03.15.2012 07:57 AM

What does this poll mean?

It means that Ontario Liberals need to work even harder, and earn the privilege of governing every single day.

18 Comments

  1. Joey Rapaport says:

    Very impressive after so many years in power…

  2. Jim Hanna says:

    Damn straight. Never rest.

  3. Conservative Socialist says:

    Warren has the right attitude, but even he knows that long incumbency brings about complacency and flabbiness.

    Even the ‘white knight’ Paul Martin couldn’t fully escape several years of Liberal incumbency with it’s accumulation of hubris and scandals no matter how much he tried to blame his predecessor.

    Ontario Liberals, like the Federal Conservatives, will eventually face an electorate that has a “let’s throw the bums out” attitude.

    • Michael says:

      Shhhh. no one say anything to Tim Hudak, but the problems he is suffering from now are the same ones he had during the election.

      All I hear from Tim and my PC MPP is how bad the Liberals are, they offer no solutions themselves. What would they do differently?

      The voter malais had already set in before the election. The Liberals could have been beaten. But the PCs offered no positive reason to vote for them. The impression I get from the PCs is that they are just a bunch of angry white men that want power just for the sake of power.

      Keep up the good work Tim!!!

  4. frmr disgruntled Con now Happy Lib says:

    Back by popular demand……..http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YZKLCJBoBYw

  5. Let’s take the medicine now.

  6. Brad Young says:

    Maybe instead of a Liberal NDP coalition federally, Dalton could run against Harper for the Liberals. He doesn’t appear to hate Canada.

  7. Philippe says:

    Not to be a pessimist but I’m not sure that support will last when the cuts actually happen (and they do need to happen, we’re broke). I hope not, but the reality is that it may be impossible to get our fiscal house in order without peeing off quite a few people.

    • Conservative Socialist says:

      Our Universal Health care system is popular because it benefits a large swath of the population (like all of them). I suppose some rich people would rather jump the queue and pay for it themselves (and they can do this, if they travel abroad), but it works for the majority. Canadian health care model works because it provides convenience (single payer). This is an example of socialism that works.

      But when you get into certain government benefits like welfare or even a government job, with it’s generous pensions, then the majority of the electorate doesn’t really particularly care if these get cut. These programs cost money, and the taxpayers who don’t directly benefit from them are somewhat resentful.

      Has Dalton McGuinty increased welfare payments to what they were before Mike Harris had cut them? No. I particularly didn’t feel too sorry for those able-bodied welfare recipients who were actually collecting more money than I did when I was working a full time minimum wage job at the time.

      True, many welfare recipients were unemployed and couldn’t find a job (1990s Ontario economy kind of sucked), but welfare creates a trap of lifetime unemployment for many people. We definitely should create policies that encourage as much employment as possible. There is dignity in work.

      I tend to favor socialist policies in general, but I recognize the reality of human nature. There is far too rigid ideology on the left that fails to see this.

      • Philippe says:

        What worries me in all of this is the government’s willfulness to make the necessary cuts (and I’m a Liberal). I don’t think people realize just how broke we are – and how deep we need to cut to get back into a surplus situation. I would never vote for the hypocritical Cons who preach fiscal restraint but green-light & empty the till for whatever falls within their ideological parameters. However, I really, really hope our Libs are up to the “tough medicine” job. Don’t tell us what we want to hear, tell us what we _need_ to hear. People will understand shared sacrifice if our as long as our cataclysmic economic situation is explained properly.

        • Conservative Socialist says:

          In the context of electoral politics, it’s very difficult to implement what is really needed because the party in power wants to continue getting reelected. Harper’s cutting the GST, increasing transfers to the provinces, and increased child benefits are very populist moves–nobody likes paying taxes and they like getting money from the government. But for the long term fiscal health of the nation, it’s not a good thing. And it will become politically impossible to raise the GST back to 7 percent when the Conservatives are replaced. Canada going back into deficit spending was likely unavoidable considering the global economic situation, but it would be less severe if these things hadn’t been done.

          There is talk of raising OAS eligibility to 67. I’m not necessarily opposed to the idea in principle–being a GenXer with a calculator I could see that it will eventually become mathematically impossible to sustain the retirement and health benefits of an ever-growing aging population. I’m trying to take responsibility for my own health (by eating right and exercising) and I’ve been saving for the future. I’m surprised that Harper is raising OAS eligibility, considering that his most loyal constituency is “old white males” 😉 (nothing against old white guys, I meant that in the most tongue-in-cheek manner).

          Maybe McGuinty will recognize that winning a fourth term for the Liberals might not be a sure thing (his current lead is most likely a soft one) and then expend whatever political capital he has left and implement tough love policies. It’s evident that with the recent technological advances, that government can find efficiencies and provide the same services, but with less.

          • Philippe says:

            I agree with you 100%.

            I’m worried though when I hear them on the radio with messaging like the cuts “won’t be very painful”. Christ, we’re 1000 feet underground and they’re pretending there’s an easy way out? Ontarians aren’t stupid, we get it. We’re in the deficit shitter, tell us how we’ll get out of it and what we need to sacrifice rather than sugar-coating. Make the tough decisions. There’s no way we’re getting out of this easily with soft cuts.

            I like to think that like both of us, most reasonable Ontarians are socially progressive, yet fiscally Conservative.

  8. Michael S says:

    Recent history has shown that the discipline that slim minority brings is healthy for an incumbent government, and breeds arrogance in the official opposition. But you knew that, WK.

  9. fred says:

    The rigid ideology on the left lived in a city with 13 to 14 % unemployment and 10,000 people on welfare. After the fedCons and the Ontario
    Libs eliminate jobs to cut the deficit, expect to see more of this.

  10. Iris Mclean says:

    As long as the Cons have Hudak with his shit-eating smirk as their leader, I think the Libs will look good to most voters. Good Lord! What the hell were they thinking when they decided to keep this repulsive little twerp to lead their party?

  11. reformatory says:

    I know this is off topic.. but those who are working towards an NDP/Liberal dance… should read…..

    http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2012/03/15/michael-den-tandt-thomas-mulcair-would-bring-harpers-dream-of-liberals-demise-a-closer-to-reality/

    That article explains everything I’ve ever attempted to say on the matter. HArper would salivate at the prospect of a merger. He would be the only party left standing. His party would become the Republican ( grand ol party ). The new party would get trounced and the rich Liberal tradition in Canada would be finished.

    Just my 2 cents

    • Conservative Socialist says:

      A lot of people on the centre-left don’t mind or fear a two-party system (Warren is quite open to the idea).

      I find the following in the article quite over the top: “That’s because, in a standup fight between a socially moderate party of the centre-right and a party of the centre-left, this PM believes Conservatives will win every time — because most Canadians, while socially moderate, are economic conservatives.”

      That’s just as silly as saying that a united left will keep the Conservatives out of power forever. If the voters want change, the opposition, with a proper campaign can tailor it’s message to garner appeal and win. Mike Harris took the reins of a third-place party and won over the voters. It only took 5 years of the NDP to poison the minds of the electorate and overwhelmingly support Harris’ radical “Common Sense Revolution”.

      If the left does merge, then the Conservatives will have to appeal to a broader constituency (as in tack to the middle) and the united left will have to do the same in order to win 50% + 1 of the vote in a two-party system.

    • Conservative Socialist says:

      I moved from Ontario to Alberta quite a few years ago, and it is a de-facto one party system here.

      Honestly, I am glad that the Wildrose Alliance is making waves and will provide much-needed competition for the PC party whose 41 years of incumbency is far more arrogant than even the worst excesses that the Federal Liberal dynasties have done. MPs have been caught padding their paychecks with do-nothing committees that don’t even bother to meet at all.

      A healthy two party system where the PCs represent the left and Wildrose represents the right would be a good thing as far as I’m concerned.

Leave a Reply

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


*