19% of Canadians -- and counting -- can
As the 2008 federal election progresses, it seems that Liberal leader Stephane Dion may be sho' nuff fucked.
With Stephen Harper's Conservative party comfortably in control of this election with 38% support, Dion's Liberals are polling at 23% -- a narrow lead over Jack Layton's NDP, who are polling at 19%.
"Although it is clear that the Liberals retain a small edge, on some days the difference is within the margin of error," said Ekos president Frank Graves.
In other words, the Stephane Dion Liberals are statistically tied with the NDP.
This comes as Dion gathers his former leadership rivals around him for campaign help.
Which he could certainly use. After all, as the campaign progresses, some of Dion's star candidates are nowhere to be seen -- in particular, Michael Ignatieff has inexplicably been a non-entity during this election campaign.
It seems even perennial insufferable douchebag Scott Reid can figure this one out.
Whether even the combined popularity of Ignatieff, Bob Rae, Ken Dryden and Martha Hall Findlay (among others) can save Dion at this point is anyone's guess. (You were going to make a "Kermit De Frog" joke here, weren't you? I have a sixth sense for these things. -Ed)
...Unless, of course, there's a reason why some of his higher-profile "team members" don't seem to be so eager to be seen with him.
An election result with the Liberals being punted from the status of Official Opposition in favour of the NDP would unquestionably turf any further leadership ambitions on Dion's behalf. The smart money says that any one of these individuals would absolutely love to play hero and lead the Liberal party out of the dredges of third-party status and back into the government benches.
Which would, of course, cast the Jamie Carroll affair in a whole new light.
Carroll, as some may recall, resigned as the national director of the Liberal party over outrage over comments he made about the backroom deals being made in the name of the leadership ambitions of Dion's rivals.
Of course, before anyone can even begin to worry about that, they have to worry about the current election. The Liberals still have almost a month to turn this thing around.
"If the alarm bells are not ringing already at Liberal headquarters, they should now," Graves says.
The question is: are those alarm bells being heard?
Showing posts with label Jack Layton. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Jack Layton. Show all posts
Election costs party leaders in public regard
As the 2008 federal election progresses, each party leader is hoping to make a positive impression on Canadians and improve their party's standings in the House of Commons.
Almost inevitably, some parties will accomplish the latter. But a poll released yesterday reveals that none have yet accomplished the latter. In fact, Canada's political leaders have done the precise opposite.
Stephen Harper's sweater vest and lack-lustre campaign ads couldn't save him from being the leader losing the most -- 36% of polled Canadians hold him in lesser regard, likely due to an unprincipled election call and a pair of serious campaign gaffes on the part of his Conservative Party.
Liberal leader Stephane Dion suffered as well. 32% of Canadians hold him in lower regard following a week in which he claimed he wanted an open debate about his Green Shift plan, but instead settled for calling his Conservative opponents liars.
Jack Layton tried to emulate Barack Obama, but 15% of Canadians found him to be considerably less appealing than that.
23% of polled Canadians found Gilles Duceppe less appealing. Picking at the religious beliefs of a Conservative candidate probably didn't help him much, but then again the only numbers that are really applicable to Duceppe are the ones collected in Quebec.
Hopefully, Canada's political leaders will avert the course they've been following and give Canadians a little less reason to feel cynical and discouraged about our politics.
As the 2008 federal election progresses, each party leader is hoping to make a positive impression on Canadians and improve their party's standings in the House of Commons.
Almost inevitably, some parties will accomplish the latter. But a poll released yesterday reveals that none have yet accomplished the latter. In fact, Canada's political leaders have done the precise opposite.
Stephen Harper's sweater vest and lack-lustre campaign ads couldn't save him from being the leader losing the most -- 36% of polled Canadians hold him in lesser regard, likely due to an unprincipled election call and a pair of serious campaign gaffes on the part of his Conservative Party.
Liberal leader Stephane Dion suffered as well. 32% of Canadians hold him in lower regard following a week in which he claimed he wanted an open debate about his Green Shift plan, but instead settled for calling his Conservative opponents liars.
Jack Layton tried to emulate Barack Obama, but 15% of Canadians found him to be considerably less appealing than that.
23% of polled Canadians found Gilles Duceppe less appealing. Picking at the religious beliefs of a Conservative candidate probably didn't help him much, but then again the only numbers that are really applicable to Duceppe are the ones collected in Quebec.
Hopefully, Canada's political leaders will avert the course they've been following and give Canadians a little less reason to feel cynical and discouraged about our politics.
Anti-family label is just plain silly
Yesterday, as Prime Minister Stephen Harper denounced the Liberals and NDP for allegedly being "anti-family", the Conservatives released yet another spot targeting Stephane Dion.
The ad addresses a previous statement by Stephane Dion in which he announced he would cut the Conservative's $1200 per annum childcare tax credit.
The ad insists that the choice to voters is clear "you keep the $1200, or [Dion] gets it."
Dion has denounced the claim as a "lie". Yet Dion did, in fact, say that he would cancel the Tory plan. More specifically, Dion would replace the Universal Child Care Benefit with Ken Dryden's plan for a national daycare program.
"The Dryden plan was much better. We need child care facilities to provide Canadian parents with real choice. It's a matter of social justice, but also of sound economics: child care facilities are a good way to encourage flexibility and mobility of our workforce, at a time when, often, two parents are working outside the home."
Which is obviously precisely what the ad is referring to when it warns that "[Dion] thinks he can spend [the $1200] better than you can."
Thus, there's nothing dishonest about the ad.
However, the ad's place in an effort to counter-brand Stephane Dion as "anti-family" is just plain silly. After all, Dion is a family man himself. It's unlikely that Dion himself would do anything to hurt his own family. Anything that would hurt Canadian families would inevitably hurt his own, in one way or another.
Just as Jack Layton is a family man as well, and has campaigned on numerous pro-family policies.
However, as silly as the Conservative effort to counter-brand Dion as Layton as "anti-family" (and there is a great peril in dragging politics down into the realm of vapid "anti-" labels), Dion's attempt to counter-brand the Conservatives as "liars" is doubly silly.
For one thing, the claims in the Conservative ad pan out to be true. Secondly, the base accusation of lying portrays Dion as a man incapable of debating the real issues -- instead choosing to dodge behind accusations of lies.
Stephen Harper himself insisted that the 2008 federal election would be a nasty one. With moves such as the inherently silly "anti-family" label, he's done more than his fair share to make it a nasty one.
Equally unfortunately, Stephane Dion has proven himself more than willing to oblige him.
In this video, released by the Green party, Elizabeth May answers some questions about the decision to exclude her from the televised leaders' debates, and about her non-aggression pact with Stephane Dion.
Unfortunately, in the course of the latter, she insults the intelligence of Canadians.
"One must remember that when Stephen Harper first ran for his riding, he was unopposed by a Liberal candidate. I don't think at the time that anyone made the mistake of thinking he was the Liberal candidate because he was unopposed.Unfortunately for May and her party, this insistence is just as intellectually dishonest as her insistence that Blair Wilson joining her party entitled her to a spot in the televised leaders' debate.
There is a tradition in this country of called 'leader's courtesy'. Mr Dion and I agreed to this measure in respect of each other as leaders of different political parties to not challenge each other in each other's ridings."
May certainly is correct in pointing out that there is a "leader's courtesy" tradition in Canada. However, it generally applies to newly-selected party leaders who don't possess a seat in the House of Commons.
When this happens, one of the party's MPs usually resigns their seat so the leader may take their place. When the by-election occurs, the other parties agree not to contest the seat. They do this for two reasons:
First off, because the party in question already has possession of that Parliamentary seat.
Secondly, because they expect the other parties to return that courtesy in the event that they elect a leader without a Parliamentary seat.
In order for May's theorem to hold water under the principle of "leader's courtesy", two very important conditions would have to be present: first, we would have to be talking about a by-election as opposed to a general election. Secondly, the Green Party would already have to possess Central Nova.
Neither condition is present, making her reasoning flagrantly fallacious. It would actually have to be a good deal more sound to actually qualify as "specious".
Moreover, the Liberal party certainly hasn't declined to run a candidate against Stephen Harper out of respect for "leader's courtesy" -- Marlene Lamontaigne is running for the party in Calgary-Southwest. The Green party isn't respecting "leader's courtesy" there either -- they're fielding Kelly Christie as a candidate.
Nor are the Liberals and Greens showing any "leader's courtesy" to NDP leader Jack Layton. The Greens are running Charles Battershill and the Liberals are running Andrew Lang in Toronto-Danforth.
So, one question that could still be raised is this: did the Liberals and Greens even bother to contact Jack Layton and Stephen Harper to offer them "leader's courtesy" in their ridings?
There's no indication that they ever did. And even if they did, it's hard to treat a request that Stephen Harper cancel the nomination of his own Deputy Prime Minister as anything other than untenable.
Of course May is, in principle, right to object to Stephen Harper's potrayal of her as the Liberal candidate in Central Nova:
"I am no more the Liberal candidate in Central Nova than Mr Dion is a Green Party candidate anywhere.Yet if, indeed, Elizabeth May is predisposed toward disagreeing with Stephane Dion on any policy topic, Canadians would be hard-pressed to determine precisely which topics those are -- she has not yet, to date, voiced a disagreement with Stephane Dion on record.
We are separate political parties. Our views on most issues are quite different."
She hasn't even voiced disagreement with Dion over his party's performance on the climate change portfolio -- especially given that the Liberals were the ones who ratified the Kyoto protocol in the first place.
Which is, of course, only another little bit of intellectual dishonesty by Elizabeth May and the Greens.
If Canadians need another reason to reject the Green party, this is as good as any other.
Layton getting awfully cozy with oft-despised Americans
To adopt the old parlance from sports to politics, "everyone wants to be like Barack".
It doesn't have quite the same snap as "everyone wants to be like Mike", but when assessing the state of left-wing politics in at least North America today, it holds true.
Just like anyone who ever even touched a basketball wanted to emulate the then-best-known athlete in the world, anyone who's ever embraced progressive politics wants desperately to emulate the man who is currently the best-known politician in the world today.
Certainly, Jack Layton wants to be like Barack. One need look no further than the theme of the 2008 NDP campaign: change.
It certainly doesn't hurt that Jack Layton attended the 2008 Democratic National Convention, either. For a party all too often content to accuse their opponents of importing American policies and American values, it seems that Jack Layton is utterly unafraid to get good and cozy with the "empire" to the south -- particularly with a Presidential candidate whose rightward shift promises little global reprieve from the "imperialist" policies the NDP so often denounces as abhorrent.
Of course, this particular paradox is nothing new for the NDP. Consider commentary offered by journalist Ian King about NDP House leader Libby Davies.
The episode in question involves Davies taking CBC veteran reporter Terry Milewski to Seattle to attend some anti-war protests there. Afterward, Davies brought anti-war protester Ann Wright back across the border.
As King notes, "There is nothing Canadian about the wholesale importation of the American “anti-war” movement, with all its attached hangups over Vietnam and line-by-line reuse of symbols and slogans from the time."
Add that to the fact that the anti-war movement in the United States -- preoccupied first and foremost with the Iraq conflict -- are ill-suited to address the state of affairs in Canada in regards to the Afghanistan conflict, which has been sanctioned by the United Nations, putting the lie to insistence that the war is "illegal", as opposed to the Iraq war which enjoys no such sanction and so arguably is illegal.
Not to mention that the Vietnam-era rhetoric being employed by Iraqi war resisters in Canada is also ill-suited to their obligation to participate in a war they volunteered to fight in (for good or ill).
Likewise, there is nothing Canadian about the wholesale importation of Obama-esque rhetoric into Canada, no matter how much the NDP wants to, or the Liberal party wishes they could.
Certainly, there's nothing un-Canadian about looking to political movements in other countries for inspiration, but therein lies the rub.
If it isn't un-Canadian for Jack Layton and the New Democrats (as Layton emphasizes it) to look south of the border for inspiration, then it isn't un-Canadian for the Conservative party to do likewise.
While the current state of affairs in the United States should serve as a cautionary tale to the Conservative party to remain very careful about which inspirations to act on and which to reject, for the NDP or their partisans to accuse the Conservatives of being un-Canadian for doing so isn't only engaging in some inherently silly rhetoric, it's also being incredibly dishonest.
Of course Jack Layton isn't really an agent of American Imperialism. To insist so is just plain silly. But, like stupid, silly is as silly does.
If Jack Layton wants to continue indulging himself in silly rhetoric that panders to cross-border partisan parochialism, he may want to remember this:
He could always reap that particular whirlwind.
To adopt the old parlance from sports to politics, "everyone wants to be like Barack".
It doesn't have quite the same snap as "everyone wants to be like Mike", but when assessing the state of left-wing politics in at least North America today, it holds true.
Just like anyone who ever even touched a basketball wanted to emulate the then-best-known athlete in the world, anyone who's ever embraced progressive politics wants desperately to emulate the man who is currently the best-known politician in the world today.
Certainly, Jack Layton wants to be like Barack. One need look no further than the theme of the 2008 NDP campaign: change.
It certainly doesn't hurt that Jack Layton attended the 2008 Democratic National Convention, either. For a party all too often content to accuse their opponents of importing American policies and American values, it seems that Jack Layton is utterly unafraid to get good and cozy with the "empire" to the south -- particularly with a Presidential candidate whose rightward shift promises little global reprieve from the "imperialist" policies the NDP so often denounces as abhorrent.
Of course, this particular paradox is nothing new for the NDP. Consider commentary offered by journalist Ian King about NDP House leader Libby Davies.
The episode in question involves Davies taking CBC veteran reporter Terry Milewski to Seattle to attend some anti-war protests there. Afterward, Davies brought anti-war protester Ann Wright back across the border.
As King notes, "There is nothing Canadian about the wholesale importation of the American “anti-war” movement, with all its attached hangups over Vietnam and line-by-line reuse of symbols and slogans from the time."
Add that to the fact that the anti-war movement in the United States -- preoccupied first and foremost with the Iraq conflict -- are ill-suited to address the state of affairs in Canada in regards to the Afghanistan conflict, which has been sanctioned by the United Nations, putting the lie to insistence that the war is "illegal", as opposed to the Iraq war which enjoys no such sanction and so arguably is illegal.
Not to mention that the Vietnam-era rhetoric being employed by Iraqi war resisters in Canada is also ill-suited to their obligation to participate in a war they volunteered to fight in (for good or ill).
Likewise, there is nothing Canadian about the wholesale importation of Obama-esque rhetoric into Canada, no matter how much the NDP wants to, or the Liberal party wishes they could.
Certainly, there's nothing un-Canadian about looking to political movements in other countries for inspiration, but therein lies the rub.
If it isn't un-Canadian for Jack Layton and the New Democrats (as Layton emphasizes it) to look south of the border for inspiration, then it isn't un-Canadian for the Conservative party to do likewise.
While the current state of affairs in the United States should serve as a cautionary tale to the Conservative party to remain very careful about which inspirations to act on and which to reject, for the NDP or their partisans to accuse the Conservatives of being un-Canadian for doing so isn't only engaging in some inherently silly rhetoric, it's also being incredibly dishonest.
Of course Jack Layton isn't really an agent of American Imperialism. To insist so is just plain silly. But, like stupid, silly is as silly does.
If Jack Layton wants to continue indulging himself in silly rhetoric that panders to cross-border partisan parochialism, he may want to remember this:
He could always reap that particular whirlwind.
Potential leadership challenger Michael Byers waiting in the wings
In 2006, NDP leader Jack Layton led his party from a meagre 18 seat caucus to prey upon Liberal weakness and return 29 Members of Parliament.
The eventual by-election victory of Thomas Mulcair in Outremont -- a Liberal stronghold riding formerly held by Pierre Trudeau brought the NDP up to a respectable total of 30 seats.
With the 2008 federal election now underway, however, it seems the pressure on Layton could be as intense as ever. If he fails to make further gains or (worse yet) loses seats, it seems the NDP's candidate in Vancouver-Centre, Michael Byers, may decide to make a run for the NDP leadership.
According to the Georgia Strait's Charlie Smith, the entrance of BC Liberal MLA Lorne Mayencourt as a federal Conservative candidate may have put Byers in the driver's seat in Vancouver-Centre.
Mayencourt, currently representing the provincial riding of Vancouver-Berard, may siphon enough conservative Liberals discontented with the carbon tax to potentially unseat Hedy Fry.
According to Smith, if Mayencourt manages to attract as much as 20 percent of the ridings voters -- based on appeal to pro-free enterprise gays and lesbians and the law-and-order vote -- and Green candidate Adrianne Carr (formerly a provincial Green party leader) can attract 15-20% of the vote in the riding, either Byers or Fry could claim a victory with just over 30% of the vote.
Smith predicts that Byers could do even better than that, winning 35% of the vote if Jack Layton runs a good, solid campaign. Even if Layton doesn't run a good campaign -- and there's no reason to expect he won't -- Byers is still a definite contender in the contest.
Byers seems to understand this, as well. Byers didn't even wait for the campaign to begin before taking the fight to Hedy Fry.
Certainly, a successful campaign by Layton would benefit Byers at least in the short term. However, such a successful campaign could only put off any leadership amitions Byers may have.
However, should the NDP campaign flounder federally, Jack Layton will almost certainly find himself subject to a leadership review. Should disgruntled New Democrats decide to ouster Layton as leader, a Byers victory in Vancouver-Centre -- toppling the giant killer who once slew Prime Minister Kim Campbell -- would make him a tough opponent to beat.
Not that the NDP is guaranteed to be well-served by Byers' leadership. He has a tendency to make narrow ideological foreign policy statements that fail to stand up to scrutiny.
But if Byers wants to follow Michael Ignatieff's lead into federal politics, he may as well do it in style. And while it may be unbecoming for Byers to be keeping his fingers crossed for the failure of his party leader, one can't help but wonder if that isn't exactly what's on his wish list for the 2008 federal election.
In 2006, NDP leader Jack Layton led his party from a meagre 18 seat caucus to prey upon Liberal weakness and return 29 Members of Parliament.
The eventual by-election victory of Thomas Mulcair in Outremont -- a Liberal stronghold riding formerly held by Pierre Trudeau brought the NDP up to a respectable total of 30 seats.
With the 2008 federal election now underway, however, it seems the pressure on Layton could be as intense as ever. If he fails to make further gains or (worse yet) loses seats, it seems the NDP's candidate in Vancouver-Centre, Michael Byers, may decide to make a run for the NDP leadership.According to the Georgia Strait's Charlie Smith, the entrance of BC Liberal MLA Lorne Mayencourt as a federal Conservative candidate may have put Byers in the driver's seat in Vancouver-Centre.
Mayencourt, currently representing the provincial riding of Vancouver-Berard, may siphon enough conservative Liberals discontented with the carbon tax to potentially unseat Hedy Fry.
According to Smith, if Mayencourt manages to attract as much as 20 percent of the ridings voters -- based on appeal to pro-free enterprise gays and lesbians and the law-and-order vote -- and Green candidate Adrianne Carr (formerly a provincial Green party leader) can attract 15-20% of the vote in the riding, either Byers or Fry could claim a victory with just over 30% of the vote.
Smith predicts that Byers could do even better than that, winning 35% of the vote if Jack Layton runs a good, solid campaign. Even if Layton doesn't run a good campaign -- and there's no reason to expect he won't -- Byers is still a definite contender in the contest.
Byers seems to understand this, as well. Byers didn't even wait for the campaign to begin before taking the fight to Hedy Fry.Certainly, a successful campaign by Layton would benefit Byers at least in the short term. However, such a successful campaign could only put off any leadership amitions Byers may have.
However, should the NDP campaign flounder federally, Jack Layton will almost certainly find himself subject to a leadership review. Should disgruntled New Democrats decide to ouster Layton as leader, a Byers victory in Vancouver-Centre -- toppling the giant killer who once slew Prime Minister Kim Campbell -- would make him a tough opponent to beat.
Not that the NDP is guaranteed to be well-served by Byers' leadership. He has a tendency to make narrow ideological foreign policy statements that fail to stand up to scrutiny.
But if Byers wants to follow Michael Ignatieff's lead into federal politics, he may as well do it in style. And while it may be unbecoming for Byers to be keeping his fingers crossed for the failure of his party leader, one can't help but wonder if that isn't exactly what's on his wish list for the 2008 federal election.
It's official -- federal election set for Oct 14
"Between now and Oct. 14, Canadians will choose a government to look out for their interests at a time of global economic trouble," Prime Minister Stephen Harper announced today, shortly after asking Governor General Michaelle Jean to dissolve parliament.
The move came amidst questions over whether or not such an election call would be illegal according to Harper's own fixed date election law.
In calling this election, Harper has pulled the trigger on what he's predicted will be a "nasty" election.
"To be really honest, I anticipate a very nasty, kind of personal-attack campaign," Harper mused. "That's just what I'm anticipating; that's what the opposition's done in the past. I think that whether Canadians agree with what we're doing or not, I don't think they're going to believe the kind of personal attacks and scare tactics that we've seen in the past."
For his own part, Liberal leader Stephane Dion has already started the partisan ideological wrangling typical of his party at election time.
"Stephen Harper formed the most conservative government in our history," Dion insisted.
Which, unfortunately for Dion, is historically untrue. In terms of conservatism, Harper's government could never hold a candle to the government of William Lyon Mackenzie King, among others.
Certainly, Harper's government has been the most Conservative seen in more than fifty years, but that's really only in contrast to what many would consider the runaway statism of previous governments -- including previous Conservative (Progressive Conservative) governments.
Jack Layton, fresh off his visit to the Democratic National Convention, has taken a page out of Barack Obama's playbook and promised to be the candidate for change.
"I'll act on the priorities of your kitchen table not just the boardroom table," he promised.
Last (and least) Elizabeth May portrayed her party as an alternative to the three national parties that have actually managed to -- you know -- actually elect Members of Parliament.
Her race against Deputy Prime Minister Peter MacKay will be one of the key battlegrounds in the election. Ironically, she'll be depending on heavy support from partians of one of the mainstream parties, as the Liberals will not run a candidate against her.
Many Canadians likely find themselves somewhere between disappointed and angry to be facing an election right now.
However, there is one bright side to this election. Not only will Canadians elect their leaders before the Presidential race is settled, one can safely assume that Michael Moore will be keeping his mouth busy with American politics for the duration of the Canadian election.
Thank god for small favours, one supposes.
"Between now and Oct. 14, Canadians will choose a government to look out for their interests at a time of global economic trouble," Prime Minister Stephen Harper announced today, shortly after asking Governor General Michaelle Jean to dissolve parliament.
The move came amidst questions over whether or not such an election call would be illegal according to Harper's own fixed date election law.
In calling this election, Harper has pulled the trigger on what he's predicted will be a "nasty" election.
"To be really honest, I anticipate a very nasty, kind of personal-attack campaign," Harper mused. "That's just what I'm anticipating; that's what the opposition's done in the past. I think that whether Canadians agree with what we're doing or not, I don't think they're going to believe the kind of personal attacks and scare tactics that we've seen in the past."
For his own part, Liberal leader Stephane Dion has already started the partisan ideological wrangling typical of his party at election time.
"Stephen Harper formed the most conservative government in our history," Dion insisted.
Which, unfortunately for Dion, is historically untrue. In terms of conservatism, Harper's government could never hold a candle to the government of William Lyon Mackenzie King, among others.
Certainly, Harper's government has been the most Conservative seen in more than fifty years, but that's really only in contrast to what many would consider the runaway statism of previous governments -- including previous Conservative (Progressive Conservative) governments.
Jack Layton, fresh off his visit to the Democratic National Convention, has taken a page out of Barack Obama's playbook and promised to be the candidate for change.
"I'll act on the priorities of your kitchen table not just the boardroom table," he promised.
Last (and least) Elizabeth May portrayed her party as an alternative to the three national parties that have actually managed to -- you know -- actually elect Members of Parliament.
Her race against Deputy Prime Minister Peter MacKay will be one of the key battlegrounds in the election. Ironically, she'll be depending on heavy support from partians of one of the mainstream parties, as the Liberals will not run a candidate against her.
Many Canadians likely find themselves somewhere between disappointed and angry to be facing an election right now.
However, there is one bright side to this election. Not only will Canadians elect their leaders before the Presidential race is settled, one can safely assume that Michael Moore will be keeping his mouth busy with American politics for the duration of the Canadian election.
Thank god for small favours, one supposes.
