[dino_bobba_renno]

BluesBud BluesBud:

dino_bobba_renno dino_bobba_renno:

BluesBud BluesBud:

dino_bobba_renno dino_bobba_renno:

BluesBud BluesBud:

If they are doing such a fantastic job for Canadians then why are those numbers not on the rise? They have not changed in the entire time they have been in power.

They sure changed in Vancouver-Quadra.

That was always a hard fought riding in any election campaign. but it always ends up as Liberal. Besides come on are you going to base your entire argument on one riding. Get real!

If you prefer I can base my arguements on Dion's lack luster leadership.

No that has been covered by you guys ad nausea. Just answer the question if you can. It is very interesting that all of you CONartist Party supporters would rather spin & deflect then acknowledge the fact that there is no growth in your Party's polling due to your brilliant governing of Canada over the last two years.

Well if you want to look at the polls you could view it that way, or like Ryan suggested you could look at the fact the Liberals have been bleeding seats since the election. I guess we'll find out when the Liberals use their "power" and spring an election.

Sorry, I don't think the Liberals will do well in an election until they dump Dion. As for Harper, yeah he could be doing better but he still beats the alternative.

[dino_bobba_renno]

grainfedprairieboy grainfedprairieboy:

Conservatives should not be too pleased with the numbers. What is troubling is that the Liberals are polling roughly 30% consistently and this is absolute hardcore support that won't change in spite of the past scandals, corruption, and an obvious joke of a leader orchestrating perhaps the most impotent opposition in parliamentary history. This is one of the reasons the Liberals aren't worried about losing anymore support because they figure they've hit rock bottom.

All the Liberals need to do is bring in Ignatieff and they'll be polling 40+ in a week with maybe half the gains coming off the Conservatives. I'd feel a lot better if the "I'll vote Liberal at any cost" support was around 15% and the soft vote was going across party lines.

Definitely agree with that. Not sure about the numbers but the Liberals will definately gain with a new leader. It will be interesting to see how they will make that transition. I'm not sure if they are going to be content waiting until after the next election to make that move or if they will do it some time sooner.

[westmanguy]

Since 1896 every Liberal (elected, not interim) leader has become Prime Minister of Canada, may that be through a general election or taking the reins from an outgoing one.

The face is the Conservatives are making big inroads grainfed.

For the first time, it appears Stephane Dion will be the Liberal leader to break that 100 year record of every elected Liberal leader being Prime Minister.

It is sad that approx 25-30% of Canadian voters will vote Liberal no matter what, but that support is slowly corroding. The "vote Liberal for no reason, besides the reason I always have" vote is slowly softening.

Grainfed, the Liberal Party of Canada is a strong and powerful national institution that can't be killed overnight. But you need to look at the progress.

5 years ago, grain, they were predicting a MASSIVE 200-seat majority for the Liberals under Paul Martin. It was supposed to be a nation-wide sweep (even inroads into Alberta) under Martin, according to all the pundits.

And under Stephen Harper and the united right (Conservative Party of Canada), we reduced the Liberals to a minority, and formed our own minority.

Tearing apart this party will not be easy, but were making huge gains with the CPC.

Look how far in debt the Liberals are since Chretien screwed them over by banning corporate donations. Conservatives are racking in the donations.

Conservative voters are out for blood, they put their money where their mouth is, and the Conservative Party of Canada is becoming very strong.

We have a very strong and key database (CIMS: Constituent Information Management System.), that is really helping the party target voters.

We are in a huge surplus of dollars, while the Liberals are in debt.

The Conservative Party of Canada is very well positioned to break in with a majority (albeit, not a landslide, probably slim). And once a Conservative Majority occurs, Harper and the party can prove themselves to Canadians, and FINALLY the "Conservative have a hidden agenda for when they get their majority" card can die, and more of that "Liberal voter because I have always been" and "Liberal voter because the Big Bad Conservatives are too radical" will begin to corrode.

Heck one person I know who leans left told me "Yeah, Harper hasn't done a bad job, actually a pretty good job. But I don't trust what he would do with a majority, and thats why I vote Liberal".

Look at Quadra...

[westmanguy]

Oh and the media just likes to pump up Liberal infighting.

Dion will get his general election campaign. I don't believe the Liberals would boot a leader before he gets a chance to get one election in.

Dion will be gone when he loses the next election.

[dino_bobba_renno]

westmanguy westmanguy:

Oh and the media just likes to pump up Liberal infighting.

Dion will get his general election campaign. I don't believe the Liberals would boot a leader before he gets a chance to get one election in.

Dion will be gone when he loses the next election.

If anything they will wait to save face. I can't imagine how they would go about it otherwise.

I don't rally care what other people say about the Liberals abstaining from votes, I do think it is going to hurt them in the long run unless they start changing that .. policy (I guess for a lack of a better word). It would be one thing to do it on some moral ground or something but to do it simply for the sake of self preservation? I think that is really going to haunt them if they continue doing it. Who wants to elect an MP knowing that they really won't count if it comes down to a confidance vote? Not to mention if reflects badly on the party as a whole when they are simply doing it to cover their own buts.

Oh, and the strange relationship they have with the Greens? I know Stéphane maybe pumped about May running in McKay's riding unopposed but I can't help but wonder how the average Liberal MP feels about the him endorsing the Greens the in ridings where they are competing against them. It's not like the Conservatives are going to bleed votes to the Greens. It will be the NDP and the Liberals competing with them.

[grainfedprairieboy]

westmanguy westmanguy:

5 years ago, grain, they were predicting a MASSIVE 200-seat majority for the Liberals under Paul Martin. It was supposed to be a nation-wide sweep (even inroads into Alberta) under Martin, according to all the pundits.

One year before the election - independence sentiment was polling in the mid forties in Alberta and many were waiting for a leader to stand up and take the province out of Confederation. In Quebec, separatists were again talking about the winning conditions that a Liberal government was fostering while in Newfoundland, there was a resurgence of nationalism like never before witnessed. Canada itself was reduced to a bit player internationally and our relations were deteriorating with our brothers to the south.

Paul Martin by all rights, should never have stood a chance. Had his been an NDP or Conservative government with its track record it would have been obliterated.

westmanguy westmanguy:

And under Stephen Harper and the united right (Conservative Party of Canada), we reduced the Liberals to a minority, and formed our own minority.

We did not do it. The people of Canada recognised that one more Liberal term and the damage to Canada may have been irreparable and acted accordingly.

westmanguy westmanguy:

Tearing apart this party will not be easy, but were making huge gains with the CPC.

The crux of my arguement is that is not the case. Harper has had some failures to be sure, but he may go down in history as one of the greatest PMs ever and in spite of this, the Liberal core support has not been cracked and shows no signs of doing so.

I don't have the answer as to why so many stubbornly support the Liberal party, especially the ones who profess to be Canadian nationalists, nor will I blame the Conservatives for failing to capitalise on the Liberals shortcomings, I am just merely stating the obvious.

westmanguy westmanguy:

Look how far in debt the Liberals are since Chretien screwed them over by banning corporate donations. Conservatives are racking in the donations.

What Chretien did was ban the corporate donations hoping that Parliamentary funding to each party per vote would cripple every other Party indefinatly. Historically the Liberals are in power 75% of the time and coupled with a hardcore support in the 30% range, they will do just fine under Chretien's scheme in the long term.

The only thing carrying the CPC right now is the old grassroots Reform supporters who know how to work the personal donations. Give the Liberals time and they will adjust. Give the Conservatives time and the red tories will alienate the money source.

westmanguy westmanguy:

Conservative voters are out for blood, they put their money where their mouth is, and the Conservative Party of Canada is becoming very strong.

Despite an incredible job by Harper, the Conservatives have failed to make major inroads. If Harpers government were a Liberal one with the same policies and track record as a minority government, then even a lame duck like Dion would be able to lead them to a solid majority.

westmanguy westmanguy:

The Conservative Party of Canada is very well positioned to break in with a majority (albeit, not a landslide, probably slim). And once a Conservative Majority occurs, Harper and the party can prove themselves to Canadians, and FINALLY the "Conservative have a hidden agenda for when they get their majority" card can die, and more of that "Liberal voter because I have always been" and "Liberal voter because the Big Bad Conservatives are too radical" will begin to corrode.

I think this is wishful thinking.

I'd bet you dollars to donuts that if Ignatieff were handed the keys to the party tomorrow; any future election would be anybodies call.

Stockwell Day was not a Prime Minister. He is an excellent cabinet minister and as far as integrity goes, few in parliament can match him. The same can be said for Dion.

When the Liberals are through their walk in the wilderness there will be a resurgence of the party. When your base core of hard support hovers around 30%, in Canadian politics you don't have to climb very far to make it to the top of the hill.

[westmanguy]

Wow, you don't have much faith in a brighter tomorrow.

Its been done before...Mulroney had a landslide in 1984 when they had an infective leader (Turner / Martin/Dion) take over from a long Liberal rein (Trudeau/Chretien)

Its only been 5 years since the Right merged, lots of work to be done, but it doesn't mean it can't happen.

And I don't buy your argument that the Liberals are walking in the wilderness and will surge back.

The Liberals are so used to governing, and so arrogant about their right to be in power, that when Harper pulls off a slim majority next General Election (thats my prediction at least), their will be more internal Hell with the fall of Dion, and more fighting.

Ever since Chretien/Martin the Liberals have had a real problem with infighting.

In my opinion all it will take is that 1 Conservative Majority, to change Canadian politics.

That will mean Canadians will have lived under 6.5 - 8 years of Conservative governance, and the scare tactics of social conservatism and Reform roots will have finally be shedded and dead.

Harper is a Blue Tory, but he leans Progressive Conservative in the sense he wants to shed the harsh social conservative ends and professionalize conservatism. He doesn't want to go into a majority government with an abrasive revolutionary agenda. He want to take small steps in a path of Incremental Conservatism, that - over time - will corrode the power and size of the federal government.

Do you think Canadians are generally Liberal or something grain?

At the end of the day, I think generally speaking the general population (not the party members or party activist faction of the population) is common sense. And if the Conservative Party can appeal conservative common sense policy plans, we can get those common sense voters.

-Lowering Taxes
-Giving more taxation/social program power to the provinces (decentralization)
-Bringing more democracy to our form of government (Tripple E Senate)
-Investing in our military
-Increasing punishments for capital/heinous offenses
-Pro Family Tax structure for married couples with kids

All these things are conservative, but can be made to appeal to Common Sense Canadians.

Perfect example:

Choice in Child Care with the $100 / month, per child under 6. This was a Conservative idea (to give people CHOICE, not a government national institution) that was able to appeal to the Common Sense population.

--

Finally, best of all, there are a new generation of voters, and the longer the new generation lives under Conservative rein, the more the "voted Liberal because they have always been in power, and I always will vote for them" vote will corrode.

---

In conclusion thats my theory...the longer the Conservatives are in power, the more the Liberal base is corroded to lower numbers.

Also remember the left has the Greens and NDP to deal with too. The Right is united. And the Greens are becoming a big nuisance to the Liberals these days.

[YOUR_DEAD]

I'm not a fan of the Conservatives move right as opposed to the PC party, but that said, I do believe that Harper deserves a chance to lead with a majority after the election. I just thank god he wasn't PM when Iraq started or we would be involved in that mess. I agree with the mission in Afghanistan but not the one in Iraq.

[Wally_Sconce]

Cretien's decision to stay out of Iraq was not a moral decision as many canadians claim. Cretien stayed out because we didn't have the troops. In fact, a few months later, Canada did not have enough troops to properly perform the scheduled replacement of deployed troops in Afghanistan.

[kenmore]

suppose you got that info from Chretien when you were a member of his caucus..?
i mean you seem to have all the answers aging_redneck...

[ridenrain]

Sure as hell didn't get it from Chretien's own book. I believe it was Shiela Copps who let that cat out of the bag.
Kenmore: You hardly accept that Chretien put us in Afghansitan so I don't know why you should be demanding proof.

[kenmore]

well actually sheila is a family friend... so next I speak with her I will ask her.. I am going her way in April... I have proof that he did not put us in combat.. he was against it and still is..... he put us in as peace keepers not combatant ...

[westmanguy]

See! Liberals are always relatives of Liberal politicians/appointees!

[Schleihauf]

kenmore kenmore:

well actually sheila is a family friend... so next I speak with her I will ask her.. I am going her way in April... I have proof that he did not put us in combat.. he was against it and still is..... he put us in as peace keepers not combatant ...

Peacekeepers? Who were we keeping the peace between, NATO and the Taliban?

[RUEZ]

Schleihauf Schleihauf:

kenmore kenmore:

well actually sheila is a family friend... so next I speak with her I will ask her.. I am going her way in April... I have proof that he did not put us in combat.. he was against it and still is..... he put us in as peace keepers not combatant ...

Peacekeepers? Who were we keeping the peace between, NATO and the Taliban?

You gotta love it when people perpetuate that myth to suit their agenda.