Vote has become referendum on Harper

mentalfloss

Prickly Curmudgeon Smiter
Jun 28, 2010
39,778
454
83
Vote has become referendum on Harper

Who says elections are a nuisance? Stephen Harper and the media. The latter also parroted his pronouncement that this campaign was “unnecessary,” being the fifth since 2000. It’s a waste of money. It’s boring, to boot.

Canadians have proven them wrong, being fully engaged from the first week to the last, turning up in record numbers to the advance polls and dragging Harper onto a knife’s edge for Monday night.

Pooh-poohing politicians used to be the staple of hotline radio. But now it’s most media’s. Stripped of the resources for in-depth coverage and analysis, they feed off the contemporary culture of trivialization and Oprah-ization of democracy.

Thus we are told that it must be Jack Layton’s moustache or his cane that brushed aside Harper’s and Michael Ignatieff’s best laid plans. Or perhaps it was Harper not deigning to look the three opposition leaders in the eye in the televised leaders’ debate.

Speaking of which, how did you feel watching it? About 1,000 Canadians told a pollster that they were irritated, annoyed. Conclusion: “Canadians find politics ‘off-putting.’” Well, we all find all sorts of things “off-putting” every day. But that doesn’t make us infantile and incapable of sober second thought, especially about elections.

Stoking cynicism was Harper’s strategy. The more disengaged the voters and the smaller the turnout, the higher the chances of his hard-core constituency catapulting him into a majority. He was going to consolidate his base and sprinkle it with sectoral politics — Jewish Canadians here, Sikhs there and some Chinese in a handful of ridings.

The tactics worked for a while. It let him separate himself from the other three “bickering politicians.” They were getting in the way of his forming a “stable” government. Democracy equalled instability. That’s what Hosni Mubarak used to say as well.

Harper also delegitimized possible post-election arrangements between political parties in case no party won a majority and the one with the most MPs failed to get the confidence of the House of Commons.

Standard parliamentary practice, that. But Harper made it sound like a coup being hatched by the opposition.

Including even the Bloc Québécois in a parliamentary partnership would not be all that scandalous, says eminent historian Desmond Morton of McGill University. “The separatists are Canadian citizens and Canadian voters. They have a right to have their voice heard in Parliament. We hear it in Quebec all the time, so it had better be heard in Ottawa and English Canada.”

But the “Harper-ization of our minds” (in the memorable phrase of John Meisel of Queen’s University) has been such that it tripped up even Ignatieff, as he tried to run as far as he could from the very notion of a coalition.

However, Canadians quickly caught on to Harper’s politics of division, his contempt of Parliament, his bully tactics (symbolized by students being thrown out of Tory rallies), abuse of power and misuse of the treasury in showering tens of millions of dollars on ridings and groups with the sole purpose of advancing the partisan Conservative cause.

Ordinary citizens have turned the election into a referendum on Harper — specifically, on a Harper majority. Their answer to his fanning the fears of “reckless coalition” post-election was to forge one at the grassroots level, now.

Thus such groups as Project Democracy and Catch 22 are advocating strategic voting for the two-thirds of voters who do not support Harper. On their websites (projectdemocracy.ca and catch22campaign.ca), both identify candidates in ridings most likely to beat the Conservative standard-bearer. (Catch 22 is named after the number of days lost in 2008-09 when Harper prorogued Parliament).

There have been Vote Mobs on university campuses and social media activists tweeting and making videos, such as Go Ethnics Go!?!?, on YouTube, mocking the Harper strategy of wooing “ethnic” and “very ethnic” ridings.

Also taking to YouTube is a revered senior citizen, Peter Russell, constitutional expert at the University of Toronto. In his video and in a statement to Project Democracy, he says he has “never been more worried in my lifetime” than at the “scary” prospect of a Conservative majority. “I really tremble” that if Harper were to win a majority, “it’d be an indication that parliamentary crime pays.”

Siddiqui: Vote has become referendum on Harper - thestar.com
 

CDNBear

Custom Troll
Sep 24, 2006
43,839
207
63
Ontario
I love the comparison to Mubarack!!!


 

mentalfloss

Prickly Curmudgeon Smiter
Jun 28, 2010
39,778
454
83
No, because I don't believe that Harper = Mumbarak.

So, you're wrong again.

I do, however, realize the many failings of parliament that have been objectively outlined in that article.
 

SLM

The Velvet Hammer
Mar 5, 2011
29,151
3
36
London, Ontario
When it comes right down to it, is it really all that different from other elections? Do we not have a tendancy to vote someone out as opposed to vote someone in? Is that not "the Canadian way"?

Is this sudden surge towards the NDP really about heading towards Layton or is it about heading away from Harper?
 

CDNBear

Custom Troll
Sep 24, 2006
43,839
207
63
Ontario
No, because I don't believe that Harper = Mumbarak.
Yes, which is why you highlighted it, I'm sure.

So, you're wrong again.
I doubt it, given your continuous silly insinuations about 'media control'.

I do, however, realize the many failings of parliament that have been objectively outlined in that article.
Yes, and all those failings are the fault of Harper, according to you and your spin. There's little objectivity in that article. But I'm not surprised you didn't notice. Since you are voting NDP, as I predicted long, long ago.
 

mentalfloss

Prickly Curmudgeon Smiter
Jun 28, 2010
39,778
454
83
Yes, which is why you highlighted it, I'm sure.

No, I highlighted it because I knew it would drive you batty. And you delivered, lol

But don't let that take the spotlight when there are some legitimate critiques in that article.
 

Jack_Of_Spade

Nominee Member
Mar 31, 2011
87
0
6
Vote has become referendum on Harper

Who says elections are a nuisance? Stephen Harper and the media. The latter also parroted his pronouncement that this campaign was “unnecessary,” being the fifth since 2000. It’s a waste of money. It’s boring, to boot.

Canadians have proven them wrong, being fully engaged from the first week to the last, turning up in record numbers to the advance polls and dragging Harper onto a knife’s edge for Monday night.

Pooh-poohing politicians used to be the staple of hotline radio. But now it’s most media’s. Stripped of the resources for in-depth coverage and analysis, they feed off the contemporary culture of trivialization and Oprah-ization of democracy.

Thus we are told that it must be Jack Layton’s moustache or his cane that brushed aside Harper’s and Michael Ignatieff’s best laid plans. Or perhaps it was Harper not deigning to look the three opposition leaders in the eye in the televised leaders’ debate.

Speaking of which, how did you feel watching it? About 1,000 Canadians told a pollster that they were irritated, annoyed. Conclusion: “Canadians find politics ‘off-putting.’” Well, we all find all sorts of things “off-putting” every day. But that doesn’t make us infantile and incapable of sober second thought, especially about elections.

Stoking cynicism was Harper’s strategy. The more disengaged the voters and the smaller the turnout, the higher the chances of his hard-core constituency catapulting him into a majority. He was going to consolidate his base and sprinkle it with sectoral politics — Jewish Canadians here, Sikhs there and some Chinese in a handful of ridings.

The tactics worked for a while. It let him separate himself from the other three “bickering politicians.” They were getting in the way of his forming a “stable” government. Democracy equalled instability. That’s what Hosni Mubarak used to say as well.

Harper also delegitimized possible post-election arrangements between political parties in case no party won a majority and the one with the most MPs failed to get the confidence of the House of Commons.

Standard parliamentary practice, that. But Harper made it sound like a coup being hatched by the opposition.

Including even the Bloc Québécois in a parliamentary partnership would not be all that scandalous, says eminent historian Desmond Morton of McGill University. “The separatists are Canadian citizens and Canadian voters. They have a right to have their voice heard in Parliament. We hear it in Quebec all the time, so it had better be heard in Ottawa and English Canada.”

But the “Harper-ization of our minds” (in the memorable phrase of John Meisel of Queen’s University) has been such that it tripped up even Ignatieff, as he tried to run as far as he could from the very notion of a coalition.

However, Canadians quickly caught on to Harper’s politics of division, his contempt of Parliament, his bully tactics (symbolized by students being thrown out of Tory rallies), abuse of power and misuse of the treasury in showering tens of millions of dollars on ridings and groups with the sole purpose of advancing the partisan Conservative cause.

Ordinary citizens have turned the election into a referendum on Harper — specifically, on a Harper majority. Their answer to his fanning the fears of “reckless coalition” post-election was to forge one at the grassroots level, now.

Thus such groups as Project Democracy and Catch 22 are advocating strategic voting for the two-thirds of voters who do not support Harper. On their websites (projectdemocracy.ca and catch22campaign.ca), both identify candidates in ridings most likely to beat the Conservative standard-bearer. (Catch 22 is named after the number of days lost in 2008-09 when Harper prorogued Parliament).

There have been Vote Mobs on university campuses and social media activists tweeting and making videos, such as Go Ethnics Go!?!?, on YouTube, mocking the Harper strategy of wooing “ethnic” and “very ethnic” ridings.

Also taking to YouTube is a revered senior citizen, Peter Russell, constitutional expert at the University of Toronto. In his video and in a statement to Project Democracy, he says he has “never been more worried in my lifetime” than at the “scary” prospect of a Conservative majority. “I really tremble” that if Harper were to win a majority, “it’d be an indication that parliamentary crime pays.”

Siddiqui: Vote has become referendum on Harper - thestar.com
j

Well said! I couln't have said it better myself! No realy ! I couldn't! Godd writing skills ! If you dont have your own political columb you should.
 

lone wolf

Grossly Underrated
Nov 25, 2006
32,493
210
63
In the bush near Sudbury
When it comes right down to it, is it really all that different from other elections? Do we not have a tendancy to vote someone out as opposed to vote someone in? Is that not "the Canadian way"?

Is this sudden surge towards the NDP really about heading towards Layton or is it about heading away from Harper?

I can only speak for myself. I don't care much for hiding behind colours. Ever since the vote got split and we got Free Trade - then the tax created to compensate for all the trade that got frittered away - Canadian politics as been a joke.

I won't not vote - if only because I so dearly love my right to bitch - so I go for the Rhinos or the Marijuana Party ... just so the Ol' Boys clubs can't claim my support. Who really likes being talked down to?

This time, it matters.
 

SLM

The Velvet Hammer
Mar 5, 2011
29,151
3
36
London, Ontario
I can only speak for myself. I don't care much for hiding behind colours. Ever since the vote got split and we got Free Trade - then the tax created to compensate for all the trade that got frittered away - Canadian politics as been a joke.

I won't not vote - if only because I so dearly love my right to bitch - so I go for the Rhinos or the Marijuana Party ... just so the Ol' Boys clubs can't claim my support. Who really likes being talked down to?

This time, it matters.
If that's really the turning point for the downward slide of Canadian Politics, that would go a long way to explaining my complete cynicism since I came of voting age and political awareness in the late 80's.

No political party has ever seemed better to me than the others, so the focus always seems to be on which one is the least bad as a choice. I've really not known any other experience.

Even on this forum, my perspective is to be that most (not all, but most)spend their time explaining what is wrong with the other guy, instead of what is right with their candidate of choice. Which, if you flip it around, says that their candidate is the best of the worst. What kind of choice is that really?
 

CDNBear

Custom Troll
Sep 24, 2006
43,839
207
63
Ontario
If that's really the turning point for the downward slide of Canadian Politics, that would go a long way to explaining my complete cynicism since I came of voting age and political awareness in the late 80's.

No political party has ever seemed better to me than the others, so the focus always seems to be on which one is the least bad as a choice. I've really not known any other experience.

Even on this forum, my perspective is to be that most (not all, but most)spend their time explaining what is wrong with the other guy, instead of what is right with their candidate of choice. Which, if you flip it around, says that their candidate is the best of the worst. What kind of choice is that really?
I couldn't say that any better if I tried.
 

mentalfloss

Prickly Curmudgeon Smiter
Jun 28, 2010
39,778
454
83
If that's really the turning point for the downward slide of Canadian Politics, that would go a long way to explaining my complete cynicism since I came of voting age and political awareness in the late 80's.

No political party has ever seemed better to me than the others, so the focus always seems to be on which one is the least bad as a choice. I've really not known any other experience.

Even on this forum, my perspective is to be that most (not all, but most)spend their time explaining what is wrong with the other guy, instead of what is right with their candidate of choice. Which, if you flip it around, says that their candidate is the best of the worst. What kind of choice is that really?

True, but it's definitely difficult for 30 million people to agree one platform in its entirety. The reality is that there will never be the perfect party in any political framework.

Ever.
 

CDNBear

Custom Troll
Sep 24, 2006
43,839
207
63
Ontario
True, but it's definitely difficult for 30 million people to agree one platform in its entirety. The reality is that there will never be the perfect party in any political framework.

Ever.
Finally, something objective and even more puzzling, something I agree 100% with you on.
 

wulfie68

Council Member
Mar 29, 2009
2,014
24
38
Calgary, AB
Even on this forum, my perspective is to be that most (not all, but most)spend their time explaining what is wrong with the other guy, instead of what is right with their candidate of choice. Which, if you flip it around, says that their candidate is the best of the worst. What kind of choice is that really?

Thats been the truth about Canadian politics since Clark and Trudeau were leaders, if not earlier (this was when I became politically aware). Unfortunately, in my opinion, many Canadians are more about style than substance, which is why Trudeau triumphed over Clark.