[Scape]

Harper will send country to polls to beat facing difficult budget, boondoggle audit

Quote:

With the parliamentary playpen mercifully silent and MPs girding for a summer of discontent on the barbecue circuit, the nation’s political backrooms are abuzz with talk of a fall election.

QMI Agency recently reported that the prime minister’s chief of staff has been warning Conservative insiders to brace for ugly times ahead this fall.

Think lawn signs. Again.

Senior government sources say they expect the PM will execute a minor cabinet shuffle in the coming weeks to sideline any ministers not committed to running for re-election.

That would make room for junior ministers and other Conservative up-and-comers to get the increased profile of a cabinet portfolio for however many months are left in this government.

Given the move could cost Harper some of his top players, it is hard to imagine he would be forcing the issue unless an election were likely.

Already, the PM has seen a recent exodus of his own senior staffers, often a sign that the high command is moving from governing to election mode.

How all this will unfold remains to be seen.

It would take all three opposition parties to topple the government, and the Liberals aren’t ready to fight a common cold.

The general assumption in political circles, therefore, is any call to the polls this fall would have to come from Harper.

Easier said than done — after all, this is the government that passed a law to fix election dates every four years.

Ironically, the utter dysfunction of a vacuous Parliament during these past months may provide Harper with both an excuse to go to the polls, and a narrative for an ensuing campaign.

We say ironic because if there is a crisis of confidence in this Parliament, the Conservative government is at least as much to blame as the opposition parties.

No matter. Recent public-opinion surveys suggest the Harper government has sustained remarkably little damage from the months of parliamentary mudslinging, head-butting, stonewalling and general Conservative contempt for the whole process.

That means Harper might even get away with claiming an election is necessary to make Parliament work.

So, why the rush? Why not wait for the opposition parties to make the move, say, in spring 2011 over the next budget?

The first reason is precisely that that budget is expected to be a deficit-cutting slash-and-burn exercise rarely popular with voters.

The second reason to rush the writ is the Harper government’s destiny with the hellfire of St. Sheila.

This fall, Auditor General Sheila Fraser is expected to release an audit of the government’s economic stimulus program — more precisely, what happened to all those billions of taxpayers’ dollars shovelled out the door in haste.

Can you spell boondoggle?

Harper’s end-game, of course, is trampling the Liberals and winning a majority.

While the polls have yet to show that as a likely outcome, Conservatives are convinced they can gain ground against the Grits in an election campaign.

To that end, they are convinced they have a powerful hammer in all the recent talk of a possible Liberal-NDP merger.

And given the underwhelming leadership of Michael Ignatieff to date, Harper will be sorely tempted to strike while the Grit is cold.

Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but when the autumn leaves drop, so likely will the writ.

Frankly, I'm amazed we lasted this long.

[Strutz]

Frankly, I could last longer.

Ahhhhh.... a fall mud-slinging fest. Ugly signs everywhere. How exciting.

It'll be interesting to see how much lower we can push the % of voters who don't bother voting though. My bet is it will be a lower turnout than last time around.

[Khar]

I suppose I will vote, although given I live in the heartland of the Conservative support I am sure my vote will matter little in any way -- I also doubt that the topics I would broach interest in for the most part will play a major part in any party's philosophy, save the economic aspects. People here will continue voting Conservative for the simple reason that they have felt forgotten whenever the Liberals have been in power, as they are wont to limit their viewpoints to Vancouver, Montreal and Toronto...

I do think the newspapers need to focus as well on the fact that the opposition have also not helped in the parliamentary process, in the least that neither side was willing to negotiate and all Ignatieff seemed chiefly interested in was discussing largely polarized topics as much as Harper would not want to. However, this is a problem which has been getting worse since confederation -- the amount of bills getting through our House of Commons has been getting lower and lower with each sucessive parliament for the decades Canada has been around. That the media seems to sensationalize every minor fallback or slipup of any politician only drives the parties farther apart lest they lose public support.

I do not want any party to get a majority. In fact, I don't think much has changed since the last election -- Ignatieff still has the support of the Liberals who would always vote Liberal, the Conservatives have the support of the people who would always vote Conservative, the Bloc will likely maintain roughly the same amount of seats from the people who voted Bloc last time and the NDP will retain the North and whatever other seats they have, if not for a little change. I wonder if the Green will win a seat this time?

[CDN_PATRIOT]

Good. As soon as the Prime Minister calls it, I'll head down to my Tory MP's office and load my car full of signs and banners. Let the battle commence, and may the Libs be crushed by the blue wave of the Right.

Ignatieff, you're ass is grass.

-J.

[CommanderSock]

Libs won't lose too badly. I reckon same as last election. Perhaps NDP will strengthen it up a bit in Ontario.

No major change in QC.

As usual Toronto/Montreal/Vancouver will take away from the Conservatives what they crave most, a majority.

G20 fiasco has surely scampered any chance of a Conservative inroads into Toronto, this is guaranteed.

[Mr_Canada]

Aw, I promised I'd vote, but I have no one to vote for,

[Winnipegger]

So what would you vote for? What do you want to see? What would make you passionate about politics?

[andyt]

Winnipegger wrote:

So what would you vote for? What do you want to see? What would make you passionate about politics?

Somebody who said they're going to cut down the deficit/debt, but that they're going to ask for belt tightening starting from the top, leave people who are barely scraping by alone. So I guess an NDP social conscience combined with maybe Sheila Fraser running the finance ministry, or somebody else who's tight with a dollar.

[Mr_Canada]

Winnipegger wrote:

So what would you vote for? What do you want to see? What would make you passionate about politics?

How about a guy without influence of the rich and some dedication to the people?

For starts.

But no seriously, I want someone who talks about corporates like they'd talk about rapists.

[PostFactum]

Mr_Canada wrote:

Winnipegger wrote:

So what would you vote for? What do you want to see? What would make you passionate about politics?

How about a guy without influence of the rich and some dedication to the people?

For starts.

But no seriously, I want someone who talks about corporates like they'd talk about rapists.

Ok, ok, Mr. Canada I'll try to run on next elections))

[ShepherdsDog]

Mr_Canada wrote:

Winnipegger wrote:

So what would you vote for? What do you want to see? What would make you passionate about politics?

How about a guy without influence of the rich and some dedication to the people?

For starts.

But no seriously, I want someone who talks about corporates like they'd talk about rapists.

You really haven't got a clue how politics works.

[PostFactum]

ShepherdsDog wrote:

Mr_Canada wrote:

Winnipegger wrote:

So what would you vote for? What do you want to see? What would make you passionate about politics?

How about a guy without influence of the rich and some dedication to the people?

For starts.

But no seriously, I want someone who talks about corporates like they'd talk about rapists.

You really haven't got a clue how politics works.

Well Shepherd, on first look it's crazy, but it may work))

[Mr_Canada]

Actually Shep I'm pretty positive politics works exactly how I think, and that's why there's no one to vote for.

[PublicAnimalNo9]

Now I understand the passion behind both parties working to get the immigrant vote.
Considering a lot of Canadians are fucking fed up with the bullshit from our politicians, it seems immigrants are the ones to decide the vote these days.
And yer absolutely right Mr C. it looks like yet another election where we get to choose between a giant douche and a shit sandwich. Oh, and a used car salesman lol

The sad thing is, if voting actually changed anything in Canada besides which party gets to collectively ass-rape us, it would be illegal.

[EyeBrock]

Well it will either be another crappy Tory minority government or a crappy Lib-NDP minority government like the Tory/Lib Dem thing in the UK.

Either way we can count on more divisive and crappy government from Ottawa. That's for certain.