Site Administrator Of:

Supporter Of:


Counting your chickens before they hatch

Prime Minister Harper is obviously feeling very good about himself right now. He (and Canada) hosted an immensely successful Kate and Will tour (which thankfully came a couple of months into his mandate, not immediately before an election, else he might have rode it to a bigger majority). Now, we see that he has declared the “end of Liberalism” and the claim that Canadians are turning more Conservative and that “Conservative values are Canadian values” etc, and that they needed to woo Quebec, because the honeymoon with the NDP would soon be over and of course, they’re the only party who could do that.

Some of this was probably red meat for his base, as it was said at a Conservative Party meeting in Calgary, in the heart of Conservative country, but putting aside the obvious exaggerations (60.1% of those who voted did not share his values, and when factoring in eligible voters who didn’t vote, only approximately 24% of eligible voters actually voted for his party’s “values”), I’m not unhappy to see this – it shows some of Harper’s arrogance coming to the fore. He had a solid election win and yes the Liberals were decimated, but it’s a bit early to be declaring the end of the Liberal Party, or proclaiming that Quebec will soon turn from voting left to voting for the opposite in his party.

As some may recall, another cocky conservative, US President George Bush and his advisers (primarily Karl Rove) declared after his 2nd Presidential win in 2004 about a “permanent Republican majority” and we see how that turned out. The old saying is “Pride goeth before a fall”, and we’ve just witnessed the first part of the equation north of the border.


6 comments to Counting your chickens before they hatch

  • Roll Tide

    All I heard was the permanent “Democratic majority” after Obama was elected. He had his super majority (House Senate WH). Obama had a arrogance about him.

    Then he took his shellacking.

    Harper on the other hand is on a winning streak. He has won more seats in every election, he is winning Canadians people over, not losing them. The longer Canadians know him, the more they support him. This despite being portrayed by the liberal media as right wing, George W Bush north, tea party ,fundamentalist Christan, Republican, Zionist,…..Canadians are ignoring this liberal BS.
    We are becoming more and more small c, distinct Canadian conservatives. Thank God for this….We do not want to be in the mess they are in south of the 49th.

    • Um.. can you show me the quote where Obama or his advisers boasted of that? Because I didn’t see that. I did see Karl Rove boasting however on the other side. He was quoted in the media extensively, both when they won all levels of government and again after he lost it 4 years later.

    • Beerbob

      I don’t know if you read my post, but maybe I should point out that the Conservatives have already done many of the things I mentioned, and are gearing up to do more of the same. I don’t know where you get the “Liberal BS” stuff, and by the way, I’m not a Liberal. I’m a left leaning Libertarian, and in some ways I have things in common with some of the Conservatives, as well as some of the Liberals.

      It is unfortunate that lots of folks, just like you, have bought Harper’s implying that they’re just like the old Progressive Conservatives. They died a decade ago. They were absorbed, and then most of them (the ones that were too “progressive”) were purged. If you want to understand Stephen Harper, read the National Citizen’s Coalition Web site. We’re heading towards that. We’re not there yet, but they’re working in that direction.

      I think I understand your point of view, though. You’re not a woman living in sub-Saharan Africa, or a Palestinian, or “underemployed”, or have an eighteen year old kid who grows weed (somewhere within a half klick of a school – look up what that means), or has a couple of kids who use the Internet for, well everything, including a bit of the old copyright infringement.

      Most of these CPC policies (which you somehow think of as “Liberal BS”) actually have no effect on you, except for the cost of the giant prisons, which we all get to pay for. You don’t know those people that get oppressed and whose lives are degraded due to these policies. I suppose you feel they don’t really matter.

      Speaking of the Wall Street Journal – are you sure that you want to quote anything associated with Rupert Murdoch in support of an argument?

  • Beerbob

    The Conservatives have to get the ideological hot stuff out of the way ASAP. The monster prisons and the mandatory minimum penalties to help fill them come to mind. Watch for more corporate handouts, more big drops in funding for groups/charities that don’t follow the Conservative Party/Evangelical line on Middle East affairs and Third World women’s health issues, maybe some “tweaking” of EI benefits, and the passage of laws supporting regulations that require ISPs to install the software and hardware capability to monitor and record everything you do on line and keep it for a few years – and the elimination of the requirement for police to acquire a writ before they can access that information. It may include agency for copyright holders (I would imagine after some rubber stamp application process) to troll your internet activity for that twenty-five year old TV series you pulled off of BitTorrent.

    This (and more) has to go through fast, or that few percent of voters that got them a majority could swing the other way if there isn’t two or three years of relatively bland behaviour to help this stuff slide down the memory hole. It’ll be the fall and spring sessions where there’ll be a load of this crap forced through.

  • TofKW

    Have to disagree with you on those ~40% who didn’t vote on May 2nd. Anyone who doesn’t bother to vote basically doesn’t care, and if they’re not motivated enough to get off their collective asses to mark an ‘X’, then they are comfortable and complicit with the present situation.

    You shouldn’t factor those who do not vote to the opposition in ANY election. They ultimately, if anything, support the incumbent, and also they have no right to bitch about the outcome if they come to regret the results.

    Aside from that, fair points. Though I think this example of smugness will be downright modesty when compared to what we’ll be witnessing from this government in about 2-3 years.

    • Ian

      Polling data before and after the election showed that Conservative voters were the most likely to vote, while supporters for the other parties (or none) were significantly less likely to vote. This suggests to me that there’s a ceiling on Conservative support in this country that’s maybe just a bit higher than the 24% Scott quotes.

      Obviously the non-voters (for whatever reason) didn’t vote for the opposition, but I wouldn’t claim they supported the incumbent either. Difficulty voting (the inconvenience of it) was they key reason Canadians didn’t vote, not apathy.

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