Site Administrator Of:

Supporter Of:


Harper talking domestic politics (trash) on his world tour.

No surprise that Harper would do so; he’s done it before where he talks about some aspect of domestic politics while he’s abroad. I guess he feels that everyone is watching his trip, so they’ll be paying more attention. Today, in the UK, the talk arose of coalition government there, and the parallels between that scenario and what could play out here.

Harper was today asked about coalition governments; specifically about the parallels between what has happened in the UK, withe the recent coalition government agreement with the Liberal Democrats and the Conservative Party, and what could occur in Canada. His answer was this: “Losers don’t get to form coalitions. Winners are the ones who form governments.”

This is of course a mis-characterization of Parliamentary government. When no party “wins” a majority in Parliament, there is no clear winner to start with. Further to that, there’s also this inconvenient fact for Harper:

In the British coalition, it wasn’t even the least losing-iest party, Labour, that formed the coalition with the Conservatives, it was the Liberal Democrats who had one of their worst showings in years.

This sort of statement is again designed to try and confuse and trick the voters back at home, and to try and somehow downplay the fact that we have a UK Parliament that is being run by a coalition government, something that Harper and his colleagues in the Conservative Pary are still attempting to fear-monger.

UPDATE: Excellent point by the CBC’s Terry Milewski:

..Harper’s warm welcome for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was out of order, too. (Tzipi Livni’s Kadima Party got the most votes. But Netanhayu managed to form a coalition of…”losers.”)


12 comments to Harper talking domestic politics (trash) on his world tour.

  • ridenrain

    Keep in mind that in the 2006 election, only 64.9% of registered voters bothered to vote. That means that 35.1% didn’t get their say and that’s almost equal to the 36.27 popular vote that the Conservatives won with. We need a party that’s going to catch and captivate those 9.5 million folks.

    • ck

      @ridenrain the figures of those who went to vote in 2008 were even more dismal; something like 57- 59% showed up to the polls.

      Many of those voters tend to not realize that staying home and not voting is just another vote for STeve. Low voter turnouts generally favour the incumbent

  • winched317

    Let’s also not forget that a majority of Canadians did not vote for Harper in the last election.

  • Anon ABC

    Good that some Constitutional experts are promptly calling him out on it:

    Thus it seems that we have a PM who either: (a) is genuinely ignorant of our own Constitution, (b)does not engage his brain before he puts his mouth in gear, or (c) thinks nothing of misleading (being polite here) voters in order to score a partisan advantage.

    Why are the opposition parties so quiet on this issue instead of calling him out on it immediately?

    • ck

      @Anon ABC: More like Steve really does know the truth but takes advantage of the Timmy’s crowd who really don’t know any better and don’t wish to be stood corrected. Remember, one thing they hate is someone trying to explain facts to them; makes us sound more like those intellectual elitists.

      In fact, ask your garden variety member of Joe and Jane ‘centrist’; they will tell you that in spite of minority numbers, the majority of Canadians voted for Harpercons simply because they have more seats than everyone else.

      Another reason why they will never ever see the coalition as legitimate in 2008: when they vote, they don’t realize they’re not voting for the PM but voting for an MP who they feel would best represent his/her riding. No, ask their intent when they vote and 9/10, they will tell you they’re voting for Mr X of Harpercon because they want Steve to be PM. It doesn’t matter that it isn’t true, it’s true to them and that’s what matters most. Their intent.

      Those folks are content to simply let the corporate media turn them on that sharp right turn. Honestly, I don’t know how we can change their minds without their resentment of ‘patronizing elitists’ (how they think of folks like us for the most part) like ourselves.

      It’s one of the reasons why I say that the Harpercons are not a just a political party; they’re practically a cult.

      • Nadine_L

        ck Reply:
        June 3rd, 2010 at 10:50 pm

        lolol at your line: Remember, one thing they hate is someone trying to explain facts to them; makes us sound more like those intellectual elitists.

        I agree what you said about many Canadians letting MSM form their opinions. I work with a group called and thank God for them because talking to my friends and neighbours and family is like trying to get an abused wife to leave her husband, NeoCons…. IT IS A CULT.


        Because Harper is Sucking Canada Dry


      • Anon ABC

        Hey CK: The bad news is that you are right (don’t mean that it is bad that you are right, lol). Like you, I think that most of these “Timmie’s crowd” would always vote for Steve because of their own reasons (and it is their prerogative to do so). It would be a waste of time to try to tell them that our constitution does not forbid “losing” parties to form a coalition or that in a minority Parliament, even the party with the most number of seats is a “loser”. The good news, however, is that we only have to change the minds of a small minority of these voters.

        If you believe, as I do, that Harper’s base is 28-30%, then with his recent polls in the 33% (this week’s was even lower at 31%), then we only have to change the minds of 3-5% of the “swing” voters to vote non-Cons. It is doable. Then the outcome of the election would depend on the non-Cons parties not splitting each other’s votes. There are various mechanisms to achieve the latter, no?

    • TofKW

      @Anon ABC, The answer is c). Harper LIES to the public, assuming they are ignorant enough to take his word as the truth.

      And Israel is a great example of ‘the losers’ forming a coalition to form government. But a more current example can be found just a few days ago in the Czech Republic. Three ‘loser’ centre-right parties just formed a coalition government there, regardless of the Social Democrats receiving the highest number of votes.

  • Jenny

    It is interesting that the spin is that he somehow raised this issue on the “world stage”. He was asked a question and he answered it.

    Prime Minister Jack Layton is coming to a Liberal Party near you!

    • @Jenny, The point is, whenever he gets asked about something like that, he frames his answer in a way of trashing his political domestic opponents back at home.. he’s one of the most classless Prime Ministers in that respect Canada’s ever had.

      My title of the blogpost has been made more clear, for those like you who didn’t grasp that.

    • ck

      Oh, dear, dear Jenny! You mean Jack Layton is coming to a Harpercon party near you!

  • […] because they’d then BE FORMING GOVERNMENT. The only losers are the Canadian people who suffer through an insidious Prime Minister who thinks coalitions are bad (even though he governs through a […]

unique visitors since the change to this site domain on Nov 12, 2008.