PCC
New Member
Like giving a drunken sailor the keys to the whorehouse. Last thing Dad needs is more of our money.
And they'd have had an extra $1B if they hadn't squandered it on E-Health.
Last edited:
|
|
|
Why the Liberals lost and where should they go from here.
- Thread starter kEiThZ
- Start date
Like giving a drunken sailor the keys to the whorehouse. Last thing Dad needs is more of our money.
And they'd have had an extra $1B if they hadn't squandered it on E-Health.
afransen
Senior Member
I'll note that the federal government, in terms of revenue as a % of GDP, is at its smallest since the 1960s.
pman
Senior Member
That's not the point. The problem for Ontario and Toronto is the difference between the taxes the federal government collects from us and the amount of money we get back. Both the C.D. Howe Institute and the Conference Board pegged that number at around $20 billion a year in the early oughts, and McGuinty made it at around $23 billion a year at the start of his premiership. Nothing has changed in the structure of federal spending and taxation since then, so it's probably still a good ballpark estimate.
That $20 billion a year would go a long way to fixing our health care and our transit deficiencies.
kEiThZ
Superstar
But government in general is smaller (as a % of GDP). I think we can all agree though, that the problems are with who collects the revenue and who pays the bills.
Eug
Senior Member
National Post: Harvard rallies round its man Ignatieff
Boston's chattering classes are struggling with the stunning political defeat of one of Harvard's most popular academics at the hands of Canadian voters, painting Michael Ignatieff's historic loss as Liberal leader as a new low in Canadian politics.
A series of editorials and articles published this week in the Harvard Crimson, Boston Globe and elsewhere has blamed Canadians for being closed-minded and anti-American when they handed Mr. Ignatieff and the Liberals the party's worst defeat in history.
"Harvard sees itself as the centre of the universe, so I'm sure it felt it very deeply," said Graham Wilson, chair of Boston University's department of political science.
In a front page article, The Boston Globe said the main reason for the Liberal collapse was that Mr. Ignatieff -the former director Harvard's Carr Center of Human Rights Policy and an expert on international military interventions -had views on the Canadian mission in Afghanistan that had pushed "war-weary voters toward the more left-leaning New Democratic Party."
The paper's editorialists noted with some disbelief that Canadian politics had become "surprisingly caustic" and described the "sadness and indignation" his former Harvard colleagues felt at seeing that Conservative attack ads painting Mr. Ignatieff as a foreign Ivy League elitist had played so well with Canadian voters.
The Harvard Crimson: The Canadian election results mean the demise of liberalism
Boston Globe: Harvard connection plays in Canadian’s loss
Boston.com: Ignatieff learns “Harvard†a code word in Canadian politics, too
Boston's chattering classes are struggling with the stunning political defeat of one of Harvard's most popular academics at the hands of Canadian voters, painting Michael Ignatieff's historic loss as Liberal leader as a new low in Canadian politics.
A series of editorials and articles published this week in the Harvard Crimson, Boston Globe and elsewhere has blamed Canadians for being closed-minded and anti-American when they handed Mr. Ignatieff and the Liberals the party's worst defeat in history.
"Harvard sees itself as the centre of the universe, so I'm sure it felt it very deeply," said Graham Wilson, chair of Boston University's department of political science.
In a front page article, The Boston Globe said the main reason for the Liberal collapse was that Mr. Ignatieff -the former director Harvard's Carr Center of Human Rights Policy and an expert on international military interventions -had views on the Canadian mission in Afghanistan that had pushed "war-weary voters toward the more left-leaning New Democratic Party."
The paper's editorialists noted with some disbelief that Canadian politics had become "surprisingly caustic" and described the "sadness and indignation" his former Harvard colleagues felt at seeing that Conservative attack ads painting Mr. Ignatieff as a foreign Ivy League elitist had played so well with Canadian voters.
The Harvard Crimson: The Canadian election results mean the demise of liberalism
Boston Globe: Harvard connection plays in Canadian’s loss
Boston.com: Ignatieff learns “Harvard†a code word in Canadian politics, too
Observer Walt
Senior Member
Mr. (Ms.?) Rao, the writer in the Harvard Crimson, apparently is following closely in Iggy's footsteps in more than one sense. He is in danger of being away from Canada so long that he (I assume it's "he") is in danger of losing much of his Canadian perspective. He verges on outright panic as he contemplates the loss of Canada's values, which he blurs together with liberalism with both a capital and small "L". The statement that the NDP has no experience of holding a government to account, and that only the Liberals have been doing that recently, is also open to debate, to put it mildly. I'm sure Jack Layton would chuckle ironically at that. Perhaps Mr. Rao should look into doing a semester abroad (read: "back in Canada") to regain perspective.
Urban Shocker
Doyenne
The Economist did a couple of articles on the election last week, with a perspective on the NDP that was about 20 years out of date.
Mongo
Senior Member
I read those articles, and I was not surprised at all. The Economist has always had a condescending attitude towards Canada (when they bother to notice it at all), caused by what appears to be a significant level of ignorance about this country.
afransen
Senior Member
The Canada pieces is the Economist are usually written by Canadian freelancers. They are, of course, writing for an audience that knows little about Canada and would generally find a long exposition on the nuance of Canadian politics rather boring.
Eug
Senior Member
So Rae has now given up the chance to be their real leader and has decided to go for the consolation prize of interim leader. WTF is the Liberal party thinking? Just what benefit is there to having the iLeader declare in writing s/he won't run for (more) permanent leadership later?
If Rae really were to rebuild the party in two years, why wouldnt they want to keep him on as leader? Or at least give him a chance to run for the position?
If Rae really were to rebuild the party in two years, why wouldnt they want to keep him on as leader? Or at least give him a chance to run for the position?
adma
Superstar
Maybe *he* knows he's getting old.
Observer Walt
Senior Member
Not only getting old, but would be a definite liability to the party in an election campaign. Too many people, in Ontario, still remember Rae days.
In addition, from a perspective of internal party politics, it seems wise to specify that the interim leader is not to run for the permanent leadership, otherwise, the internal sniping would begin, to the effect that he has an unfair advantage. This was actually a wise move, IMO, to avoid a bone of contention.
In addition, from a perspective of internal party politics, it seems wise to specify that the interim leader is not to run for the permanent leadership, otherwise, the internal sniping would begin, to the effect that he has an unfair advantage. This was actually a wise move, IMO, to avoid a bone of contention.
Eug
Senior Member
So what if an incumbent has an advantage? Isn't that the point of experience?
It kind of reminds me of my university days. One of my schoolmates actually argued that the lab space shouldn't be open for extended hours because it gives those who are willing to put in the extra time studying there an unfair advantage.
It kind of reminds me of my university days. One of my schoolmates actually argued that the lab space shouldn't be open for extended hours because it gives those who are willing to put in the extra time studying there an unfair advantage.
Urban Shocker
Doyenne
Rae just wants a make-work project for a couple of years to ease him into retirement, I expect.
TrickyRicky
Senior Member
I think making Rae interm leader and delaying the Liberal leadership race are the first good ideas the Liberal party has had in years. Rae is a liability to the party and this allows him to be put out to pasture in a dignified manner.
I also believe that Justin Trudeau is a liability for the party. The thought of Justin Trudeau flying in to "help" bolster liberal candidates in GTA ridings is symbolic of everything that is wrong with the Liberal party. They need to find a way of putting this kid out to pasture as well.
I kind of care about this subject because I've decided that I have a vested interest in the Liberal party. While I'm probably a conservative, I have a much greater interest in the idea of representative government and avoiding a two party system here in Canada. I don't think this scenerio, pursued with such vigour by Mr. Harper, is a positive step in our evolution as a nation.
On this note I wonder if the Liberals should take a page from the Conservative playbook. Create and start from a regional base, extend outward by fanning the flames of regional dissenchantment and finally galvanize support in Ontario where elections are really lost or won.
In this case I would suggest they first create a regional bastion in Atlantic Canada, choose an intelligent populist East coast leader. Fan the flames of eastern and Quebec greivances and move west from there. The east wants in!
I also believe that Justin Trudeau is a liability for the party. The thought of Justin Trudeau flying in to "help" bolster liberal candidates in GTA ridings is symbolic of everything that is wrong with the Liberal party. They need to find a way of putting this kid out to pasture as well.
I kind of care about this subject because I've decided that I have a vested interest in the Liberal party. While I'm probably a conservative, I have a much greater interest in the idea of representative government and avoiding a two party system here in Canada. I don't think this scenerio, pursued with such vigour by Mr. Harper, is a positive step in our evolution as a nation.
On this note I wonder if the Liberals should take a page from the Conservative playbook. Create and start from a regional base, extend outward by fanning the flames of regional dissenchantment and finally galvanize support in Ontario where elections are really lost or won.
In this case I would suggest they first create a regional bastion in Atlantic Canada, choose an intelligent populist East coast leader. Fan the flames of eastern and Quebec greivances and move west from there. The east wants in!