04.14.2011 06:50 AM

KCCCC Day 20: Bonjour!


61 Comments

  1. Scott Tribe says:

    I said at the start of this campaign that if Ipsos-Reid’s prediction that the Liberals were down by 19 would hold, I’d tear my Liberal membership up. May I reinforce that stance over the Compas 21 pt poll claim? I mean, do even die-hard Conservatives on here really believe their guy is approaching Mulroney majority #’s?

    • fritz says:

      The COMPAS ‘poll’ isn’t a poll, it’s just Tory propaganda based on data no one has seen. It has as much validity as P&P text question, maybe less.

  2. Dr.J says:

    I see Iggys biggest problem is Jack, he has been bleeding off Jacko’s support since the election has started but out of all the leaders the past two nights have been very kind to Jack…..also is this just another sign of the Liberal collapse in Quebec, the former Quebec co-chair has quit and is now helping the CPC…John Lapierre has been going on about this Liberal downturn in Quebec for the last little while and he always appears to have his ear on the ground in Quebec.

  3. Cat says:

    Layton’s the sleeper and the one to watch. He’s the only guy with momentum at the moment. That may fade but the NDP and Liberals are very close in many ridings….that could be a surprise.

    Didn’t watch much of the French debate but from what I saw I wasn’t impressed with any of their performances. Harper looked bored, Ignatieff lectured, Layton and Duceppe had the best exchanges and I still say that opening up a willingness to open up the constitutional debate might be something typical in French debates it’s a non-starter in the rest of Canada.

    It’s shaping up to be a really nice day in my region today. To answer your question of a few days back Warren – I’m not excited about this election yet. Although I do see that Harper can squeak a majority out if he remains consistent but the big battle is for 2nd place. If the NDP seal Toronto and win back Hamilton plus take a few from the Libs. in both BC and Quebec…you just never know.

  4. Dr.J says:

    Harper is thinking that is a pretty tie Iggy is wearing.

  5. G Betts says:

    “The definition of ‘smarmy'”.

    • Hmnn.. if the latest Liberal war room revelation has meat to it, things could get very interesting very quickly for Jimmy Flaherty. Details.

      At a time when Canadian families are struggling to make ends meet, Finance Minister Jim Flaherty secretly used a government jet to fly him and his wife to a partisan Conservative gala to honor Brian Mulroney – and even charged taxpayers for a hotel room they didn’t use, Liberal candidate for Ajax-Pickering Mark Holland said today.

      The flight manifest for Transport Canada jet C-FKEB – obtained through Access to Information – shows that on September 17, 2009, Mr. Flaherty, Conservative candidate for Whitby-Oshawa, flew from Ottawa to Oshawa with his wife Christine Elliot, MPP, then flew immediately to Montreal for the gala, and then back to Ottawa the same evening. Mr. Flaherty and Mrs. Elliot used these taxpayer-funded flights solely to join their fellow Conservatives for the 25th anniversary of Brian Mulroney’s 1984 election victory.

      Stuff like this makes me mad, no matter which party is behind it.

      Apparently Flaherty feels “entitled”. Bull shit!

  6. Robin says:

    Harper thinking to himself, “How is that he keeps talking like that and saying the things he does, yet 38% of Canadians still believe my lies? I guess mine is not to question why.”

  7. Pete says:

    layton and his mouth probably won over a few voters temporarily. he’s the mouth that roared but in the real heat of things he hasn’t got the candidates to take him very far. I predict he will slip bel;ow 15% when all is said and done….I think the Libs will end up at around 33%.

    Friends with their ear to the ground in the Quebec City region tell me the reformatort vote is all but collapsing due to the arena issue and the fact others are running good candidates there.

  8. George says:

    10:45 PM on April 13, 2011
    Former co-president of the Quebec wing of the Liberal Party of Canada, Denise Verrreault, abruptly abandoned the Liberals and joined the Conservatives today, urging Montrealers to vote Conservative.
    The Globe will not likely report this important event, which is crippling to the Liberal Party in Montreal.
    http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/coalition-constitution-long-guns-dominate-french-debate/article1984748/comments/

    • Namesake says:

      Except that they DID report it, Georgeous (‘So, what shade of lipstick do you wear?’),

      and also WHY she defected:

      “The Conservatives responded by parading their latest recruit, Denise Verreault, a former federal Liberal supporter, owner of the Groupe Maritime Verreault shipyard just east of Quebec City and who publicly announced she was backing Mr. Harper.

      Ms. Verreault’s shipyard may be in the running for a portion of the massive $35-billion ship-building contracts announced recently by the Harper government.”

      http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/debate-gives-duceppe-a-lift-but-will-quebeckers-respond/article1984988/

      So the fact that she’s most likely acting solely out of self-interest and/or out of anger over an announcement by the Libs that they would try to intervene to enable one of her competitors to compete for the multi-billion-$ National Shipbuilding Procurement Strategy bid* is hardly a crippling blow to the Libs.;

      it’s only right, since it’s increasingly clear that the CPC is the party for those who are ‘only in it for themselves.’

      * http://thechronicleherald.ca/Front/1237965.html

    • MontrealElite says:

      Where does it say she was a campaign co chair other than in conservative blogs?

  9. J.G. Love says:

    Harper praying, please Lord, smite him down right now.

  10. bell says:

    how about “Harper reconsiders conservative position on same sex marriage”?

  11. EM says:

    Mr. Harper’s best impression of the Stay-Puft Marshmallow Man.

  12. EM says:

    Mr. Harper’s impression of the Stay-Puft Marshmallow Man.

  13. Tippbub says:

    I don’t have a clever caption buy Harper’s makeup job reminds me of the classic WKRP episode where Arthur Carlson runs for Cincinnatti municipal council and his overly made up face is a source of great comedy. That said, my wife remarked how Steve’s shade of lipstick really did set off his dreamy eyes. Yes, I’m now considering divorce…

  14. Ted H says:

    I watched the debate in translation and was impressed. By and large it was a real debate, comments were pointed but there wasn’t really an emphasis on a “gotcha moment”. The moderators kept things tight, they were vastly better than Steve Paikin. The four leaders were forced to be as concise as possible because the time limits were strictly enforced. Mr. Harper was a bit shakier than the night before but then he is less accomplished in French than the others. He still spoke to the camera, not the others which made it seem he wasn’t really there. But, he wasn’t bad, I admit that though I don’t like him. Most of the citizen questions were aimed right at his policies. Mr. Ignatieff was much better than the previous night and managed to promote his Liberal platform while still criticizing the Conservative record.

  15. Loraine Lamontagne says:

    Quebeckers sit in front of their TV every Sunday night for an hour and a half to watch Tout le monde en parle, a show where guests are seated around a table and debate issues. It’s been the most popular show in Quebec for years. Quebeckers love debating things.

    And it showed last night. The format was better that for the English debate. In addition to the questions from citizens, two journalists were questioning the leaders and furthering the debate. It was, in my opinion, a vast improvement.

    The losers in my opinion were Messrs. Harper and Duceppe. The two emperors were shown wearing no clothes. On the one hand, Harper kept on explaining to us how he went about dilapidating public funds and bringing us into deficits again, while Duceppe shamelessly accused Canada of ignoring Quebec’s constitutional demands.

    Let us be clear: there is one, and only one, leader who has no interest in constitutional proposals: Gilles Duceppe. He gave us a brilliant demonstration. When Layton explained how his conscience made him back out of the Three Amigos arrangement in 2004, Duceppe retorted proudly that HE had gotten what he wanted from Harper : billions of dollars to settle the fiscal imbalance. There he was, given the chance to bring forth constitutional proposals to a man ready to seize power and seeking allies: he chose money. And he was the leader who supported The Harper Government in its first months in power, while Bill Graham had the liberals voting against The New Government. Harper is shown once again to be willing to throw money at anything that will secure his hold on power. He is never motivated by the betterment of Canada.

    I really liked Ignatieff’s performance last night. He puts before us ideas and a direction for the betterment of Canada into the future.

  16. Cam says:

    Good Morning. I watched the French language debate last night with the English translation. I certainly concluded Mr. Ignatieff won the debate last night. Mr. Harper appeared to be flustered at one point in the debate last night and was only rescued when the moderators changed the topic. Maybe it was the translation but I don’t think so.

    I’m still holding the belief that Canadians are not blind and will see the truth about the inappropriate behaviour of the Conservative Government. Time will tell.

  17. Mike says:

    Caption: Harper wonders who is the bigger pr*ck and smiles. He knows he’s still the champ.

  18. dave says:

    Old rule of thumb in coaching was that an athlete does not hit her or his stride until the season’s 4th competition. Je ne parle pas cette langue qu’ils ont parle hier nuit, cependent – I figured that all of the participants were better last night, individually, and as a group. I thought that a tad more issue substance came out. It crossed my mind that maybe a series of debates would be useful in that there would be time for all the leaders to get into more substance. That would encourage us voters to consider more real situations and possible solutions, rather than train us with one debate to decide which superficial ad campaign to vote for, or which bumper sticker accusations seemed true.

    • Loraine Lamontagne says:

      I really think this had to do with the two journalists following up on the questions.

      French people here in Quebec as in France love debating and arguments. It is a very important aspect of our culture. The most popular TV shows in France and in Quebec, Tout le monde en parle being the prime example, are debates, whether on political issues or any other issues, like books and music, whatever.

  19. kyliep says:

    Harper is thinking, “I think the E is kicking in. Mmmmn. Michael. This is fun. I like debates. I feel warm”.

    As for the polls, realize that the MOE is almost 6% but wondering why the trend numbers in Ontario don’t prompt a “Liberals overtaking Conservatives in Vote Rich Ontario” headline? Too early? Wishful thinking?

    • W.B. says:

      The Don Martin/Taber/Nanos poll consortium have decided Harper is holding steady and cruising despite all the wasted votes in the west, And that Layton’s uptick to WOW 18% is more significant than the Harper slide in Ontario and Ignatieff’s slow rise. And that’s just the Nanos poll which already seems a little weighted toward Conservatives.

      • kyliep says:

        While I hope you’re right, W.B., I suspect Nanos and others are remaining cautious until the regional numbers in ON and QC move a little more, lest they incur the wrath of the right wing commentariat and their Sunmedia propagandists for being too ‘liberal’.

  20. TimJS says:

    “I want your love and I want your revenge, you and me could write a Bad Romance…”

  21. James Bow says:

    CAPTION: Harper: I think I’ll have his liver with some fava beans and a nice chianti. Just like that long-form census taker.”

  22. James says:

    Hey Warren, I watched the entire French debate on CTV News Channel (which had an excellent English translator/voiceover). Iggy did perform a lot better in this debate; he was a lot more confident and he communicated more effectively. I think he particularly shone when he and Duceppe were debating the constitutional file (Iggy stated that in his travels in Quebec the issue of the constitution never arises with voters; they are concerned with jobs and the economy instead). And Iggy wasn’t as repetitive with his “bumper sticker” lines that prevailed in the English debate.

    Duceppe was thoroughly obnoxious, sanctimonious and overbearing; he wouldn’t let the other leaders finish their remarks with his constant interruptions. He seemed to think that because he was the only francophone of the four that Quebecers wanted to hear only him and no one else. He really has to curb his phony outrage and soften that wild look on his face.

    I still have to hand the victory card to Harper. He was calm, confident and prime ministerial, and looked like the polished Boy Scout Troop Leader who was forced to deal with three errant Boy Scouts.

    • Namesake says:

      Harper was medicated in both debates; that’s not the real him. I.e., he cheated, by doping, just like certain Olympic athletes. And like he did in the ’08 debates, when he brought & used cheat sheets, as Elizabeth May’s disclosed (twice). And as he did in the ’06 election with the in-and-out overspending on ads. And as he does almost daily in his false claims and advertisements.

      • Roger says:

        what were all those cue card sized papers that Iggy had on his podium?………numbnuts…..

      • Troy says:

        By “cheat sheets” do you mean notes that you refer to when debating an opponent or verifying facts?

      • Namesake says:

        they changed the rules this year, to allow the debaters to bring and and make notes… most likely at the ex-PM’s special pleadings / insistence

  23. Harith says:

    The scariest yet nicest thought is this: More NDP presence in Quebec.

  24. Michael Behiels says:

    Here are my rankings from last place to first place for the French language debate.

    Harper looked and acted like he did not want to be there- if he could have walked out he would have. This would have made his base ecstatic. Harper followed his script and felt awkward by his limited French language skills once off script. Harper lost ground in Quebec but he no longer cares. He is determined to win his majority outside Qc.

    Layton, a proponent of a Quebec/Canada binational federation, was pandering to Quebecois nationalists all evening. His performance was quite pathetic and shows how fragile Canada really is on this issue of national unity. He is delusional in believing that Canada will stay united by letting Quebec go it’s own way! Many NDP people outside Qc will not be pleased with this pandering.

    Duceppe is Duceppe – he was on his own territory and in complete control of his agenda that focussed exclusively on Quebec Francophones demands and ignored the needs of Quebec’s English language minorities and Francophone minority communities outside Quebec. He solidified his base.

    Ignatieff’s performance improved greatly last night. He was more connected to the audience, less scripted, and came across as the best defender of Canada and the place of Francophones within Canada, in the manner of Pearson, Trudeau and Chretien.

    He is hitting his stride but, many will argue that he will not have enough time and resources to catch Harper before May 2 unless Harper stumbles badly. And the counter attack by Harper will get nasty.

    I agree with Warren that the Liberal campaign has to jack up its ad campaign big time. The only way to get 1 million Liberals who stayed home last time and to convince Dippers that Jack’s way is the way to Harper’s autocracy continuing unabated and with greater determination to crush any and all opposition.

  25. Paul says:

    Caption: Iggy to JL – come to Harvard so I can #fail your ass. SH – huh??

  26. Caption, Harper thinking and then being instructed by his autonomous program:

    “Ignatieff is whipping my ass. I’d better unleash my secret weapon right now. Aaaah, there, that giant Silent But Deadly just released should wipe that smile off his face. Now I will [click…whirr] INTERRUPT SEQUENCE ALPHA4 BEEP 0011100100101 PROGRAM CHANGE RECEIVED 10011110011 REPLY WITH ‘UNNECESSARY ELECTION’ VERBAL ATTACK !ACK!ACK!ACK”

  27. Pat Heron says:

    With quite a good understanding of the language, I watched the French debate with someone who is bilingual. We both thought it much better than the English debate: more issue-focussed and lively. Jack was cute and, frankly, admirable, given his recent medical history. He and Gilles were feisty. Gilles was just a little too edgy, too combative, but Jack was just fine. However, Michael was way better than the night before. He showed more real passion and caring for both Canada and Quebec than any of the others. The disappointment was Steve, who, in a boring undertone, rhymed off his lines as though gazing at an invisible monitor. Gilles won on points scored but he didn’t win hearts — that went to Jack. But Michael gained my respect; he was Prime Ministerial.

    Here is a poll about the french debate from this morning’s Montreal Gazette: http://www.montrealgazette.com/news/decision-canada/Harper+stumbles+Duceppe+shines+French+debate+Poll/4614114/story.html

  28. HonestB says:

    I was actually really surprised to see the poll saying Iggy did so well. I though he looked better in the English Debate by far, and that Layton looked a lot stronger in the French one. I guess that goes to show how hard it is to predict these things.

    I think the real question right now is whether or not Duceppe did well enough to hold onto the seats he’s got (they’ve been falling in the polls for awhile now). If yes, I think we’ll see pretty similar results to the last time around. If not, the outcome of this election is going to be hard to predict. The Bloc’s support is falling and the other three parties are basically even in the polls in Quebec.

  29. WesternGrit says:

    “Dammit! Why won’t you act like the monster I said you were in 2 years of attack ads???”

  30. Pedro says:

    Hey Liberals! How about some policy? And not warmed over 70’s style neo-Trudeau stuff the establishment Libs think will work because it’s being delivered by the new social media.
    Please promise, if the Liberal seat total doesn’t change much after the election, that you’ll tear the thing down (have some guts) and re-build it with young people. And new, innovative policy that is not just a new nameplate on “Let us collect a portion of your wealth and then give it back to people we think deserve it after taking a cut.” How about getting rid of Young Liberals and bringing them in to play with the big boys?
    Have your fun mocking Stephen Harper and mouth-breathing conservatives on Warren’s site. All I know is that 20 something voters at my workplace have no idea what the Liberals and Ignatieff stand for and they realize we can’t afford many of Jack Layton’s plans. They don’t read newspapers so they don’t know the latest faux pas made by local conservative election volunteers. And they’re not happy about having this election.
    Get together and brainstorm and come up with the big idea just as Brian Mulroney suggests (cue lighting strike!). Young commenters have said current political leadership shows no passion. Find it in yourselves and build the majority of the future with young people.
    I’ve said it before – Ignatieff is fax machine technology. The fuure is beyond Twitter and texting now.

  31. Jane says:

    Caption for Pic of the day CONTEMPT

  32. MontrealElite says:

    Just watching the kids at McGill filming their vote mob.

    Well done!

  33. fritz says:

    There’s still a big undecided out there (15%- 18%) that can move the polls any which way in the next 2+ weeks. Lots of time to make that gaffe that changes the inevitable course of the election.

  34. Cynical says:

    Keep talking like that, Harvard Boy, and I’ll have JTF2 coming down your chimney before you know it. Then you’ll know what “pesky” means.

  35. allegra fortissima says:

    “Qu’est-ce qu’un trone? Un morceau de bois dore et recouvert de velours. Je suis l’etat.”

    Halte, Stephen – you borrowed this from Napoleon Bonaparte!

  36. Lysol says:

    If the Libs want an issue to bring up in the last two weeks that will target soft NDP votes, I suggest the issue of unions and collective bargaining. If Harper gets his coveted majority, what’s to stop him from reducing the federal deficit by taking away the rights of federal public sector unions to negotiate for increased wages and improved benefits? This is straight out of the Scott Walker Republican playbook in Wisconsin…and other states are starting to follow his example. If the Cons couple this legislation with reduced transfers to the provinces, provincial governments will follow the federal lead to address their own shortfalls. And if the legislation includes the right of workers to “opt out” of paying union dues, it will tie in well with Harper’s other initiative to remove the per-vote subsidy to federal political parties. After all, there’s no harm in allowing unions to donate unlimited amounts to parties if they’re financially crippled, right?

  37. Namesake says:

    It’s not a “breaking story” — it’s McParland & a bunch of you blogging bories trying to make something out of one of Ignatieff’s lines from the debates that, “you can be a Quebecer or a Canadian in the order you prefer.”

    And that’s just re: the repeated surveys by the Association of Canadian Studies http://www.acs-aec.ca/en/social-research/identity-values/

    which have found that, “On Harper’s watch, francophone Quebecers more disengaged than ever,” as Chantal put it,

    http://www.hilltimes.com/page/view/hebert-01-24-2011 or http://urlm.in/hnku

    when people are asked whether they’re very or somewhat etc. Attached to their:

    Country, Province, Ethnic Group, language, City or town, Religion, or Family.

    Now, some of you are apparently outraged when you see the results of these polls, & want to make something of it, and be the thought police, to tell people that they MUST be as attached to one or the other of these as, e.g., the people of Alberta are. (70,6%, 39,0%, 25,5%, 68,1%, 25,0%, 30,5% & 85,3%, respectively)…

    …or, what, get out / separate from the country if they don’t? Or submit to reprogramming?

    While MI apparently DOESN’T think it’s the government’s place to try to tell people what they should or shouldn’t value more, or to what degree; rather, it should tolerate differences in values which are compatible with our coexisting and even flourishing peaceably in a single country.

    If your guy thinks differently, it’s he who’s channeling Mao.

    • Namesake says:

      So you DO want to be the thought police, even though there’s absolutely no evidence from that statement that MI holds the views you’re trying to foist on him.

      Well, put yourself in a mega-prison along with Dear Leader, then,

      because it was Harper who said (in 1994, while serving as the constitutional affairs critic for the Reform Party at the time) that the country of Canada was less important than him than reducing the size of the government(s) that the people within its borders are subject to:

      “Whether Canada ends up as one national government or two national governments or several national governments, or some other kind of arrangement is, quite frankly, secondary in my opinion…. What matters and should matter to politicians and people who believe in the kind of values that I believe the National Citizens’ Coalition share and the Reform Party share is not whether the Canadian state prospers, but whether the Canadian people and the land we call Canada prosper…. Whether Canada ends up with one national government or two governments or 10 governments, the Canadian people will require less government no matter what the constitutional status or arrangement of any future country may be.

      http://thetyee.ca/News/2004/05/20/So_What_DID_Harper_Say/

      and when I brought that to your attention here, you consequently endorsed that yourself:

      “in the context within which he was speaking I agree with him – the interests of canadians comes before the interests of a confederation called Canada. The Czechs and Slovaks have moved on from the relatively brief construct that was czechoslovakia to what seems from the outside to be a happier arrangement. Canada is not necessarily a forever creation – even PET mused about that.”

      http://warrenkinsella.com/2011/03/to-campaign-or-to-not-campaign-that-is-the-question/#comment-28592

      Ergo, by your own McCarthy-ite test — failing to rank the country of Canada as the top of one’s hierarchy of patriotic allegiances — both you and Harper are demonstrably unfit to govern.

      • Namesake says:

        You’re a loon. I don’t know ANYbody, incl. Ignatieff, who “believes that Quebec is on an equal legislative footing as Canada”; they’re clearly different AND unequal levels of gov’t, with some different, and some shared, areas of responsibility. Tulk about a straw man.

        And your false choice that they’re either completely equal or in a completely hierarchical relationship is even more distorted, although, yes, I, like MI & most Liberals, are clearly in favour of the fed. gov’t exerting SOME influence on the provinces when it comes to enforcing the universality and portability of health and social benefits, e.g…. whereas with Harper — not so much. Indeed, altho’ he’s been singing a different tune on the campaign trail, he’s the one who really wants to whittle the size of the fed. gov’t down so much that it has no money left to influence what the provinces (don’t) do. So as usual, you’re being a complete hypocrite on trying to fault the other leader on the area that Harper is more guilty of.

    • pomojen says:

      I think talking about provinces within Canada as above or below in such a hierarchical fashion is 1) falsely dichotomous 2) divisive and 3) pointless. Are the seeds in the apples more important than the apples? Is the third floor of a 30 floor building more important than the building? Stupid-talk. Without the seeds, there are no more apples. Without the third floor, there is no total of 30 and the whole thing might even collapse. Drop this overly concrete thinking at the door and get a little more comfortable with shades of gray, contradiction and the reality that we all have a multiplicity of identities. I am a woman first and a Canadian second sometimes. Sometimes I am an Atlantic Canadian and sometimes I am a “come from away”. Sometimes I am even a Canadian who lives and works in another country ….and sometimes I am a citizen of the world. I want a Prime Minister who is not going to equivocate on how “Canadian” I am because I am not properly ordering them in a false hierarchy.

      You’ve said all those things yourself. You are an Albertan, a Newfoundlander and a Canadian. So embrace it and let the rest of us embrace our identities too.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


*