Week Four


This is the week that was. Week One of the campaign was recounted here. Week Two was recounted here. Week Three was recounted here.

Michael Ignatieff explained how democracy works. Stephen Harper refused to agree and rejected the question of compromise. Ned Franks clarified the situation. Brad Wall felt it necessary to impart his own wisdom. John Duffy wondered if Mr. Harper remembered Mackenzie King.

Mr. Ignatieff addressed Edmonton and heard the concerns of British Columbians. Mr. Harper spoke to the faithful in Campbell River.

Jack Layton talked to Peter Mansbridge. Michael Ignatieff talked to Nardwuar and chatted with me. And then took to the Easter airwaves.

Brad Trost claimed the Harper government had defunded Planned Parenthood. Bev Oda said Planned Parenthood was welcome to apply for funding. Mr. Trost insisted that what he’d said was correct. There was debate over the precise condition of Mr. Layton’s hip and Mr. Harper’s exact feelings for public health care. Mr. Harper fretted about national unity. The CAW and the Conservative campaign focused their respective efforts. Various Liberals were prank called. The NDP quibbled with the latest Conservative ad. And Conservatives shouted down a reporter’s question.

Ads, ads, adsadsads and more ads.

Mr. Ignatieff promised a first ministers’ meeting on health care and a freshwater strategy.

Mr. Layton promised a fine for unduly absent MPs.

Four of the five parties explained their policies on the north and the environment.

Sarah Millar considered the student vote. Michael Veall questioned sudden polling changes. And economists wondered about the Conservative side’s promised cuts. And Susan Delacourt heard a profound question in Kitchener.


Week Four

  1. …and many of us have already voted in the advance polls…

    • For the wrong candidate, many of us would argue. How's the privatized nuclear management going, by the way?

      TEPCO = Tell Everyone Privatization Creates Oblivion

      You guys make me shiver, involuntarily. Get a reality check.

      • I won't argue that everything TEPCO did at Fukushima was perfect but given the fact it was Japan's oldest reactor and survived a magnitude 9 earthquake, it says good things about the safety of nuclear power. The problem was the way the company handled the subsequent earthquake. in which the company took too long to decide what to do. That has nothing to do with whether the company was private or not. Only a socialist would argue that a government corporation would have reacted differently.

  2. Coyne, via Twitter, about Twitter, but certainly applicable to these forums we hang out in as well:

    To the people who see any criticism of Harper as confirmation that nothing he has ever done is of any worth…

    And to the people, just as vigilant, who see any criticism of Harper as confirmation of bias against him…

    I have only one question for you both: what is it like to live in your binary, on-off, up-down, black–white, all-or-nothing world?

    Is it not possible to imagine that all of these people – Harper, Ignatieff, Layton etc – are a mixture of strengths & weaknesses?

    The same with past PMs: Chretien, Mulroney, Trudeau. They all had great achievements, and all had terrible failures to their name.

    Yet you'd never get partisans of any stripe – which would appear to be most of the people on twitter – to admit that of any of them.

    It's just BIZARRE. For the 1st time in the whole history of the human race, everyone has the chance to publish their own point of view…

    For the 1st time, they don't have to just be passive receptors of others' views, but can think and speak for themselves. And what is…

    … the first thing that most of them do? Spout the nearest party line, in the most doctrinaire, unthinking, OBEDIENT way. What a waste.

    • I agree with all of this, to a word. How many of us are there left in Canada, who think like this? Ten? Twelve?

      • 13

        • 14

  3. "Brad Trost claimed the Harper government had defunded Planned Parenthood. Bev Oda said Planned Parenthood was welcome to apply for funding. Mr. Trost insisted that what he'd said was correct. "

    "…welcome to apply for funding." Oldest trick in the book.

  4. And harper attended an evangelical church in B.C. Sunday where the pastor asked for God to "erect a wall around harper and his wife to protect them from evil". This is beginning to sound more and more like an American election with religion co-mingling with poitics. What the H E L L is going on?

    Does harper think he is some version of the Second Coming?

    • The bible encourages prayers for those in leadership positions, so that they may make wise decisions, be humble, respectful of the people, etc. It’s not limited to Harper. Most churches pray for political leaders in general. This pastor is making a prayer specific for Harper. Accusations of ‘second coming’ are a little over the top.

      • The bible? Which version? There are so many now. They can pray whatever they want, but when they seem to endorse a candidate WHILE HE IS THERE to the exclusion of ALL candidates, then it sounds PARTISAN and very, very much like American politics. Sorry but it has no place in an election. AFTER the election, fine.

        • Endangers their tax status too.

          I agree…no place for this in Canada.

          • Emily,
            Was Mr. Iggy in Mississauga last night at the Ice Dogs game?

          • Where were you? Mister baiting?

  5. hate to say it but…I told You! We aint seen nothin yet if Harper gets a majority.

    • A-men. A-women. A-hermaphrodites. Oh, and A-liens too!

  6. Is anyone else wondering if the Canucks collapse, if completed on Tuesday, might affect voting behaviour in Vancouver, and how? There are some tight races in the region that are crucial to the outcome? Will they take their anger out on incumbents? Will they cling to the familiar? Just not vote at all since what does it matter, life is full of despair and hopelessness regardless of who runs the country? Thoughts?

    • the latter…total despair and hopelessness. Though some of us would argue that Canuck fans ought to just always be in a state of despair and hopelessness, presidents trophy or not.

  7. I predict in one week there will be much teeth nashing and weeping by Aaron and his faithful.

    How his mighty Liberals have fallen.

    • You think that way because you see it all as a game, and you assume others do as well.

      • I see it like that because of the constant braying on this Blog by Aaron and all his Liberal shills, you being the prime example.

        I will truly enjoy the ever increasing level of vitriol that will follow the Liberal collapse. So, by all means, crack up your crazy to all new heights of rage, I love to laugh! Never forget, 60% of Canadians don't want Harper!

        Hurray for Jack and his manly moustache!

        • No, you see it that way because you're a partisan game-player.

          The future of the country doesn't matter to you…..you simply want your team to win this game.

          I don't know what party Aaron supports, if any….and neither do you.

          I'm not a member of any party….haven't been for years since I left the Reform/CA

          • I'm not a member of any party either, and because I care about the future of our country I have decided to throw my support behind Harper.

            And it takes some mighty big blinders to read Wherry's blog regularly and not know where his sympathies lay.

            For example: do you really expect that the hockey booing incident would have been passed over by Wherry if it had happened to Harper. Before answering, please take a deep breath and just put your knee jerk reaction to the side, and try to think clearly about the hypothetical for a moment.

          • "And it takes some mighty big blinders to read Wherry's blog regularly and not know where his sympathies lay."

            Personally I think it takes a mighty thick blindfold to comment about Wherry's bias without actually reading his comments in full. If you're a Harper sympathizer, you'll see anything that sheds some light into his wrong doings as Liberal bias. As the leader of the last Government, Harper is naturally subject to more scrutiny and observations because he's the one with a record, while journalists can only comment on the opposition's voting record (or lack thereof in the case of Ignatieff (yes, Wherry did post something about that too)).

            Would you really rather the journalists ignore the Election fraud, the Cadman Bribe, the Pension Fund Fiasco, the G8 pork barrel, the international embarrassment at the UN, the revolving door of oil lobbyists, the premature election of 2008, two prorogations of parliament, MPs with criminal records, untendered spending of 30 billion $… instead of getting to bottom of every story?

            Or, would you rather be blissfully unaware of how your Government spends your money in order to support someone who's spin caters to your wants?

            Come off it. Wherry reports. End of.

          • Quelle coincidence — concern for the future of Canada is why I wasn't worried when Harper was elected the first time, but will take great satisfaction in voting against him today.

            What I take no satisfaction in is knowing he'll likely win again, and possibly even get his majority, which according the the example set by the past few years will only accelerate the slide of Canada's international reputation from respected, if boring to accidental comedy by the Not Ready For Prime-Time Players.

            I've never worked abroad, but if the opportunity presented itself in the near-future I would leap at it, just to get out of the depression blast radius for the next few years.

        • I guess it should be expected that the fall of our great economic regime should be laughing matter for someone who finds humour in a larger than normal hat.

  8. Ebb and Flow – Ebb and Flow, buddy. Much like the decimation of the Cons thanks to Mulroney. Like nasty phoenixes, these things keep crawling back, whatever party they profess to belong to.

Sign in to comment.