Election 2015

[MARS]

The fact that only this kid was caught suggests to me he's taking the hit for whoever was directing him. It's far more likely that this goes up the ladder than it was a one-off prank by a junior staffer.

I agree with you, 100% actually.  I would hope that EVERY party has some sort of cell working away in a back room, generating a "dirty tricks" campaign.  This cell should be removed enough to provide deniability for the party if they were ever caught out.  And yeah, someone is going to take the fall if things go south.  I would expect that person to be well compensated for being the fall guy/gal though.  I would consider any party that didn't at least entertain this notion in some form to be rather unsophisticated and naive.  I would suggest someone like a Chief of Staff would be well placed to oversee this - again, in a fashion that provides complete deniability for the candidate or party in question.

I just don't think that this kind of thing is limited to the CPC, is all.

 

[Kilo_302]

We all have low expectations of politicians at this point, but I do think public service is a noble endeavor (even if the majority of those who pursue it tend to be on the megalomaniacal side). Anyone who actively tampers with the election process, whether it's Dean Del Mastro or this staffer should be punished to the full extent of the law (no matter the party affiliation, lest anyone think I'm a Liberal or NDP supporter). Viewing crimes like this as "shenanigans" or a "prank" is a disservice to anyone who has fought for democracy in Canada. We tend to forget that liberal democracies are a very new (and probably temporary) way of organizing things. If this is the best we've done, we need to protect that.

I just don't think that this kind of thing is limited to the CPC, is all.

Agreed. Although I do believe that under Harper, the Conservatives have taken things further than the Liberals have, no matter how despicable they've been at times.

 

[Good2Golf]

I would encourage both of you to read the report and decide before you judge it based on the source. Everything in it is verifiable and fact based. The author describes past Conservative and Liberal government policies in a favourable light. The point is, this government IS different. Canada has not seen anything like this before, and we are now less democratic.

Also, "three very democratic elections"? The last one saw a 20 something staffer being tossed in jail for misleading voters. The Conservatives are actively practicing voter suppression.

From the report:
This is a Prime Minister that prorogued Parliament not once, but twice, when it suited his political agenda.

Okay, so technically, even though it is the Sovereign's representative who prorogues government (GG for Federal, LGs for Provinces) to end the parliamentary session, let's give the author the benefit of the doubt...the Right Honourable Stephen Harper prorogued Parliament twice.

"So what," you ask?

Well, that means that Mr. Harper has to prorgue Government yet again for a third time to even try to match the record of Bob Rae, as NDP Premier of Ontario from 1990 to 1995.  Rae's accumulated prorogation totalled a whopping 373 days, more than a year in total  and the last time in 1995, they didn't even return to sit before dissolution...AND the NDP didn't even table a '95 budget.  So Harper is worse than (now) Liberal Bob Rae? 

*scratches head wondering what Kilo's point was again?*

So Kilo_302, I guess you must have overlooked the above?  No?

I would encourage both of you to read the report and decide before you judge it based on the source. Everything in it is verifiable and fact based. The author describes past Conservative and Liberal government policies in a favourable light. The point is, this government IS different. Canada has not seen anything like this before, and we are now less democratic.

 

So I read the report and repeat my question to you based on the report you quoted, amongst other questions flowing from the report is "when is Stephen Harper worse than Bob Rae?" 

  ???

 

[MARS]

We all have low expectations of politicians at this point, but I do think public service is a noble endeavor (even if the majority of those who pursue it tend to be on the megalomaniacal side). Anyone who actively tampers with the election process, whether it's Dean Del Mastro or this staffer should be punished to the full extent of the law (no matter the party affiliation, lest anyone think I'm a Liberal or NDP supporter). Viewing crimes like this as "shenanigans" or a "prank" is a disservice to anyone who has fought for democracy in Canada. We tend to forget that liberal democracies are a very new (and probably temporary) way of organizing things. If this is the best we've done, we need to protect that.


Agreed. Although I do believe that under Harper, the Conservatives have taken things further than the Liberals have, no matter how despicable they've been at times.

I agree with everything you wrote there, for sure.  Perhaps it is because I have such a low opinion of most politicians that I can't generate too much outrage over these things. 

The counter argument would be that these are the first steps down a slippery slope, but I personally am not sure that would be the case.  I can think of a whole host of other things that would worry me, but from which I could still see us able to arrest any fall before things got too bad.

Im not sure that Prime Minster Harper has taken things further, I think he simply has an unsophisticated, ham fisted way of doing disagreeabkle things that is really quite unappealing to most.  That is pretty irritating, i have to admit.  Drives me nuts that he and his party get burned for some of the stuff they do.  Im not convinced the CPC is irreparably harming the country, if thats the concern.  But then again, they are winning elections, so who am I to criticize.  :-\

Just because I call them shenanigans doesn't mean I disagree with you on punishing them, again if only for being so stupid as to get caught out.  I do think democracy is an imperfect and often dirty business and these kinds of things are just part of that.

:radar:

That smiley has no bearing on this discussion.  I was looking for a 'shrug' smiley and thought the radar one looked neat...

 

[Kilo_302]

So Kilo_302, I guess you must have overlooked the above?  No?
 

So I read the report and repeat my question to you based on the report you quoted, amongst other questions flowing from the report is "when is Stephen Harper worse than Bob Rae?" 

  ???

That's one point out of dozens she makes. I'm no Bob Rae supporter, and what he did was also undemocratic.

Look, as we've been discussing, ALL parties and MANY politicians have acted inappropriately, or even broken the law at times. It's the sheer scale of offenses that the Conservatives are racking up that has people talking. The argument "but they did it too" doesn't hold water if what "they" did was a fraction of what our current government is doing. We've got left wing radicals like Brian Mulroney coming out and saying Harper has crossed the line. It's different this time, I'm not sure why that's so hard for some people to see.

 

[Kirkhill]

Here's a thought: perhaps some folks agree with dismantling government - and it is neither a surprise nor is it undesirable.

 

[Good2Golf]

That's one point out of dozens she makes. I'm no Bob Rae supporter, and what he did was also undemocratic.

Look, as we've been discussing, ALL parties and MANY politicians have acted inappropriately, or even broken the law at times. It's the sheer scale of offenses that the Conservatives are racking up that has people talking. The argument "but they did it too" doesn't hold water if what "they" did was a fraction of what our current government is doing. We've got left wing radicals like Brian Mulroney coming out and saying Harper has crossed the line. It's different this time, I'm not sure why that's so hard for some people to see.

Not "they did it too," but "they did it worse than the Cons." 

...but don't let that ruin your narrative -- you keep picking only the issues that support your case.  It's actually becoming somewhat endearing...if not comfortably predictable.

Perhaps next time you should be more specific when recommending that people read the reference you provide, and state which parts they should read so as to avoid those inconvenient portions that make your mortal enemy appear less evil.

 

[Kilo_302]

Again, there's nothing inconvenient about that  "portion." I am not a Bob Rae fan. I'll repeat it since it appears the movie Memento was inspired your true story: I am not a Liberal supporter and while I'm voting NDP I'm no fan of theirs either. You'll have a hard time convincing me however that Harper's government isn't decidedly worse than previous governments. Again (again), we're seeing Conservative supporters come out in increasing numbers against Harper because he no longer represents what they believe in. Andrew Coyne has written at length about this. My "narrative" is based on many things, not least of which is the incredible dissonance required to believe that the Harper government is conservative in the first place. If anything, your inability to understand that Harper is different than say, a Mulroney or a Joe Clark, your ideological rigidity, would suggest that YOU are following a narrative. A deeply entrenched one at that.

 

[McG]

Can we, maybe, keep this thread about its topic and not about our opinions of other posters?

 

[SupersonicMax]

Can we, maybe, keep this thread about its topic and not about our opinions of other posters?

 

[cupper]

Ha. Imagine that. A campaign that lasts only only 11 weeks. Pity.

Federal election 2015: Stephen Harper to launch campaign as early as Sunday

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/federal-election-2015-stephen-harper-to-launch-campaign-as-early-as-sunday-1.3172602

Prime Minister Stephen Harper will call an election as early as this Sunday, kicking off what would be the longest federal election campaign in modern history, CBC News has confirmed.

The election is generally considered to be set for Oct. 19, 2015, under the Conservatives' fixed election law, although there is wiggle room. But Prime Minister Stephen Harper told Bloomberg News Wednesday that he considers that date to be set in stone.

Stay on track with election trends with CBC's Poll Tracker
Harper will go to Rideau Hall Sunday or Monday to ask Gov. Gen. David Johnston to dissolve Parliament.

The Conservatives have sent out invitations to supporters for a rally in Montreal Sunday night. Harper is likely to head to Toronto after that.

Rumours about possible dates have swirled around Ottawa in recent weeks, partly because of a change in electoral law thought to benefit the Conservative Party.

Until last year, the spending limits were set no matter the length of a campaign, the minimum amount of time for which is 37 days (with voting day falling on the 37th day). But the Conservatives' Fair Elections Act provided for the parties' $25-million limits to be increased if the campaign is longer than 37 days: for each additional day the limit is increased by 1/37th, or an extra $675,000.

Candidates get an additional $2,700 a day to add to their usual limit of approximately $100,000.

Dropping the writ more than 11 weeks before voting day will make it the longest campaign in modern history. The previous longest campaign was a 74-day one in 1926.

Harper's interview with Bloomberg raised some eyebrows for the prime minister's assertion that he doesn't "speculate" on what he will do in the future. That came in response to Bloomberg's question about the election timing — a decision which rests entirely with the prime minister.

"I don't speculate, and I particularly don't speculate on my own actions.... Obviously, there is an important decision coming up for Canadians [on] Oct. 19," Harper said.

The first leaders' debate will fall in the first week of the campaign. The debate hosted by Maclean's magazine was already set for Thursday, Aug. 6 in Toronto, but hadn't been intended to fall during the campaign.

The campaign's timing could also mean Harper will be more available than usual to reporters and members of the public at the same time that his former chief of staff, Nigel Wright, takes the stand at the trial of Mike Duffy on Aug. 12. Duffy faces charges of fraud and breach of trust related to his time as a Conservative senator. He left the caucus to sit as an independent during the RCMP investigation into his expense claims.

Duffy and two other senators, Patrick Brazeau and Pamela Wallin, were suspended from the Senate during the investigation. The writ drop, however, dissolves the current session of Parliament and will result in the suspensions being lifted.

 

[Edward Campbell]

The tactical advantage in a long campaign goes to the CPC in the sense that the LPC and NDP are less "rich" and will have some difficulty in allocating their financial resources in the long haul.

There is a risk, however ...

I remind readers of something the late Harold Macmillan* might have said in response to a question regarding just what would defeat his government: "Events, dear boy, events," SupeMac is reported to have responded. A lot of events can transpire in a long campaign and at least some (likely many) of them will bite the CPC in the ass.


_____
* Harold Macmillan, 1st Earl of Stockton, (1894 – 1986) was Prime Minister of the United Kingdom from 1957 to 1963.
 

  Also know as SuperMac

 

[George Wallace]

Again, there's nothing inconvenient about that  "portion." I am not a Bob Rae fan. I'll repeat it since it appears the movie Memento was inspired your true story: I am not a Liberal supporter and while I'm voting NDP I'm no fan of theirs either. You'll have a hard time convincing me however that Harper's government isn't decidedly worse than previous governments. Again (again), we're seeing Conservative supporters come out in increasing numbers against Harper because he no longer represents what they believe in. Andrew Coyne has written at length about this. My "narrative" is based on many things, not least of which is the incredible dissonance required to believe that the Harper government is conservative in the first place. If anything, your inability to understand that Harper is different than say, a Mulroney or a Joe Clark, your ideological rigidity, would suggest that YOU are following a narrative. A deeply entrenched one at that.

Conservative supporters coming out in increasing numbers against Harper, does not necessarily represent a fact that they are jumping ship.  They are voicing their discontent.  If they did not do so, and accepted the status quo, then nothing would change in the Conservative platform.  If the membership voices their opinions, then the leadership will, or should, take notice, and that to me is a good thing.  If the membership is apathetic to the direction the Party is going, then there would be no such voicing of discontent.  Of course, if you really think that the leadership is a 'dictatorship' and will not listen to the Party membership, then of course they deserve to lose.  Do you really think the leadership is that dumb?

 

[cupper]

The rumblings within the CPC are simply a warning to Harper that this needs to be a successful election for the party (ie a majority win) or he will need to step down as leader, and allow the party to begin a rebuild.

I've said this before, I think he should have taken the traditional walk in the snow and allow a new leader time to move the party in a more favorable direction, or at least begin the process of putting the party in a position of surviving the upcoming election without being a bunch of also rans.

Interestingly enough, only Laurier and MacDonald have won 4 consecutive elections.

 

[Kirkhill]

Funny thing about Harper - his body language doesn't look any different now than any time earlier.

I honestly don't think it bothers him if he wins or loses.  He wants to win but I believe he is comfortable with losing if he believes he has done what he can.

I wouldn't play poker with him.

 

[a_majoor]

Prime Minister Harper is obviously scary smart to have made so many strategic and tactical victories throughout his political career (from merging the Reform and PC's to becoming PM with a majority government), but he is also human, so I suspect there is an element of Hubris involved.

He may well have contemplated the "walk in the snow" option, but there is the issue of leaving at the height of his power, and his very probable desire to end his political career with the Young Dauphin's scalp on his belt, to display with the other three. I think his "ideal" outcome would be to win with a reduced majority in 2015, then call a leadership convention at some time thereafter to "renew" the party and gracefully step down before the 2019 election (when he will retire and a new candidate will be groomed for his riding as well).

Since no plan survives contact with the enemy, we have no way of knowing how this will play out on the end. Tom Mulcair gets a very large vote, the Young Dauphin gets a small one but even Elizabeth May could find some way to stumble in the path of the oncoming party machinery and derail one or more campaigns. Perhaps even the Libertarians could finally unleash the horde of cats they have been gathering for the last 20 years, or something equally unlikely from one of the other 19 registered parties could cause consternation and upset carefully made plans. (I might also get a pony....).

So in the end, the only poll which will count is the one on election day....

 

[ModlrMike]

I think that even a minority could be considered a win. Mr Harper gets to serve at least one year and then call a leadership confernce to set his successor up for the inevitable fall of the government.

 

[cupper]

I think that even a minority could be considered a win. Mr Harper gets to serve at least one year and then call a leadership confernce to set his successor up for the inevitable fall of the government.

I think that it would need to be a substantial minority, not just a squeak by the second place party result. There are too many unhappy people behind the scenes, and some potential successors who walked before things got nasty to allow a skin of the teeth win to stand.

 

[Brad Sallows]

Harper is different from Mulroney, certainly.  I don't think anyone has accused Harper of taking money, or for that matter intervening to obtain favourable treatment in a real estate deal.  No-one has accused any of Harper's COS of altering a document to protect Harper.  Harper is, fortunately, a pretty bland guy; I'm sure if he were caught on questionable premises he'd dominate the Canadian internet for a while.

People's disagreements with Harper are about policy.  Remarkably, there are still no hordes of soldiers with guns in the streets.

 

[Harrigan]

Conservative supporters coming out in increasing numbers against Harper, does not necessarily represent a fact that they are jumping ship.  They are voicing their discontent.  If they did not do so, and accepted the status quo, then nothing would change in the Conservative platform.  If the membership voices their opinions, then the leadership will, or should, take notice, and that to me is a good thing.  If the membership is apathetic to the direction the Party is going, then there would be no such voicing of discontent.  Of course, if you really think that the leadership is a 'dictatorship' and will not listen to the Party membership, then of course they deserve to lose.  Do you really think the leadership is that dumb?

But I thought that "membership voicing their discontent" was the sign of a civil war within the party?  ;D

Harrigan

P.S. I am joking of course, but surely you see my point.