Poll: Harper is losing ground

[slowpoke]

Once this session of parliament ended, I thought Harper and Dion would be making the rounds trying to stay in the public eye and maybe round out their support. But Dion has been virtually invisible so Harper has been getting all the attention with nobody around to spoil it for him. Yet, even with these near-ideal conditions, Harper is still sinking in the polls. The honeymoon is over, apparently, because Dion's support has remained steady - even though he's missing and unaccounted for. Meanwhile, Harper has been gallivanting around in Colombia and the Caribbean, getting plenty of ink on the world stage but nobody back home seems to give a shit.

Harper's recent follies are making him look a lot more ordinary than he did when everyone was still pissed at the Libs over sponsorship. Harper and his CPOC have lost points over their juvenile equalization squabbles, heavy casualties in Aghanistan, idiotic handling of the Afghan detainee controversy, broken promises about taxing income trusts and buying a fleet of armed icebreakers, pandering to Quebec, lavish and flagrantly political budget, environmental flip flops / distortions, Harper's combative style in the house, attack ad mentality and so on. Also the environment now ranks ahead of both health care and government corruption so Harper needs some new tunes in his songbook. Now that Harper has worn out his "blame the Liberals" routine, he seems to have lost his momentum and sense of direction. It's almost like Harper is such a political pit bull that he needs a fight more than he needs an issue to fight for.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20070719.poll18/BNStory/National/home

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20070719.poll-issues19/BNStory/National

 

[lookingforitallthetime]

Just who is this Dion guy you're referring to?

 

[slowpoke]

Just who is this Dion guy you're referring to?

Can I get back to you on that one? Like maybe later when I have a clue!!

 

[lookingforitallthetime]

Can I get back to you on that one? Like maybe later when I have a clue!!

He will only show his true colours if he gains power. I recommend you join me in the effort to ensure this never happens.

 

[TQM]

Even with those numbers, you'll see

little change in the numbers in parliament.

Tory vote is much more concentrated than Liberal vote. And the Liberals, more than the Tories, will see vote move to the Greens (if that poll is to be believed, the really only news there is the breakthrough into legitimacy of the Green Party).

 

[slowpoke]

He will only show his true colours if he gains power. I recommend you join me in the effort to ensure this never happens.

I'd be happy if Dion had some colours! Right now he's got nothing but a strong accent. But Harper isn't doing it for me either nor does he have much in the way of colour. Dion has been a public servant long enough that it is highly unlikely that he has a hidden dark side that would emerge the moment he gained power. I just want him to address the issues so I can see what he's planning to do. In the next election, he will be forced to unveil his platform so we will eventually see WTF he intends to do.

I'm still hoping that Dion's strategy is to let Harper have centre stage for a while so we can all get to see those hairy warts and become uncomfortably familiar with his halitosis etc. Meanwhile Dion is busy taking a crash ESL course somewhere and will soon emerge, perfectly fluent in both languages. Elizabeth May will be eating out of his one hand and the other will be waving a long list of hot button issues for which he has ingenious solutions. We all need our dreams....

 

[LateComer]

Why the long face?

Just who is this Dion guy you're referring to?

Didn't he sing that Titanic song

 

[chubbs]

None of this means anything until the night of the election.

 

[enduser1]

1) heavy casualties in Aghanistan,
2) broken promises about taxing income trusts,
3) pandering to Quebec

Those are your three reasons right there:

He can't seem to understand that a majority of Canadians are opposed to Afghanistan. Furthermore pulling out of Afghanistan would not lose him a single Conservative vote but it would gain him "Red Tory" votes and undecideds.

Income Trusts was a moronic move because it cost him money from rich Conservative party backers

Quebecer's are tired of being pandered to so he gains nothing there and loses Conservative support in the rest of Canada.

EU

 

[clubber]

Harper is either wearing a lot of tight clothes, or he is getting fat? He seems to be putting on the pounds lately.

 

[red]

on top of everything else he has done- he has lost part of canada?wtf?

 

[slowpoke]

Those are your three reasons right there:

He can't seem to understand that a majority of Canadians are opposed to Afghanistan. Furthermore pulling out of Afghanistan would not lose him a single Conservative vote but it would gain him "Red Tory" votes and undecideds.

Income Trusts was a moronic move because it cost him money from rich Conservative party backers

Quebecer's are tired of being pandered to so he gains nothing there and loses Conservative support in the rest of Canada.

EU

I'd be only too happy to gloat over Harper's poor strategies but I think I'll wait to see if Dion has any better ideas. My big question about Dion is whether he's intentionally playing political hard-to-get right now or is he just sleeping at the switch? If Harper can alienate the voters all by himself, Dion may be doing the right thing by letting Harper do his thing for a while. But, sooner or later, Dion is going to have to come out and show us something.

 

[red]

who cares? is there any substantive difference in their policies? I mean real differences and not nuances?

 

[TQM]

red, red, red,

Is there anything substantively different in their policies?

I think the bigger question is is there anything substantially the same?

a) The Liberals continue to support a national daycare program. Harper maliciously (in my opinion, anyway) has attempted to dismantle it, by redirecting the funds to households rather than daycare (secret message: women should be made to feel as comfortable as possible in staying in the home).

b) Harper has given us a free vote (which he lost) on gay marriage.

c) Harper has redesigned provincial transfer payments, impacting at some point, the Atlantic provinces, particularly Newfoundland.

d) Kyoto.

Just off the top of my head.

 

[slowpoke]

who cares? is there any substantive difference in their policies? I mean real differences and not nuances?

There could be all kinds of differences but we won't know what they are until Dion comes out of hiding and takes a position on something (other than Kyoto). He announced the Liberal plan for meeting our Kyoto targets in mid March but that was one of the last clues he's given us about his policies. Surely he's thought of something since then!

 

[enduser1]

I'd be only too happy to gloat over Harper's poor strategies but I think I'll wait to see if Dion has any better ideas. My big question about Dion is whether he's intentionally playing political hard-to-get right now or is he just sleeping at the switch? If Harper can alienate the voters all by himself, Dion may be doing the right thing by letting Harper do his thing for a while. But, sooner or later, Dion is going to have to come out and show us something.

Very Fair comments all.

Also, I agree with the Kyoto comments. I am opposed to Kyoto, which would make me a Conservative. But Harper by refusing to confront the problem is leaving it there for the Liberals to exploit.

Harper is going to be on the political ropes on this one. Interestingly in Australia the government scrapped Kyoto to the howls of the left but ultimately what is going to cost them is Iraq and Afghanistan.

I bet if Harper had done nothing on Kyoto but blustered saying that "Canada is exceeding its Koyoto targets" he would be farther ahead than he his with his half cocked "Green Initiative". What is really hilarious is in Germany the government realized that Germany is not going to meet it's Kyoto targets, so what they did was they announced that the Kyoto targets were not enough and they would bring in ever tougher targets, which presumably they will fail to meet in even more spectacular fashion! LOL

EU

 

[lookingforitallthetime]

I'd be only too happy to gloat over Harper's poor strategies but I think I'll wait to see if Dion has any better ideas. My big question about Dion is whether he's intentionally playing political hard-to-get right now or is he just sleeping at the switch? If Harper can alienate the voters all by himself, Dion may be doing the right thing by letting Harper do his thing for a while. But, sooner or later, Dion is going to have to come out and show us something.

Dion is a lightweight.

If the Liberal strategy is to hide him while waiting for Harper to screw up (more), it only confirms he's a lightweight and, most probably, a coward.

Dion doesn't have any ideas. He's another example of the Bob Rae complex of not expecting to win.

 

[TQM]

looking,

That's really silly.

I suppose he should spill out his entire platform now, just to meet your challenge.

In what way is he a lightweight compared to any other current leader of any party? How many past leaders were heavyweights - off the top of your head?

 

[lookingforitallthetime]

That's really silly.

I'm curious, is there any topic in which you don't consider yourself an expert?

I suppose he should spill out his entire platform now, just to meet your challenge.

A real leader doesn't criticize existing policies without offering an alternative. I hope all Canadians, not just me, would throw down this challenge.

How many past leaders were heavyweights - off the top of your head?

Off the top of my head:

Macdonald
Harris
King
Pearson
Trudeau
Mulroney

 

[TQM]

First,

How was Mulroney not in every sense of the word, a "lightweight"? What were his credentials before he took office?

Unless you are older than I'm guessing, the only guy who makes your list that was in office when you were alive is Trudeau - right? That says after some 40 years, only 1 guy (if you want me to give you Mulroney 2 - but I won't) who was more of a heavyweight. (I actually have some personal respect for both Stanfield and Lewis too, but you failed to mention either.)

Second, in the history of Canadian politics how many times has a leader of a political party spelt out his election platform prior to the election and gone on to become Prime Minister?

Third - the only heavyweight you've got that we agree on that you were alive for - Trudeau - is infamous for regaining power against Joe Clark through an election where he actually refused to put forward any policy whatsoever.

Lastly - my expertise? I consider myself miles wide, but inches deep. The funny thing is that being inches deep seems to be remarkably deep in these waters.

Seriously - if you want to criticize Dion, there is much to criticize him for. But to call someone with such a strong academic background, who served ably as a Cabinet Minister, and who seems to be scrupulously honest (for a change, eh?) as a "lightweight", just seems silly.

Criticize him for waffling on something. Criticize him for an appointment. Criticize him for supporting kyoto or gay marriage or whatever - but don't criticize him for the one thing he ain't.