You are so right Ed.

Harper deliberately hid his real personality. He couldn't use power with a minority so he was careful not to display arrogance. lots of folks knew what was to come if he got a majority but a lot were fooled - only once I hope.

I also saw twit Bill O'Reilly on TV today making excuses that hurricane Sandy was the only reason Obama won.

Romney could not have done it

There are too many extreme people in the GOP and the Tea Party for Romney to have wrangled into submission as a common-cause coalition of the right.

It still amazes me that Harper gets away with the style he's unveiled since he got a majority.

Harper Lies His Way To Power.

Harper ran $25 milion worth of adds a year before the election, that is cheating.
He brainwashed people to think he was the best manager of the Canadian economy, all the while running the largest deficits in Canadian History.
He has spent $28 million on the 1812 War so far, who gives a crap!
Yesterday I watched CPAC news and the NDP asked why Harper did not use the Mercedes S Type bomb proof cars offered free by the India government? Harper took his own car at a cost to taxpayers of $36,000 per hour for a week! How dare he waste our money!
Romney was whipped last night, thank God!
To me Harper is not the leader of Canada.
My MLA is John Duncan, might as well put a manakin in his chair.....

Don't think so Harv

Neither Mitt Romney, nor any other Republican 'leader', has the ability to whip his caucus as Pee Wee does.

Your thesis fails because of a fundamental misunderstanding of the differences between the two governmental systems in Canada and the USA.

You simply can't compare a parliamentary system with the US bicameral republic.

m i

Give the guy a break once in a while grant,he means well.

There are a couple of key

There are a couple of key differences between Romney's position and Harper's position which actually made it impossible for Romney to have emulated Harper in this way.

First, Harper was solidly in charge and in control of his party. Romney was not and never was. In many ways he was just the figurehead the party decided to put forward for this election. Harper actually had the means to silence and ignore the far-right extremists in his party. Romney did not.

Second, Harper gets the good fortune of facing a divided opposition. Without vote-splitting among liberals, centrists and progressives between the Liberals and NDP, Harper would never have even had a ghost of a chance to be PM at all.

Harpers Majority

The main reason that Harper got a majority was that people were tired of having so many elections one after the other. Too soon! Another reason is that he promised to abolish the gun registry, that was a small present for small minds to make them happy. Notice how he baited them on and did not delivering it right away.

Romney would have gotten in if he chose the right running mate like Ron Paul. Ron Paul had a large following, together with Romney they would have broke the 50% mark.

Corollary

I guess the corollary to the notion that the U.S. Republican candidate would have won had he been as clever as his Canadian equivalent: The U.S. electorate was smart enough to deny this right wing nut job from becoming their leader. In Canada, surely, "We won't get fooled again!".

Graham Robertson

Impossible

"Romney Would Be President If He'd Emulated Harper"

With the GOP it's the tail that wags the dog.

The USA got a Republican President anyway...

... he just runs on the Democratic ticket.

Case in point: Obama delivers a Republican health care bill that originated as the proposal of a right-wing think-tank (the Heritage Foundation) - an enormous giveaway that entrenches the private health insurance industry as the lynchpin of health care delivery - and the Republicans all vote against it because they call it a government takeover and socialism, and say that it won't work.

Now, of course it won't work - but they're dishonest about the reasons WHY it won't work. It won't work because subsidizing a for-profit, publicly-traded health insurance industry that has completely screwed up the US health care system is a recipe for them to raise premiums and for health care costs to go up. Which they are - Romney was right about that, but not honest about the reason.

But you'll never see that conversation take place as long as the Democratic Party feels that it can pass shitty health care bills, sell people out with more free trade deals, cater to Wall Street when they burn the house down, and then run an election on a platform of "At least we don't think some rape is legitimate". The Democratic Party feels no need to offer any actual solution or prescription for the economy, poverty, or health care as long as they feel they can position themselves one step removed from crazy and browbeat people to vote for them on that basis.

And in that vein, why should the Republican Party change? The further right they march, the further right the Democratic Party marches along with them. Maybe not on all social issues, but on the economically substantial ones. Obama has had far fewer federal financial fraud prosecution cases than Reagan, Bush I and Bush II - and he had a hell of a lot more to work with.

Take a look at what's happening already - we're a couple of days after the election and Obama is already in pursuit of his Grand Bargain - cuts to Medicare and Social Security (which will not be reversed) in exchange for some nebulous closing of tax loopholes (which can easily be lobbied back open). You can bet that in 2014, the Democratic message will be "We cut Social Security and Medicare, but at least we didn't raze them to the ground like the Republicans want to".

......................@Silthas

"The USA got a Republican President anyway..."

Excellent commentary, Silthas.

And, It's really nice to see you adding to these Tyee pages, Harvey. It's been my pleasure to watch you hold your ground while the province and the country has moved so far toward the corporate (Reform Party) line that we are in danger of losing even more sovereignty. Though I believe my place has generally been somewhat left of yours, it is an interesting commentary on the state of our governments that what was once middle-of-the-road thinking is now considered left of center.

Barack Obamavision, The Second Coming

Part I

The big errors came late to this contest, looking for a rose garden fumbled ball gotcha moment during debate number II, not denouncing the one candidate he endorsed over the "life can begin at rape" comment followed by the late, not fashionably late but the re-arrival of Donald Trump, along with special guest appearances by..Jack Welch..Rudy Guiliani..

Mitt Romney had to be perfect in the homestretch to have a snowball`s chance in hell of becoming president, he also needed shackles, chains and muzzles to keep gnashing fangs and forked voices of Republican reptilian relics from ascending to public airwaves..

Jack Welch claimed, in an hysterical rant on Peirs Morgan that September job numbers were "rigged", Mr. Welch and company were probably unaware at the time they made that ridiculous claim, unaware they sowed the first seeds of defeat for Romney, a crude statistical footnote of history ate Jack Welch alive from the inside, no president has been reelected president with unemployment over 8.00%...That September jobs report brought the unemployment level to 7.8%, nothing robust, nothing to fear but so hung-up was Jack Welch over the difference between 8.1% and 7.8% that at..

....at that very moment Jack Welch`s horse in the race Mitt Romney became glue and maybe it`s contagious, out they came, Richard Mourdock of Indiana and the rape is life comment, the one candidate Mitt Romney endorsed, a blink of the eye statement that infuriated female, no, make that infuriated everyone..

The game and Mitt Romney`s fairytale run for Whitehouse gold officially ended when, don`t tell the paid pundits and talking heads but when Donald Trump and re-birther II, the money-passports-charity-school records hail Mary pass went backwards in the face of hurricane Sandy....Rudy Guiliani too showered himself in his own yellow liquid urinarygold, firing barbs and treasonous slurs from a campaign rally, really Rudy, maybe it would have been more effective if George W was with you,

Barack Obamavision, The Second Coming, part II

President Barack OBAMA will indeed win the presidency, and win easily, 303 electoral college votes and to tell you the truth, the re-affirming of his mandate was never in doubt, Romney`s message to America, a message bellowed from the privileged royal railing was vacant, what message, that Bush`s mess wasn`t cleaned up sufficiently, that he, a Bain`s crony capitalist raider knew better....No, the people know better, even those that say they believe Romney has magic beans, one snap of his gold-plated thumb and corporations will pay more money and hire redundant drones, even in those wishful hearts the truth is on display. America has always been troubled with humility. even when earned.

Decades of right-wing corporate dogma, bit by bit local politicians and legislators sold America out, outsourcing to slave labor countries, intellectual thefts run rampant, lobbyists with individual needs that ranked high above the aspirations of the many..

Blame the blackman, blame the Kenyan, America by god couldn`t have done this to itself, Ronald Regan, trickle down, George W Bush, trickle trickle bang bang ..A tired corporate run entity on a debt spiral, racing headlong into a gravitational black-owe(hole), leave the cupboards bare and suck every last breath out of America`s sail and hand it to the Blackman and when...

Barack Obamavision, The Second Coming, part III

and when Barack Obama attempted anything tea-partying obstructionists and bar-bouncing Boeners said no, not on their watch, so bad was the mess George W Bush left America the only option Republicans had was to defend it, Mitt Romney, poster boy for success in America, born of silver spoon pedigree, sheltered and well- helled, educated and placed in the position of modern day robber-baron and Mitt flourished, his beckon call, the $billion dollar man with the never having to work social butterfly tag-along-Anne, 1% club members sent to defend the "method"..More trickle down economics laden with financial land-mine instruments..

Maybe there is no real difference, maybe once in office you meets the boys, the Chairman of the Fed, private bankers, heads of communist countries like China, the Koch brothers, where you are merely handed a script and asked to play a role..

I can only hope that right and wrong still exist.

Barack Obama is real, Michelle Obama is real too, I look in their eyes and see that racism, and racial verbiage using words like noose and nigger aren`t foreign language to them, they live in a time that still prevents people like them from attending places like that, places where class of wealth are keys of entry, or locks of denial.

I too wanted to believe Mitt Romney, snap my fingers and change the world, high-paying jobs for everyone and country club memberships....Then I awoke..

Barack Obama, the best of a bad-lot...

You have nothing to lose Mr. President, forget compromise, ram through the people`s agenda, healthcare, better education, social justice, draw lines in the sand.

The Presidency of Barack compromise Obama is over..

The presidency of Barack Mandated by the People to Govern America Obama begins.

Congratulations

Wingnuts

Romney's people were well aware that they needed to tack toward the centre in order to win, hence the etch-a-sketch comment from their campaign manager. But, with their weak party system (very different from Canada's) it's very difficult to keep the crazies quiet. This has been a constant problem for the Republicans and will continue to be.

@Silthas "The Democratic Party feels no need to offer any actual solution or prescription for the economy, poverty, or health care as long as they feel they can position themselves one step removed from crazy and browbeat people to vote for them on that basis."

Not true. The Democratic Party may not succeed in getting progressive legislation passed very often, but it's not for lack of trying. There are many examples of progress led by the Democrats across the country -- same-sex marriage was just passed in three states; Californians just approved a $6 billion dollar tax increase to pay for education; Obamacare is a helluva lot better than the system they had before (and passing it cost them control of the House). Obama is a centre-left politician trying to operate in a country with a very strong right-wing and a very weak tradition of social democracy. I'm not satisfied with his achievements, but there is a huge difference between him and the Republicans.

@Booker

Of course the reason the national Democratic Party doesn't succeed in getting progressive legislation passed very often is for lack of trying. Bush and the Republican Party actually tried to pass conservative legislation, and they had no trouble doing so when they were in power. When Democrats pass something progressive, it's usually on social policy - the Wall Street titans really don't care whether or not same-sex couples can marry or go fight in a war.

As to health care, "Obamacare" was passed not by initiating a public dialogue about health care, explaining what was needed to actually fix the system, or fighting for any kind of principle. It was passed by cutting deals with the health insurance and pharmaceutical industries to keep their profits healthy, and by throwing more public money at a completely broken private system that needed to be dismantled, not subsidized. The Republican Party doesn't actually have any sincere objection to it, their rage is all for show because it was passed by a Democrat. It was their own proposal and Mitt Romney's own bill.

I was following all this quite closely, and through it all, polls kept consistently showing that most Americans - even half of Republicans - were in favor of a public, not-for-profit health insurance plan to be offered by the government for people to choose instead of private insurance. But of course the health insurance industry wanted no part of that, and it was therefore jettisoned.

The Democratic Party insisted that even though their health care bill was seen as lousy, the proof of the pudding would be in the eating - that once it was passed and people got to see how it improved their health care and lowered their premiums, the American public would warm up to it. Not surprisingly, since a solution that consists of propping up the private health insurance industry was never going to accomplish that, most Americans polled want it repealed.

Here's Obama in 2008, criticizing Bush for cutting deals with Billy Tauzin the pharmaceutical lobbyist and preventing Medicare from negotiating for discounts on prescription drugs:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NCRO0g9CfAw

Guess what part of Obama's process for passing his health care bill was? You guessed it - cutting a deal with Billy Tauzin the pharmaceutical lobbyist to prevent Medicare from negotiating for prescription drug discounts. That would have hurt industry profits.

That's not to say that the national Democratic Party is devoid of any good people - it's good that Elizabeth Warren won a Senate seat on Tuesday. It's just that the national Democratic Party has not, is not, and will not in any meaningful way move in any direction that is progressive on substantial economic issues - and that Obama is not one of those "good people". The public wasn't exactly applying pressure on Obama to shield Wall Street from accountability and prosecutions in 2009, when the Democrats controlled everything.

Romney doesn't control the Republicans, they controlled him!

House Speaker John Boehner made it pretty clear yesterday that the Republicans aren't about to alter their positions on issues despite Obama winning a second term. I am convinced that Obstructionism will continue to be their modus operandi even if the USA ends up going over the fiscal cliff.

The Republicans are still owned by the Tea Partiers and the far right wing of the party, so almost nothing has changed. It's too bad that such a large number of Americans are so stuck on their antiquated ideologies and biases, as shown by how strong the right wing vote was, despite the lies and deceit being used by Romney and Ryan.

In past history aristocracies

In past history aristocracies used religion to control their people, to enslave and mass murder them on the advice and legitimized by their priests.

Nothing has changed. Today's aristocracies are using the religion of imaginary monetary economics for the same purpose, on the advice and legitimized by the priesthood of "economists".

The best part of the racket is the "national debt" where governments are borrowing monies, at high interests, that already belongs to them by law.

What the world needs are brain testing machines to find out what their "leaders" have in their heads ?

Ed Deak.

harper's comments today.

“What we do have to realize when we deal with India, as opposed to some other countries that we’re dealing with in the developing world – this country is a democracy,” said Harper.

“And that means that governments cannot simply dictate a whole set of policy changes to happen the next day. That means governments must develop consensus behind policy changes. And that, in this country is not easy. We understand that.”

“At the same time I’m also a believer that although democracy can slow things down from time to time, in the long term, democracy produces more robust consensus. That means better things for the long-term trajectory.”

I would have expected some intrepid reporter to have asked him if this was not just a little inconsistent. He accepts the slow pace of democracy in India but not in Canada. Here we sign deals in secret and refuse parliamentary debate but in India they take their time and (get this) "develop consensus".

You would think he would choke on a comment like that but no he's not going to change when it comes to China - and it isn't a democracy.

The great democracy of India

The great democracy of India has 15 million kiddie slaves, who'll send "cheap" products to us for our non renewable resources and China is called a Peoples' Democracy.

Do you think Harper knows, or has the intelligence to comprehend these facts ?

When you look at the pictures of Harper and US Speaker John Boehner, can you tell the difference between their eyes?

The only difference is that Harper's handlers put glasses on him to cover up his eyes.

Ed Deak.

The "Cliff"

Yikes!

This is apolitical.

http://www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/EW5IdwltaAc?rel=0

skywalkers re: Harpers comment

Thank you for posting Harpers sermon to the Indian people. I feel that he gave it with covert contempt when he could not dictate his will to the Indian government. I wonder when he refers to "some other countries" if he meant Canada. His lies and hypocrisy will entangle him.

The nut right runs the GOP

Nice article but not possible in the states. Romney had to morph from a "Light Right" moderate to become the Wing-nut Right in order to secure the GOP ticket. I agree that if the GOP ever wants to rule again they have to tone down the right wing nut bars and present themselves as somewhat centrist, but that is not about to happen any time soon. Just look a the candidate pool for the GOP ticket. I was ripe with absolutely insane candidates, the only one that made partial sense was Ron Paul, and he is pretty much out there as well. No, to win the ticket Romney had to ramp up his conservatism and he sealed it with that oh so handsome (and Lilly white) Ryan. I'm glad they went that route, at least they were more honest than Harper, they clearly stood out as ultra right wing and so the country made the choice (the right one I believe). Harper just lied and presented himself as a moderate, when really he should be in there with the GOP nuts in the states.