Election 2009

[nfitz]

Can either the NDP or Liberals really use deficits as an election issue with any effectiveness?

I don't see why the Liberals can't. Their record under Chretien and Martin was stellar. It's unrealistic that there wouldn't have been a deficit under any leader; but I have a hard time thinking Paul Martin would have had a $55-billion deficit if he was currently finance minister. The stimulus program is about $2-billion this fiscal year.

Certainly highlighting the Tories generous tax credits for business might play well.

 

[GraphicMatt]

Link here.
Love the irony of the NDP criticising the Cons for betraying their own principles for running deficits while pushing for more deficit spending themselves when the recession hit last fall. Gotta love politics.

Can either the NDP or Liberals really use deficits as an election issue with any effectiveness?

The Liberals probably can, given their fiscal track record when in power. But then that was a long time ago. And did the Paul Martin camp of the Liberal Party become the Ignatieff camp? There's so many warring factions in the LPC that it's hard to keep track.

Regardless, though, the key is not so much to spin the deficit as a very terrible thing. Rather, point out that the CPC went from claiming that there would be no recession at all to continuously underestimating the size of the deficit again and again. That doesn't begin to resemble good fiscal leadership.

http://www.threehundredeight.blogspot.com/ is a good site for poll tracking, by the way. An obvious rip on the FiveThirtyEight concept in the US, but still interesting. Current projection is a weakened Conservative Minority.

Other thoughts:

- The CPC nuked a lot of the support they had in Quebec with the arts cuts and the separatist stuff during the Coalition arguments last Christmas. They'll lose a bunch of the 10 seats they hold in that province.

- Similarly, since a lot of the 905 ridings that flipped Conservative were so close last time, expect a lot of campaigning there. I think a lot of voters were swayed by a combination of Dion seeming weak and fear of the 'Carbon Tax' stuff. The Liberals will gain in Ontario.

- Harper's going to hammer the NDP more than he normally would, referring to them as 'socialists' constantly and making them seem scary. The reason? Polling is indicating that seat counts might make a Liberal + NDP coalition possible and he needs to make that idea deeply unpopular with voters.

- Left-learning people should continue to make themselves aware of Elizabeth May's position on abortion and other social issues before they vote for the Green Party

- I don't think the Conservatives will ever formally split again, but I do think things will get nasty for them if Harper starts losing elections. There is no obvious successor to the leadership - it's either someone from the old Ontario PC party like Clement, Prentice or (impossibly) Flaherty or someone from the West. A contest for the leadership between those two camps would be worse than the Rae v. Ignatieff stuff was for the Liberal party.

 

[lordmandeep]

people need to stop voting for the NDP, its a loss cause..

 

[SimonP]

people need to stop voting for the NDP, its a loss cause..

If we do get a coalition next time, a couple extra NDP seats could make a tremendous difference.

 

[nfitz]

We've had about 8 minority governments in the last 50 years or so, without a single coalition ... seems unlikely there would be one now.

And now we have day 3 of Harper's unusual campaign. Go to Toronto and announce hundreds of $ millions of projects, despite Toronto breaking the rules for the stimulus funding. Well it might be popular in Toronto, it's hard to imagine him winning a 416 seat, not even being close last time. And surely it won't do him any favours outside of 416!

So here's the recap:
Day 1 - Fire and Brimstone
Day 2 - Bigger deficit
Day 3 - $$$ for Toronto

Will this continue on the weekend, or does he need more than one day of rest?

 

[ShonTron]

And now we have day 3 of Harper's unusual campaign. Go to Toronto and announce hundreds of $ millions of projects, despite Toronto breaking the rules for the stimulus funding. Well it might be popular in Toronto, it's hard to imagine him winning a 416 seat, not even being close last time. And surely it won't do him any favours outside of 416!

There are a few ridings the Cons are targeting in the 416 - think Etobicoke. They did better than they should have in my riding, York Centre (represented by Ken Dryden) partly because of Liberals staying home (also resulted in the gains in West-Central Ontario) and courting the pro-Israel crowd. We've got lots of "10-percenter" mailings from MPs in Alberta and Saskatchewan bashing Iggy.

 

[Blovertis]

I don't think it's possible anymore for the Liberals to win a majority. Once they come to terms with this reality (i.e., election night), cutting a coalition deal with the NDP will suddenly seem very attractive.

I see that Iggy is disavowing that very notion in a press conference this morning. But I note that Dion also ruled out the idea of a coalition in the run-up to the last election.

 

[Tewder]

If only Toronto would not give up its vote so easily and so predictably. Make the parties pay for it with lots of money! That is the better way.

I don't buy a lot of the political propaganda and partisan crap that gets spread around. A minority Conservative government is just fine, and a minority liberal government would probably be just fine too. At the end of the day, however, an election call would purely be a power grab by the liberals and this is how it will play to the majority of moderate centrist Canadians. Let the conservatives govern with the minority that they won, twice. We don't need the expense of yet another election just to replace one minority with another especially as we are coming out of an economic downturn. Shame on the NDP/Liberal hypocrits who advocate wasting this money at this time. There are no major election issues at stake and Canada has fared remarkably well in the latest global recession. This context does not exactly justify election talk and Iggy comes off looking like the out-of-touch, disgruntled and spoiled, power-hungry prince without a throne he is painted to be by the Conservative spin machine. He's playing into their hands.

What's more is we at least risk a conservative majority by playing these games, and that probably wouldn't be a great thing.

 

[kEiThZ]

^ Well put. That view might not be popular on UT but it certainly seems more reflective of how the rest of canada feels in my most humble opinion. That the Conservatives aren't popular should not be mistaken for unpopularity or Liberal popularity.

Unfortunately for Iggy though, he has to do it now before the economic recovery really takes off and while the government is knee deep in deficits. There will not be as opportune a moment as this for the Liberals any time in the future.....which is exactly why it's hard to say they aren't being opportunistic (though personally, I don't think ambition is necessarily a bad thing).

 

[afransen]

A conservative majority is pretty unlikely. That's why I'm puzzled by the 'majority or bust' rhetoric from Harper. He's essentially saying: we will only 'win' if we get a majority, a minority means the other three can/will govern. Seems like a dangerous message if he wants to be PM in a couple months.

 

[lordmandeep]

Really the NDP and the Bloc will not help the Liberals with an election, they will lose seats.


Why would they...

The only way is Harper goes crazy, dissolves Parliament and then says bring it on!!!!

I am telling you the Liberals should become conservatives like they were in the early 1990's.

This will really screw over things in Ottawa...

 

[Jonny5]

If we keep electing minority governments, I think people will become more open to proportional representation and coalitions.

It seems that "instability of minority governments" and "frequent elections" is the primary talking point bantied about by people who are told think PR is bad. While "it's undemocratic" is the talking point for the anti-coalition folk (who are really just pro whoever is in power at the moment).

If we wind up with some kind of calcified state of dysfunction in the house (which IMO will begin if there is another close minorty for either party), PR & Coalitions will be the ONLY way to sort out governance in Canada, other than radical change, like giving the Senate and GG real power.

 

[Whoaccio]

The deficit most likely wont be an issue. Maybe I am overestimating the electorate, but the Liberal's have spent the last budget season arguing that the government wasn't spending enough, and I'm sure most people could see that spending more, all things being equal, would raise the deficit. Especially if Iggy runs on "nation building" projects (like HSR, or upgraded energy grids), people will be able to see that such substantial spending pledges would increase the deficit.

I am doubting whether or not there will be an election. What the hell is the point? The Liberal's look like they are just trying to force an election before any possible economic recovery. They have no noticeable disagreement with the Tories, at all. What will they run an election on, how the budget they "approved" was insufficient? Unlikely. Besides, if the Liberal brain trust was determined to force a fall election, wouldn't Liberals have done some kind of campaigning over the summer? Why would Iggy disappear for two or three months, only to come back and force an election?

 

[CodeMonkey]

The deficit most likely wont be an issue. Maybe I am overestimating the electorate, but the Liberal's have spent the last budget season arguing that the government wasn't spending enough, and I'm sure most people could see that spending more, all things being equal, would raise the deficit. Especially if Iggy runs on "nation building" projects (like HSR, or upgraded energy grids), people will be able to see that such substantial spending pledges would increase the deficit.

I am doubting whether or not there will be an election. What the hell is the point? The Liberal's look like they are just trying to force an election before any possible economic recovery. They have no noticeable disagreement with the Tories, at all. What will they run an election on, how the budget they "approved" was insufficient? Unlikely. Besides, if the Liberal brain trust was determined to force a fall election, wouldn't Liberals have done some kind of campaigning over the summer? Why would Iggy disappear for two or three months, only to come back and force an election?

The question is what made Liberals feel confidant to public say "we can win, if have a election now"? Do they have bigger financial backers compared to the Conservatives this time around? Or is there something they know that we don't know yet? We can always say they want power. But, that's not a justfible reason on it's own unless they have something they can go after the Conservatives with.

 

[waterloowarrior]

The electoral system is the problem for Harper in 416. The Conservatives are fairly strong in a bunch of ridings and would get some seats under some kind of proportional system.

The Conservatives are more popular than the NDP in the City of Toronto. About 26% of Toronto voters chose the Conservatives in 2008, but they got 0% of the 23 seats. The NDP got around 19% of the vote but only 2 seats (9%), so they are also underrepresented.


In Total 53% of people in Toronto voted against the Liberals and only 47% for the Liberals, but the Liberals got 91% of the seats in Toronto.