NationStates Jolt Archive


Is Harper shooting himself in the foot again?

Silliopolous
20-01-2006, 19:40
I have to admit that, up to now, he has run a pretty good campaign. He has managed this by
a) Capitalizing on Adscam.
b) Letting the other parties concerted efforts to oust the Liberals aid his numbers.
c) Pandering to the social conservatives.
and
d) Mostly keeping his yap shut. Don't say squat, don't give 'em any ammo.

Hell, people were tired of Chretien's Liberals before the previous election. But Stevie boy's Angry White Dude routine that time just didn't sell. This time, he toned it back. Played it cool. And lived off of conflating Martin's brief tenure (during which Harper actually BACKED the Liberal budget) with that of King Jean.

An effective strategy.

Did the poll numbers boost his ego I wonder? He started to think people were voting FOR him instead of AGAINST the Big Red Machine? Did a couple of the attack ads fired his way prick his soul?

I don't know.

But over the last 72 hours he has managed to finally do what he does best - open his big mouth. And people all over the country are pausing and saying "Whoa!"


In response to the allegations that a Harper government would be GW's new sycophantic biatch, he responded with a gushing "Gosh, yes, I'm gonna cozy up to Washington big-time! Missile defense? Sign me up! More help in the middle east? Woohoo! Anything else America? Whatever it is, the answer is YES you big studly country! But *ahem* really my fellow Canadians - I'm still gonna be tough on trade issues with them. Honest! *wink wink*"

And a bunch of Canadians went... "Huh?"

Then, after sucking up to every congregation that would have him through their doors, he admitted that that in point of fact overturning the Gay Marriage legislation was really not a priority for him. But he wanted to assure them that he fully intended to "get around to it".... eventually.

And a bunch of zealots started wondering if they should be thumping HIS ass with their bibles... instead of whatever it is that they normally thump.

And now?

Now he is essentially laying the groundwork for being an ineffective PM. He is claiming that the civil service and courts are so loaded with liberal appointees that he will find it difficult to push his agenda through.

To which people wonder... "ummmm, why? WTF are you up to that you are so worried about Constitutional complications that would require Supreme Court scrutiny? And why the fuck should we vote for someone who suffers from delusions of inability to get the job done?" Governments in Canada rise and fall. But blaming the bureaucracy is not a part of the normal course of business. Did the Liberals complain about all the Tory appointees left over from a decade of Lyin' Brian's rule? Fuck no! They passed legislation and had it implemented. Period. And when they faced setbacks they dealt with them as they arose.

It's called LEADING the country. But I guess that this is a new concept for CRAP (still love the old acronym) and they haven't quite got used to it yet.

Yes, this sudden Harper theory that running the country is a difficult thing to do raises all sorts of fun questions. Like:
1) Don't you think you're up to the job Happless? And why not?
and
2) So, how many years do the Liberals get a pass on as they dealt with Mulrooney's appointment leftovers?
not to mention
3) If it's so damn hard to get shit done, why are you complaining that the Liberals had trouble getting shit done?

It just makes no sense from a campaign perspective to say what he has. But he has. And thanks!

The remaining questions from the fallout this week?

1) Will it rattle Happless enough that he makes an even larger ass of himself trying to overdo the damage control?
and
2) Is it too late for this to really grow legs?

At the least, I think this probably takes his aspirations down a peg from his burgeoning hope to win a majority. And I'm OK with that. As a minority leader he can't do that much harm, and may precipitate a further change in the Liberal camp. I like Paul, but he is indeed the fruit of the poison tree. His legacy as a senior cabinet minister under King Jean is a black mark, as is the perception that he assassinated the King to assume the throne.

I don't know who might come next, but with a clean slate they can run on the better part of their record again without needed to overcome the bad. The new leader can brandish the broom and promise the return to the simple core values of fiscal sanity and social progression that the majority of Canadians support, and that the Liberals have championed.

Indeed, that was what Paul should have done when he cleaned house, but he didn't. He couldn't stop begging forgiveness when what people wanted to see was firm action. And it would have excused the rebellion as being righteous while he retained his reputation as a fiscal wizard had he delivered the coup de grace to his former boss by way of putting it all on him. I would like to think that he didn't out of personal honour, but that doesn't change the baggage that he stuck himself with by doing it as he did.

So it may be too late for Paul. But the other question is if it will become too late for Stevie too. His party won't allow a two-time loser to continue at the helm. Nor should they.


Three days to go, and things just got a whole lot more interesting.....
Ol Erisia
20-01-2006, 19:59
O_o...





Canadian politics seem so much more complicated than the US 2-party system, where you have to constantly choose the lesser of two evils.

I...um....well, err....

I wish i knew what you are talking about...but i would support a liberal canidate that wasn't intrested in American politics...
Silliopolous
20-01-2006, 20:23
O_o...





Canadian politics seem so much more complicated than the US 2-party system, where you have to constantly choose the lesser of two evils.

I...um....well, err....

I wish i knew what you are talking about...but i would support a liberal canidate that wasn't intrested in American politics...


lol, yeah - we have a wee bit more diversity. Throw in an uncertain electoral timetable, the Bloqheads, non-confidence motions, a very short campaign period, much more limited spending rules, and it gets to be a different sort of entertainment.


Actually, there's another knock against Harper lately. He has been talking about going to a fixed timetable for elections like happens in the states.

No offense, but that it one of the things I dislike most about your system. After every three years you get one whole year dedicated to primaries, stump speeches, conventions, etc. while the nation's business gets ignored in the face of the need to spin everything the way you think the voters want to hear it.

Up here, we call an election, the campaigns gear up, and three months later we get back on with the business of running the country. Plus, how do you manage a fixed timetable for a minority government? Do you get rid of non-confidence motions? Or does the subsequent election only put peoplein power for the remainder of the term?

It just makes no sense under our system.
Gargantua City State
20-01-2006, 20:23
I'd also like to point out that, just today, Harper was using a "Get tough on crime! Vote for the Conservatives!" speech... which made me go, "What?"

Reason: The police dismantled many Hell's Angels clubhouses, taking care of a massive crime ring... just the other day. The investigating and evidence gathering was going on... under the Liberal watch.
2 million worth of drugs just out of my city of Thunder Bay alone.
Plus guns.
And a big wig fraud man going to jail.

So... Harper should stop that speech, because it sounds pretty silly, in light of this latest tour de force.
I'm still voting NDP. I love Layton.
Liberals have been in too long. Harper is TERRIFYING. Green is a waste of time. And I can't vote for the Bloc. :P
Willamena
20-01-2006, 21:15
I was more disappointed that Martin stopped talking to people and started spouting rhetoric. Pity.
Willamena
20-01-2006, 21:17
Harper is TERRIFYING.
Have you noticed that our conservative leaders seem to require mustaches? They all have these fleshy, mask-like faces that a mustache could only make more personable.
(Not what you meant, of course, but....)
Megaloria
20-01-2006, 21:24
Have you noticed that our conservative leaders seem to require mustaches? They all have these fleshy, mask-like faces that a mustache could only make more personable.
(Not what you meant, of course, but....)

You've...you've SOLVED it.

It's the same equation that makes me feel awful when I see a police obituary because the guy has this friendly moustache. The same reason that I don't care about baseball as much as I did in the eighties. If Layton can exploit this he'll take a landslide victory.
Silliopolous
20-01-2006, 21:40
I was more disappointed that Martin stopped talking to people and started spouting rhetoric. Pity.


As opposed to everyone elses rhetoric in this campaign? The crappy buzz-phrases like "Culture of Corruption" and/or "Entitlement"?

You have to win the battle of the minds with the voters who follow issues and actually think.

For everyone else, it's the Battle of the Slogans.
Gargantua City State
20-01-2006, 22:31
For everyone else, it's the Battle of the Slogans.

It's SO true. I'd love to hear them talk about what they're going to do, rather than what the other parties are doing wrong, or will do wrong.
Politics is so negative...
There are times I think about becoming a politician just to try something different... talk about issues, and what the party plans to do about them, rather than launching attack ads and the like.
Silliopolous
21-01-2006, 02:22
It's SO true. I'd love to hear them talk about what they're going to do, rather than what the other parties are doing wrong, or will do wrong.
Politics is so negative...
There are times I think about becoming a politician just to try something different... talk about issues, and what the party plans to do about them, rather than launching attack ads and the like.

But it's so much easier to denigrate what the OTHER is going to do. After all, the less you make of your own platform the less you give the voters as ammo to say that you didn't deliver next time around.


Remember the Red Book?

Boy did THAT come back to haunt them. And they all learned from that.....
Bobs Own Pipe
21-01-2006, 02:27
Frankly, I wish Harper'd shoot his own foot off altogether. No, wait - feet. Yeah, that's more like it.
Kreitzmoorland
21-01-2006, 02:37
Well, I don't find Harper terrifying at all. I think all this villainization of the conservatives is just plain silly, and also, counterproductive if you're a Liberal (and this is coming from someone's that's voting NDP). It rings false, and most people don't like that.

Harper has a good shot at forming the government, and if Canadians want a change, so be it. Hopefully it'll be a minority and won't last too long - at least not long enough to thwart the environment, reopen the gay marriage debate, sign up as George's lapdog, or emperril the CBC.

Still though, the conservatives are legitimate and they have some solid policy. The Globe and Mail has endorsed them for chrissakes - it won't ruin the Canada we know and love to have a guy with a freaky smile leading us for a year or two, and besides, his voice is strangely sexy.
Bobs Own Pipe
21-01-2006, 02:41
Yeah, well Sun Media has endorsed them too, so there goes your proof.:rolleyes:
Kreitzmoorland
21-01-2006, 03:42
Yeah, well Sun Media has endorsed them too, so there goes your proof.:rolleyes:The globe's endorsement isn't 'proof' of anything. I'm merely saying that people who claim to be terrorized by the concept of a conservative government are drama royalty.