04.22.2011 09:30 AM

KCCCC Day 28: No schadenfreude here (well, maybe a little). And some soul-baring.


  • Are yesterday’s polls so astonishing? Seen here and here and here, there can’t be much doubt anymore: we seem to be at the start of a realignment in Canadian federal politics.  About two years ago, you’ll recall, I was tossed on the political barbecue pit by Michael Ignatieff and his Super-Smart Senior Staff (4S, for short) for having the temerity to suggest, out loud, that Messrs. Chretien, Broadbent and Romanow were right.“I have no relationship with Warren Kinsella,” sniffed the fellow for whom I’d busted my hump for a couple years, and that was that.  My sin? Agreeing with, you know, the most successful Liberal leader in history: suggesting that those of us who opposed Conservatives clearly needed to get together if we were ever to defeat Conservatives.  And, more broadly, that Canada – like other democracies around the world – seemed to be heading towards a binary political universe, whether the political classes approved or not.
  • What now? Well, that’s a really good question.  If the NDP make history, and carry their current popularity past the weekend and into next week, they could very well form the Official Opposition.  The instant that happens, as I told this PostMedia reporter yesterday in a long chat, the aforementioned Ignatieff and 4S are gone.  They’ll all have to resign on election night if they are to escape the enraged, pitchfork-wielding grassroots Grits. Even in 1984’s rout we held onto Opposition status.  With that gone – and the staff, and budget and influence that brings – it will be a long, hard slog back.
  • We get emails, etc. Yesterday afternoon, not a few Gritty folks called and emailed to say, ruefully, “Damn, I guess Chretien and Broadbent and dinks like you were right.  We should’ve gotten together with the NDP when we had the chance.” My response, and as I plan to write in my Hill Times space on Monday:  “Uh-huh.  Forgive me for repeating myself, which I do all the time, but why the Hell would the NDP be interested now?  They look like they’re going to be the Official Opposition, and are on their way up.  Why would they want to get together with a party on its way down? The opportunity has passed.  Enjoy the next decade of misery.” Well, okay, maybe I wasn’t that harsh, but I was certainly thinking it, in my smallish cranium.  I’m just pissed off, you know?
  • Now is the time for all good persons to come to the aid of the party: I’m pissed off, I’m gloomy, I’m mostly sad about what has happened.  And, in fairness, it’s not all Michael Ignatieff’s fault: every federal Liberal is to blame.  The leadership wars, the policy vacuum, the lousy fundraising and recruitment, the lack of election readiness, the self-defeating culture within the party itself: all of those things, taken together, have taken us to this remarkable moment.  Personally, I don’t plan to sit out the rebuilding.  After sifting through yesterday’s polls, I announced to myself – and now to y’all – that it’s time for me to take another stab at elected office.  Not sure where, or when, but that’s what I’m going to do.  You read it here first, etc.
  • Pic of the day: Get used to this, too.  He deserves to be happy.

 

162 Comments

  1. JH says:

    Jaysus WK – I’m told the Montreal Gazette is saying the Bloc could be reduced to 4 seats if this keeps up – is that possible? Also they are predicting a Tory majority with over 200 seats?
    I’m finding this all a little hard to believe this am, but haven’t seen a paper yet.

    • Warren says:

      Anything’s possible in this one, seems.

      • Ron says:

        you on tv may 2nd or minding this site as you watch the results?

        let’s have a contest based on seat projections that day
        what do you think?

      • Ron says:

        About your soul baring
        First off thanks, for creating an environment where different views and thoughts can be shared.
        Thanks for taking the time to participate in the discussion and offer your input.

        I also want to thank you for giving us your thoughts on what has happened to this great party.

        You’ve pointed out a lot of things which I believe all began after the leadership race in the early 90’s.

        Everything you listed I think for the most part we all knew.

        I may not always agree with you or you with me but that’s how it should be.
        At the end of the day we live in the greatest country in the world and we make it what we want.
        I salute you for taking up the charge and running for office, do yourself and us proud
        Thanks

      • Swervin' Merv says:

        Chances are the CPC/LPC/NDP split will again be closer to 40/30/20 on election day. Unless you think the rogues at EKOS are right in predicting the NDP will suddenly go from one to 14 seats in Quebec and zero to five in Saskatchewan, for example.

    • Cow says:

      The huge caveat on those numbers–and any, even 308’s predictions–is that we’re in weird, uncharted territory with all this. None of the models that people have built to predict seat counts really know what to do with this big of a shift.

      How we get to 200+ Tories is basically a perfect vote split between the Grits and Dippers. That suddenly turns a lot of suburban and even urban races into three-way runs, and when *that* happens, 37% gets you a victory. But that 200 number basically assumes they win all the three-way ties.

      So yeah, anything’s possible. It could just as easily go the other way and Liberals or NDP pick up a ton of them. More likely, in my mind, the three parties split the victory in a lot of the split votes, and we end up more or less back where we started (except with a stronger NDP and a weaker Bloc).

      But who knows? We’ve got a long week and a half to go.

    • fritz says:

      They got that 200 seat majority by entering the most recent Ipsos-Reid poll into the fairvote.ca vote calculator. You can get a more rational result by entering any other poll. It’s a fun toy but; as the saying goes; garbage in garbage out.
      Here’s the link:

      http://www.fairvote.ca/en/vote-calculator

      I expect Layton and the NDP will be downplaying these polls and any talk of official opposition so as to dampen expectations for May 2nd.

      We should know by Monday if this is all an illusion or the real thing.

      • JenS says:

        Maybe I’m wrong but doesn’t fairvote.ca calculate based on how things would look if we had proportional representation?

        • fritz says:

          It gives both FPTP & proportional predictions with the same seat totals so you can see how much fairer proportional representation would be.

    • James Bow says:

      I’d say the Ipsos poll is an outlier, and likely the opposite to the Ekos outlier which places the C/L/N split of 34.4/24.7/24.7 respectively. Nanos tends to call things in the middle, and earlier today, they knocked the Conservatives down to their 2008 election totals.

      What may have happened is that Harper and Ignatieff spent so much time slagging each other, Canadians finally got tired enough to look for a third way. Either way, it’s safe to say that Ignatieff hasn’t set the world on fire. We may yet have a minority parliament, but one which the NDP wields more influence.

      Either way, we live in interesting times. And anybody who thinks that’s just a Chinese insult either doesn’t work in journalism or isn’t a political pundit.

  2. Cow says:

    I’ve kept donating through this ugly period, but I’ve sat out this election in terms of volunteering. I just can’t find the energy to get out and work for a party that so obviously doesn’t think it wants me around right now. (It doesn’t help that, in my riding, Bob Rae doesn’t need the assistance; the Liberals could drop to five seats and he’d be one of them.)

    As for rebuilding and running again: if you do it in the GTA, I’ll be there to work. And if you think this is pointless internet blathering, well, you’ve got my e-mail address on this comment; you can call me on my offer.

  3. Christian Giles says:

    Hi Warren. Happy Easter! Great post agree 100%. I also thought the Libs should have gotten together with the Dippers back when we had the chance. As you say we are moving into a binary political world. Plus with the FPTP electoral system likely remaining with us foreever and a day there is no room for multiple centre left parties. Not if we ever want to displace the CONS. Running for office sounds like a great idea – go for it dude. As a fellow Beach citizen I’ll gladly lend a hand!

  4. Cow says:

    Okay, enough rambling from me on your comment board. I’ve got to go catch the train to my mom’s for Easter dinner. Happy Easter to you and yours, sir.

  5. George Webb says:

    Geez Warren
    You’re young enough to be around for the rebuild. We pinko commie Trudeauites from the sixties will have to watch the country we love slip into the dark ages in our declining years.

  6. James Curran says:

    Here. I’ll go on record too. Until the little minds currently in charge of the LPCO management are “let go” nothing will change in this province. Or we can continue to banish the grassroots and ignore them completely until we are at two seats. After all they are entitled to their entitlements at LPCO. And everything they say is their way or the highway. Kinda like that Harper guy, only waaay not as smart.

    Dont get me started. You know I’ll start to name names and it will be too long winded. It would be novelesque in length.

  7. James Curran says:

    Oh. And I wouldn’t be adverse to helping run “Warren’s Warriors”.

  8. JStanton says:

    … in fairness, schadenfreude is entirely appropriate.

    Mr. Layton deserves to feel good. He has earned it.

    Imagine, though, with him as opposition leader… does he up the stakes to become PM through an arrangement with the other parties? It’s his best chance ever… and the wailing and gnashing of teeth by Cons and cons will be piteous and wonderful to hear. Mr. Harper moves to Stornaway, Jack and Olivia to 24 Sussex, and Mr. Ignatieff to the Chateau Laurier, I would imagine, however temporarily.

    Because this election just wasn’t interesting enough…

    .

    • Ron says:

      J
      If you’re in Laytons shoes and if (big if) things hold and materialize
      would you not want to control things?
      Imagine him having more seats…he holds the control
      I just think the Liberals would not go for that

      Thoughts?

    • PoliticalStaples says:

      I really don’t see the Liberals (if they finish 3rd) working with the NDP to make Jack Layton the PM. This would only help the NDP in trying to replace the Liberals. If the Liberals come third they dump Ignatieff and non-officially prop up the Conservatives (assuming a minority) so they can get a new leader.

      • hollinm says:

        I agree. If Jack is lucky enough to win official opposition he is not going to enter into anything with the other parties. He is in full control of his party, he has the bully pulpit, the money and the research capabilities to wield the power of the official opposition. To think that he would include the Libs and the Bloc is foolhardy. Layton loves power and he will not want to share it with anyone.

      • JStanton says:

        … sadly, you may be right. The cut-off-your-nose-to-spite-your-face thing the LPC has been channeling for long, appears to have become habituated. My hope is that, given the scenario proposed, with Mr. Ignatieff having had his kick at the can, he will let other players take the lead on the question.

        Mr. Rae, for example, is unlikely to have the same knee-jerk reaction as would what Warren has termed the “Rosedalian” cabal.

        Mr. Chretian, having always his eye on the end game, is also unlikely to become weak-kneed at the thought of a temporary arrangement with Mr. Layton.

        With Mr. Rae in Foreign Affairs, and perhaps Mr. Brison at Finance, the optics of the NDP managing the other ministries should be fine. After all, Mr. Harper’s crew of unheard-of’s have, by and large, been prevented from breaking the crockery by civil servants, so the risk is slight. The interesting role will be Defense. I can see that one providing lots of laughs and apoplexy.

        .

  9. Curt says:

    My mom taught grade seven English for 35 years. She would have really liked your alliteration.

  10. Patagonia says:

    Other Could-Happens: Jack becomes minority guv PM, proves once and for all that dippers can’t manage the economy, whole Party goes the way of the dodo bird, Kinsella becomes PM.

    • Dr.J says:

      You just do not get it….your grasping is just sad now. You are “hoping” for scandals and quick fixes for power. A gutting and rebuild is needed for the Liberals..maybe just maybe after the election you can come to this realization otherwise expect more of the same of what you are getting nowadays

      • Namesake says:

        – …and Dr.J loses all his Craig’s List celebrity conbot Appearances, Endorsements, and Speaking Engagements; hits the skids; and becomes known as the Slam Drunk.

      • hollinm says:

        Liberals will not learn. They still think they are entitled to their entitlements and do not want to do the hard work of rebuilding. Watching Ignatieff and the party bounce from pillar to post is embarassing.

  11. Namesake says:

    Two years ago? um, it may seem like that long, but I’m pretty sure that took place 11 months ago, when I wandered in here.

  12. Pat Heron says:

    For the time being, we should be looking at this group’s proposals re vote splitting in 50 swing ridings: http://www.catch22campaign.ca

  13. Mike Singh says:

    Mr.Kinsella, i have never commented before, but read your blog everyday. I have always been progressive, volunteered for PC’s long ago, then for Liberals under Mr. Chretien and was lucky to meet him in 1993( along with Clyde Wells,very cool) but voted NDP while Mr. Martin was leader and back to Liberals under M.Dion. I thought you were wrong about going public about a potential merger with the NDP, but now believe you were right to get people talking openly about it. I think it is too late for this election(obviously) but in the long term, it isn’t, for the Liberals and NDP to start making moves towards a united left. A new party with new people would be the best way, and i for one, believe you are one of the right people to help make this happen. If you were in my neck of the woods (KW), you’d have my vote. Cheers, here’s hoping we don’t end up like the PC’s in 1993.

  14. michael hale says:

    that second to last bullet rings more true than anything else – all of us need to find a way back. It can’t happen until after the election for some, but it needs to happen.

  15. John says:

    I’m with you on the merger, and I’m with you if you decide to run. Best of luck!

  16. The other George says:

    Warren, seeing how you so aptly used a non-English word to describe something that cannot be as eloquently spoken or written in English I shall do the same:

    “Multa cadunt inter calicem supremaque labra”

    from Erasmus’s “Adagia,” I.iv.1

    It is not voting day yet and those are the results that count. All the teeth gnashing and hand wringing is the equivalent to pre-exam jitters. We know we should have studied more because we had all the opportunity to do so, but we procrastinated and fooled around etc etc and we wont go through is agony by studying and preparing better for the next exam etc etc.

    So, here we are. It is almost exam day. May the 3rd will be a new day and we will know what to do. I myself, know that my involvement with the Grits will escalate because I ever more see the necessity of it.

    And, for Steve and Jack, as I have stated in Latin, “There’s many a slip ‘twixt the cup and the lip”

  17. AP says:

    If you want a historical comparison with what is happening in this election take a look at the 1990 Ontario provincial election. Started off as a foregone conclusion (re-elected Liberal majority) and was a more or less boring campaign and with about two weeks to go the polls started to measure the voters shifting and then BAM an NDP majority government — basically out of nowhere Bob Rae is premier. Voters like jumping on the bandwagon and they like to vote for the winning side. A whiff of death is trailing the Liberal party and Michael Ignatieff and I fear that whiff is becoming a stench.

    VOTE LIBERAL

    • AP says:

      Yes that is true. But I’m just talking about what is happening now with this election — not what the long term consequences are.

    • Ron says:

      If Jack becomes leader of the opposition does Bob Rae
      have another identity crisis and want to go back to the NDP?

  18. WDM says:

    While a merger/electoral cooperation may make sense on the surface, I’m not convinced it’s the solution for the Liberals. A few things I’d like to note:

    1) I’m not convinced it’s sustainable. I don’t see a Lib/NDP merger the same way I see the PC/Alliance merger of 2003. In the case of the current Conservative Party, it was two sides coming back together, rather than the creation of a new parties from two, long established parties that have been separate entities for decades. The upshot? I think disgruntled Dippers start up a new left wing party (heck, they’ve tried to do it with the NDP as a solo entity!). There’s also the chance centrist and right of centre Liberals get spooked and run to the Conservatives.

    2) I don’t think a merger/cooperation helps cures what ails the Liberals. What ails them isn’t splitting the vote, what ails them is a brand that is dead in the water west of Ontario for the most part, in large parts of Quebec and in most of rural Canada. While he was an excellent politician, M. Chretien also benefited from the split on the right. While the obvious impact of this was the sweep of Ontario, what it also meant was, that while winning three majorities, there was little need to worry or notice about the problems the party was facing in other parts of the country, particularly Quebec where the Liberals haven’t won a majority of the seats since 1980. In the decades previous, it had been Quebec which the Liberals had built majorities, and now they’re struggling to win a dozen seats. This has been a problem for decades that continues to worsen, but because of the split on the right, and later issues regarding Sponsorship, the fact Quebec has been hostile to the Liberals for 30 years hasn’t been given the attention it needed.

    The Liberals need to re-invent themselves. Take bold stands. Offer more than just the standard fare of throwing money at every issue (which every party does, not just the Liberals). As long as we have a first past the post system, some form of cooperation with each other is going to be inevitable with five competitive parties, but the Liberals need to decide what they want to be before they try and go for the quick fix.

    • reformatory says:

      halelluja
      that’s what I’ve been sayin and sayin and sayin. WK doesn’t even have a response to that. Look I’m not against cooperating or a merger if it is really the issue and the fix. But I don’t see it. I only see more or other problems to occur. I’ve asked on this site for somebody to help me see the light as to why the idea is so good- cause I will be the first to say- okay I’m wrong if it is so and then I’ll embrace the new idea and roll with it. But.. nobody can.. all anybody does is wait for a favourable poll then they wave that one favourable poll like it’s redemption time. Liberals firmly in the centre are not buying it. Liberals in the centre also do not want to sell out their party to the left and watch the conservatives firmly entrench themselves where the liberals have always had success.

  19. Cam says:

    Good Day. I agree, unite the left. But for now, I am not going to partake of the defeatist Kool-aid. I think we will see Liberals coming out of the woodwork in the next week or so prior to the election. I don’t think they will be waiting for defeat. It may be too late, but fear motivates.

    The upswing for the Federal Left in Quebec is far better than an upswing to the right. Hopefully we don’t see the Conservatives coming up the middle in Quebec. I’m curious about how the Montreal Port Authority and the Senator and the “big boss” stuff will play out for the Conservatives in Quebec?

    • JH says:

      None at all outside Montreal and overall it’ll just be another scandal-a-day ‘distraction from the message’ type of issue. Looking back over this thing, that seems to have been the problem for the Libs. WK says the idea is that everyday you knock the other guy off his message of the day. But what if you’ve done it to yourself? It seems that Ignatieff , instead of focusing on the platform and a central campaign theme built around it, has tried to make points on every so-called scandal that arose. Thus knocking himself off message on each occasion. Harper on the other hand just keeps repeating the same boring mantra every place he goes. I guess dull works or at least seems to.
      Now it seems the voter has become inured to the peep show stuff and so this week-end will sit around the Sunday dinner table debating majority or no majority and the benefits of each. Or at least that’s MHOP. BTW my captcha code this time was peew as in stinky – maybe that’s a subliminal message that imfullofit. Namesake would probably agree.

    • Namesake says:

      I was hoping someone else would weigh in, here, but here’s why this Soudas/Housakos / Mtrl Port Authority affair SHOULD be more than a momentary blip and cause at least some QC CPC voters to stay home.

      So many of the elements of the reasons this gov’t fell — which violate so many of the principles they vowed to stand up for, when they were in Opp. — and which the Charest gov’t is likely to fall on, as well — are here:

      – possibly illegal lobbying being done from within the PMO’s office;
      – an arrogant, unaccountable political staffer having more clout in the province than the party’s elected officials, including a Cabinet Minister;
      – a backroom fundraiser for the party standing to gain personally from his interfering in municipal and quasi-Crown Corp. matters, and also being rewarded for his service with a plum patronage appointment of his own;
      – the connection to construction industry bosses connected with tax evasion, public works contracts bid rigging, and, yes, actual Mafia investigations

      In a word: Corruption.

      And note, it’s not the FIRST time these two have been caught up in it: a while back, a company the newly minted Senator Housakos was still on the payroll of received a stimulus contract; and a year before that, as the G&M notes, the pair of them “tried to interfere in favour of a Montreal real-estate firm [Rosdev] that was involved in legal battles with the federal government.”

      http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/the-senator-the-tape-recordings-and-the-big-boss-in-quebec/article1995433/

      … and also tried to help some company wrangle a defense contract of some sort from the feds, although neither of them was registered as a lobbyist at the time.

      For some interesting reading on all this to remind people from QC and enlighten people from outside it, here’s the wonderful blogger with a lot more institutional memory for this sort of thing than me, Emily Dee:

      http://pushedleft.blogspot.com/search/label/Leo%20Housakos

      • Namesake says:

        oops, left one element out:

        – Lying to / Contempt of Parliament

        http://www.montrealgazette.com/news/decision-canada/Soudas+under+oath/4651518/story.html

        • JH says:

          Well I’m told 1 story in the Gaz, laPresse and Le Devoir. Opinions are that it seems to be interesting but quite a while back. Bloc and Jack seem to be the focus. With a week to go – Francophones are talking about that choice. Libs and Conservatives don’t even seem to be in the conversation on that side of the linquistic divide according to Quebecois pals.

        • hollinm says:

          You see this stuff is what is causing the Libs so much of a problem. They think they can make this stuff stick in a campaign. It cannot. Most of this stuff is based on assumptions, guessing, speculation and eventually the public just stops listening to the message.
          We all saw how the Libs have been acting for the past five years. No real policy. No vision. Only attempts to create a scandal. Committe hearings that have been turned into U.S. style kangaroo courts. Unless the scandal affects Canadians directly they are not going to get too excited. It is all inside baseball.

          Instead the Libs should have got a leader that had demonstrated leadership capabilities..not another professor who lived outside of the country for 34 years. Instead of developing policies routed in the 21st century we get policies that have been recycled from the 80’s. We get a party that feigns outrage but does nothing to say what they would do differently.

          If the Libs lose official opposition status it is their own fault. They have been looking for the quick fix. It hasn’t worked and their opponent is one tough sob.

  20. Mulletaur says:

    I have never seen the slightest indication that any grassroots militants for either the NDP or the federal Liberal Party want to merge. On the contrary, this is totally the invention of certain political elites, mainly for self-serving reasons. The result of a merger would be a whole that’s much less than the sum of the parts. Right leaning Liberals will go to the Conservatives, militant socialists in the NDP will mainly go off the process altogether and stay home while some will join the Greens. In this scenario, the Conservatives will become the natural governing party and will be in power forever.

    In the meantime, Liberals who still believe in their party and its future need to keep working hard, keep asking people for their votes and their donations and get out every last vote now during the Advance Polls (today, tomorrow and Monday) and on Election Day. Don’t stop working, Liberal friends. Every vote counts.

  21. ottawacon says:

    It is pretty earth-shattering. If the election does indeed play out as the polls do, I think we may well see the convergence theory enforce itself on the Canadian political system. Middle parties get squeezed out. The Liberal Party was so successful at resisting that dynamic that it has long considered a challenge to the theory in political science, but once it stopped being able to manage that dynamic, it entered an era that would challenge its very existence – something Harper has been extremely aware of. No way the NDP talk about merger now, instead they move in for the kill.

  22. bocanut says:

    Please count on my support when you decide to run for elected orfice.

    • smelter rat says:

      You again, Boca? Warren is a bright guy and wouldn’t touch your support with a 10 foot pole. Now, climb back under your rock.

  23. Dr.J says:

    I seen the polls like everyone else and I am shocked to say the least. Even though I could gloat about the Libs, I am even more happy at the prospect of the BLOC getting hammered… Also, IPSOS have said that the Liberals free fall may not even be done yet!! The Liberals need to be gutted and a re-build needs to take place which takes some time. Compare it to sport teams which need a re-build, it takes years not months!!! I also agree 100% the NDP do not need a merger, they have the left now. Caption – “You say Stornaway has a his/hers bike rack…COOL!!!!”

    • Riley Robertson says:

      Ipsos hasn’t had the Cons below 40% since early February. Their polls are useless. They’re way out compared to every other poll. Add their numbers to the seat calculator at Fair Vote Canada and you have complete misinformation. The formulas used in the vote calculator are completely arbitrary and I suspect designed to emphasize disproportionality since Fair Vote Canada’s purpose is to demonstrate how phony our electoral process is. But read the fine print. It doesn’t really drill down accurately to the individual riding and that is where we need to be looking right now and nobody has any accurate information on those numbers except a few candidates with the budget and volunteer base to do their own statistically valid polling.

      • Namesake says:

        Ipsos Canada should’ve been banned from polling when its head, the former Mulroney in-house pollster Darrell Bricker, appeared before Clement’s ‘let’s bash the census’ committee last summer and testified that the private pollsters could get along fine w/o the mandatory long-form census….

        …even though he knew full well that pollsters — likely including him, the weasel — rely on it to sample & weight respondents to more accurately reflect a properly representative no. of the actual population’s province of residence; age; education; and household income characteristics. He’s a Judas to his profession.

  24. Rob Walker says:

    Warren,

    Yesterday’s news reminded me of the last chapter of The War Room. We can’t stop fighting. None of us. I agree with your assessment, if we are not the Official Opposition on May 3, we will be spending 10 years in the wilderness. This is tooth and nail time.

    I think it is still quite possible that this wave will crest and recede. Now that the Reformatories are attacking the Dippers, we shall soon see whether there is any momentum to the NDP surge. It is also quite possible that the regional distributions will wreak havoc in ridings with deeply rooted incumbents. I fear the split though.

    When you run, I will be there to help you. You have my email address.

    RW

  25. pomo says:

    I love Jack’s smiling pic here. He deserves all that happiness and then some. He’s a tough nut. He’s run a campaign to be proud up under the duress of recovering from serious illness (and he looks healthier than the other two, might I add. Amazing) He’s dedicated and hardworking, pragmatic and down to earth. I don’t see the same naivete I saw a few years ago. I don’t detect the “never been in a rural Canadian place in my life” vibe anymore. He seems comfortable as comfortable in a martini bar as slinging beer at a pub. I am not afraid of handing him the reigns. I would love to see a reckless coalition, either with him at the helm or in some other major role.

    And I never thought I would say any of that.

    Bring it, Jacko.

  26. I’m all for the party coming together, but it cannot start with blame and blood on the floor. If it does, things are destined to get worse. Obviously some people will need to move on, but it should be done in a civilized and reflectful manner.

      • Ron says:

        but is that possible considering the people involved, respective egos etc.
        Or…do they do it for the greater good?

      • Jeff P says:

        1. This thing aint over.
        2. Warren isnt the only one that has been cut loose by these guys. There are a lot of us that have been run over by some of these smart guys.
        3. If you are a Liberal you’re always loyal to the PARTY. No matter who is running it.
        4. Ignatieff himself isn’t the issue.
        5. This isnt going to be better with fewer Liberals on board.
        6. Find a campaign and get out our vote. I will be.

  27. AmandaM says:

    Say when, W. I’ll be there too.

  28. Riley Robertson says:

    Look, the polls don’t mean anything in our phony electoral system. Popular vote doesn’t translate into seats in any legitimate way. The fact the there is all kinds of wild speculation about who’s going to form government, become the opposition, get decimated, etc. only reinforces the fact that we don’t have a real democracy. When we come to the day in which 24% of the popular vote means you get 24% of the seats, we will have a real conversation. Until then, any government we get is a phony government and, in my view, illegitimate — regardless of what our constitution and traditions say. We have an ingorant electorate that doesn’t realize our steam age electoral system is a laughing stock — or would be, if it weren’t so tragic.

  29. Riley Robertson says:

    Another wild card is the youth vote, which on the surface at least seams energized more than it has been the last few elections. I don’t imagine a lot of them will be voting Con. Probably get some more Green votes out of them, and split the progressive vote even more. As for the prediction of the Bloc getting 4 seats … please.

    • Al in Cranbrook says:

      Riley, I’m going to disagree with you.

      I don’t want a system of “government” that somehow is beholding to represent the views of every crackpot, two-bit political movement.

      Government is serious business, far too serious to be hamstrung by people peddling narrowly held ideas and/or ideologies that can’t pass the test of achieving at least some degree of critical mass. It is this test that weeds out the silliness…more or less…and separates the proverbial wheat from the chaff when it comes to governance on behalf of the entire nation.

      Manning and Bouchard, agree with them or not, proved that new political movements can, if they go about it the old fashioned way by earning respect and acceptance, can break through into the mainstream of political affairs, and thereby affect legitimate change.

      On the other hand, if they can’t, then they won’t. And that’s how it should be. It’s like anything else life, if one wants to succeed at something, then one has to those thing well that it takes to succeed. And the Green Party thus far has not, and thus deserve their current status such as it is because that’s as much as they thus far have earned for themselves…as judged by the electorate!

      That there is some sort of bar, spoken or merely tacitly understood, that thereby establishes legitimacy is a good thing when it comes to governance of the affairs of the nation as a whole. If nothing else, it saves wasting a helluva lot of time on half baked nonsense that is irrelevant to the vast majority, and thus to the affairs of nationhood.

      IMHO.

      • Riley Robertson says:

        Just put the minimum popular vote to get seats up to a sufficiently high level … say 5%, or so. If wingnuts get significant seats, the mainstream parties get together and form a government based on compromise and co-opertation like theyr’e supposed to. Such as the Grand Coalition of the CDU and SDP in Germany. In our exsisting system, a minority of the popular vote can lean to 100% of the power with no need for compromise. Do you want Brad Trost and Maurice Vellacot in charge of the country? At the end of the day, though our electoral system simply doesn’t produce the outcome citizens vote for — ever — unless we have only two parties and then what kind of a sham democracy is that? That’s not real.

        • Al in Cranbrook says:

          Riley…

          You’re missing the point! Nobody wins power in our democracy without compromise. Certainly neither Liberals nor Conservatives. Every successful political party is a manifestation of compromise on a myriad of issues. This is how we achieve balance in government! There are always evolutionary processes at work, and the system allows for the good ones, the cream of the crop so to speak, to rise to the surface, while the nonsense sinks to the bottom where it belongs.

          In our system, and rightfully so, one does not get to play merely by showing up at the door and demanding a seat at the table! In the real world nothing works this way, neither in enterprise, nor public affairs, and certainly not in nature!

          For all its weaknesses, the overriding strength of the first past the post system is that it keeps everyone honest, and forces compromise upon all those who wish to become significant players therein. This system literally forces every political party, and the leadership thereof, to keep its doors open to the evolutionary process. The Creditistes/Socreds (of which I once was a member) ultimately passed into history because they failed to be relevant. The CCF went through a process of rebirth in order to be relevant once again. The PCs, dominated by Red Tories, fought to marginalize “conservatism”, thereby stifling this vital process, and paid the ultimate price for it in 1993 by becoming irrelevant to enough voters that they could only win 2 seats.

          And I would suggest to you that this is now what is happening to the LPC. There’s no longer room for the centrist voices, and balance provided thereby, of the likes of the John Manleys of the nation. They’ve been stifled and brushed aside for no more good reason than expediency, and the convenience of finding the the easiest, but to the point, quickest way back to power that too many think is somehow theirs by some sort of divine right.

          Nature abhors a vacuum. Evolution is the means by which nature solves this problem.

          As long as the LPC keeps thinking the way back to governance is by way of circumventing centrist and pragmatic policy that reflects, not abstract ideological notions, but that which actually works on behalf of the most people, they’re hooped!

          Something I’d suggest Harper finally figured out circa 2000 or so.

  30. WesternGrit says:

    No talk of merger. Cooperation – maybe. NDP won’t form official opposition based solely on their Quebec numbers.

    Liberals won’t abandon the center. The dynamic will not change. A “bi-polar” dynamic in Canadian politics will simply lead to Republican-style masterhood of Canadian politics from the right. The fact is, a wholly-owned right of center corporate and corporate media world would mainly support the right. The so-called “left” would become the US-style democrats, with the far left marginalized. What would result is mainly right-wing governments interspersed with right-of-center “democrat” governments here and there, when people get bored of the “nationalist/right-wing” party.

    I honestly don’t think that is what Canadians want. Heck, 60% of them voted for parties from the center to left. If you subtract the Liberal 30% at the center, you still have 30% of Canadians supporting the pure left. I have many good friends who are NDP, and they don’t even think of the Liberal Party being a party “of the left”. There is no way these good Canadians would even consider a merger.

    • Mulletaur says:

      Correct.

      • reformatory says:

        Triple correct. Everybody needs to stop calling the Liberals a party of the LEFT. It is and has always been firmly placed in the centre. The conservatives right now are trying to emulate them. Can you imagine what a gift for them it would be.. if they merged. They would in one broad swipe BRAND the new party “the left” and it would be game over. Look what the Republicans do to the democrats in the US.

        Unless someone can convince us of some compelling evidence- do not fall for it. I think it’s the conservatives who are secretly behind this push to merge.

        • fritz says:

          Your wrong reformatory. Yes there would be some bleeding of Manley Liberals to the Tories just as there was some bleeding of red Tories to the liberals when the Reform Party took over the PC’s; but the new merged party would end all those LPC/NDP vote splits and ensure a more unified opposition in elections. It would be a center/LEFT party just as the CPC is a center/RIGHT party. The thing you have to remember is that 2/3rds of Canadians vote for cente/LEFT parties and only 1/3rd for the center/RIGHT party.

  31. Susan says:

    I am fed up with the Liberals and they are my party. Time for new blood, new thinking. I will support you Warren and be thrilled to help out.

  32. artwilliams says:

    If this is an ongoing trend then it will be interesting to see what will happen in Parkdale-Highpark, Beaches-East York and Davenport where the NDP are now competitive against Liberal incumbents. Also, the Etobicoke ridings where the Conservatives could go up the center with a split vote Liberal/NDP vote. Esp. Etobicoke-North where our portly major no doubt has his army running about.

    The worse scenario for the Liberals? A Conservative majority, NDP in opposition and the per vote subsidy eliminated. The last point would really be a kick in the head to the Liberals and the BQ. These next 9 days will be a wild ride.

  33. dave says:

    Speaking of the Vancouver Canucks…

  34. Ted (not the other one) says:

    If you run in Calgary West I’ll volunteer all of my time. And I’ll vote Liberal for the first time in my life.

  35. Craig Chamberlain says:

    WK-

    But here’s the issue at the heart of all this: I am not a socialist.

    Chretien stands as my favorite PM. AND Ignatieff’s views and style strongly resonate with me. And yes, he was TO ME correct in his response to the talk of a coalition. A distraction and a drag on the energy that the party needed to move forward.

    Who am I? Well, nobody really, and perhaps at times a bit more. But as an observation, respectfully, you seem to lack the freedom to hear this side of things.

  36. gretschfan says:

    I’d welcome a merged Liberal / NDP. But not with Rae at the helm.

  37. James says:

    Canada’s entered a new political era and it will be officially confirmed on May 2.

    The Conservatives are already the country’s natural governing party: broad cross-country support, growing base in urban centres, growing base within ethnic communities, the rise of the west as a political power base. And let’s not forget that a large percentage of Conservative supporters are ex-Liberals (like me).

    I was out in Toronto’s financial district watering holes last night and the talk there is all for a Conservative majority. The “Ford-revolution” of Toronto last November will carry over into this election: some 416 ridings could end up blue.

    • Derek Pearce says:

      The Conservatives, who can’t sustain any support above the mid-to-high 30s % wise, are now the natural governing party? Tanking in Quebec, and they’re the natural governing party? Despised in the Metro centres across Canada, and are the natural governing party? LOLz for days!

      • Namesake says:

        and resisting seat redistribution, and suppressing the youth vote,* so they can keep bootstrapping on their unrepresentative, older, non-metropolitan voters that they keep scaring into carrying the day.

        yup, it’s only natural they should keep governing

        * http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/decision-canada/Opinion+Vote+mentality/4658160/story.html

        • How can the opposition parties have been preventing Bill C-12 from passing second reading, when the government has hardly called it for any debate at all, and hasn’t called a vote on it, Gord.

          (BTW, it’s a bill on seat reapportionment, not redistribution which is a separate process and which will go ahead after the 2011 census regardless of whether a successor to Bill C-12, to amend the seat reapportionment process spelled out in the constitution, is passed or not.)

      • Michael Reintjes says:

        UH…SO..we should elect a liberal party who can’t elect anybody west of Mississauga,can’t sustain any support above the High 20% and has now 13% support in Quebec?
        How ’bout we put all this “Natural Governing party bullshit” right in the shitter where it belongs?

        • James says:

          Okay, we’ll replace “NGP” with “Pan-Canadian Party”. Still the same point: Conservatives have broadest base of Canadian support.

          Derek, it’s the Liberals who fancied themselves to be the country’s “natural governing party”, and if we’re going to talk sbout popular support then remember that Chertien achieved his majorities with mid-to-high 30s%, and all because the right-wing vote was divided under two parties at the time (i.e. before the merger of 2003).

  38. ben burd says:

    Speaking as a loonie-lefty there is no way in hell that I would be joining either the greens or the Libs, If a new party is to be drawn up it has to a “big tent” of many factions, ergo – a coalition. An electoral coalition would be the only way to maintain the integrity of each faction. If that leads us to Israeli politics so be it. Let’s be real folks no Messiah is coming down the pike to lead us from the 40 years in the desert.
    BTW does all this LPC teethgnashing lead Senator Smith into his dotage?

  39. Warren you should run again, you have a lot to offer. If your web traffic is any indication – you’ll have an abundance of support. As for this election, I think people are seeing through Harper in unprecedented numbers. They are turning to Jack as someone who is likeable and more importantly understands the optics of being assertive in the debates. Iggy missed his chance to nail Harper in the debate and he’s paying the price. I hear anecdotal stories all the time that people were impressed with Jack in the debates. TV is so important in modern elections. Too bad for Iggy. He lacks the killer instinct.

  40. R says:

    Liberal think and talk

    but

    conservative act then talk agresivly

    when conservative and liberal are fighting
    NDP is oppoutunist take fish from muddy rive and open small gap to come up
    If jack layton was good enough he could get more vote in TOronto and ontario place he live most of his life

    this is like you bring harper to US and people vote for him more than Canada

    now Jack Layton got more vote every where except place who knows him well is questionable

    Jack Layton are in Toronto and mostly in Ottaw is more reachable

    but problems I noticed of NDP and Jack layton he did not follow up his promises and any phone call
    or any help to his office seriously

    now he get older and iller how is going to follow up

    his wife are chineese who follow to thier culture chiness in ontario like each other and help each other alot and ignore other community

    they do not talk scare they lost energy and get hungry to eat and gain fat or not take care of his own husband health

    jack layton need group who work and follow peopel when they call him for help

  41. JWN says:

    We’ve reached a point in our federal political history where right minded citizens are better served lobbying for changes to our electoral system than supporting any traditional political party.

    I would vote for a single issue proportional representation party in a heartbeat, reform the system, call an election, and then get to governing the country effectively for the first time in over a decade.

    No more 38 percent majorities, compromise becomes a systematic necessity with marginal gains of two or three percent in support having minimal impact on election outcomes. The end result of a pr system would effectively be coalition centre left governments.

    Alternatively have always felt the first step in uniting the left could be a negotiated Non aggression pact where libs don’t run in Ndp held ridings and vice versa. While that may have been enough to hold the cons this time out more will be required next time.

    Happy to help in any merger effort. The country needs it and I’m glad other grits are finally understanding the reality of our federal political landscape.

  42. DJ says:

    The IPSOS poll seems to significantly overestimate Conservative vote. No one else is howing them above 40. They’re in the mid to high 30s in every other poll.

  43. Harith says:

    The new tory attack ad re the NDP is hilarious. The same tired coalition fear monger lines, just aimed at Layton.

    http://youtu.be/_PYTd52pT28

    They have nothing else to say? Really?

  44. Hey, At least you don’t have Stock Day in your past, nor do you have Joe Clark bashing you while you rebuild.

    Who do you think would win a fight in Quebec, Justine or Maxime or Muclair???? anyone!

    • Patrick Hamilton says:

      Hey, you should have been around when we were trying to rebuild the PC Party…..Reform/CA took a mickey out of us anytime they could, not to mention the full page attacks by Lord Tubby’s

      rag against us…..Remember “Say Goodbye Joe!”….I do…..So Mr. Clark didnt support the merger later on, big whoop….knowing what I know now, I shouldnt have either…..

      But we survived, 12 seats, and lived to fight another day…..only to be sold down the river by you know who…..

      I suspect the Liberals wont do as badly as Mr. Kinsella is predicting, but I certainly could see the writing on the wall, at least in my local riding, ahem, electoral district…

  45. scot says:

    If I have to watch that Con Canada ad again, I think I’ll puke

  46. R says:

    sorry I do not want to be rude with NDP or talk lack of any optomestic yes we can do it

    This Jack Layton if you go to his web site ndp
    and listen to his video
    He keep promise to give away like account payable

    or like you tell your kid stay quiet I give you candy and food and cake but you come with some not all if you have no job to gave them all attached to it
    unbelievable

    problems I see he did not explain how he manage account as account reciviable

    how he can afford all give away

    the money he promise he comes

    it come from rich people tax collection for example

    he better stop robin hood
    because even Robin hood must have rich to take from them to give it to poor to become happy

    if government is transtion of money from rich to poor

    still government must built and support rich and famous and smart ceo to get that

    that plat form of ndp is only like selling second hand car kind of promise or bluffing talk that car working fine but next month you must go to car shop for fix it has lack of all facts with no full explanation

  47. R says:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oni0tO_HN30&feature=related

    conservative party put us down in any shape in business in international view and our life went down with conservaitve in power

    now how new politcal party can raised us up again

  48. allegra fortissima says:

    Nice to see a man with a no-stripes tie – good taste, Jack!

  49. Robin says:

    That would be awesome if you were elected. The Liberals need someone sharp to counter the likes of, say, John Baird or Jason Kenney in QP (Sadly it is Rae who seems to be the only clever one in the current caucus, at least in media, and infrequent at that).

    • fritz says:

      Your assuming WK will be running federally. Don’t forget there is an Ontario election is coming up this fall. Perhaps Mr. Kinsella is thinking of running provincially. After all his noted dislike for Tim Hudak and affection for Premier McGuinty are well documented on this site.

      • reformatory says:

        Most are assuming he would run federally. After all he did say.. he did not want to wait and watch for the re-building he wanted to be a part of it. Well the scenario he was talking about would be after and if the rout took took place after this election. The Ontario liberals are certainly not in that rebuilding mode. Besides if McGuinty wins in Oct. it would most certainly be only 1 more term- then the pendulum would swing. The Ontario Libs have never run this province for 3 straight terms ever ever ever.

        I’m sure WK would want to be a part of a newer entourage with more upswing with more years in office. He would not want to head into a starting OPPO situation. The federal Liberals are more into an ending OPPO situation.

        Besides he seems to be the type that would be bored of the daily mundaness of the Pink Palace. He seems to be the type to crave more action and appears to be more the Ottawa type. If i had my bet.. I bet he would choose the Hill over Queens Park Circle anyday.

        If I’m wrong though.. and he does choose Provincial.. somebody please tell him to run against ROCCO ROSSI. That would be the mother of all showdowns. Every Liberal on this planet would show up to make sure WK routs him.

      • reformatory says:

        say who? WHAT? who said anything about an elected senate?

      • reformatory says:

        how the heck is any provincial party going to elect someone to the federal senate. they have no porogative jurisdiction over that.

  50. G Betts says:

    Just let me know where to donate to your election fund.

  51. h holmes says:

    Warren,
    Time to focus on the fact that Jack is not a leader.

    Too many people think because of some cute words and a few sound bits he is a better leader than Iggy.
    This is madness. He has an uncosted platform and has never had to make a major a decision on leadership.
    He is more than culpable on the fact that Harper is in Power for the Last 5 years.
    Between him and Duceppe they have helped Harper stay in power

    Everytime we run at Harper we leave ourselves open to this, because Layton doesn’t have to do any of the dirty work.

    We have spent far too much time tearing down Iggy and not enough crediting his strengths.
    Things will workout but it might get a little muddy getting there.

    • Namesake says:

      I dunno… I say leave him alone on this score, and not just because it’d probably backfire on the Libs.

      No, just stay out of it, and let Jack keep ‘Odasizing’ the soon to be former PM: you know, how it’s Harper who’s ^NOT a Leader

      ‘Cuz even on the Nanos indicators, they’re now tied or Jack’s even ahead on Trust, and closing on the Vision thing

      http://www.nanosresearch.com/election2011/20110421-LeadershipE.pdf

      And even tho’ more still deem Bubble Boy to be Competent, big deal:
      – that’s because they haven’t got enough evidence on Layton or MI as PMs to judge by; and,
      – it’s also ‘damning with faint praise’: a minimal criterion for a performance review, and frankly, it’s not enough for a micro-manager like Harper who tries to run all the portfolios since he’s such a megalomaniac, and also kinda has to anyway, since they’ve got such a vacuous bench.

      He needs to be much much more than merely competent, but he’s not, judging not only by his spectacular failures even in his own wheelhouse (there’ll be no recession? a 6% increase in annual gov’t spending even apart from the stimulus? doesn’t think the coming interest rate increases will impact his ability to balance the budget?), but also in various cockups all over gov’t: see, e.g., POGGE’s lists at http://www.pogge.ca/archives/003226.shtml and http://www.pogge.ca/archives/003240.shtml

      And on other leadership indices, Layton’s either virtually tied with Harper: http://www.harrisdecima.ca/node/1140

      or way ahead: http://abacusdata.ca/2011/04/20/party-leadership-layton-sores-ignatieff-jumps-harper-stuck/

      And since a strong showing by the NDP right now is mainly going to take away seats from the CPC, not the LPC in BC (where they, sigh, blame the LPC instead of the CPC for the HST) and in rural areas & the Prairies (where, sigh, the LPC are still being blamed for decades old grudges like the NEP and Trudeau saying it’s not his job to to sell their wheat),

      let’s live and let live… and overthrow Harper together. (Either on May 2 or before too long when he falls either through his own obstinance or because of one of the many Contempt of Parliament motions that are likely to come as the various chickens come home to roost.)

  52. Joe says:

    Well Cat if that is the Liberal Last Supper they are confused. They have Jesus and Judas played by the same man.

  53. R says:

    Finally

    Jack Layton it is better to laugh or smile less we accept his wife smile not him
    he better act seriously I know he is happy

    hire better advicers to work with him and people know them too

    I do not know why Prince William is young and rich

    do not have good nutrition in take or good doctor ask opera
    he needs to take look at Rogaine shsmpoo , propecia tablet or hair surgery before wedding

    pass advice to Jack too when he becom rich only

    lol

  54. Bruce from Etobicoke says:

    Good article in the Star stating the absolute obvious and asking an even better question. The facts are from the economists. The conclusion is my own.

    1) Harper can’t possibly balance his so called budget without cutting programs. They’ve already been through once and it ain’t going to work the second time either.

    2) If there was $4 billion per year available to cut without eliminating programs – why didn’t they do this 4 years ago? Three years ago? Last year?

    3) I just can’t help feeling Harper knows this already and therefore he is not being completely truthful with me when he speaks about his “budget” and balancing it….

    http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/politics/article/979132–harper-would-have-to-axe-programs-to-reduce-deficit-economists-say?bn=1

    • Curt says:

      Attrition

      • Namesake says:

        a curt — and preposterous — answer.

        “The 80,000 public servants Harper expects to retire over the next few years represent about 30 per cent of the 283,000-member federal workforce. Replacing none of them would mean a radical, disruptive downsizing, affecting hundreds of programs and services.

        Senior cabinet minister John Baird — running for re-election in Ottawa West-Nepean, which has a large number of public servants — has said the Tories do not plan to ‘slash and burn’ the federal bureaucracy. The reductions will be ‘modest,’ he said.

        A five per cent cut in the workforce through attrition would reduce payroll by about $1 billion annually, based on what Statistics Canada says is the average 2010 federal salary of $70,000.

        Those savings represent only a quarter of the $4-billion target, leaving unanswered questions about where the rest of the cutting will be made.

        …[Nor would there be much in savings from consolidating the various federal IT programs.] …an internal report commissioned by Public Works shows how difficult the proposed consolidation will be, and how modest the expected savings. …annual savings might be between $40 million and $170 million for those systems that are easiest to rationalize, but only with full co-operation from all departments. ‘A more conservative assumption would be that 50 per cent of departments would align with the new strategy,’ warns the [PriceWaterhouseCoopers LLP] report.”

        http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20110418/computer-cuts-offer-only-modest-savings-110418/20110418?s_name=election2011&no_ads=

      • Bruce from Etobicoke says:

        Nonsense. I hope that was a joke. Or you didn’t look at the article. You think the guy who increased spending more than anyone since Trudeau 5 years in a row plans to cut 20% of the Federal workforce by 2014? Because that’s how you get to $4 billion through attrition. Oh, and he says he won’t need to cut services or programs. That’s a big boost in productivity on that remaining 80%….

  55. RP. says:

    WK, serious question, if you run and there hasn’t yet been something like a merger, what potential Liberal leader would have you as a candidate?

  56. reformatory says:

    As Chretien would have said….lots of “nervous nellies” over here!

    polls.. polls.. and more polls.. got everybody in the lurch. I bet you any money– the NDP will still not deliver May 2nd and all this talk will make everybody seem…. (?). Polls are not everything.. and Liberals have lots to be proud of in this campaign… anybody who sais it is not one of the better campaigns they have run in many many years- is either partisan, lying or plain (?).

    On another note – I’m looking forward to Sunday afternoon ( 30 minute special with Ignatieff ) should be a groundbreaking event. My bet- the idea will be replicated by many other parties in future elections- cudos to the team for thinking outside the box- and going for it. They deserve a round of applause.

    Another side note.. I was thinking about a few scenarios

    1. What if Harper gets a minority and he resigns within a few days. Before he resigns he announces that he will wait 180 days or so before parliament resumes– then resigns and in the meantime the conservatives will have leadership convention and then the house when it does resume will face a new PM– that then the OPPO would have to cooperate with– since the new chief would be so fresh? That would be plausible and a serious wrench in things? Harper is no fool and rather than go down to a coalition- I’m sure he would take one for the team and pass the baton to a teammate? He would then be entrenched as a martyr for the Conservative Party. Not a bad way to out ablazing!!!

    2. Next plausability- what if the NDP/Liberal merger is already a done deal in the backrooms. The NDP surge would be a good thing– seats from Harper, BC, and Quebec would be had. Then after the election– the 2 parties announce the merger– and presto – one new party with all new MP’s belonging to one party. No need for coalition, no need for alliances, no need for accords… they are one. Layton leaves for health reasons— Ignatieff takes the helm of the new party and in turn sends Layton to the Senate?

    Am I dreammin in technoCOLOUR?
    C’mon the ideas are kinda good. Admit it:)

    • Paul says:

      At this rate, it is more likely the liberals will be the fourth party. Iggy will resign. Check out what happened to the PC party when it was decimated by vote splitting on the right. Time to merge.

    • reformatory says:

      i did not say coalition– you conservatives only see what you want to see. I said they could announce a party merger.. thus making all other arrangements a mute point.

      what do you think of both ideas? how about commenting on those 2 in a hypothetical sense? Are they plausible?

      • reformatory says:

        …talking like you know eh! I can assure you if PMSH gets another minority.. the HOUNDS will be out for him and rightfully so. Can’t you see the look on his face– he is so totally worried. Why do you think he’s trying so hard to drive the majority stake in everybody’s mind. He is desperate. He knows he’s up against the well. It’s majority or bust for him. By BUST I mean there will be an internal mutiny and the conservatives would be smart to seek someone else to lead the rickidy ship.

        I gotta ask… cause you sound like you hang out with one too many reformed conservatives… why would you guys plan such a lousy, uninspiring campaign, and why would you expect any better results from such a lacklustre performance?

      • reformatory says:

        Write me back on May 3rd after you finish licking your wounds. I’ll allow you to apologize for being wring in your assumptions at that time. I can assure you- CONS will be in minority territory. The hounds will be out for STEVE, and the Liberals and NDP will both have enough to SAY Adios :o)

  57. reformatory says:

    Come again.. WK running? I hope it’s federally and I hope it’s in Ontario. Please not in BC like last time… we want to keep you in Ontario.

    BUT

    If WK wins.. what happens to this site? Remember what happened to the last MP who tried to keep a site going. He will then be bound to a WHIP.

    I suppose we can all then wait to get TWITTER announcements from MINISTER KINSELLA. I like the sound of that:o)

  58. Wendy Camp says:

    Warren:

    This is not over yet.

    You guys have ten days. Ten days is a long time in a federal election campaign.

    Get out the vote and take heart!

    The only poll worth its salt is the one on election day.

  59. Political_Outsider says:

    The demographic breakdowns for the CROP poll in Quebec were released.

    Among non-francophones: NDP – 45%, Cons – 26%, Lib – 20%, BQ – 4%, Green – 4%

    Who would be left standing? Irwin Cotler?

  60. reformatory says:

    ahhh… NO… more like they know what is really going on and have their handle on all the levers. If they do tune in, they are most probably shaking their head thinking….” those kids…. if only they knew”.

  61. Patrick Hamilton says:

    Almost as much as the effect Con MP Brad Trost taped revelations had on the Harper campaign bus, Mr. Tulk?…….”Whoops, there went our last hope for a majority, down the shitter”…..

    • Philip says:

      I really appreciate Trost’s candor in giving props to all the good work done by the PMO on this issue. Maybe he should get Soudas involved, apparently he is good at “twisting arms”. Or is that only for Quebec construction bosses who pay him kick backs?

      • Namesake says:

        Well, in fairness, it seems they didn’t actually pay him, because he didn’t deliver: he made the ‘offer,’ but the board refused (altho’ one member lost her job over it, and had to sue for wrongful dismissal to get reinstated).

        But now there’s a little more info. on what it was all about, and why both City Hall & the construction bosses Poulin and Accurso wanted their guy Abdallah in there as the new President or CEO of the Port:

        ‘cuz the Montreal Port Authority — which is a federal entity, no? — owned a whole whack of Crown land that developers had been just dying to get their hands on to build condos (on the waterfront, which would ‘be worth their weight in gold’), but the former President who’d been in place for 20 years or so had been dead set against it.

        http://www.ledevoir.com/politique/elections-2011/321718/port-de-montreal-harper-mele-a-des-jeux-de-coulisses

        Follow the money. (The CPC sure do!)

      • Patrick Hamilton says:

        Touche, Philip!

    • Patrick Hamilton says:

      Except when the view of “the rogue elements” is the majority of Con MP’s, including Mr. Harper, of course……If Mr. Harper wins his majority, and womens

      right to choose in this country isnt affected by some legislation sooner or later, I will be amazed. Do you deny that this govt wont defund Planned

      Parenthood?….actions speak louder than words, Mr. Tulk…..and I can tell you its done your party no favours in Quebec…..

      • Namesake says:

        yup. Here’s a list of them — of the two-thirds of the CPC caucus that have been deemed anti-choice because of their opp. to Morgentaler getting an Order of Canada or their support of Ken Epp’s “Unborn Victims of Crime Act” which would have accorded a type of legal personhood to fetuses:

        http://www.arcc-cdac.ca/action/list-antichoice-mps-apr-11.html

      • Patrick Hamilton says:

        Thankee, namesake…..yup, a solid two thirds of em…..Majority govts have had a tendency to stamp up and down that they are not planning to do something and then turn around and do it….and if you dont think they will try and legislate against abortion in some way, shape or form, Mr. Tulk…..the swampland still awaits…….Mr Tulk?……Mr. Tulk?……

        …..Crickets….

  62. Patrick Hamilton says:

    Almost as much as Brad Tulks taped revelations(no pun intended) effect on the Harper campaign bus, I suspect, Mr. Tulk?…..”Whoops, there went our last chance for a majority, down the shitter”….

  63. Patrick Hamilton says:

    Me apologies for the second post…but enjoy it again for the first time, Reformers……

  64. Philip says:

    just got back from doing the advance polls as a scrutineer in my riding, pretty heavy turn out at the poll division I worked. No line ups to start but very steady all day. A couple of people, in surrounding poll divisions, reported line ups outside the doors waiting for them to open. What really struck me the most was how many people were smiling and looking happy after they had cast their ballot. Not sure what this means in the grand scheme of things.

  65. Chipotle_Dude says:

    Jack’s peaked.

  66. reformatory says:

    …talking like you know eh! I can assure you if PMSH gets another minority.. the HOUNDS will be out for him and rightfully so. Can’t you see the look on his face– he is so totally worried. Why do you think he’s trying so hard to drive the majority stake in everybody’s mind. He is desperate. He knows he’s up against the well. It’s majority or bust for him. By BUST I mean there will be an internal mutiny and the conservatives would be smart to seek someone else to lead the rickidy ship.

    I gotta ask… cause you sound like you hang out with one too many reformed conservatives… why would you guys plan such a lousy, uninspiring campaign, and why would you expect any better results from such a lacklustre performance?

    • Patrick Hamilton says:

      Typical front runners campaign, Reformatory…….bland, try not to make any foolish mistakes, and dont give the electorate any reason to actually get out and vote, being that a low turnout typically favours the Reformers immensely(seeing as their own zealots, with visions of saved fetuses, gay men back in their closets, and silenced women dancing in their heads, are only too eager to get out and vote.)

      But I do agree if Mr. Harper doesnt get his majority this time round, the fundy shivs will be out for him. Say Goodbye, Stephen……

  67. R says:

    Obama will misuse canada to pay his bills to US-Israeli by treat Harper like Irish-Somalian black praite
    If Iggy listen to Obama because he is also Russian – America Canadisn citizen this become more messy over security sovernity of Canada
    I hope that was not the case

    http://thestar.blogs.com/davidolive/2011/04/turns-out-this-race-is-about-likeability-thats-why-laytons-winning-it.html

    http://lecanadian.com/2011/04/22/obama-and-harper-plot-anti-democratic-two-nation-merger-with-anti-terrorism-pretext/

    http://lecanadian.com/2011/04/22/harpers-conservative-scandal-decentralize-canada-toward-north-american-union/

  68. Stan Wright says:

    “…why the Hell would the NDP be interested [in a merger] now?”

    1. Why wouldn’t they? The NDP have nothing to gain by fighting the Liberals to the death, and there’s much to be gained: power.
    2. Battling it out will take at least one and more likely two election cycles to happen. Why would Jack Layton want to sacrifice another decade of his political life
    3. Because the cooperation, co-option, seduction and subversion of opponents are core elements of Jack Layton’s political philosophy, and of his nature. Everything he has accomplished in politics came about this way.

  69. nic coivert says:

    This is no time to throw in the towel.

    The situation we have is the result of a government that has been obsessed with altering the political landscape while practically ignoring its duties of governing. It really is that simple. Dump on the Liberals, dump on the liberals… and polish the NDP.

    Harper’s vision for the country is to annihilate the political opposition. This of course, would create a political vacuum that the right could then occupy with impunity for years. Cue the propaganda machine and you have fascism in the making.

    And don’t call me on Godwins law either. That is just another way of deflecting criticism on real issues.

    The issue here is Harper’s total lack of substantive policy and vision coupled with his pathological hatred of liberal socialism and a compulsive need for propaganda.

  70. Brad says:

    I would say to Jack Layton, be careful what you wish for. Up until now he has had it easy. He never had a chance in hell of running this country, let alone leader of the opposition. He could say and promise whatever he wanted, he knew he never had to deliver. If we wind up with a minority and Jack is number 2 guy, he won’t be able to vote against everything the conservatives propose, that will be the Liberals role, he will have to work with Steve and that will be tough. Steve will be able to bully the NDP even more than the Liberals. He’ll be the guy who has to compromise and his supporters will not like it, it will be the end of him for sure.

  71. Meg says:

    Sigh. The only reason we should have gotten together with the NDP was to get rid of them altogether. Swallow the moderate progressives, and alienate the far-left rabblerousers. Plus we’d form a stronger front against the Conservatives. Granted, there are some nice, moderate NDP’ers to be found, but from what I’ve seen since moving to Toronto, there is also a significant number of militant shit-disturbers who do not understand the political process of this country, and frankly are a liability. From the point of view of one very Liberal 20-something year old, the idea of some of these folk in Cabinet is enough to make a girl consider voting Rhino. And I cant be the only one.

    Regards,

  72. Without any reservation at all, I sincerely wish you nothing but the best in your party rebuilding adventures. If you and your like minded brothers and sisters can rebuild an institution into a centrist pan-Canadian organization that matters, I’ve no doubt that I would be tempted to look.

    The LPC circa 2011 sure feels a lot like the PCPC not long after Mulroney left. While it is doubtful the party will suffer to the same extent as the post-Campbell years, it seems the party is going to face something of the equivalent of the Charest-Clark years. The PCPC ended up being largely an Atlantic Canadian party for a while with very little depth in much of the country and hardly any chance at winning seats west of Ontario.

    Meanwhile that other “conservative” party was powerful and growing.

    Realignment? I guess we’ll see on May 2, but sure seems eerily familiar. We all know how the PCPC ended…

  73. Craig Chamberlain says:

    WK —

    Not sure which would be worse for me — PR or disintegration into a soft-sell socialist party. Chances are I’d opt for the former over the latter.

    We can look at the numbers for the Liberals and the NDP and speculate what it would be if the two merged — or we can say, “it seems a though there is something we need to hear from Canadians — they’re not willing to turn their back on either brand and want more than a binary, winner takes all system that has no room for minority governments.” I think Canadians are voting on more than political parties, but on the plurality of our political system and it seems to me Canadians are OK with viable parties that may not necessarily on their own be able to form government. It’s as if we are seeing the makings of a Canadian system that says “no thanks” to PR but is also saying “no thanks” to perpetual majorities and more, “no thanks” to one-party rule. Canadians are in fact deciding in 2011 whether or not they accept the “winning conditions” of facism in Canada.

Leave a Reply

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


*