[Eug]

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/reuters/0...itics_poll_col

Canada has been in a minority govt for some time now, but on the w/e, they just called an election for next month. (None of this 2 years of campaigning crap. )

The Conservatives and the Liberals had been neck and neck for quite some time, but it seems the votes are going more and more to the Conservatives.

I had thought it would be a Conservative minority in the very least, and a Conservative majority was possible, but didn't think their support was going to be this good:

A Canadian poll released on Monday predicted for the first time that Conservative Prime Minister Stephen Harper would be able to transform his minority government into a strong majority in the October 14 election.

The Segma poll, taken for La Presse newspaper, put support for the Conservatives at 43 percent, which the pollsters said would translate into 183 of the 308 seats in the House of Commons.

It predicted the main opposition Liberals would get 25 percent of the vote, translating into just 62 seats.

Maybe in retrospect I shouldn't be surprised. The Liberals have basically painted themselves into a corner, with their transformation into a sort of Green Party. Almost their entire platform going into this election is based on carbon taxation, in a time when Canada's boom has been oil-related, while other industry is suffering because of the high dollar and high production costs related to that high oil. (We're not technically in a recession, but we've come close.) Talk about poor timing on the Liberals' part. While some of the goals are laudable, you can be 100% sure that the public doesn't want more taxation, even if those taxes are offset by tax rebates.

There's still 5 more weeks until election day so things could change, but what I see is the Conservatives doing well, along with the left-sided NDP, whereas the Liberals lose a good chunk of their core votership. I think the Liberals were hoping the green types would move to them, but even if some do, I think more non-green types will leave the Liberals.

[Doofy]

People are slowly waking up to the fact that global warming is a crock - and any lib party which seeks to curtail freedoms or increase taxes in the name of "green" is going to get fewer and fewer votes.

[Eug]

Originally Posted by Doofy 

People are slowly waking up to the fact that global warming is a crock - and any lib party which seeks to curtail freedoms or increase taxes in the name of "green" is going to get fewer and fewer votes.

For the record, the Conservatives here do not deny the concept of global warming being related to carbon. In fact, the Conservatives had implemented tax rebates for those driving fuel efficient cars. My GF just got a $1000 cheque from the government because she had bought a Yaris last year.

The public was perfectly happy with that - govt giving taxes back if you're good to the environment.

What people are not happy with is charging additional taxes (that didn't exist before) if you're not so good to the environment. That's essentially the new Liberal platform.

[OreoCookie]

Same in Germany, global warming is accepted by all parties currently in the parliament. Fortunately, it's not a `conservative vs. non-conservative' issue anymore.

[Doofy]

Same here. Difference being that the libs use a stick and the conservatives use a carrot.

[vmarks]

Originally Posted by Eug 

For the record, the Conservatives here do not deny the concept of global warming being related to carbon. In fact, the Conservatives had implemented tax rebates for those driving fuel efficient cars. My GF just got a $1000 cheque from the government because she had bought a Yaris last year.

The public was perfectly happy with that - govt giving taxes back if you're good to the environment.

Ah yes. giving back that which always belonged to me, provided I behave the way someone else wishes me to behave. Gotta love that sweet sweet social engineering.

What people are not happy with is charging additional taxes (that didn't exist before) if you're not so good to the environment. That's essentially the new Liberal platform.

Carrot vs Stick, no?

[Eug]

Germany also had the foresight to invest in green technologies. There hasn't been such a push here. Canada is a very oil-rich country (and in fact is the biggest supplier of oil to the US), but the profits from that are... well... profit. Germany is now an industry leader in solar technology for example... and Canada isn't.

So, in some ways, the govt here is like Germany's, but in others we're more like the US.

As far as the Liberals are concerned, I think their problem is two fold:

1) Their approach to greening is huge in scope. It's so revolutionary, that everyone is scared. And perhaps justifiably so.
2) Their leader is a meek academic who doesn't inspire confidence.

Originally Posted by vmarks 

Ah yes. giving back that which always belonged to me, provided I behave the way someone else wishes me to behave. Gotta love that sweet sweet social engineering.

The carrot is always more palatable than a stick.

Furthermore, it's a matter of direction. The Conservatives have pushed lower taxes. With the Liberal platform, much of the middle class is afraid they'll be taxed more heavily, even if the lower class is a net beneficiary. However, the lower class is also afraid, because up front costs could be higher, even if they're compensated for in tax rebates. And of course, many in all income strata don't actually believe that the tax rebates will actually cover their tax increases.

[Spliff]

The liberal party should've gone with Ignatieff.

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by Doofy 

People are slowly waking up to the fact that global warming is a crock - and any lib party which seeks to curtail freedoms or increase taxes in the name of "green" is going to get fewer and fewer votes.

Originally Posted by Doofy 

Same here. Difference being that the libs use a stick and the conservatives use a carrot.

So, I don't get it. Are you saying global warming is a crock, or are you saying that the use of a stick is a crock? Or, in the first post, did you just forget that you were using last years talking points?

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by Eug 

Latest poll predicts Conservative majority in Canada's October federal election

Not surprising. Most of the people better qualified than Dion seem to have decided to let him ride the party into the ground so they can blame him when they try to rebuild it.

With the exception of copyright reform (and this election may force them to finally answer some of our questions on the topic), I've been quite happy with the Harper government. Hopefully they're just as sensible if they have a majority.

[stupendousman]

Too often people confuse the desire for humans to not pollute unnecessarily, and their buying into the idea that changing in temperatures are directly related to how much gas you use or how much electricity you use.

People forget that even if you understand the flimsy science "man made global warming" is based on (and more and more countries are coming to their senses in this regard), you can still agree that efforts should be made when possible and when reasonable to do what we can to keep the air cleaner and the sky bluer. That's the case even if we really can't do all that much about what the temperature of the planet may be at any given time.

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by Wiskedjak 

So, I don't get it. Are you saying global warming is a crock, or are you saying that the use of a stick is a crock? Or, in the first post, did you just forget that you were using last years talking points?

I'm saying that global warming is a crock (to the extent that they're pushing it) and I'm saying that the stick is a crock.

Sure, we might be a couple of degrees warmer. But it ain't the end of the world and there's nowt wrong with chicks wearing summer clothes for a little longer.

Like stupendous hints at above, people are quite willing to save a bit here and there. But they're not willing to go as far as the politicians want them to. Probably because the people realise that most of the green stuff imposed by the politicians is the polis helping themselves to taxes and control, not helping the planet. And hey, helping the planet always takes second place to paying the mortgage.

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by Doofy 

I'm saying that global warming is a crock (to the extent that they're pushing it) and I'm saying that the stick is a crock.

Sure, we might be a couple of degrees warmer. But it ain't the end of the world and there's nowt wrong with chicks wearing summer clothes for a little longer.

Like stupendous hints at above, people are quite willing to save a bit here and there. But they're not willing to go as far as the politicians want them to. Probably because the people realise that most of the green stuff imposed by the politicians is the polis helping themselves to taxes and control, not helping the planet. And hey, helping the planet always takes second place to paying the mortgage.

For my part, I don't think global warming is a crock. I don't necessarily buy that it's totally human caused, but I do think there's a high possibility that we contribute and I do think there's probably something we can do about it, even if it isn't our fault. I don't think that driving more fuel efficient cars is the answer (I drive a fuel efficient car, but because I want to save money, not the environment)

That said, I'm not willing to go as far as some politicians want me to.

[RAILhead]

Sounds like some kind of vast, right-wing conspiracy!

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by Wiskedjak 

For my part, I don't think global warming is a crock. I don't necessarily buy that it's totally human caused, but I do think there's a high possibility that we contribute and I do think there's probably something we can do about it, even if it isn't our fault.

There ya go: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/7600005.stm

[ShortcutToMoncton]

Originally Posted by Wiskedjak 

With the exception of copyright reform (and this election may force them to finally answer some of our questions on the topic), I've been quite happy with the Harper government. Hopefully they're just as sensible if they have a majority.

What about Bill-61 in particular didn't you like? Unfortunately it looks like it's now dead, but I'm sure round two will arrive shortly....

greg

[lpkmckenna]

Originally Posted by Spliff 

The liberal party should've gone with Ignatieff.

After the Libs are crushed in the election, Dion will be replaced, probably by Ignatieff. If Dion is smart, he'll resign soon after the election, giving Iggy enough exposure for Canadians to warm up to him.

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by Doofy 

There ya go: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/7600005.stm

That one's pretty old.

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by ShortcutToMoncton 

What about Bill-61 in particular didn't you like? Unfortunately it looks like it's now dead, but I'm sure round two will arrive shortly....

greg

All of the protections against unauthorized downloading were fair. The biggest things about it that I didn't like:
- if I transfered a movie from a DVD (that I own) to my AppleTV or iPod, the motion picture industry could sue me for $20,000 (per movie)
- if I copied a copy protected CD (that I own) to my iPod, the CRIA could sue me for $20,000 (per song)
- if I kept a TV show on my DVR for too long, the motion picture industry could sue me
- TV distributers would have the right to decide which broadcasts I can and can't record with my DVR. Circumventing the block could result in the motion picture industry suing me for $20,000 (per show)
- Being in possession of tools that could be used for circumventing DRM could result in being sued by the CRIA or the motion picture industry, again for $20,000. Handbrake would be one such tool. Even Linux could be considered a tool for circumventing DRM, since most DRM isn't written with it in mind.

[Eug]

Bill 61 is totally brain dead. I hope they unplug the respirator on that one soon.

BTW, it seems Ontario's Liberal Premier Dalton McGuinty won't endorse the federal Liberal Campaign. He says he supports his brother who is running for a federal Liberal seat, but basically disses the federal Liberal platform.

While McGuinty said his aides would be allowed to help federal Liberal Leader Stéphane Dion "on their own time," he took a veiled shot at the federal party's Green Shift carbon-emission reduction program, which would tax fossil fuel consumption in exchange for income and corporate tax cuts. "I've got my own particular approach when it comes to dealing with carbon emissions. We believe in a cap-and-trade system."

Under a cap-and-trade system, government sets a total limit on carbon emissions as well as a cap for each major polluting industry. Industries below their cap can sell emission permits to those that exceed their limit. The intent is to encourage efficiency and conservation by rewarding industries that get below the cap and adding costs to high polluters.

Meanwhile, the Conservatives tried to unveil their new attack ads at 6 am. The press didn't bother to show up.

The Tories hoped to drive the daily news agenda with the planned 6 a.m. news conferences at their sophisticated campaign headquarters several kilometres away from Parliament Hill. But yesterday's unveiling of a new series of campaign ads attacking Liberal Leader Stéphane Dion received no live coverage on any of the major national television networks.

Later yesterday, the Conservatives announced they are pulling back from the strategy of news conferences at dawn. They said they would move today's announcement to 8 a.m. and will likely have evening announcements.

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by Eug 

Bill 61 is totally brain dead. I hope they unplug the respirator on that one soon.

Which ever party wins, something similar will appear again. All the election does is give us an opportunity to question candidates for their position on the issue.

[Monique]

It will be kind of good if the Conservatives win a majority no more elections for a while.

I cannot discuss the bad side of it.

[Eug]

Originally Posted by Eug 

As far as the Liberals are concerned, I think their problem is two fold:

1) Their approach to greening is huge in scope. It's so revolutionary, that everyone is scared. And perhaps justifiably so.
2) Their leader is a meek academic who doesn't inspire confidence.

The carrot is always more palatable than a stick.

Furthermore, it's a matter of direction. The Conservatives have pushed lower taxes. With the Liberal platform, much of the middle class is afraid they'll be taxed more heavily, even if the lower class is a net beneficiary. However, the lower class is also afraid, because up front costs could be higher, even if they're compensated for in tax rebates. And of course, many in all income strata don't actually believe that the tax rebates will actually cover their tax increases.

The Conservatives are capitalizing heavily on this green tax thing. The Liberals' greening would impose a 7 cent / L tax on diesel fuel, but would provide tax rebates/incentives to industries who are heavy diesel users.

The Conservatives just announced they'd reduce taxes by 2 cents per L on diesel fuel across the board. Yeah it's a gimmick (as the Liberals say), but nonetheless it's going to win votes.

[ShortcutToMoncton]

I'm surprised by Harper's promise to be out of Afghanistan by 2011, as well. It actually makes a lot of sense, and we're certainly not getting the NATO support that we should over there, but at this point it seems that, unless things change in the next couple years, the country simply won't be ready to be NATO-free by that date.

Good call on that one, though, by the Conservatives.

greg

[Eug]

Heheh. Regarding greenness:

Conservatives: Chartered a fuel efficient plane. Did not buy carbon offsets.
Liberals: Chartered an old gas guzzling plane. Spent a moderate amount on carbon offsets.
NDP: Chartered a fuel efficient plane. Spent a lot on carbon offsets.
Green Party: Did not charter a plane.

So, ironically, despite the fact that the entire Liberal platform is greenness, they don't quite practice what they preach, at least compared to the NDP.

[ShortcutToMoncton]

Originally Posted by Eug 

So, ironically, despite the fact that the entire Liberal platform is greenness, they don't quite practice what they preach, at least compared to the NDP.

When have the Liberals ever practiced what they preach, in the past 15 years? Jean survived for as long as he did by telling people what they wanted to hear, and then quietly doing nothing about anything. And since this means people then don't need to do anything either, everyone is delighted over a shared sense of complacency.

Canada was a leader in progressive, forward-thinking environmental matters like Kyoto – at least at the start. The Liberals talked very large for over a decade, but did absolutely nothing about the situation.

That is why I'll vote for Harper again – one might say he didn't do enough, but he's been very adamant about doing something. In my view, that's the goal we need – not to look at the finish line and say "that's way too far, let's not even bother" but at least to keep moving forward with attainable goals.

(Now what those are is for another debate.... )

greg

[Eug]

Originally Posted by ShortcutToMoncton 

Canada was a leader in progressive, forward-thinking environmental matters like Kyoto – at least at the start. The Liberals talked very large for over a decade, but did absolutely nothing about the situation.

??? The Kyoto push was killed by Harper and Conservatives when they got elected.

[ShortcutToMoncton]

No. There was no push. There had never been any push.

That's what was so funny. Canada ratified Kyoto, and then the majority liberal government(s) introduced zero legislation to do anything about it at all. I mean, Canada's emissions rose tremendously during the time when it was supposed to be dropping, to the point where we're one of the biggest energy users (per capita) in the world. According to the few lawyers I've talked to on the subject, there was absolute no political will to do anything more than talk about how Canada must be "greener" because they'd signed Kyoto and the US hadn't. You might remember a couple times when Chretien, and I believe Martin, criticized the US for not ratifying.

Harper killed Kyoto because at this point it's impossible to meet it. I believe we would've had to drop emissions by over 1/3, in 6 years, not to mention actually implement effective legislation on how to do that. Nothing had been done.

greg

[Eug]

People seem to be ignoring Dion to a large extent. Outside of Quebec, he's trailing Layton and sometimes even May (Green Party).

In Quebec, Dion is doing slightly better, but that's not saying much.

[shabbasuraj]

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servl.../politics/home

[Dual Porpoise]

Originally Posted by Doofy 

People are slowly waking up to the fact that global warming is a crock

That's simply not true. Globally, evidence for, and public recognition of human caused global warming is stronger than ever.

[Eug]

Originally Posted by shabbasuraj 

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servl.../politics/home

It's a sad day for the Liberals when an improvement has them at 27% of the popular vote, vs. 38% for the Conservatives.

IMO that likely still points to a Conservative majority. I think the best the Liberals can hope for is a Conservative minority government.

[shabbasuraj]

CPC will not get a majority.

I am looking forward to the leaders debate..

Rumour is that there will be a virtual Harper roast-fest via the entire opposition.






















allegedly.

[lpkmckenna]

Originally Posted by shabbasuraj 

Rumour is that there will be a virtual Harper roast-fest via the entire opposition.

Unlikely. Layton will attack Dion, because the NDP is always after Liberal voters.

[shabbasuraj]

Originally Posted by lpkmckenna 

Unlikely. Layton will attack Dion, because the NDP is always after Liberal voters.

this is what people think will happen...

[ShortcutToMoncton]

It's what SHOULD happen, by rights. There's almost no hope in the Libs winning, so the NDP and the Greens should be capitalizing on the Liberal weakness and stealing votes. After all, attacking the Conservatives will get them nowhere – people who will be voting for the Conservatives almost certainly won't vote for those two as an alternative, so they'd just be making the Liberals stronger.

Of course, I wouldn't put anything past a jackass like Jack Layton.

greg

[Eug]

Liberals could suffer big loss: polls

Based on surveys over the past three days, Ekos said the ruling Conservatives were slipping away from their chance to form a majority government, but could still take twice as many seats as the Liberals.

Ekos projected the Conservatives would win 147 of the 308 seats in the House of Commons, shy of the 155 needed for a majority but above the 127 they have now.

The Liberals would drop to 71 seats from 95. Their previous worst electoral result was in 1984 when they were reduced to 40 seats. The separatist Bloc Quebecois would rise by one seat to 49, the left-leaning New Democrats would pick up 10 seats to win 40, and the Greens would have one, Ekos projected.

The Ekos data was based on an automated telephone survey from Friday through Sunday, putting the Conservatives at 35 percent of the vote, the Liberals at 25 percent, the New Democrats at 19 percent, the Greens at 11 percent and the Bloc at 9 percent.

[Wiskedjak]

Realistically, I think there are very few in the Liberal party who *want* to win. Dion is a lost cause and the Liberal party is in a shambles. There's a reason why none of the most promising candidates for the Liberal leadership were at all interested in the position.

If anything, the Liberal party has a better chance of regrouping if we have a Conservative majority.

[nonhuman]

I'll readily admit to knowing essentially nothing about Canadian politics (and not as much as I'd like about non-US politics in general), but clearly my understanding of parliamentary democracy is also somewhat flawed. How is a minority government possible? Isn't the government formed by either the party with the majority of seats or a coalition made up of minority parties that together have a majority of the seats?

[shabbasuraj]

The NDP have to merge with the Green Party.

Thus creating the GDP. LOL

Seriously doesn't the NDPs cap and trade system sound like a Green Party platform.

in the end..as Danny Williams says.. A B C !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Eug]

Originally Posted by nonhuman 

I'll readily admit to knowing essentially nothing about Canadian politics (and not as much as I'd like about non-US politics in general), but clearly my understanding of parliamentary democracy is also somewhat flawed. How is a minority government possible? Isn't the government formed by either the party with the majority of seats or a coalition made up of minority parties that together have a majority of the seats?

To get a majority you need more than half the seats.

The ruling party in the minority government simply is the party with the most seats. There does not need to be any specific coalition formed right from the outset. All you need is all the main party's big bills being passed by the majority of parliament.

So what this means the "coalition" passing the bills can change at every vote.

If the Conversatives pass a tax reduction bill, they could have just the Liberals on board to pass the bill.

If the Conservatives pass an oil drilling bill, they could just have some independents on board (if there are enough of them).

However, if not enough people vote with the Conservatives and an important bill is defeated, then that "non-confidence vote" will trigger an election. For this reason, minority governments never seem to last the full four years.


---

Stumbling campaign angers Liberal insiders

Behind the scenes, Liberals worry about a "loosey-goosey" operation that staggered out of the gate, minus an airplane, to sell a complicated Green Shift plan that bears the heavy stamp of Stéphane Dion, professor. Nobody seems to have even Googled the name to see if it was taken.

"I wish we had one," says the Ottawa-based Liberal veteran, when asked who's the party equivalent of Conservative powerhouse Doug Finley. "There's nobody – nobody in charge, except Dion, and he isn't listening."

Liberals say there are talented people in senior positions – Smith, Mark Marissen, Gordon Ashworth, Herb Metcalfe – but that Dion runs his own show, eschewing advice.

"Dion is in another friggin' world," says a Toronto Liberal MP. "I could go on ad nauseam about how he won't listen to anybody.

"He's not a political animal and he just doesn't get it."

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by nonhuman 

I'll readily admit to knowing essentially nothing about Canadian politics (and not as much as I'd like about non-US politics in general), but clearly my understanding of parliamentary democracy is also somewhat flawed. How is a minority government possible? Isn't the government formed by either the party with the majority of seats or a coalition made up of minority parties that together have a majority of the seats?

The key here is that there are more than two parties.

Consider this scenario with 3 political parties:
Party A gets 25% of the seats
Party B gets 35% of the seats
Party C gets 40% of the seats

Party C didn't get the majority of the seats, but it got more than either A or B, so it wins the election. Number of seats = number of votes on political issues, so if A and B band together, C can't get laws passed. Ideally, minority governments are nice in that they can force the government in power to cooperate with other parties in order to get anything done, with no one ideology forcing itself and truly reflecting the split of the vote. In reality, however, party politics come in to play and the other parties just focus on trying to make the party in power look bad and maybe force an early election (as is the case here)

[Eug]

For the record, the current government is:

127 (41%) - Conservative
95 (31%) - Liberal
48 (16%) - Bloc
30 (9.7%) - NDP
1 (0.3%) - Green
3 (0.97%) - Independent
4 (1.3 %) - (currently vacant)

There is a total of 308 seats, and thus 155 are needed to pass a bill.

With the Conservatives holding 127 seats, they only need 28 more seats to pass a bill. For this reason, the traditionally left-leaning NDP has had more of a voice than in previous years. For example, to get a bill passed, the Conservatives could theoretically add some juicy bits for the NDP on a specific issue to get them on-board while completely bypassing the Liberals, even though the Liberals hold a third of Parliament.

[nonhuman]

Gotcha, forgot about the possibility of a non-majority plurality.

On the plus side, I ended up spending a good chunk of the day researching parliamentarianism and a few related subjects, so I'd say it was definitely a productive question.

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by nonhuman 

Gotcha, forgot about the possibility of a non-majority plurality.

On the plus side, I ended up spending a good chunk of the day researching parliamentarianism and a few related subjects, so I'd say it was definitely a productive question.

The question becomes even more interesting when you look at Israel's political makeup, where they have so many political parties that the party in power can have less than 20% of the seats, results in sometimes bizarre allegiances forming between vastly opposed parties.

[Eug]

Well, this probably rates as the stupidest thing said so far.

From the Conservative Agriculture Minister, Gerry Ritz

It is the second time Ritz has been urged to resign because of his handling of the outbreak, which has killed 17 people in Canada and prompted a nation-wide recall of Maple Leaf Foods meat products.

In a statement released Wednesday night, Liberal Agriculture critic Wayne Easter said a media report that quotes Ritz making wisecracks about the outbreak during a conference call with scientists, bureaucrats and political staff was unacceptable.

Sources who took notes during the call told the Canadian Press that Ritz fretted about the political dangers of the crisis, before quipping: "This is like a death by a thousand cuts. Or should I say cold cuts."

When told about a new death in Prince Edward Island, Ritz said: "Please tell me it's [Liberal MP] Wayne Easter."

What a frickin' idiot.

[shabbasuraj]

[ShortcutToMoncton]

Hahahaha… I mean, politically dumb, but funny nonetheless. I dunno, I have a real problem with all the political correctness injected into politics in this day and age – which has resulted in everything we hear being a carefully scripted sound byte.

Of course, this happened weeks ago; the Liberals have been holding onto it until now, so they're getting a little boost at a time when they've really been struggling.

greg

[Eug]

This isn't just about political correctness. This is about bad taste and bad judgement.

He was in the middle of a conversation with lots of government officials about dying people, and he cracks jokes about it. Yeah it was very offensive, but the main point is that it was extremely stupid.

Maybe if you were talking to your best bud in the bar, you can reasonably expect it to stay private. But when you're on a conference call with 30 people, it's simply moronic to think your statements are private. That shows a serious lack of judgement, esp. when you hold public office.

[shabbasuraj]

Another CPC apology ...

At this rate they will be apologizing for calling this $300 million election....





Tories apologize for "sober" remark to aboriginal protester

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servl.../BNStory/Front