going to political war in this country.

But the "master of snark" let his mouth run away with him, and a few paragraphs later, I was done. Couldn't finish the article, Bill, so I've no idea how you ended up. One would think you'd come down from on high in your white robes, daintily trod your first step in the filth that exists here on earth, and pronounced us sinners guilty of poor judgment for all time.

Anyway, enough about you and your ego - I'll try to go back to some of the comments later. There are a few that make their points pithily. Ron Wilton, Barry Eng, SIG, frank, daveoferg, GWest, thank you for bringing thoughtfulness to the party.

Thoughts from the cheap seats

First of all, the cost of an election is chump change in the grand scheme of things. A goiod portion of the cost will go to temporary workers hired to man the polls which will most likely be spent within the community. Think of it as economic stimulus that actually gets spread throughout the country rather than the usual stimulus designed to buy votes. Also, these temporary workers that man the polls are obliged to claim their stipend on their income tax, so a portion will find itself back in Ottawa's coffers.

The drop in participation in elections could well be attributed to the menu the electorate is presented with. It's like going to a buffet where the owner has decided that you get to choose from one appetizer, one main course and one dessert. Maybe our political system would be more democratic if each party had to offer two candidates in each riding, instead of one, the electorate would feel more empowered and enticed to participate. Maybe it's time to put the word "democracy" into the concept of living in a supposed democratic society. I believe that a good number of us are tired of choosing between pre-chewed food and starvation.

Finally, I believe that this election was orchestrated by the leaders of all the parties. Regardless of what they profess, none of them seem to be capable of showing the maturity required to operate in a minority environment. I suspect that when the votes are tabulated, we will still be in a minority situation, and if they still play games rather than deal with the task at hand, then all of the incumbents should resign their seats and make way for those that can. An election may be a contest, but once it is decided, our governance is not.

Good-bye Harper? So what?

A few have been commenting that a Conservative minority might mean the end of Harper. So what? He's just a figurehead, and his passing (like Campbell's in BC) will not change the direction that the country (or the province) is moving in.

The real problem is that the neo-con movement has control of the mainstream media, and thus control of the uncritical masses who turn out to vote because they are told that's what serious adults do.

It's also disheartening that instead of discussing governance at a time like this we end up having to argue polls, media and election-timing strategies.

Figureheads and Peace I...

"A few have been commenting that a Conservative minority might mean the end of Harper. So what? He's just a figurehead, and his passing (like Campbell's in BC) will not change the direction that the country (or the province) is moving in." Khedo.

I agree with you, Khedo. And a brief but articulate piece you've written above me here.

This is a more complex and fraught with danger period than mere "polls, media and elections" are likely to satisfactorily explain or sort out here, in a way at least that serves the people's interest. Unless, of course, they will be content with the trains/planes running on time, as it finally came down to in Hitler's time.

As for Ed's final comment to me above, other than some "technical" issues, I am indeed aware that fundamentally, we agree at least on many things. From my perspective anyway.

Likewise I am aware that what Des says above is much true, "We humans are simian in nature and seem to always want 100% of everything to be directed "My Way." Though we are also more complex and different in many ways than our simian cousins. And one should not make too much of it.

Which is not possible of course... having it 100% my way... something the ruling class especially needs to learn, not only in the Middle East. Yet even I know that "some" compromise is going to be part of the future that is taking shape before us, as part of getting to where it will finally be determined by real life that we human simians have to get... to resolve the most dangerous contradictions of this period.

But I think we will discover in the course of that, there can a) be no compromise with fascism, even dressed up as Conservatism (And yes, there are other entirely palatable forms of being conservative.) and b) as part of dealing with this, the capitalist system norm and the limitations of this democracy, both from which fascism arises, is likewise finally going to have to be dealt with. And the major limitation of this democracy, in my view, is it fails to include the economy and the wage slave population that labours there, or is sidelined in poverty as our "untermenschen"... under effectively authoritarian overlordship in their workplaces.

continued next post...

Figureheads and Peace II...

continuing from above...

Outside of that, in my view, there is room for both transitional and end result compromise.

And "peace" to me is just that. It is no more nuanced than that... and certainly does NOT signal "resignation". :-) I am ever, even in my advanced years, committed to making what contribution I can to transforming society away from capitalism, fascism, and war (And I view Stalinism as a kind of fascism.)... which struggle against itself "could" get ugly, I likewise know.

And often I and the mass of my fellows do not control how that evolves. I know that too. But neither can one allow themselves to be held to ransom under threat of ruling class violence, not here anymore than Egypt, Libya or Syria etc.

It is complex... not simple. And there is no life worth living, in such times as these, that does not carry some danger.

Peace, Love and Revolution :-)
Jerry

PS
Now, I have a batch of dinner buns to make. 8-D lol

best shot

ron wilton, barryeng, fiat lux, karen d, you have all nailed it.

the timing is not good, but it is still the best shot canadians will have for a long time to escape the likes of harper.

politically correct.

the realm of liars and cowards.

folks who are afraid to express their true thoughts/feelings out loud.

and folks who do not want you to know their true nature.

kind of like a sociopath?

harper is earning his master's degree in political correctness.

his handlers' advice has allowed harper to lead the inexperienced iggy, and powerless little jackie, around by their noses.

the posters mentioned above have painted a clear picture of harper.

he is the worst that could happen to canada.

in a lot of those bully stories and movies, the bullied acted together to make a force mightier than the bully.

this is our best shot. let's take it.

C'mon Bill A Harper majority?

I don't think that the Tories will win this election, Harper's government is going to fall and change is a coming. Why?, Many reasons especially in BC. People have been turned off by the Harper attack ads and turned on by the Liberals rebuttals. Ever ask Harper about the HST in BC?, He just avoids those questions and moves on to something he can ramble on about. In past elections people voted for the party etc but I think people are now voting strategically and a Liberal goverment in Ottawa could be more balanced and fair to Canadians. It's also putting the BC Liberals into retreat because they too know as well that they very well might lose the next election in BC

Back to Bill's original article

Bill,

Frankly I'm surprised at your analysis as I expected someone with your experience to look beyond the national numbers at the ridings and electable seats.

Breaking it down we know the Conservatives need 11 more seats to form a majority. Looking at the regions we can see that:

Quebec - they'll be lucky to hold onto their seats here.
Prairies - nothing to gain here. Even the lone non-Conservative Alberta riding will likely stay that way.
Atlantic Canada - likely to stay the way it is, split between Liberals and Conservatives.
BC - one or two NDP ridings might be up for grabs (Siksay) but then the Conservatives are also vulnerable in one or two ridings.

Assumption #1: any gains outside of Ontario and Quebec will be offset by losses in Quebec.

So that leaves Ontario. Does anyone seriously think the Conservatives can pick up 11 seats in Ontario? Sure "Ford Nation" means some Toronto area seats are possible - but ELEVEN?

Assumption #2: Ignatieff can't possibly do any worse than he already is.

You heard it here first - BEST case scenario is the Conservatives keep their current seat count, I'm actually expecting them to lose seats.

Bill Tieleman replies

Thanks for the comments - a few clarifications:

1) Don't mistake my analysis for my beliefs. I do not want to see a Harper Conservative majority - that is my fear.

2) The derogatory remarks about polls are unhelpful. I've worked with Ipsos-Reid and most other pollsters - they do good work and are not favouring one party or another. One can argue the questions and methodology but blanket condemnation without evidence is meaningless or worse.

Pretending polls don't reflect the electorate's opinion or matter is ridiculous.

3. Almost every poll shows the Conservatives with a sizeable lead - the degree of that gap is in question and is fluid as the campaign moves along.

4. G West and others raise the Single Transferable Vote and the failed Coalition to discredit my points - rather sad. Both proved to be highly unpopular with voters. Give it up.

5. If you think a coalition is great, find a party willing to declare that publicly. Personally I don't want to see a Liberal-NDP coalition - Ignatieff is the most right-wing leader the Liberals have ever offered voters.

6. Fighting "contempt of Parliament" by giving Harper a majority is beyond ridiculous.

7. Finding the Conservatives in "contempt of Parliament" was a vote of all opposition parties against the Tories - no neutral judge, no independent arbiter of justice - just politicians vs politicians. Regardless of how bad the Conservatives' behaviour is - and it is very bad - don't hang your hat on Canadians having any faith in that. Most voters hold Parliament in contempt of Canadians, often for good reasons.

Fire away!

None of The Above...

"Most voters hold Parliament in contempt of Canadians, often for good reasons." Bill T.

Indeed.

Many good points and a "reasonable" analysis in most ways BT. And I share your view that Iggy, the US patriot, is near as dangerous a right winger and pro-US Empire threat as is Harper.

Layton on the other hand, likewise in my view, outside of being possessed of a shallow "do gooder's" analysis of what is happening here, is really only dangerous as well... because he really wants to be a Liberal... or to negotiate "agreements" with the fascists.

I said it at the top here, in effect, that this is a great roll of the dice going on here... of either a Conservative or Liberal majority, with Jack as the court jester role. Either Harper or Iggy will deepen the crisis of capitalism and the loss of the nation. Both are tied foot and mouth to the Empire. Jack will just be towed along behind in their wake. He clearly doesn't know how to swim in these deep waters. He's irrelevant.

No matter what occurs here, or who gets elected of all the realistic possibilities, this only continues to get worse... And so will until a dark horse "serious" and "progressive nationalist" Left finally rises from out of the gathering storm... to challenge all the players, force a new more sharply polarized and focused political development, that is prepared to aggressively take on capitalism... its rapidly failing economics, bullshit democracy, and betrayal of the country to the US.

Short of this, the bullshit only gets piled ever higher and higher, and the nation settles into its harness of servicing the Empire, trousers around its ankles with a smile/grimace on its lips.

Mark your ballot "None of The Above". Don't give it your legitimacy.

I hate to say this but...

...I have noticed that Ignatieff is sounding much better these days. Not that I would vote for him but a conservative swing voter might.

Skywalker

No reason to hate saying it, I think Ignatieff is sure to look better than the Conservative attack ads have painted him.

The more people see of him the better it will be for the Liberals.

Bill T.

"One can argue the questions and methodology but blanket condemnation without evidence is meaningless or worse."

Actually, that's what I was arguing. The rest of your point is a strawman. I look back over the last few federal elections and I see Harris-Decima and Nanos as the best. Leger and Angus Reid come in first in certain regions.

I don't see Ipsos.

"G West and others raise the Single Transferable Vote and the failed Coalition to discredit my points - rather sad. Both proved to be highly unpopular with voters. Give it up."

Almost every non-Conservative in the country is complaining about vote-splitting. Telling them to "give it up" is like spitting on them. Electoral reform has been defeated in 3 provinces yet it would have passed easily if the vote was limited to non-Conservatives. There are legitimate reasons why people that don't support Harper would want to see the end of vote splitting and why people that do support Harper want it to continue. You may not like it but when you hitched your horse to the side that opposed electoral reform you allied yourself with mostly Conservative voters.

"If you think a coalition is great, find a party willing to declare that publicly"

Under first-past-the-post what would be the point? People can't vote for a Coalition, they have to pick a Liberal, an NDPer or a Green. Those are their choices.

WTF?

I have to agree with Bill. Iggy is making a desperate play and Jack got sucked along for the ride. I cannot see any upside to this other than to perpetuate the fraud of what passes for democracy in Canada. The only winners are the political careerists who actually believe that the political system serves anyone other than the core wealth establishment. I shudder to think about where we are going after the Canadian Taliban get a majority.

Wallace

What's the difference between majority government and voting for all of a minority government's money bills and confidence motions????

None.

Personally, I might agree with the title

...of the article if only because I was gerrymandered into Vancouver Centre a few years ago. Fat lot of choice I've got - two unpalatable options and two throw-away votes.

These are the elections that try people's souls.

It's not democracy anyway

Tweedledum and Tweedledee or the NDP which is unsupported by the mainstream media (one rich family, two corporations) and thus will never win. It's a bad joke.

the need to vote strategically

Hey Bill - lighten up. No need for pessimism now and if you check the polls today the Liberals are up!

Here is my letter about this election that ran in the Globe and the Sun (today) plus other papers...

We can only hope that Stephen Harper's coalition scare tactic will backfire, as it is likely that he is the one most worried that the majority of Canadians might see a coalition as a better choice than his jets, prisons and corporate tax cuts. Most other multi-party, parliamentary countries have coalition governments that serve their population very well, and it would be great to see political parties working together for the good of this country. Since Canada lacks a tradition of coalition governments, the only way for the majority of Canadians to ensure the next government best represents their issues is to vote for the candidate that has the best chance of winning. Most Canadians would prefer their government to invest in health, education, environment and culture and yet we have been stuck with a Conservative government that focuses on the military, resource exploitation, corporate tax cuts and cutting services. We have a crisis in democracy in Canada and the only way to get real representation of the majority is for everyone who wants change to get out and vote strategically.

Tweedle-dee, Tweedle-dum and Tweedle-dip...

"It's not democracy anyway
Tweedledum and Tweedledee or the NDP which is unsupported by the mainstream media (one rich family, two corporations) and thus will never win. It's a bad joke." Driftwood.

Agree completely. It's only what passes for democracy at this time.

But which is especially why I refer to Jack Layton as the court jester in the piece. The NDP, even if one accepts that it will do anything any differently than the Liberals, which I don't, are not going to be allowed in to play "government" by the Gate Keeper Systems in place. (Ruling class media and/or their financial support. Which is why the NDP keeps moving right to and beyond the Liberals, hoping to attract some of this essential "stuff" to themselves. 'Cause the know, as well as I do. One can almost hear them pleading to the ruling business class, to be allowed in to play.)

The NDP, even though they are bent over backwards trying to play by the Rules, will not be allowed into the ruling class yard. They are all from the wrong side of the class tracks to start with. They are not trusted. Even though their faces are scrubbed clean, their hair is combed and neatly parted and they're wearing little suits. Besides, they've got Tweedle-dee and Tweedle-dum, they don't need, at least yet, a Tweedle-dip. (Which could change, I grant, if the NDP sucks long and hard enough, and makes enough compromises, and the other two become hopelessly alienated from "the masses". But we ain't there yet.)

Jack and the NDP, though they really aren't anymore substantially different from Tweedle-dee and Tweedle-dum, are yet destined for as far ahead as I can see, in the eyes of "the system" itself, to play the brightly coloured, conical capped, red nosed, painted cheeks parliamentary court jester to this multi-act play. Ever a bridesmaid but never a bride. Tweedle-dip in waiting.

This is not democracy. At one now ancient time it may have appeared so, compared to what was before that. Now, it's just bullshit.

quote]look back over the

quote]look back over the last few federal elections and I see ... Nanos as the best.

Oh really? BC's Nanos numbers today:

Con: 42%
Lib: 32.3%
NDP: 19.4%
Green: 6.2%

Again, a smaller regional sub-sample size. You better stick with the weighted 308.com model.

Ignatieff

The Liberal leader seems to be impressing Canadians. Nanos tracking polls have the Liberals up roughly 4% since yesterday at the expense of the NDP.

Of course its only one night's tracking poll so it could be off however I doubt that it is.

I think Iggy is getting a decent reception to his "campaign from the Left" strategy and drawing NDP voters who think Canada is one big riding.

Everyone who agrees with Bill T's concerns about a Harper's majority can breathe a sigh of relief. From the look of the current polls it is simply not going to happen.

Harper's Conservatives are not showing any signs of growing their vote.

Harper flip flops

He challenged Iggy to a one on one debate and now that Iggy accepted it he's declined.

The Conservatives don't seem to have any new policy ideas, all they do is keep harping on about "coalitions".

Which I guess explains why they're hiding from Canadians, refusing to answer questions and now refusing to be in a debate Harper himself proposed. Why he would challenge an intellectual like Iggy to a debate in the first place is bizarre.

Harper is an American mole, IMHO

Barryeng is right, Fiat Lux is right, and a whole whack of others here. Bill is wrong, but he's been wrong a lot lately. Courage is required in this instance. We cannot go on as before, bending over backwards for foreign overlords and corporate psychopaths. Even if we lose, we, the people, had to stand up against the undemocratic forces lined up against us. Even the media are against us Canadians. It's time a true Canadian led this country, instead of American corporate tools. Canada for Canadians, equal in all ways, sharing and caring for all and our environment and other species. We're all in this together, not for the benefit of a so-called elite.

ok Marysue52

Elizabeth May is also an american, (dual citizenship)is she a mole?

Apples and Oranges... May and Ignatieff

"Elizabeth May is also an american, (dual citizenship)is she a mole?" alive.

Might be. I don't really know. "Cause there's lots of good dual citizen people in this country too... most draft dodgers or anti-war refugees from the "Land of The Like Hell Free".

But then Elizabeth May is not about to be elected Prime Minister of the country either, such as may make me look more critically at here. On the other hand, there are loads of public domain evidence that indicate Iggy's primary loyalty to this country should be viewed some suspect... in my view.

It's a Conservative ad, but the words are his:

http://theashcan.com/2011/01/25/political-attack-ads/

Even more disturbing:

http://www.learnoutloud.com/Free-Audio-Video/Philosophy/Ethics/The-Lesser-Evil/19095

More on Ignatieff...

Or download here, Ignatieff's thesis on the justification for using torture in the defense of US power.

http://millercenter.org/scripps/archive/forum/detail/1843

And the problem is, of course, this asshole is probably preferably to Stephen Harper... which says abyssmal things about "our democracy". In my view.

A Coalition is Coming to Canada I... :-) Stephen is Right.

But I really want to talk about a quite different aspect of this election.

First, from Stephen Harper's perspective, his fears about a "coalition", whether there is anything "wrong" with a coalition or not, (and clearly there is not), are entirely legitimate... in my view. For he MAY have seriously miscalculated here.

First, he knows, as well as I know, and many of you judging from what gets written here, that there is no "fundamental" difference between the Liberals and NDP. In particular, the NDP really wishes it occupied the Liberal Party's political positions, and could replace it, or become a part of it... through an alliance, coalition or even outright merger. would it be proposed in full seriousness. Jack would grab it and run. (Whatever denials.)

Plus, in this election, the Liberals are programmatically signalling that they want the NDP and "tepid left" vote. The Liberals are sounding actually quite "social democratic". (The NDP does the same shit with the other working class left at election time, kid yourselves not. In power is another matter.)

Stephen Harper is many things, including, in my opinion, an extremely dangerous man, but he is not a dummy. He knows all this too. He knows that he could not govern and get his Conservative/fascist way from a minority government position anymore. He was at a point where the rest of his extremist fascist agenda was stymied. It was a stalemate.

On the other hand, looking even just at the polling, but also fundamentally ideologically, the Liberal Party "could" govern from a minority position, where he cannot. Why? For the same reason the Liberals governed everywhere in the country, basically, throughout the entire Social Democratic State period. They are quite able of "stealing" and "living with" all the "critical" programmatic positions of the NDP... they pose no direct challenge to capitalism. These NDP are really just "liberals" in "left wing" clothing anyway. They all know that. We might as well too. :-)

The Liberals and NDP quite naturally, in effect, know they it or not, and I think both now do, constitute a "coalition", even acting separately and "informally". They are fully capable of it. More, the Bloc will strategically, or more accurately tactically, support them too, because they think they can get more for Quebec out of both of them... than they can the "Anglo based and anti-French chauvinist" Conservative Party.

continued next post...

A Coalition Is Coming To Canada II... Stephen Is Right.

from previous post...

IF I am right, and all the parties to Canadian politics know what I do, and the indications are that they do... Harper has as much to fear from a minority Liberal government. that will have a majority mandate power given to it more or less by the back door, from NDP and Bloc support. They will work together.

This is why he always, no matter who says what about supporting or not supporting a coalition from the other parties, hangs onto this "coalition" meme. Even he fears that he has miscalculated. And I think he has.

In effect, again assuming all the players know who is and is not naturally simpatico with who, as I do, we are about to be governed by an "informal" coalition. Which is driving Stephen Harper near mad to distraction. He loves power. (Or what passes for it.Real power being in the economy.) And he is going to lose.

Yes, the neo-liberal economic agenda still proceeds, but at a slower minority Liberal government pace, as it did under Paul Martin, from here to the next roll of the dice. :-)

Jerry: You should read this essay

God knows I'm no Ignatieff fan.

That said, the suggestion that he supports the use of torture is simply not supportable on the facts.

He certainly supported the US adventure in Iraq - and that, in itself, is something for which he may be justifiably criticized; but, at least on the basis of my reading of the text cited hereunder, he DOES NOT SUPPORT TORTURE.

I acknowledge that his language is often conditional and that his rhetorical style is complex and frequently obscure, but, that being said, I think this phrase is unavoidable in its clarity.

So I end up supporting an absolute and unconditional ban on both torture and those forms of coercive interrogation that involve stress and duress, and I believe that enforcement of such a ban should be up to the military justice system plus the federal courts. I also believe that the training of interrogators can be improved by executive order and that the training must rigorously exclude stress and duress methods.

You can read the whole of the essay here:
http://tinyurl.com/l2t3qu

GWest's Iggy I...

It is sometimes said G., that a dishonest man's arguments are always convoluted... or words to that effect. Iggy's politics certainly come across as convoluted. He seems to take one position here and another there, for sure. Which screams dishonesty and opportunism to me.

But goodness it's refreshing to finally hear you NDPers coming out and openly defending Iggy. It's been increasingly obvious, I think, to every serious student of politics in this country, for quite awhile now, where the NDPs politics has evolved to.

Which is too bad in a way, even though, now that all the illusions are about gone, it finally opens up that "Left" position in Canadian politics to a new, more "serious" Left development. Which position is already creating a "suck" from its vacuum, seeking to be filled.

But sad first because of the loss of a very promising, especially early, left wing/progressive history which the CCF/NDP represented. But secondly, and more importantly in the context of the present, it opens up the way to the collapse of minority government, which I think has been largely responsible for at least "slowing" the neo-liberal/neocon agenda in Canada.

If the early reports from the campaign trail are indeed true, as reflected in the reporters questions and comments in the interview with Jack Layton on CBC News this morning, that there is a distinct lack of vigour and enthusiasm, as well as attendance, at NDP events, much more than usual, that says to me, a possible collapse of NDP support. (The rumours of a "fall-off" in NDP membership renewals, have been around for awhile now.) Which will, frankly, go to the Liberals. Which, again if true, signals to me the high likelihood of a majority Liberal government.

How soon people all forget, for sure. But which has been in the cards for awhile now... and why Jack was so desperately trying to secure/negotiate a "face saving" alliance with the Liberals, in the early moves to create a "coalition". And, in my view, his attempt to negotiate a budget deal separately with the Conservatives, was likewise possibly an attempt to put pressure on the Liberals to let them into the "liberal" ruling class yard to play. But which failed as well.

But it is early going yet. We shall see. It is appearing though, that Iggy's increasingly sounding progressive/left campaign is having its desired effect on NDP support. Which is no surprise.

But which is not my focus, as y'all know, regardless how much I regret the possible collapse of minority government. It is, watching that new vacuum opening up on the Left, which the NDP has now totally walked away from, and for the possibilities for a new style and content development there.

continue next posr...

GWest's Iggy II...

from previous post...

For a Liberal majority government is going to be only modestly less dangerous to what little is left of the old Social Democratic safety net, and to the future meaningful development of democracy, for especially the working class and communities. Nor will they stop the drift toward global war underway, or Canada's participation in it, and the increased militarization of the country at the behest of the US, and the newly emerging Anglo-American Empire. Nor will they do what has to be done, in a serious way, to stop the economic and political betrayal of the country to the US. (For which Iggy carries a great deal of US loyalty baggage himself.)

Nor will they act aggressively to curb the power and influence of the corporate sector, over all aspects of Canadian life.

This all continues, if at a pace designed to be less alarming to Canadians. For the Liberals were actually co-initiators of this process with the Conservatives, in this country, and have overseen and shepherded it even more than the overtly fascist Conservatives.

Jerry

First of all, I'm not defending Ignatieff.

I would have thought that was clear from what I wrote, wasn't it?

I have all kinds of difficulties with Ignatieff and all Liberals - as you no doubt know.

But that doesn't mean I have to sit still while someone 'claims' the man supports torture when he clearly doesn't.

That's all I have to say on the subject.

As for the 'idea' that New Democrats aren't really socialists any longer - which is the essence of your argument - I think there's a good bit of truth in that statement.

As for your last suggestion that Liberals and Conservatives are not very different - I guess I can agree with that too.

Although, I do think a clear case can be made for classing 'The Harper Government' as something quite different from the traditional Conservative party or the Liberal party.

As for what the NDP would do with power in the Federal sphere - who know?

GWest... You Do Need to Listen to This.

GWest

You really do need to listen to the full speech of Ignatieff to the Miller Institute of Public Affairs at the University of Virginia. Here, he dos actually defend torture as part of justifying the use of American power, to shape the world according to their interests. This is not a Conservative ad, but a scholarly dissertation, full length.

Unfortunately, there is a rather long introduction you have to go through to get to Iggy. But there is absolutely no doubt where this guy, at least, was coming from, in building the case for the US use of torture in what he describes as "the age of terrorism".

Listen to it. Then I'd be more interested in what you have to say about him.

Whether he holds these same views today or not, I can't say... but this is scary shit.

http://www.learnoutloud.com/Free-Audio-Video/Philosophy/Ethics/The-Lesser-Evil/19095

How to do terrible things... and feel good about it.

This is how they introduce him in the introductory text, before you get to the actual video/audio of the speech.

"Michael Ignatieff is an articulate advocate of the use of American military power to shape the world according to American values and interests. A reviewer in The New York Times Book Review writes that Ignatieff “tells us how to do terrible things for a righteous cause and come away feeling good about it.” Ignatieff, the Carr Professor of Human Rights at the Kennedy School of Government, is the son of a Russian emigre father and a Canadian mother who studied at the University of Toronto. He earned his doctorate at Harvard University. This Forum is co-hosted by the University of Virginia Law School and the Forum for Contemporary Thought."

Jerry

I did listen to it - the whole hour and 20 minutes - and my opinion has NOT changed - Ignatieff does not support torture of any kind.

There was, in my view, nothing whatever scary about it AND, he was absolutely clear in saying that the US went too far out of fear and weakness and that a continuation to behave in this way would destroy the US's capacity to win any war - let alone one with terrorism.

I urge you to listen again and not accept the verdict of 'a reviewer' in the New York Times or anywhere else.

Cheers.

By the way, I'll sign off this issue with another disclaimer as to not being a supporter of the man as a politician and a potential leader of this country.

But, I'm not prepared to lie about the guy and try to twist his own words against him over this issue.

Hmmm...

Lotta griping about a man who has the kind of brains both of you would be pleased to sit around the dinner table with and pick apart. I think you'd both enjoy the chance to sandpaper his opinions with your rough lumber and find out how closely they match your own.

I have to admit to a certain liking for Iggy despite his political affiliation. In the same way as Trudeau awakened a political excitement in a 12-year-old, I sense something of the possibility for Canada that Iggy occasionally talks about - not a consumerist clone, but a Sweden, an independent thinker and doer with little to stand on but a few resources, a remarkable intelligence, fortitude and a keen sense of fairness and charity.

That's my Canada. I don't see it, however in the major parties, particularly the Liberals, who I don't think have spent nearly long enough in the political woodshed yet. I think the same old "backroom boys" are still in charge, and that's why Iggy's leash is necessarily short and tempered.

Mind you, it may be a couple of centuries before all traces of their odour disappears.

I don't think I need to say much

...about my opinion of Harper, though. He's our own Jean-Marie LePen, which makes it very hard to take seriously anybody who tries to support him. I can't help but think of what they're not saying, and wondering if I'd be the first to be shipped to our very own gulag in Norman Wells mining diamonds that don't exist with bare hands that soon won't....

Conservative Vote

I have a hard time believing these polls that show Harper at 39%. I have not run across an admitted Conservative yet!
Last election he got in on the Ontario and Albert Vote. The media spoke about low voter turnout but that was not the whole story. Tens of Thousands of voters were turned away in each Province because they changed the voting cards and 2 pieces of ID were needed one being a household bill. Like people keep that in their pocket!
So go and Vote Harper out! And make sure you read your voting card!