Well, here's my take

Up until now, Harper has kept the nuts in his CPC caucus on a leash by telling them that he couldn't do what they wanted because he didn't have a majority, allowing him to sidestep the problem. That excuse has come to an end, and will be interesting to watch. If he caters to them like they demand, it will piss people off, and if he ignores them, the CPC base is going to be pissed.

What the government does is also now exclusively on Harper; there's no one he can blame anymore. Even if Harper tacks to the middle somewhat out of desire to be re-elected, I don't think that's a possibility; certainly not a majority even if there is no merger, in which case he'll be on the way down. The economic stimulus just ran out. Conservative economics has been undeniably, conclusively proven as disastrous since 2008 - so far Harper has just managed to avoid blowback since then by passing the opposition-demanded stimulus and advertising on it as if it was his prophetic Economic Action Plan, and blaming everything on others. That's not going to be an operative deflection in 2015.

Vote splitting is obviously a big problem. A merger would eliminate that, but that was never going to happen until the Liberals lost, for the same reason Liberals wouldn't consider electoral reform when they had the chance, and instead just told progressives to suck it up and vote for them. Now the party with the influence in the merger is the appropriate one. My concern is that it would end up like the farce in the US, where the Democrats campaign on being 1% less evil than the Republicans and sell out to their campaign funders, but it's also true that Canada doesn't have the same level of corrupt fundraising in politics and it's the NDP branch that will have the most power there.

I obviously disliked Ignatieff, though not for the reasons the CPC ran attack ads about, but seriously, what the hell were the Liberals thinking with Ignatieff after the character assassination Dion went through. That the CPC wasn't going to use the treasure trove of material? Anyways, it's undeniable that Ignatieff was an absolutely atrocious leader, and I think that was more what led to this travesty than any public adherence to Conservative policies, past or future.

Looks like Ontario is going PC provincially in October. Maybe Ontario needs a full dose of conservative governments to wake up - that's what it took in the US, when Bush won in 2004 with a Republican House and Senate. There was no one to scapegoat for the disaster. Of course, then the Democrats fucked it up but that's the Democrats for you...

The Next 4 Years Are Going To Be Hell

Progressives have to face this right from the get go. Yes Mr Layton will hold the Harper government's feet to the fire but alas does any government with a majority really pay attention to the opposition?, Just look at the BC Liberals time sitting in Victoria? True our opposition did an awesome job but they could not stop the BC Liberals policies and agenda nor will the NDP in Ottawa. I still do not trust Mr Harper and 4 more years is just an awful thought. At the end of this term our country will be a very different place and some of it may not be so great. I'm no soothsayer but common sense tells me we are in for a rough ride. Of course we have all been there before and most likely we we all be there again soon. Too bad as I was looking forward to a moderate government that not only kept a decent social contract but also a government that I finally could be proud of. The Cons agenda leaves little for me to hope for. Already I've read comments like. Lefties are parasites who should just get a job, bums on welfare should be cut off etc. This is some of the attitude that I've already noticed rising up from the right. Joy oh bliss more ignorance and intolerance, that is also something well kept I think in Mr Harper's government. We are a strong group of people us Canadians and somehow we all must go through this period, there are a couple of bright spots in this kerfuffle so to speak, first the election of Ms May to Ottawa I think is a good thing, next is the election of a new opposition in Ottawa or the reformation of the opposition so to speak. Harper is a controlling type of individual and he is an economist. his agenda caters to big business and "traditional values" this has always made me nervous because it excludes a lot of people who are not traditional and that is not the Canada that I know and love. I guess as an individual I'll have to write my MLA (who by the way now sits in 3rd party status in the house, joy oh bliss)and I hope that the Tyee and other media types will continue to publish and report on issues that are important to us all. As for provincial politics I hope that we elect an NDP government at least that would give us a "buffer' from the Feds.
This I think would be a good thing for BC

what to do during four years

We don't have to wait four years to revitalize our democracy. Clearly the Right has been so effective because its 24/7 and the money speaks. We may not be big business but we are 60% if the Canadian electorate that spends a lot of money and has a lot of clout if we use it to actually get the just and sustainable world we believe in. Clearly the big money told the Conservatives and Reform that the money wouldn't be there if there wasn't a united Right. We can tell NDP, Liberals, Greens that we are setting up a pledge account (and account of pledges) that will be there to fund parties on the Left that unite to fight for a just and sustainable Canada. Until that happens we won't actually send any money to political parties that can not set aside egos and concentrate on what we have in common. It would be a powerful political organizing tool. I saw it work at a ski hill where all the abused pass holders simply got together and told the ski hill no affilitates of the pass buyers group would purchase any passes until certain standards of fair treatment were agreed on. The Ski Company held out for a week! Our politicans need our support and yet they don't listen to us. I leave it to the negotiating group to decide what the conditions of the pledgers association would be --single left candidates/riding, commitment to preferential ballot, merger(as the conservatives were forced into) the idea is we create a 60% solution by our collective demand that we get a 60% government.
What other actions could the 60% solution group take with their allegiance, efforts and money that would insure we never again have a Canadian government in contempt of parliament and in contempt of 60 % of the Canadian people?

Progressive or emulation

PROGRESSIVE OR EMULATION.......

AS LONG AS BLUE CONS OF CANADA WANT TO EMULATE THE USA WE WILL END UP LIKE THEM.

HITTING BOTTOM AND HATED BY THE WORLD, WITH NO POSSIBLE RECOVERY.
HAVE A LOOK FOR YOURSELF.

CANADA IS A BIGGER COUNTRY THAN USA BUT HAS NO REAL LEADERSHIP OR UNDERSTANDING OF LEADERSHIP OF PEOPLE, CREATING JOBS, IMPROVING ON NON PROFIT HEALTHCARE, RESOURCES AND PEACEFUL ALTERNATIVES.

FOCUS PEOPLE FOCUS.

RECALL IN 6 MONTHS IF BLUE CONS ARE NOT WORKING WITH THE PEOPLE.

STAND UP PEOPLE, STAND UP PEOPLE, STAND UP PEOPLE.

REMEBER EGYPT, FRANCE, YEMEN,IRAN AND MANY MORE. STAND UP PEOPLE.

IF THE THE BLUE CONS CONTINUE TO SHOW THE WORLD THAT CANADA IS TRYING TO ACT LIKE A FOOLISH BULLY THEN 911 CAN AND WILL HAPPEN HERE.

JUST A MATTER OF TIME OVER 4 YEARS.

Yes, boycott

I agree totally with N Reynolds.

I've already decided that I will withhold all political donations until my party moves towards merging with the other(s.) Progressives can never win the 2015 election without unity, and I'm not about to throw good money away on magical - we can create voters in the ROC (rest of Canada) out of thin air in 2015 - thinking.

i think we have to ignore

i think we have to ignore right vs left, and become friends (and worst enemies) of conservative MPs and voters.. become results oriented. when talking to con voters pretend harper isnt scary and then be surprised when he does something weird. partisan politics/divide and rule works for the corporations right now, its their whole basis for existing.

if we can sneak in critical questions... i'll skip to the end where we eventually one day get con voters calling their MPs, demanding answers. its happened before. of the con MPs snubs them it'll go along way. they know they can safelt ignore us for 4 years, as long as we wear 'lefty bleeding heart fringe activist' nametags

there's a good example of this in an old episode of deconstructing dinner. when the mandatory gmo labeling bill was introduced, one con MP read a statement opposed to it that john steinman (the host of the show) thought was misinformed.. so steinman called him up later. the mp was himself a farmer,
and i think a lot of the GMO specifics were new to him even though he may have been growing it.. i'll look this up after work and be more specific later. i think he changed his vote

one problem with this plan: its hard to imagine it, and then once its imagined it doesn't sound very likely.

The Left... Loosely and Concretely Defined I...

"There is no point dwelling on the obvious other than to simply reiterate it. The election of a Conservative majority government will usher in wrenching change in Canada and we will have to witness the worst that Stephen Harper has to offer." Murray Dobbin.

I disagree somewhat, The Left... Unless one assumes the sum total of that to be the NDP. ...needs precisely to dwell at some greater length on what has happened here. For it is critical to the wellbeing of the country that we do so, its very survival, and that of the great mass of our people, not just its ruling class.

As I've said before, I can understand the sense of giddiness of the NDP, and "its" desire to "over-blow" the positiveness of what has been achieved here, with their own perceived good fortune. From their vantage point as now, the leading "capitalism light" party of "liberalism" in Canada, they see the long held ambition of the Party Leadership within their grasp... to move in on, adopt and be seen as the replacement Party traditionally held by the Liberal Party in this country... sans the baggage.

Which may or may not yet be true, that this has for all time been achieved. Time is needed to tell us that yet.

The rest of us, in any case, more concerned with the direction of economic and political development of the country, and the vitality of what, to our minds, is a desperate need for a more relevant and vibrant democracy, and no less the "necessary" well being of people, may want to take a more in depth consideration here. There is more to politics than this or that "Party fortune", especially of one that likes, as did the Liberal Party before it, to claim a "centre left" position... But was, as is this crew, really just another Party of capitalism, posing no challenge to the status quo system whatsoever.

So, for example, some of us can be excused for questioning whether the NDP is even, in fact, a Party of the Left, representing any kind of victory for it. The dividing line, historically, for Left and Right, has been determined by one's attitude toward capitalism, or indeed any entrenched "historical" status quo. Does one support it and work for its success, or does one consider it a passing stage in socio-economic development, and oppose it as redundantly counter to the majority interests of the masses, nature and society?

For sure, there are "degrees" on the Right and of the Left. Always have been. But we should be clear about where the dividing line is... or the concept really is irrelevant, as some claim. And the only sense in which the NDP can be seen on a "left", is in the context of support for capitalism on the Right. Within the context of "capitalism" it is, it has been assumed anyway, a "moderate party of capitalism"... but capitalism and on the Right nonetheless.

Which clarifies things anyway... from my perspective. :-)

Continued Next Post...

The Left...

Continuing from above

So lets be clear, within the context of "the system" nothing has really and seriously changed... except perhaps for the somewhat worse for us, on the Serious Left. All the Parties to the Parliamentary system no less, are all "Parties of capitalism", only in varying degree of intensity, and certainly posing no threat to either its ruling class wellbeing or continued existence.

In a state of "minority" governance, all the parties had to work, in the interests of maintaining "re-electability", at safeguarding their "optics"... how they were perceived by the masses. Even the Cons/fascists. Which made them all, to one or another degree, not be seen acting against "the people's interest". It restricted what they could get away with. Which was some "useful" to that interest.

Though nothing, zip, zero, nada stays the way it was forever... and this too has passed.

For this is no longer the case. We have the "traditional" parliamentary arrangement of capitalism back firmly in place, where in the early governance stage the Governing Party can push through its ruling class serving agenda... get all of the "bad stuff" out of the way early in its mandate, and kiss the majority electorates ass again in the run-up to the next election cycle.

AND, the Party in Opposition, the new Liberal-NDP, can do what oppositions always do in capitalism... claim they were powerless, as the excuse for them having not been able to seriously change anything, other than maybe "cosmetically". They will put on an opposition show.

We are back to capitalism as per usual. The ruling class interest is back in full charge, with an effectively powerless opposition going through the Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition motions. The New Opposition looking and acting pretty much like the Old Opposition. Only the colours of the flags and banners having really changed... the optics.

A victory for The Left? My ass.

There is now, as has always really only ever been the case, the politics of The Street.

Now What for Canada's Left?

Well over 50% of Canadians are justifiably not happy with the 2011 election results, yet both Harper and Layton are!

And with repect to Murray's othewise fine article, nevertheless, what's wrong with this picture where the majority are unhappy and our "leaders" are happy?

From these figures what might assume some 40% are truly happy with these results. The reality based on publicly available information is that truly a full 99% of us are getting the short end of the stick. Please see http://www.vote123.ca/page.php?20

This brings me to "Maybe what we need is... people serious about social change willing to publicly commit to giving five per cent of their pre-tax income to fight what is coming down the road. WE WILL NEED IT."

Where does Murray Dobbin get off that the best of democracy is limited to democracy by proxy and not by self-rule?

Our current single-mark ballot system is very vulnerable to vote-splitting which allows the above realities. As a people, we can self-organise, readying ourselves for the next election and empower our communities to actually elect whoever the majority prefers. Please see more of vote123.ca

Eduard

Anti-racism works needs emphasis

Thanks, Murray, for all you did to keep us from these evil days.

As my heading shows, I think we badly under-emphasize combating racism/ethnocentrism, so leaving the field to the Right.

In QC, they badly miscalculated their audience (itself an indicator of contempt for the people of QC) by running, in french only, a virulent anti-refugee ad. Who hasn't seen it, I recommend a look.

I spent time commenting in the G&M, counter-acting spinning - no doubt some paid out of our taxes - of Harper shills. If only the racism displayed was only from them. Of course lots was combined with the smear against Jack Layton's supposed exploitation of Asian prostitutes. Very ugly.

There are models from elsewhere on how racism can be combated - I'm thinking of Barking, London, where the BNP got an electoral drubbing.

Furthermore, more anti-racism would bring in lots of great people, of whom those involved in music-making would be very helpful - including to our spirits of resistance. It is vital that Aboriginal people be brought in.

OK, everybody, Restiamo umani!

Good article Murray.

Good article Murray. Canadians will embrace the idea of extending the single payer system to home and drug care when they start paying through the nose for the private laternatives--the only question then, is "will it be too late?" I think we can get over the need for a referendum on national electoral reform by putting it front and centre in an electoral platform.

We must come to terms with the new political reality: http://markcrawford.blogspot.com/2011/05/triumph-of-politics.html

And prepare an economic strategy of social investment: http://www.themarknews.com/series/14-how-to-fix-canada-s-political-parties-the-ndp/articles/1594-get-practical

Everyone's Happy Now.

Well almost.

Jack and his NDP are very happy and the Conservatives are too, that's over 70% of the electorate.

An overwhelming majority of of happy people. No wonder Canadian's rank among the most happy people in the world!

Does it matter?

First, he'll dismantle public election funding, which arguably was responsible for nearly one million voters -- nearly 7% of votes cast in 2008 -- to get ONE MP (0.4% of the total) this time around. (At least we have Elizabeth May!)

His corporate backers have deep pockets that the unions can't compete with in helping the NDP. And it will take ages for the Grits to raise much more money.

Any talk of election reform -- proportional representation or priority voting -- will surely go away -- a party with 54% of the seats based on 40% of the vote obviously can't tolerate such silliness!

That alone will allow "engineered elections" into the future, as long as the left stays divided. Crushing the Liberals may backfire on him yet, as they may flock left.

But the real kicker -- why none of this really matters much -- is the coming anschluss. Expect greater corporate-driven unity with the cesspool below the 49th -- "harmonizing" regulations, making it impossible for local government to take action against misbehaving corporations, "unified defence," meaning more Canadian boys fighting Amerika's energy wars, and more forced exports of resources to the US, since they're pretty much used up all of theirs.

(Even now, with energy prices at all-time highs in Canada, we are forced under NAFTA to export petroleum, natgas, and hydro to the US, even if we don't have enough to keep our homes warm for a reasonable fee.)

Right. I get it.

Either Stephen Harper is the monster the Tyee paints, and we will enter a dark time in the history of Canada... or else he is an exceptionally cunning monster and will be benign and moderate for 4 years to trick us into another 4 years of his rule when he will reveal his true colors.

I am rolling my eyes here.

The Harper Gov't has 4 years to show what it can do. How about we have an open mind and quit the political demonizing.

"Post - war social contract."

Who would want to dismantle the "Post war social contract?" The WWII was a war vs fascism wasn't it? I think we forgot that as a nation, but yet we still celebrate "Rememberance" day. If we are to remember WWII we must also remember what we fought for? I attended catholic highschool in Alberta during the roaring 80's and if I ever mentioned anything pertaining to fascism, i would be in the hallway or the principals office ASAP. If we are to revive the left it will have to be with the truth and it will have to take place in the schools. But Harpers people already know that and I'm sure they are going to make progressives feel like they are living in Hell. WWIII is a social economic war.

Murray Dobbin's article

Congratulations Murray, you have hit the nail on the head with your observations. I for one will continue the quest for a more humane and democratic Canada. We know this will take a lot of hard work, financing, and holding Stephen Harper's feet to the fire!!!!
Carol Pickup, Victoria, B.C.

political demonizing?

Oh, you make me laugh, alice in Tahsis. Have you not read about the G20? for example? What part of those machinations belong in a democratic country?

But I want to change tack here just a tad, alice...do you work in Tahsis? Own a home? If so, you are one of the fortunate few, yes? Many Canadians are suffering without employment, or with marginal part-time jobs that do not compensate for good jobs lost, and many seniors are suffering, and anyone that takes prescription medication is suffering...yes, there is a lot of suffering in this country. Any government that has pretensions to govern must acknowledge this: exhortations for Canadians to save more and spend less are useless if credit cards are being used to buy prescriptions, and savings have been used up in the job hunt...
One thing that is very clear is that the disconnect between those that 'have' and those that 'have not' has become greater - and perhaps you should keep an open mind here. If we do not have a community that we can count on in some basic ways - us 'have nots' - why, you will do well to be fearful of what may come. There are not enough prisons to hold all of us, and not enough money in the federal budget even if Mr. Harper builds dozens more.

The disconnect in politics mirrors the disconnect in our communities, and it is you 'haves' who have something to lose.

Protest

Why not start with simply not bothering to fill out the 2011 census.

We already know the contempt this government feels for such things by the way it scrapped the mandatory long form.

I think if 60% of Canadians (the same ones who didn't vote for and don't support Harper) were to simply refuse to fill in ANY census and call Pee Wee on his attack upon social programs and the need for reliable statistics that it would get his attention in a hell of a hurry.

Any other suggestions?

too comfortable

My Argentine partner always laments that Canadians are too comfortable. When you have nothing left to lose, you rise up en masse and fight. This is what's happening in Libya. It's what's happened in Latin America over the past decade. Well, Harper may finally bring us to the brink where we are no longer comfortable, are disrespected, our values spat on, and we'll take to the streets and take over to revolutionize for change... In this time of climate crisis, how can we not?!

Progressives vs Ultra Conservatives

There is no doubt that Harper's ultra conservatives will simply heap more of the same economic policies upon us that we've faced for over 20 years. Is our economy better, yes for about 1%, the extreme rich.

There are many things we can learn from the successes of the ultra conservatives, such as building multiple organizations, incrementalling bringing about change over decades, and using and repeating common language. But we need to be careful not to adopt their deceipt, nihilism and disdain for democracy.

Bearer of Bad News

The “orange surge” did not happen in the “Rest of Canada” .... well, maybe 1.7% more than the “Conservative Surge”(+4.7% for the Cons; +6.0 % for the NDP). Quebec is a very fickle electorate, and traditionally has given almost all/most of its seats to either the Liberals(Trudeau), Mulroney (massively, twice, for all of you who believe that the Quebec electorate is so “socially progressive”), the Bloc, and now the NDP. I am delighted that the Bloc is all but gone from federal politics (at least for now), but anyone that thinks that the NDP is firmly established in Quebec for the long term simply doesn’t know history. I do not envy Jack having to kowtow to the demands of his Quebec dominated caucus, and especially with a provincial election approaching in which the PQ are all but a shoe-in. The most troubling aspect of this election for the NDP is how much of the “surge” came from Quebec, both in MP’s (an increase of 65 MP’s, 57 of them from Quebec) and in popular vote (an increase of 2 million, 1.2 million of that from Quebec). This support is extremely soft and tentative at best, and unless Jack jumps through hoops for Quebec over the next four years, it can and will evaporate as quickly as it arrived; and if Jack does placate Quebec at each and every turn, what negative effect will that have on the NDP’s traditional base of support in the ROC and especially those first-time NDP voters outside of Quebec? Lastly, for those of you who don’t know this very simple fact regarding the 2011 results: In the rest-of Canada, the Conservatives had more total votes than the NDP and the Liberals combined (5,204,751/48.1% compared to 5,124,749/47.3%). That should be the biggest concern for everyone, especially those whom believe that a Liberal-NDP merger would instantly solve all ills (and that all those 2,244,758 Liberal voters would automatically vote for a merged party; at best the split would be around 60/40). Isn’t democracy a .........

TracyM

You've drawn the wrong conclusions.

As long as the NDP has a Quebec born leader that people like facing a party whose roots are in Alberta and a leader that is cold, the NDP will dominate in Quebec.

As for the Conservative vote totals, they're warped by the strength in Alberta. Which no one cares about.

Remove that province from the totals and the Lib/NDP vote outside of Quebec and Alberta is higher than the Conservative vote.

And

Let's not forget that the NDP ceiling hasn't yet been reached whereas its obvious the Conservatives have reached theirs.

The NDP is the 2nd choice of most people in the other parties.

What happens to the Liberals is crucial. No one knows what the future holds until we know what the Liberals do.

A Far More Important Vote Ahead in BC

Whatever our concerns about Harper's newly-minted majority, we're in a much bigger world of hurt in BC if we elect another BC Liberal government under Christy Clark - who's proving to be further right than even Campbell or Harper. http://thecanadian.org/k2/item/724-batten-down-the-hatches-damien-gillis

where to put the money

The right works with stealth. They keep their goals hidden from view - though of course as progressives we know what they are up to. But at least a good percentage of those who voted for them don't know (or don't care). So our art, our songs, our films, our jokes, our t-shirts have to keep revealing their true agendas and discredit their lies - more memes. But, sure that is what we do anyway but triple the action.

But I think we have use stealth as well. The PTB on the right think they have everything: they don't need our votes b/c they don't believe in democracy and they can cheat their way if all else fails. They don't need our money (other than our taxes) and they don't need our ideas (other than as something they can mock and use to fortify their base). So we have to figure out what they need and how to use it to bargain with, to restore the balance of power. Layton and the rest of the NDP MPs shouldn't just be using this time for standing up in question period and being happy for moral victories. We don't need to put money into political ads.

Frank, No I haven't ........

a)"As long as the NDP has a Quebec born leader that people like facing a party whose roots are in Alberta and a leader that is cold, the NDP will dominate in Quebec."
Exactly, you are absolutely right, and thanks for proving my point with that statement. Those are a lot of status-quo assumptions, and as such you obviously agree how fickle the Quebec voter is. Gimmie, gimmie, gimmie.
b) "As for the Conservative vote totals, they're warped by the strength in Alberta. Which no one cares about". If you take the Alberta conservative vote totals out completely, the combined Liberal and NDP totals beat out the Conservative by less than half a million (488,933), which is less than 5%. If the Liberal party ceased to exist tomorrow, AND YOU DIDN"T COUNT A SINGLE CONSERVATIBE VOTE FROM ALBERTA, the NDP would have to capture 83.7% of the those ROC ex-Liberal voters to have more votes than the Conservatives. As for your "Alberta. Which no one cares about.", while, that's just an ignorant statement. There is no separatist movement in Alberta (all Canadians first), yet every man, woman and child in Alberta sends a net federal contribution to the ROC of $5,477.00(2007 stats)every year, much of it in equalization payments to pay for the $7/day child care programs and almost free tuition that the PQ loves to brag about. People love to demonize Albertans as a bunch of neanderthals, but please make sure and send the cheque so we can continue to be so socially-progressive andself-rightous. Your dismissive Alberta comment is quite contemptible and I'm disgusted that I wasted this time to respond.

Albertans need to ask

Tracy M points out:
...every man, woman and child in Alberta sends a net federal contribution to the ROC of $5,477.00(2007 stats)every year, *much* of it in equalization payments to pay for the $7/day child care programs and almost free tuition that the PQ loves to brag about.

Although "some" would be more accurate than "much".

The intelligent Albertan is likely asking him/herself why Alberta can't do the same thing and do their own bragging!

TracyM

"Those are a lot of status-quo assumptions, and as such you obviously agree how fickle the Quebec voter is. Gimmie, gimmie, gimmie."

No more so than other voters, especially Albertans. As for assumptions, it is what it is. Those are the facts. When the facts change we'll see if the political landscape does too. Until then, unless you have a crystal ball, you don't know.

"If you take the Alberta conservative vote totals out completely, the combined Liberal and NDP totals beat out the Conservative by less than half a million (488,933), which is less than 5%."

Less than 5% more is still more than the Conservatives.

"If the Liberal party ceased to exist tomorrow"

Let's see if the Liberals cease to exist before we start moving their voters around.

"As for your "Alberta. Which no one cares about.", while, that's just an ignorant statement. There is no separatist movement in Alberta (all Canadians first)"

I lived in Alberta for a year. You couldn't swing a dead cat without hitting a couple of separatists. And yes western separatist parties have come and gone over the years. Even now Albertans resent sharing their oil wealth with their fellow Canadians. And who can blame them, after all there was a lot of hard work involved putting that oil underground.

"the $7/day child care programs and almost free tuition that the PQ loves to brag about."

Albertans could have those programs too but they prefer lower income and sales taxes. Kinda hypocritical to complain about someone else's social programs when you're not willing to pay for your own.

"People love to demonize Albertans as a bunch of neanderthals, but please make sure and send the cheque so we can continue to be so socially-progressive andself-rightous."

You don't send us a cheque. And I can go across the border and buy gas cheaper than Albertans want to sell it to me for.

"Your dismissive Alberta comment is quite contemptible and I'm disgusted that I wasted this time to respond."

Yet you did. If Albertans don't want to be dismissed they can get off their asses and actually do some work. The oil has made you incredibly lazy which is why you vote Conservative overwhelmingly federally and provincially. You don't want the gravy train to end, don't want to go back to the days before oil allowed you all to not pay taxes to the same extent as the rest of us.

I notice though that as soon as retirement hits you head for BC and burden our healthcare system, the same one you never paid into during your working lives.

Bring On BC Election

I couldn't agree more: now that Harper is in, it is absolutely critical to defeat the BC Liberals in the upcoming election.

The biggest single threat to doing that is vote-splitting by Greens. It is either unthinking irony that, by splitting the anti-BC Liberal vote, Greens succeed in electing a party diametrically opposed to safeguarding the environment, or it is willful shilling for environmental destruction. Either way Greens are dupes. Sorry, but you can't argue with success.

Fortune Telling Made Easy

"Let's not forget that the NDP ceiling hasn't yet been reached whereas its obvious the Conservatives have reached theirs."
Based on WHAT?
Where the hell did your OPINION somehow become FACT? You "obviously" have a crystal ball. But then, apparently, it doesn't work ALL the time:
"What happens to the Liberals is crucial. No one knows what the future holds until we know what the Liberals do."
NONE of us "know" what others will do, Frank. I believed Mike Harcourt when he said "A new government can only make about 10% of real change, due to commitments made by previous governments."
I would also add that radical change is not in the best interests of ANY government in Canada.(Although I sincerely hope a change from the current BC government will mean a dramatic reversal of Gordo's Giveaway policies).

cboo44

"Based on WHAT?"

Based on the number of people that told pollsters like Ekos their 2nd choice was the NDP. If you don't believe me you can google the polls.

Frank Graves kept asking the question throughout the campaign and although NDP support kept going up so did the number of people choosing the NDP as their 2nd choice.

On the other side, Andrew Coyne said the same thing as Frank Graves. He said it on CBC, that the Cons have a very high floor and a low ceiling. They can't grow their numbers which is why I've come to believe they will ignore their base and try to change that.

Progressives can disagree.

While I applaud Murray Dobbin for a brilliant, well intended efffort to stir progressive people to a similar motivation that drives conservative partisans, I detect a rigid theme in who fits the centre-left mould.

Is it wrong for progressives to be aware of the limits imposed by chronic deficit spending?
I am in no way a right wing liberal, but I disagree with the assertion that Chretian/Martin liberals 'savaged the Canadian state and role of government'.
Of course there was pain felt by many of us, but their ultimate success in taming decades of growing debt SAVED the role of government in society rather than killing it.

Right wing liberls did flee to Harperland on May 2nd, but I'm sure most of the 2.8 million opting to stay consider themselves progressives and they are essential to any effort opposing the radical right's new vision of this country.

the episode of

the episode of deconstructing dinner i was talking about was from May 22, 2008, and it was called
"BILL C-517 - MANDATORY LABELLING OF GE-FOODS (Part II, The Vote)"

http://www.cjly.net/deconstructingdinner/052208.htm

There's also a transcript. I reread the relevant part, and I was mistaken about con mps being human.. the MP farmer, named merrifield, was indeed misinformed. but when presented with evidence and asked critical questions, he made a logic feedback loop and then still voted against GMO labeling. this makes.. my plan seem even more frustrating and pointless. maybe something like the www.votepact.org strategy is more effective than trying to educate a possibly uneducated MP

also i think we should be

also i think we should be doing all of these... although yeah vote reform is a priority i think, i'll start trying to get involved with that

Frank

I've said it once and I'll say it again - those 58 Quebec NDP MP's will eventually kill the NDP's fortunes west of the Ottawa River. 10 MP's in Quebec is one thing - 58 MP's comprising the majority NDP caucus is another.

Let's look at the some Quebec/NDP political cleavage:

1. Quebec receives ~$8 billion in annual equalization payments - mostly from AB and BC taxpayers;

2. Quebec opposes increasing seat redistribution favouring BC and AB, which is only fair and just for BC and AB due to population growth. Layton has already come down on the side of Quebec;

3. $35 billion in navy procurement contracts are upcoming. Which shipyard will the NDP caucus politically support? Quebec's Davie Shipyards (insolvent and purchased by Italian syndicate), Halifax's Irving Shipyard's, or Seaspan Shipyards in North Vancouver/Esquimalt?

I know you are a diehard New Democrat but man, political reality will soon have to set in. Quebec has always been the crybaby of Confederation demanding federal financial hand-outs to their benefit and everything else in their self-interest.

And any political party that either doesn't deliver for Quebec or support Quebec's position eventually gets tossed.

Cool Hand...

....when did Layton state his opposition to allotting more seats to BC and Alberta to reflect population growth?

I thought both Layton and NDP policy actively supports rep-by-pop AND abolishing the vulgar, useless senate----a promise not only broken by Harper, but reversed in his self serving effort to control everything he can.

about alberta seperating..

there's a sort of microcosm of this in toronto's recent rob ford election. the outlying suburbs and sub cities of toronto, perhaps rightly, loathe toronto, as they are forced to commute to it every day for 2 to 5 hours. and their tax is divided up by bureaucrats that live in the city and its used to fund things that SUV commuters hate (sidewalks, recycling bins, busses, stop lights, whatever). so rob ford says 'i'm your way to get revenge.. vote for me and i'll destroy any progressive changes those fiends in city hall try to impose on you' but he wont actually.. liberate toronto's vassal districts, he'll just attempt to help big auto eviscerate mass transit wihle pretending he's giving the people what they want. it's divide and rule!

Luke

"mostly from AB and BC taxpayers;"

You're forgetting Ontario. Having problems right now but they've been paying into everyone else's kitty for a long time.

"2. Quebec opposes increasing seat redistribution favouring BC and AB, which is only fair and just for BC and AB due to population growth. Layton has already come down on the side of Quebec"

Not quite, Layton came down on both sides. He supports increased seats for AB and BC and for Ontario. Why do you keep forgetting Ontario?? However, he also wants to increase the number of seats in Quebec.

"3."

this kind of thing comes up all the time in our system. Its not like the Cons or the Libs never faced similar issues.

"I know you are a diehard New Democrat but man, political reality will soon have to set in."

Being a New Dem IS political reality.

"Quebec has always been the crybaby of Confederation"

Whatever, they're part of Canada. Their troops have been fighting and dying in Afghanistan.

brg61

"....when did Layton state his opposition to allotting more seats to BC and Alberta to reflect population growth?"

He said the opposite. He supports more seats for BC, Alberta, Ontario and Quebec.

frank: then that means

frank: then that means alberta and bc con voters and the NDP want the same thing, proportional representation. thats gotta be good for something.. we should form an alliance with them on this one specific thing

Tracy M...

"In the 2008 Alberta general election, there was a total of 945,401 votes cast; the only separatist party in Alberta (SPA) got a massive grand total of 119 votes (just slightly more than the communist party; and no, unlike your logic, I don’t think Alberta is a stronghold of communism in Canada)." TracyM.

I think this election, if nothing else, demonstrates that the differences between Alberta and the rest of the country (outside Quebec) are less profound than Frank or G. are trying to paint here.

And make no mistake, I am modestly disturbed by the Texas North tendencies in Alberta. But I think you have more or less made your point.

And I do take the view that Quebec is NOT just another province to Canada like all the others, including Anglo-Alberta. And that Canada is in fact a country of three founding nations, (One Anglo dominant, one Francophone dominant, and the third, the now rather scattered and marginalized Native Nations to Canada). Two of which have fallen victim to an overweening, rather ugly kind of Anglo-Canadian chauvanism. All which is a seething pit of resentment that is building... and must be mutually resolved sooner or later.

Still, Alberta, for its fortunately, still relatively minor, but still there "pro-US petro state" tendencies, is I accept, still likely/hopefully an integral/inserparable part of Canada.

Frank

Quebec's percentage of Canada's population is dropping.

AB & BC combined have 8.252 million people. Quebec has 7.907 million people (both figures as at October 1, 2010).

AB & BC combined have 64 seats v. Quebec's 75. In order for BC & AB combined to have equal representation/per capita compared to Quebec the seat count in AB/BC would have to increase to 78 or another 14 seats.

And you say that Layton wants more Quebec seats, with its dwindling population, to dilute BC/AB MP representation? Nuts!

Harvey Oberfeld gave a good overview:

_____________________________________

No Man Can Serve Two Masters: Jack Layton Chooses Quebec

"Increasing the number of seats in BC, Alberta and Ontario based on growth, would PROPORTIONATELY reduce the voting power of the other provinces.

The Maritimes did not object, nor did Manitoba … but Quebec, already Constitutionally protected with 75 seats even as its population DROPS, would have nothing to do with giving Ontario, Alberta and BC their fair share.

And one of their top allies in Ottawa on the issue (apart from Gilles Duceppe) was Layton.

In fact, he even further. Despite Quebec’s stagnant or, arguably, FALLING population as a percentage of Canada’s total, Layton was reported even arguing that QUEBEC should be given additional seats “because it is important to find a balance between adequate representation and ensuring the influence of a founding nation.

In other words, keep BC’s power in Ottawa down, even as it’s population grows and grows, by giving Quebec more and more seats, even as it size, in relation to the total population, dwindles. Talk about the spoiled child of Confederation!
________________________________________

http://harveyoberfeld.ca/blog/no-man-can-serve-two-masters-jack-layton-chooses-quebec/

Now that's a populist political killer that will eventually come back to bite Layton/ the NDP big time in western Canada (and Ontario).

Can we forget the

Can we forget the recriminations and monday morning quarterbacking?

Dobbin has said that the Left has to do "something" to build itself up. He accepts some guilt for his generation (and mine) in letting things slide to the Harper disaster.

The median age of folks at NDP events (excepting victory rallies) is about twice or more the median at Green events. Lacking in both are the young/middle aged working folks with short haircuts and ordinary jobs that we encounter in going to shops, seeing construction sites, etc. Large groups of people are not "in the tent."

Harper will do his part by making almost everyone worse off, while claiming the opposite. Our job will be to ensure that the population not only understands this, but knows what it can do to correct the situation. A high order.

Jack Layton's immediate challenge is to integrate a set of younger Quebecers with older ROCs into an effective caucus. If he is successful, the caucus will play an essential role in ensuring the facts are known, and also getting the message to different constituencies (in the wider sense as well as the narrower). But I understand that Dobbin's question is what can the rest of us at the "grassroots" do to ensure the messages are heard more widely, to ensure that valid solutions are advanced, understood, widely believed, and widely acted upon in the next election?

Where are the constructive suggestions on these comment boards?

If this sounds like a "boy scout" talking, I was one over 60 years ago. I still think hopefully seeking answers will do more to defeat Harper and strengthen Canada than just resorting to informed cynicism.

Brtitish cats talk about a new voting system

Okay, these are British cats but still for all you depressed kitties out there this is both an interesting take... and a simply explained one on an alternative voting system...even I understand it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HiHuiDD_oTk&feature=youtube_gdata_player

(Rojo Girl, I like your suggestion about the need for stealth.)

Art the Green

"frank: then that means alberta and bc con voters and the NDP want the same thing, proportional representation"

Well, sort of. They want the same number of seats but they don't agree on how to fill those seats. I can't see Alberta wanting to back pro-rep. Look at Saskatchewan, the NDP got over 30% of the vote and no seats. The Conservatives want to keep it that way, their majority depends on it.

DaveS

When I lived in Alberta Trudeau was still the PM. Western Canada Concept was one such party that got a lot of support in kitchen conversations. Not just in Alberta but Saskatchewan too.

The thing is if they have Reform as their government separatist sentiment dissipates but if Harper had lost the election to the NDP for example it would have come roaring back. One has only to read comments on the Globe and Mail website last week to find Albertans threatening separation if Layton became PM.

Albertans feel they are hard done by. A constant chip on their shoulder over equalization payments and policies such as the National Energy Program. Unless and until the rest of Canada recite a "thank you for Alberta" 5 times a day while facing in the direction of Leduc, Albertans will continue to feel they are not appreciated.

I have to say I find an Albertans complaining about Quebec separatists to be hypocritical.

No need for embarrassed

The problem isn't a few folks who, from time to time, might start up a "party" like the 'Western Canada Concept' for example and garner a few votes or even hundreds of votes.

The problem is the quite clear propensity of the 'average' Albertan to feel that he and his fellow citizens are somehow 'put upon' by the fact that the province happens to be wealthy because of the accident of nature...those same citizens seemingly forget that it was their province which - in 1936, defaulted on its own bonds and had to be bailed out by the Federal Government...

Dave

I concur that much of what Harper has said is crap - but it's crap HE believes in...he has NO APPRECIATION of the Quebec 'fact' in Canada - he spins continual nonsense about the 'costs' of appeasing Quebec while ignoring the contributions of Quebec's citizens to the nation and he attacks the legit

whoops!

and he attacks the legitimate aspirations of Quebecers while paying phony lip service to their status as a nation - at the same time that he and virtually every other public figure from Alberta acts like a stuck pig because a 'Liberal Government' decided that this NATION could benefit from an energy policy which would actually consider something other than the profits of foreign owned corporations and the pocketbooks of Albertans...

frank: i was thinking more

frank: i was thinking more of the NDP and Con voters, not MPs, joining forces and demanding this, regardless of wether layton or harper or whoever would go for it.

Frank

No, it's the BQ doesn't want Quebec's share of seats dropped below 25%, even though Quebec's population now represents 23.2% of Canada. Quebec is NOT entitled to 25% of the HoC seats. Quebec is only entitled to 75 MPs and that's it!

Quebec’s seats constitute the baseline for calculating any expansion of the House. And the number of Quebec’s seats cannot be reduced.

Jack and his 59 sovereignist Quebec MP's now fill the BQ's role in Quebec.

Before the next election, MP seat redistribution will occur based upon the 2011 census and BC, AB, and ON will receive both all the new seats as well as their fair share of seats based upon Quebec's MP/ per capita. That will be a big issue on the public radar in the future.

The Cons support the new redistribution. How will the NDP react? If Jack doesn't support the BQ's position, the NDP will be toast in Quebec.

If the NDP doesn't support BC, AB, and ON's position they will be toast in those provinces. It's a Catch-22 conundrum. And now that they are the official opposition, it's akin to jumping from the frying pan into the fire.

That's what happens when the NDP captures 58/75 Quebec seats (a political snake pit), becomes Quebec-centric and not longer is considered a western, populist, anti-Ottawa/anti-establishment political party.

Frank

"I have to say I find an Albertans complaining about Quebec separatists to be hypocritical".

Not me, you are generalizing about most Albertans having separatist aspirations and that is quite simply unfair and incorrect, and normally a tactic of the right (76% of their electorate didn't vote for a separatist party at any time in their history; Quebec'ers did it recently). Alberta makes a net contribution to the federal treasury of plus 21B; Quebec's is minus 8 billion. If Albertans want to bitch a little bit, that's their right, they've paid for it.

And don't whine when you see that it's the Herald; sometimes it's helpful to expand your horizons.

http://www2.canada.com/calgaryherald/columnists/story.html?id=fa618fd4-2cf3-4b64-acce-580827cd5c23

Manning

I've been reading Murray Dobbin's attacks on Reform, Alliance, and now the Conservatives for almost 20 years. He was particularly obsessed with Preston Manning at one time. He must be a very depressed man these days. He's dedicated his career to fighting the Reform menace, and now they have a majority government. Not much to show for a life's work if you ask me.

maybe. but if there was a

maybe. but if there was a way to kick the frame off of some of these issues, underneath we both want the same thing, quite possibly on a lot of issues. maybe when the "right" wants something stupid, they're on their own for that one stupid thing, as opposed to say.. hijacking a democracy and forcing everone who's sort've a fundy or pro capitalist or just someone that really hates unions along for the ride, then winning a majority and then forcing everone else along with you to into some mega hell hole.. they dont really want that! even con voters were ripped off, we should build on that. even if they still believe they're personally benefitting from massive tar sands mining.. one thing at a time.. well everything at once too, we'll need a diversity of tactics

Tommy Douglas on Canada

"Canada is like an old cow. The West feeds it. Ontario and Quebec milk it. And you can well imagine what it's doing in the Maritimes.”

Ah, Cascadia

Interesting to see the political haggle over differing Alberta and Quebec frames, as so eloquently put forward here, but we seem to ignore southern Ontario's mostly shift to the right.

You'd think that the remnants of the Mike Harris "Common Sense Revolution" promoters, kicked out in a previous Ontario election, would not be booted upstairs to the Harper Cons.

You'd think that the G8/G20 fiasco might have shifted Ontario votes the other way.

You'd be wrong. Many former federal Liberals went to the Tories out of NDP fear.

In the 90s, Mike Harris Cons followed Bob Rae's Ontario NDP govt., much like Campbell followed Glen Clark (with Ujjal's patch) here in B.C.

The long & ongoing Conservative and mainstream media frame for the NDP is "higher taxes and reckless spending" (as the federal Liberals before them) and that they, the Cons, manage best for all of us, yet the record shows the opposite, from surplus to huge deficit, much before the 2007 start of the recession. F35s anyone?

Reducing the GST by 2% has not come close to reducing my HST costs, despite Conservative ads.

Taxes on luxuries? How about Greyhound commuter tickets or ferry tickets?

Too bad (or was it intentional ;-), that the INDEPENDENT REPORT on HST vs. GST+PST, which shows, on average, family tax increases of $350 a year, didn't come out before the election. Might have changed a few voters' minds, after all, it was a federal Con. incentive.

Yes, the arrangement will "reduce costs to businesses, in the long term, and the savings will be passed along". If you believe that, I've got an island to sell you. Guess which way I'll vote.

But somehow Ontarians, whose govt. also implemented an HST, bought it and much more.

Must watch, listen, analyze, snoop and report, but it feels a bit like being a pawn in a chess game, and black is winning.

Back to the subject

Nice work Murray. Your best ever. Hits the nail on the head in every respect.

Looking forward to more like this.

Wasn't going to get involved

in this shooting match until I saw Alberta's educational credentials show up. Having about twenty family and friends there, I quickly counted on the fingers of two hands and found six degrees among 'em, five of them in Edmonton and one in Calgary working for the oil patch.

So I had a quick look at Statscan and found the national post-secondary schooling rate in Canada is 49% of 25s-64s. And 45% in Alberta, lower than everyone except Saskatchewan, Nova Scotia and Newfoundland. And same rate as Quebec, where for years it was not only against the church to get educated, but also against the law in some towns.

What that tells me is some people want their education really bad, and some think they know enough already.

Report here:
http://www.statcan.gc.ca/bsolc/olc-cel/olc-cel?catno=81-604-X&lang=eng

Tables here:
http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/81-604-x/2010001/tbl-eng.htm
http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/81-604-x/2010001/tbl/tbla1.4-eng.htm

Hmmmm... guess I won't be able to check these kind of statistics much longer. Just got my census slip yesterday and the wife filled it out on-line. Asked me if I knew my own name, how old I was, where I lived and if anyone else lived with me.

Not a word in here about how much my government values higher education. Which, judging by where our Prime Minister comes from might be "not much".

Actually Having To Think Before They Speak

Is going to be a REAL challenge for the NDP.
"Calling the President of the US a liar", not a good start.
A candidate that didn't campaign, doesn't speak french in a francophone riding, and it would appear falsifies documents?
Jack, pointing out how his NDP would be able to influence a majority government (nice try Jacko) pointed out that 60% of Canadian did not vote for Harper, which he was using to shore up his idea that the NDP have great influence now ..... he failed to notice that the other side of the same coin reveals, the NDP had 70% who didn't vote for them.
When the youngest MP granted an interview to the CBC the NDP 'handlers' quickly stepped in and cancelled the interview.
Welcome to the REAL world Jack and the REAL press, who will now hold you accountable for EVERY word that comes out of your mouth.
It was must easier, just being the comic relief party who could safely criticize those in power, safe in the knowledge no one was really paying attention, or would challenge the statments of your left-wing nut policies.
Party's over Jack, better buckle up.

All quiet on the Tyee front

Man, if I had a nickel for every time someone on here wrapped themselves in faux outrage and claimed they were morally superior, I'd have a lot of nickels.

The sun rose this morning, sort of, the world you inhabit didn't end.

i'm going to get to know you

i'm going to get to know you jim or sheryl and find out what our common ground is. my first instinct was to sarcastically mock you.. but we do have common ground... political cynicism at least.. possibly some other thing, i forgot what it was.. is there some sort of right wing version of the tyee somewhere, i want to see it. i'd also interject that we should be constantly criticizing power, no matter who it is, as a basic duty, what do you think about that

jimorsheryl

The new NDPers are young and all that but many of you on the Right seem to have forgotten what Reform was like when they entered parliament for the first time.

We'll see if any NDPer challenges Harper to a fistfight in the House of Commons. Or, like some Reformers not even bother to read their own party's platform.

"He tells the crowd everything they need to know is in the Reform “Blue Sheet.” “Read it. If you have any questions, we’ll be happy to answer them.” Then he gives them the telephone number of his campaign office. Twice. During the question-and-answer period that follows, several people ask Stinson about his party’s position on specific issues. “I haven’t looked into that one myself but I know we have a position somewhere here in this,” he says, holding up the “Blue Sheet.” It falls to me, the Liberal candidate, to inform the audience of Reform’s position, quoting from the sheet as a furious Stinson looks on."

or

"For me the shining example of parliamentary redneck behaviour remains the former Member of Parliament for Okanagan-Shuswap, Darrel Stinson who, during his first term as a Reform Party MP stood in the House of Commons and asked an opposing MP - "Do you have the fortitude or the gonads to stand up and come across here and say that to me, you son of a bitch?"

Stinson has also suggested that the way to prevent spousal abuse was to give women hand guns AND he called then Progressive Conservative leader Jean Charest (now the Liberal premier of Quebec) a "fat little, chubby, little sucker". Then Stinson put the icing on the cake by challenging a Liberal MP to a fight in the House of Commons."

LOL

those are indeed pertinent

those are indeed pertinent counterpoints.. but
i'm also seeing how this polarization forces us to defend thinds we dont care about. i'm not 100% happy with the NDP, we disagree on some things. voting for them was a compromise. i wonder if jim or sheryl compromised to vote con, or if he believes in everything they do and say (he would be in a very weird percentile if that was true.. 90% of people support mandatory GM labeling, yet all the con MPs opposed it and half the liberals too.. not counting absentees

Send Money

I'm going to send money to the NDP. I recognize Jack's masterful timing in his pulling the plug on Paul Martin in 2006, and repeating that mastery this year. Those two stunts are certainly worth a couple of buck seventy-fives. Street fighting Jack saw Iggy as an easy mark and sucker-punched him out of the arena. Now Jack's going to straighten out Québec. Go for it Jack, there's a buck seventy-five in it for you from me.

realisticman

Jack pulled the plug on Martin?? Why repeat something that has been proven wrong over and over on here?

As for your view that Layton is a master strategist, nice of you to say but one can't help but believe you're being sarcastic.

Of course when one takes into account your strident support for the Conservatives over the years it all sort of makes sense as to why you'd want to stir those pots doesn't it?

Now that the NDP has center

Now that the NDP has center stage it should revisit the continued production in the province of Quebec of asbestos. It will be telling to see how it balances the desire to stop the production of a third world bound carcinogen vs. the union jobs producing it in the province that elected them in.

bob1964

I don't think there is any doubt where the NDP stands.

If you look at the NDP's website

http://www.ndp.ca/press/corporate-welfare-for-asbestos-continues

it says : "Only the New Democrats voted to stop the government handout to support asbestos."

plus

http://www.ndp.ca/press/quebec-s-largest-labour-group-joins-fight-to-ban-asbestos

From the Globe and Mail

All of the below are quotes from the article :

The exit poll analysis found that everyone knew about the NDP’s so-called “Vegas girl.” Indeed, Ms. Brosseau won office even though it was well-publicized that she barely spoke French, that she had spent little time during the election in her Quebec riding and that she went to Vegas on holiday.

“Participants told us they see this as proof that Canadians voted based on parties and leaders rather than their local candidate,” Ensight’s Jacquie LaRocque told The Globe. “Hardly a single participant across the entire country told us they voted for their local candidate.”

Came from this link
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/ottawa-notebook/why-voters-elected-the-ndps-vegas-girl-anyway/article2010885/

The Quebec vote explained

My quick analysis of the Quebecers' vote as 'one of them':

- Conservatives: Since the Mulroney era and it's Schreiber scandal, we were not hot for this party. Harper has made this even worst since the day he leads the CPC.
- Liberals: Were the natural federal choice for most of us until the gun registry scandal. Since then, they're ghosts over here. And we are stubborn...
- Bloc: Backed by the vast majotiry until we realized early in the latest campaing that they were just allowing Harper to maintain it's position at the top. But, the nail in the coffin came with Gérald Larose's bad mouthing (really bad) of Layton for absolutely no concrete reason. Uncalled for lack of respect is an offence that we really don't like.
- The Greens: Most of us here (still) don't even know they exist.
- NDP: Which left the NDP as the only choice, with 3 helping factors: the good hearted Jack (we love seemingly honest and good hearted ppl), the very well versed and experienced MP Thomas Mulcair, and finally, the fact that they never danced the Qc bashing dance.

Don't look anywhere else for an explanation. It was not a strategic vote; it was a 'nobody-else-merite' vote.

Sioc

Thank you and please excuse the constant bashing of Quebec here in the West. Not all of us think that way, just a very vocal minority.

Corporatocracy won't abdicate because of a well-financed left

The corporate world runs western gov'ts. I don't see how this can be denied. Any political party that has a chance at governing will inevitably be reminded of this core fact.

In the actual state of things, the ppl could maybe counter this structure by financing a lobby at least as big as theirs. We all know that it can't happen unless each citizen had it's own lobbyist. And THAT is not forseeable. And on top of that, it would be funny to lobby our own governing entity...

I see only one practical way of imposing a gov't by the ppl for the ppl: Co-operative movements. As some south american workers have done lately, we have to take industries in our own hands by creating co-operative entities that will compete with the big boys on their playing fields.

Think about it: the elites make their money and power on their employees back. No employees = no product/service to sell, and consequently, no cards to play in the political game.

That's where co-operative movements come in big. Workers leaving their corporate employers and starting their own co-operative entities to retake the markets left with no corporate providers.

It's feasable and it's the only way to force the rule of the masses over the much to powerful aristocratic elites. All the while keeping to our entrenched consumer model, because THAT is something most of us won't allow to change.

Anyhow, I'm tired of reading analysts who pose the left-right governance as the only thing that determine the course of our world. Because these are just part of a structure entirely controlled by the big ghosts whom we are not allowed to pronounce the name: corporations.

Cheers to that!

Yes Frank I'm familiar with

Yes Frank I'm familiar with their support to stop asbestos production. It is easy to be against something as obviously destructive as asbestos from the sidelines, but when you have the possibility of losing a seat, or opposition status.....
Would they put principles over votes?

bob1964

Yes. I have no idea why anyone would assume otherwise. The NDP was very openly against asbestos production while at the same time they were trying hard to increase their presence in Quebec.

Actually winning seats in Quebec won't change that. After all, if their policy on asbestos was going to hurt them it would have already hurt them.

Just as their stand against subsidies to oil companies stands whether or not Linda Duncan keeps her seat.

Frank

Alberta is well aware of the NDP's view on the oil industry,it is one of the reasons that Linda is so lonely in that province.
As many of the people voting in Quebec seemed to have jumped onto the orange bandwagon at the last minute, do you think they are as aware that their lively hood my now be in jeopardy at the hands of the people whom they picked to represent them?
Will Jack

bob1964

I can't see how the majority in Quebec wouldn't know the NDP is against asbestos. Perhaps that's why more than half the people there voted for one of the other 3 parties? I have no idea.

I'm not sure if you looked at my second link but the Confederation of National Trade Unions in Quebec is also against asbestos. And so the NDP is not the only left-wing group against asbestos.

As for the NDP in Alberta, I don't think their policy on subsidies to oil companies is holding them back. After all, they used to have no seats in Alberta.

bob1964

Frank is right.
According to the most recent numbers I could gather, there were 950 jobs in asbestos mines in the province of Qc as of 2005.
950. I don't see a big political risk opposing the industry.
And, I know that close to 100% of voters here are hoping the industry will disappear.

Again, that is a case where the big pockets running the show send misinfo because they certainly don't want to loose their cash printing machine.

Frank

Not Quebec bashing. The Reform Party became dominant in the west in 1993 because of Mulroney's Tories pandering to Quebec.

It's just a latent western undercurrent to what is perceived as the crybaby of Confederation.

And what I have stated earlier up thread is already coming to fruition:

----------------------------------------
Tories To Add House of Commons Seats

OTTAWA - The Conservative government will move forward with plans to add 30 new seats in the House of Commons from Ontario and the West.

Under the Tory plan, the seat count in the House of Commons would grow to 338. Ontario would gain 18 seats, Alberta would gain five, and B.C. would gain seven.

The NDP supports redistributing and increasing the number of seats to better reflect the population, but the party’s democratic reform critic says Quebec shouldn’t lose out.

http://www.torontosun.com/2011/05/05/tories-to-add-house-of-commons-seats
---------------------------------------
Lose out? Gimme a break.

---------------------------------------

"NDP has a separatism problem with new Quebec MPs

But there is also the possibility that the NDP will take up the role recently played by the Bloc, making demands on behalf of Quebec, and that such a stance will create discord inside and outside its caucus.

The last federalist party to contain so many nationalist Quebecers -- the Mulroney Tories of the 1980s and early '90s -- blew up into regional factions and led to the creation of the Bloc and Reform parties.

Westerners felt that the party had betrayed its base, and prominent sovereigntists like Lucien Bouchard bolted to create the Bloc."
-----------------------------------------
http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/Politics/20110505/ndp-quebec-separatism-110505/

Bruce MacKinnon Cartoon

Go to this site, today, to see an excellent cartoon about Harper.

http://thechronicleherald.ca/toon.php

Sioc

I find it hard to believe that you are actually from Quebec.

The NDP was looking at winning Mulcair's Outremont seat, Boivin in Gatineau and perhaps another one or two seats, if they were lucky, at the outset of the campaign.

The NDP ran "fenceposts with hair" in the remaining 75 Quebec ridings as they always do - none ever expected to win.

The provincial NDPQ was disbanded back circa 1990 when its members were mostly left-wing/ sovereignists who backed Gilles Duceppe as the federal BQ candidate.

The NDPQ has now morphed into the left-wing/sovereignist Quebec Solidaire, which is polling at 10%+ in Quebec provincially.

I'll wager that most of the new NDP MPs in Quebec are either Quebec Solidaire members or supporters.

For example, the new NDP MP for Rosemount-La Petite-Patrie is Alexandre Boulerice.

Boulerice, is still a member of Quebec Solidaire and a self described "militant" who strongly supports Quebec independence - a real nasty piece of work. There are many other such examples that have also been reported.

Most of the newly minted NDP MPs from Quebec also have ties to Quebec Solidaire and the two parties also have direct organizational links.

Even Quebec Solidaire co-leader Francoise David and Amir Khadir congratulated Layton:

"We are gladdened by this result and congratulate Messrs. Mulcair and Layton and the hundreds of NDP militants whose determination and fighting spirit permitted this spectacular gain.”

Just wait another few months as most of the Quebec NDP MPs and their backgrounds will be scrutinized by the MSM. Alot more information
will trickle out about their sovereignty links.

If you think that most if the new Quebec MPs are "federalist", then I have one slightly used Brooklyn Bridge available for sale.

It's gonna be fun watching how those political cleavages work out with the rest of the NDP MP's scattered across English Canada.

r'man

GWest is right, it was non-binding.

Plus, Harper or Duceppe would have introduced the motion on one of their days.

Plus, Paul Martin had promised to call an election himself.

"April 21 - Prime Minister Paul Martin addressed the nation at 19:02 eastern time and promised to call an election within 30 days of the final report of the Gomery Commission, due on December 15, should his government survive to that date, while outlining the steps his administration had taken to address the sponsorship scandal."

Non-Binding.

So you are saying that Jack didn't really mean it. He had his fingers crossed?

In mid-November 2005 Layton offered Paul Martin several conditions in return for the NDP's continued support, most notably a ban on private health care in Canada. When the Liberals turned him down, Layton announced he would introduce a motion requesting a February election.

Someone should have told Martin that Jack's ultimatum was non-binding. Carry on Paul, Jack's just blowing smoke.

Layton's campaign direction also caused a break between him and Canadian Auto Workers union head Buzz Hargrove over the issue of strategic voting. Hargrove preferred a Liberal minority government supported by the NDP and he had earlier criticized Layton for participating in the motion of non-confidence that brought down the Liberal government.

History will show that Jack was there at the centre of the action. I doubt that Jack disagrees.

In the resulting election of January 2006 Stephen Harper's Conservatives won and Harper became Prime Minister.

Luke

The only way your party will ever see power again is to merge with my party.

Something to think about eh?

I realize you would join the Cons before you'd join me but I'm just telling you you need to start thinking about your party's future, or lack thereof.

Harper's Non Majority

Harper only garnered 39% of the vote. 61% voted AGAINST Harper. He has no logical mandate nor a democratic majority. This is not how democracy works. People need to keep this in mind, even though the media keeps mistating the facts by calling it a majority mandage.

Cool Hand

Je suis Québécois...

Still, I have to admit that I was writing an opinion based on presumptions.
After exploring the issue a bit more, here are my conclusions:

Indeed many (about 40%) of the NDPQ MPs can be traced back to their nationalist roots.

However, there is a distinction to underscore in that, like most of the separatists who voted for them, they came to realize that, with the ousting of the Bloc, the federal landscape was no more an arena that the movement could use to feed their arguments for separation. They had to turn the page on this avenue.

So, the next 'page', that was an inevitable consequence, suggested that since the federal parliament could not help the cause, they had to use it at least to make sure that it could be influenced to take into account their views on the (even if auto-imposed) federation.

Basically, we're giving an other honest chance to federalism in hoping to fit in because the previous strategy failed miserably.

That is what transpires, over here.

With Harper's election, it

With Harper's election, it has become clearer that we, BC residents', don't need another right wing government. Progressives need to TALK to people every day and spell out what a LIBERAL right wing government has in store for BC -- . Commitment to childcare, commitment to affordable housing, commitment to ending homelessness, commitment to ensuring BC has a high minimum wage ... the list goes on and on ... on how the LIBERALS HAVE NO INTEREST working families.

Ms. Clark is making all the right moves to get elected .. parks, teachers, etc. and then once elected she will unleash her contempt for social institutions and services for working people. NO TO A BC LIBERAL GOVERNMENT.

REVOLUTION

I may not have enough pre-tax income to give, but I will write, volunteer, rally, and do everything I can to change this country. Citizens of the left, fight.

Jeffery J.

Actually only 24% of the elegible vote - about the same as previous election.

Stephen Harper's Solid Majority Mandate

Kelly nails it in Thursday's Post.

"It’s early yet, but easily the most annoying post-election theme to date is the complaint that “60 per cent of Canadians voted against the Conservatives.”

Please people.

Since 1867, only five elections have ended with the winner attracting more than 50% of the vote. In other words — now write this down rabble fans — the majority of Canadians almost always vote against the winner.

The only prime ministers to ever top 50% (and they managed it only once each) were Mulroney, Diefenbaker, King, Borden and Laurier (note, that’s three Tories and just two Liberals.)

The majority of Canadians voted against Pierre Trudeau every time he ran, i.e. five times out of five. Lester Pearson never came close to 50%. Mackenzie King ran the country for more than 20 years and only topped 50% once (in 1940). Sir John A. Macdonald’s best campaign was his last, when he attracted 48.6% of the votes. Jean Chretien’s best was just over 41% in 1993, even though the Conservatives were in the process of being destroyed.

So you could hardly make a more meaningless, insipid, unoriginal point than the fact that “60% of the country voted for someone else.” That’s what happens when you have more than two parties. Tell us something we don‘t know."
National Post

Not exactly

That argument is both meaningless, insipid and unoriginal.

It's a fine example of the logical falacy known as asking the loaded question - something along the lines of asking if someone has stopped beating his wife.

Kelly, like many of his compatriots at the 'Post'(and a few folks around here) is only interested in harassing or upsetting his interlocutor. He has no intention of listening to a reply, or actually confronting the democratic 'deficits' which - in terms of citizen involvement, voting behavior, fairness, equity, equality of opportunity and social cohesion, are clear evidence that continuing to do the same thing when you know it to be wrong, wasteful and harmful is a classical example of stupidity.

What is REALLY absurd, is the fact that there are still places where such logical fallacies can be published and repeated.

If such an argument has any credence at all we would still have slaves, women wouldn't have the vote and only men of property would sit in parliament.

However, changing things for the better and enhancing democracy IS a hard road – I see Jolly Old isn’t up to it either:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/av-referendum/8499151/AV-referendum-Britain-overwhelmingly-votes-No.html

Privilege and rotten boroughs die hard I guess.

My Teeth are on Edge!

Just thinking about those sour grapes you guys feast on.

Canadian's have been quite happy with the present system of government for the past 140 years. Suddenly, just when they thought they were going to slide into the driver's seat but their boy actually snatched them a nice defeat, a small group of leftie extremists are yelping over the system. Boy did they wake up to what they wrought. The operation was a success but the patient died.

New Flash

Canadian's(sic) have been quite happy with the present system of government for the past 140 years. says the R/man...

Apparently you need a history lesson:

Perhaps I can mention just a few points you may have overlooked:
1) MacDonald's prorogation during the Pacific scandal;
2) The WWI wartime election over conscription which gave 'special' votes to women who happened to be related to soldiers overseas;
3) Women not having the franchise;
4) No votes for Chinese, Japanese and Aboriginal people;
5) More problems with conscription - WWII
6) The 1970 War Measures Act - against whom only Tommy Dounglas had the bones to stand up;7
7) Federalism and the FLQ;
8) Two referendums on separation;
9) Pee Wee's prorogation and contempt of parliament (two times each)....

That's only a partial list - I haven't even mentioned western separatism and alienation or three generations of unhappiness from the losers in the Newfoundland referendum.

I know you're an immigrant and I hate to bring it up, but the suggestion that Canadians have every been happy with the political arrangements in this country is risible.

If it wasn't the government and its high-handed ways it was the CPR...the one constant in this country is that Canadians ALWAYS have real problems with their government. Our soldiers overseas had similar problems with their officers (most of whom were incompetents too) during each of the world wars too. You can look it up.

No Wonder we are so Happy.

When I came to Canada I understood that majority governments were not unusual but almost never did they receive over 50% of the popular vote. This is clearly because Canada has many different political parties. The USA has really only two parties and majority popular votes are more than likely the result. That's not the system that most Canadians want.

I guess you guys heard that all the jobs lost in the recession have now come back. At least, that's what Stats Can said yesterday. It is understandable considering the brilliant way that our administration has steered the economy in these difficult times.

Canada, 21st April 2011: "British expats have rated Canada as the best nation to live in during a recent British expatriates’ survey

British expatriates give a range of reasons for Canada being the favorite immigration destination during the latest survey. It offers best healthcare, banking services and high standards of education which contribute to make quality of life in Canada best among different nations."

http://www.canadaupdates.com/content/canada-best-nation-live-%E2%80%93british-expats-16370.html

and a stable government.