Conservative Party: Comedy of Errors

jimmy123

New Member
Apr 30, 2005
19
0
1
I am not sure who the strategists/speechwriters are in the Conservative Party of Canada (or whether Stephen Harper himself makes the final decisions on party strategy), but it seems to me that they have bungled things badly over the past couple of months.

Initially, the minority Liberal government offered the carrot of corporate tax cuts (something the Liberals never campaigned on in the last election) to the Conservatives in an effort to gain their support to pass the budget. Stephen Harper said that the budget, while not perfect, was in line with Conservative Party priorities and seemed ready to support it.

Then, damaging testimony from the Gomery Inquiry came out (which I don't think was a big surprise to anyone) and Paul Martin announced that he would address the nation. Without using his head, Harper and his speechwriters came up with a fire and brimstone speech including the pledge to bring down the government at the earliest opportunity, thus doing a 180 degree turn from what he said previously re. passing the Liberal budget, in response to Martin's national address. The only problem with that was that Harper's response went way overboard and was out of whack with the Martin speech where Martin apologized for the Liberal sponsorship program actions, said he would ensure the proper controls were put in so that it never happens again once Justice Gomery filed his final report, and call an election within 30 days of the issue of the Gomery Report.

It just goes to show you how politically tone-deaf Harper and his handlers are to politics east of the Ontario/Manitoba border. As soon as I heard Martin's speech to the nation and Harper's response, I thought to myself that Harper just blew it and would pay for it. He has. This was just the start of many more Conservative bungles to come (Harper changing his mind again and saying he would now support the original budget but not the NDP amendment - funny given the fact that the NDP amendment would not have existed in the first place if Harper had not engaged in the knee-jerk reaction of a snap-election in light of the Gomery testimony, losing Belinda Stronach after chewing her out, the whole Gamut Grewal amateur hour audiotaping episode, etc.).

As it stands now, the Conservatives look like a bizarre sideshow act, not a party ready to govern. I don't care how "liberal" people think the East is: If you have a Liberal party who has governed for the past 4 terms and involved in so much scandal, and you as a party are STILL behind them in the polls, you better look at yourself in the mirror and do an honest unbiased analysis of how the silly moves you have made have cost you dearly, then smarten up.
 

galianomama

Council Member
Jun 29, 2004
1,076
1
38
Victoria, B.C.
maybe grewal is looking for a show on tv...something to follow 'howdy doody'...or 'mr. dressup' 8O it is a total mess, anyone who would take the conservative party seriously needs their head examined.
 

Reverend Blair

Council Member
Apr 3, 2004
1,238
1
38
Winnipeg
RE: Conservative Party: C

The Harperites certainly have been looking like a sideshow act lately. What I keep wondering is who is actually in charge over there. Most accounts put it squarely on Harper's shoulders. He lives in abubble where all of his advisors agree with him, any dissent is silenced immediately, and any views from outside the party are part of a conspiracy against Alberta.
 

mps

New Member
Jun 6, 2005
44
0
6
Nova Scotia
Of course, it could all be part of Harper's scary hidden agenda :wink:

Has the Conservative party been loosing support as of late, or are the polls just screwed up? It seemed to me that they, along with the NDP, would stand to gain some hefty rewards from the Liberals being (seemingly) on the edge of a cliff. But like jimmy said up there, Harper's overeagerness to tear them down combined with Paul Martin's relative calmness, sure put a damper in those plans.

Following that, perhaps the public viewed Harper as suffering a bit of the bloodlust, while assimilating it under a banner of "accountability"; whereas Martin stepped up and delivered on a promise of accountability with the calling of an election within 30 days of the full findings. That, to me, seems more reasonable.

Harper might have been baffled by how good his hand actually was. At first he had a big grin on his face, and felt (rightfully so) that he could take Martin to the cleaners. Then he overbet, and now he's playing catch up.

Poker analogies are so lame.
 

Reverend Blair

Council Member
Apr 3, 2004
1,238
1
38
Winnipeg
RE: Conservative Party: C

Harper's latest numbers are lower than the Alliance was the last election the Harperites used that moniker. He is losing support. The polls are showing the NDP picking up support...some polls have them ahead of the Conservatives in Ontario now.

Martin has been looking more reasonable lately. C-48, the NDP amendment to the budget, has been popular and that's helped the Liberals as well as the NDP, but mostly people are just fed up with Harper.
 

Ten Packs

Council Member
Nov 21, 2004
1,505
5
38
Kamloops BC
More on Grewal: last night, two former business associates disclosed that, some time back, Grewal made a so-called "investment" of $50,000 (for a partnership in carpet store) - as a mandatory requirement to obtain landed immigrant status. Accoording to them he paid one day, received the documents for the transaction, then took the money back the next day
This could easily threaten his ability to remain in the country!

This guy just blows me away - you couldn't make this stuff up! LMAO!
 

Reverend Blair

Council Member
Apr 3, 2004
1,238
1
38
Winnipeg
RE: Conservative Party: C

I saw that. Doesn't the Conservative party vet their candidates in the least? They are supposed to be the ones that want to crack down on immigration violations too. Apparently this isn't the first time these allegations have come to light.
 

no1important

Time Out
Jan 9, 2003
4,125
0
36
56
Vancouver
members.shaw.ca
RE: Conservative Party: C

Its amazing. The conservatives were basically handed a miniority government for the next election due to the "Gomery Scandal", but blew it big time. Amazing how they could not capitalize on it.

Why on earth anyone would want to vote for these incompetent "morons" is beyond me. By the looks of it the Bloc or NDP could be official opposition next time and the Cons could even finish 4th.

Utterly amazing how they let it all slip away.
 

unspoken

Nominee Member
Jun 3, 2005
64
0
6
SK
Well, to be fair, the original post did not mention the true catalyst of the attempt to bring down the government. If the Liberals had not cancelled scheduled opposition days, they probably would have maintained Conservative support for the budget and C-48 would be non-existant.
 

Reverend Blair

Council Member
Apr 3, 2004
1,238
1
38
Winnipeg
RE: Conservative Party: C

Opposition days weren't cancelled, they were postponed. It was done specifically to keep the Conservatives and Bloc from intorducing a motion of non-confidence in the government.

The catalyst to try and bring the government down was the testimony of Jean Brault...nothing more, nothing less. The Conservatives whipped themselves into a frenzy and the short-term polls made it look like they might be able to win.

I said it didn't have legs at the time...scandals never do, people get tired of them. If you can't manage an election immediately, you lose your chance. If you do nothing but yell and scream about scandal after people begin to lose interest, they wonder why you don't shut up and do the job they are paying you for. It hurts you at the polls.

Meanwhile the government you are trying to bring down starts to bring up dirt about you and try to maneuver you into a scandal. I predicted something like that too.

In the end you get hurt instead of the government trying to bring you down.

This is Canadian Politics for Beginners. The Harperites should take a course or two.
 

jimmy123

New Member
Apr 30, 2005
19
0
1
unspoken said:
Well, to be fair, the original post did not mention the true catalyst of the attempt to bring down the government. If the Liberals had not cancelled scheduled opposition days, they probably would have maintained Conservative support for the budget and C-48 would be non-existant.

I think you are mistaken unspoken.

Martin did not go to the NDP to make a deal, or postphone the Opposition Days, until AFTER Harper had made his response to Martin's address to the nation indicating that he wanted to bring down the government as soon as possible.

This raises the whole issue of "deal making". As I'm sure Stephen Harper knows, when you are a minority government, you HAVE to cut deals with one or more other parties to keep the government alive......if the Conservatives had formed a minority government last election they would have had to modify their "ideal" budget if they wanted to stay in power too.

For Harper to foolishly state that the Liberals cutting a deal with the NDP on the budget was the worst thing he's ever seen in politics is ridiculous. Harper did not seemed outraged with Liberal deal-making when the Liberals offered small business and corporate tax cuts in their initial budget designed to lure Harper and the Conservatives to support it. In fact, he sounded rather pleased with the proposal. I guess in Harper's world, cutting a deal is only evil if the Liberals make an offer to any party other than the Conservatives.

For a guy who seems to be a very intelligent human being, I can't understand why Harper makes one foolish statment / move after another. Maybe he needs to go on stress leave.........?
 

Reverend Blair

Council Member
Apr 3, 2004
1,238
1
38
Winnipeg
RE: Conservative Party: C

Harper also forgets that the NDP amendment was very popular with Canadians. Money for education, the environment, cities, and child care are something people have been asking for. To so vocally initiatives that are so popular shows a level of political ineptitude that boggles the mind.
 

no1important

Time Out
Jan 9, 2003
4,125
0
36
56
Vancouver
members.shaw.ca
RE: Conservative Party: C

See in 1972 the NDP worked with the liberal miniority, which is good as they can work together to do the job people elected them to do. But yet in 79 Clark could not work with anyone and tried to run government like he had a majority. Then was defeated. Then lost next election.

So basically it shows me the Cons can not work with anyone to run the government. If they could, they would bring down government (with support fron Bloc and NDP) go to the govenor general and make their case to form government (even though they have less seats) or a coalition government. That would save millions from having an election. It would never happen. But they did not even try. But the Harperites do not think, either.

But since they can not really work with any other party, as their policies are so far "out there".

Harper is just as incompetent as Clark. But I guess you can't teach old politicians new tricks.
 

The Philosopher

Nominee Member
Harper never formally announced that he would bring down the government until both the Bloc and the NDP were on side. You are construing the facts there. Harper said something along the lines of, "We will not actively persist to bring down the government." He hinted that he would bring down the government, but he wouldn't be the one to do it.

So both the Bloc and the NDP announced that they would file for a no-confidence vote to bring down the government. At this point Martin canceled the opposition days so that he could choose when to have the no-confidence vote instead of the opposition. It was at that point that Harper came out strongly pushing for the no-confidence vote, and not before it.

You are misconstruing facts and reconstructing history to where it is useful to you.
 

Reverend Blair

Council Member
Apr 3, 2004
1,238
1
38
Winnipeg
RE: Conservative Party: C

Wow...what wacky alternative serve=ice do you get your news from?

We had the big speech night on a Thursday. A couple of days after that Harper gave a speech to the party faithful saying he would bring the government down. A couple of days after that the NDP budget amendments were accepted by the Liberals.
 

no1important

Time Out
Jan 9, 2003
4,125
0
36
56
Vancouver
members.shaw.ca
RE: Conservative Party: C

You are misconstruing facts and reconstructing history to where it is useful to you.

No I am not. I was also pointing out what the tories could do if they had anyone with brains in that party.

Harper has been talking about bringing government down for quite a while. He did have his chance and it failed.

It is a fact the NDP in 72 (and now) worked with Liberal miniority and that in 79 Clark could not get anyone to work with him. The consevatives policies are so far right wing they do not come close to any other parties.