Yesterday's tomorrow -

Yesterday’s tomorrow

WELLS: We couldn’t have predicted today’s electoral scenario. Or could we?


In 2006 I wrote a book about Stephen Harper and Paul Martin. Here’s a paragraph from Page 316.

“I asked an associate of Harper’s what he hoped Canada might look like in a few years. The answer reflected Harper’s blend of strategy and policy. ‘Taxes will be down. Ideally André Boisclair will be a defeated leader in the election campaign and the PQ will be in some kind of internal turmoil. That’s an uncertainty at the moment, but that’s the play.’ In this post-Harper Canada, ‘criminals are spending minimum sentences in prison, and there is an organizationally strong, united Conservative Party; a divided, discredited, possibly bankrupt Liberal Party; and a resurgent NDP.'”


Yesterday’s tomorrow

  1. Pity he didn't take the Law of Unintended Consequences into account. LOL

    • time is a telling thing eh Emily, you are conspicuously absent tonight. I say this with the upmost disgust… LOL.

      • ??? I'm right here…you're on an old thread.

  2. Wow. That paragraph is so prescient, it's uncanny. It makes me wonder if Harper considered all the unintended consequences that might result from the fall of the LPC and the rise of the NDP, such as the possibility of a NDP-led minority government, which would have been almost unthinkable five years ago.

    • Harper was a Dipper plant from the beginning :)

    • It's called a cold reading, you twit.

  3. Still one of my favorite books. Wonder if there are any nuggets in Chantels "French Kiss" as well. Another gooder.

  4. "a divided, discredited, possibly bankrupt Liberal Party"

    I wonder how Harper forseen this?

    • 'Foresaw.' I wonder how Harper foresaw this.

  5. I am still undecided. How instrumental was Harper in destroying the Liberal party? And how much of their current morass is self-inflicted? They've opted for unelectable leaders twice. That tends to hurt your party regardless of what your enemies are doing.

    • Unelectable by what measure? Thats an honest question.

      I have no love for the Liberals, or their candidates, but meassured against their counterparts, what is 'unelectable' about them? The only real issue is that the Canadian voters are extremely shallow when it comes right down to it and allow their opinions and views to be easily shaped by others.

      On the issues Dion was actually competent, and his Green Shift was an intelligent plan. But the LPC had disgraceed themselves and he was personally uncharismatic, and not able to overcome the smear campaign against him and express his message to Canadians, who werent really interested in listening. The same thing which had happened to Harper himself, at the hands of the LP. Had the Liberals not disgraced themselves, whould the CPC ever gained traction? Unlikely.

      And now, with the lingering effects of the LPs demonizing of Harper, and the CPC's demonizing of Liberals, the NDP is on the rise. Canadians do not vote on issues, or take much stock in party platforms, but merely react to perceptions. Are Ignatieff/Dion good choices for a PM? No, but no less so than Mr. Layton, or Mr. Harper.

      • They didn't get elected, despite running against someone whom the majority of Canadians simply do not like. Yes, the same can be said for Paul Martin. But he had baggage saddling him. Do you seriously think Harper would have so easily dispatched with Frank McKenna or John Manley? Those guys are electable. Iggy and Dion are not. Iggy had the huge liability of not living here for 30 years. Yes, that's a Conservative talking point, but it's also accurate. Dion simply wasn't electable on any level. A decent chap who was far too hapless and bumbling – a kind of Joe Clark with an accent. Compare that to the polish of Layton. I'm not a Layton fan by any stretch, but I could sit down and have a beer with him. Not because of his polish, but because he comes across as a genuine, regular guy. Something tells me enduring a beer with Iggy or Dion would turn me off alcohol forever. You are correct. Voters don't vote on issues anymore, but on perceptions. Precisely why Iggy & Dion are unelectable.

        • I knew Layton was only bilingual — now you tell me he has Polish too?

        • Good post, although you are a little hard on Dion. I have a feeling one on one he was quite the witty guy. Nevertheless he was hapless. At the risk of repeating myself ad nauseum. When Manley walked out the door i had a nasty feeling in my gut that he knew something i didn't; like where the bomb was or that the house was coming down.
          Will the LPC get another last shot at getting it right? I hope so. I don't share Harper's view that this countries best interests lie in a polarized left right choice. One that will most likely break for him, again and again and again. Happily SH is no more prescient then any other human being for longer then two weeks at a time with any degree of predictability.

          • The LP is a permanent fixture of Canadian democracy, any suggestion of the party as a whole sliding off the political landscape is grossly premature. The brand is just too strong.

            At the present they are facing a wave of scandals, and backlash in their strongholds over provincial brands, while their rivals have wisely taken the opportunity to crowd the center. How long can that last though? We've have short memories if we are given the chance to actually forget, and the right and left wing party bases wont tolerate their parties shift forever.

            Although if the NDP continues its shift to center, we could see a united left in the future – though I would hate to see it.

          • So were the Progressive Conservatives. And the Social Credit.

          • "When Manley walked out the door i had a nasty feeling in my gut that he knew something i didn't; like where the bomb was or that the house was coming down."

            I had the same feeling about the CPC when Prentice took his leave.

            My own dream would include reasonable people with principled positions representing each of the parties and all viewpoints on the political spectrum. In my opinion, one by one, those very people have abandoned the field and left the game to the handlers, manipulators and professional opinion-shapers.

            IMO, ethics and principles have gone on the disabled list in the Canadian political game. Sadly, like Sid the Kid Crosby, they may never be back.

          • I share your take and your pessimism. Luckily i'm wrong alot.

          • If you think that's lucky, you're an optimistic pessimist, a position I suspect many Canadians share.

            Did we get the politicians we deserve, or do we deserve better politicians?

          • Boy you ask toughies…

            I think the answer is pretty much what Ghandi said: be the change you want to see in the world. We have to get involved more and take our politcs back from the professional cynics. I'm starting first thing next week. It's a big problem.

            I like to think of myself as what i once heard referred to as a Russian pessimist: that's an optimist with a lot of experience.

          • I like that. May your viewpoint gain traction.

          • Thx

            Sorry thumbed you down by mistake.

          • You just thumbed him down. And you think that's OK because you said "sorry". You are one cold, heartless monster. I feel a chill emanating from my screen right now.

          • Nah.That's just cuz the PMO has got the place wired.

          • Maybe the LPC should try and recruit Prentice.

          • He'd likely tell them to get stuffed. For the very same reasons Manley and McKenna no longer seem interested.

    • Yup. Ignatieff, whatever his positive attributes, was crippled by an Achilles' heel or two. I'm not sure if Rae or any of the other leadership candidates would have fared much better, though.

      The Liberals needed a charismatic saviour to rescue them from the broader social and historical forces at play, and I don't know if any of the contenders measured up to that high standard.

      • No they don't need a 'charismatic saviour' to rescue them, so stop pushing for Justin. LOL

        • I don't see Justin Trudeau as a charismatic saviour. He's a good-looking, pleasant guy with a legendary father, but I don't think he has what it takes to rescue the Liberal Party. Heck, I'm not even sure Justin will still be an MP after May 2.

          • Good…because the last thing they need is Justin

          • If John Manely were to run, I just might vote for him myself. He's a fiscal hawk, much moreso than Martin ever was. And he's got a stronger backbone than Martin had on his best day. He's got his head screwed on right on all levels. If the Liberals had been smart enough to draft him as their leader, they might be looking at a majority right now.

            Does anyone honestly believe Harper could succeed in vilifying and sullying Manely the way he did to Dion or Iggy? Not a chance. But of course, the Liberals had drifted so far to the left after Chretien retired that a centrist like Manley had no hope in hell of becoming leader.

            I think I just answered my own question. The Liberals definitely destroyed themselves. Harper was just the kid playing with matches nearby when the Liberals dosed themselves with gasoline.

          • Besides his history as a cabinet minister what do the current Liberal Party and John Manely have in common? He makes much more sense as a Conservative leadership prospect, again save for his history.

          • They have nothing in common. The Liberal Party has moved so far to the left they simply wouldn't be interested in a centrist like Manley for a leader.

          • You seem to be wishing for a Liberal Party that would "do" conservative, only better than Harper's faux-conservative CPC.

            I'd like to see a strong left-center party with a national presence. The nation deserves that option. Right now, the Liberals don't seem to have the fortitude to stake a claim on that terrain and mine it effectively. They are opportunistic shape-shifters without the conviction to develop and articulate coherent policy and stick to it for more than 15 minutes.

          • They are opportunistic shape-shifters without the conviction to develop and articulate coherent policy and stick to it for more than 15 minutes.

            You couldn't make it more succinct than that without creating an entirely new language. Bravo.

          • That's likely due to the fact they were mostly in power, not getting steam rollered on the opposition bench…so they tell me.

          • Perhaps all those years of being in power just made the libs intellectually lazy? They may have forgotten how to simply work hard. One thing i will say about Harper,he doesn't sit on his laurels and he appears to like working hard. The libs used to know about that sorts stuff. Too addicted to the damn short cut now. I'd welcome a period on the bench in opposition myself in a majority govt, if i thought Harper wouldn't destroy the best of my country – which he will – if given the chance. I don't buy he'll become nice Steve with the shackles off. Despite what Messrs Wells/Potter says.

          • "Perhaps all those years of being in power just made the libs intellectually lazy? They may have forgotten how to simply work hard."


          • NDP is a strong leftist national presence. As I said, Manley isn't conservative, he's centrist.

          • I'd say Manely is well right of many Conservative MPs, particularly on the free trade / integrationist front. In terms of the Canadian population at large he's clearly right of centre.

          • Any chance they could redraft Manley? [ he was my guy too – although i'm no fiscal hawk. He just fitted my idealzation of a liberal] Guess not after the Afghanistan thing and his new job. If the libs really are stuck in a leftist track[ which i don't accept yet] he probably wouldn't want to touch them with a ten foot barge pole.

          • He's too eager to make Canada the 51st state. I prefer leaders who want a sovereign Canada.

          • It takes more then one pov to make a big tent party Holly. Manley wouldn't represent the whole party.

          • Why not just say I like leaders who I feel share my views.

          • I think I made that pretty clear when I said I could vote for Manley myself. I also believe many others could vote for Manley, not all of them right wing. TimesArrow doesn't sound like a righty to me, yet he also prefers Manley. That's the whole point. He's right wing in some areas, "progressive" in others. He has broad-spectrum appeal.

      • Aren't Harper and Layton sort of proof that the Liberal's need the exact opposite of a "charismatic saviour"?

        You need a young guy you is willing to do all the hard and grungy work of building a politcal party from the ground up.

        • You nailed it. Layton is smooth, but he's workmanlike. Certainly not a charismatic saviour. Harper is no one's idea of saviour. But he won two minority elections, and probably a third.

      • No they don't. They need someone willing to do the hard work of building a national party. How about showing up everywhere and building a grass roots organization? That is what the NDP and CPC has done. They get money and volunteers.

  6. There's no crystal ball here folks, this was a deliberate plan-and-action on Harper's part. Goodness, they said it often enough!

    They just didn't think it through. LOL

    • The Libs are just innnocent bystanders.Poor Liberals – always some one else to blame

      • We have now had years of Con attack ads shredding the character, the morals, the motives and even the 'Canadianess' of 3 Liberal leaders….but somehow Cons are innocent eh?

        • They ought to try getting a leader without a "kick me" sign on his back. That might work. Yes, Harper would try to kick him anyway. But as I've already stated, that wouldn't be so easy against someone like Manley.

          • Ministers of the crown are not in a bar brawl

            Manley btw used to be called 'Beaker'…as in the Muppets

          • Beaker was a tough ba$tard when he got mad.

          • Most people are….however, our ministers of the crown are not in a bar brawl.

          • Nobody said they w….. oh, here we go. Never mind.

          • lol

          • Yes they are. The imagined past where respect reigned either didn't exist or existed because everyone agreed on everything except who should write the cheques.

            There are serious disagreements in Canada on almost every issue. Almost every issue has groups or sectors or regions that will win or lose depending on who gains power. The politicians represent these various interests. The stakes are reflected in the energy brought to the fight. A bar brawl is a good description.

          • That is no way to run a G8 country in the 21st century.

          • A bar brawl is a reasonable approximation of most democracies in any century, G7 or otherwise. (and your G8 includes Russia as a better example?)

            The exceptions were hegemonies like 20th century Japan and Canada.

          • And I repeat….it's no way to run a G8 country in the 21st century.

            It's time to leave bar brawls behind us, and start using brains instead of brawn.

  7. Be careful what you wish for. If high levels of household debt, high fuel and food prices cause a battered middle class to become disenchanted with late capitalism Harper and friends will be praying there still existed a Liberal Party to drain support from the NDP.

    • I think any sitting PM is going to have to deal with one hell of a housing crisis, and sooner rather than later.

      • Sooner.

        • And the Conservatives idiotic decision to bring in 40 year mortgages will come back to haunt them. Of all the silly things they did, that one pushed the housing market from "overheated" to "bubble" territory. They loosened lending rules right when they should have been tightened. We need to get back to serious down payments (15% or more) and maximum 25 year terms. Also, you should be free and clear of all other consumer debt before qualifying for a CMHC insured mortgage. The taxpayers are simply bearing too much risk otherwise. Either that, or get rid of the CMHC entirely, and force banks to shoulder the entire risk of the loans they're giving. We've seen what happens (in the US) when banks are allowed to separate themselves from the risks of their own lending practices.

          • I agree that 40 years was idiotic, because the housing market is de facto a credit market, and the happy medium of between 100% down vs interest-only is clearly well south of 40. Whether it's 20, 25, or 30 I think is debatable.

            But regarding being clear of all other consumer debt, I can't agree. There's a big difference between 15 down and some student debts (education consumption) and 5 down and 5% in other debt. And what about one's other assets? What's important is ability to service all debts, which is what is considered in the debt ratios.

            As for me, I think paying mortgage default insurance for the benefit of the banks is for suckers, even if it means your equity growth is less leveraged.

      • Huh? I'm thinking of buying within the year. How long should I wait for this bubble to burst?

    • That may be the most astute comment I've read on here in a long while.

      But I don't really blame the Conservatives, whose outlook is shaped by losing too often. I blame Canada itself for not alternating gov't often enough in the 20th century.

  8. Most of that paragraph is prescient. But this…

    "In this post-Harper Canada … there is an organizationally strong, united Conservative Party."

    … is far from certain. It makes me wonder – what will the Conservative party look like when Harper eventually leaves (or is forced out at leader)? Will someone else be able to hold it together?

    • I wouldn't be heart-broken with a re-emergence of the Reform Party, minus the silly populism. This experiment of united conservatism has left me pining for better days, when principles meant something. Better to be happy and single than married and miserable.

    • Dear leader and eternal Prime Minister will tell us who to follow, when the time comes.

      • You mean order…. he'll order us who to follow. :)

    • Brad Wall, Jason Kenney, Bernard Lord, Candice Hoeppner

      • The day Canada has a virgin for a Prime Minister, I'm sewing a Stars and Stripes patch on my backpack.

      • That list doesn't impress me much… but at least it doesn't include Baird, Flaherty or Clement. The three stooges of the Harrisite era are another reason why I have a hard time seeing the CPC as a party I could support.

      • I'll see that list, and raise you Peter MacKay, Maxime Bernier, and James Moore. Don't discount Mad Max – he is well liked by the party rank and file for his economic views, and he has made good use of time out of cabinet by building an impressive network of contacts across the country. By the time Harper is ready to go, the notion of having a francophone leader with good support from Western party members, kind of a Tory version of Chretien, might be very attractive.

        Oh, and Kellie Leitch will spend about five minutes as a backbencher before she gets elevated to cabinet. She is smart, tough, and very savvy. Any leadership aspirant would be wise to get to know her well.

        • Max actually has some economic smarts. Too bad his judgement of people is lacking. Sorely lacking.

        • I think Bernier could comfortably slot into the current Conservative Party as leader: his sins are easily forgiven. He's certainly a lock for cabinet after the election. If, however, they want to move even closer to the centre, they're going to have to find someone more pragmatic/vanilla…

          • My fear is they'll go for Bernard Lord. A Conservative who isn't at least a little bit scary is one I'm not interested in voting for. Lord couldn't scare mice if he was wearing a cat suit.

          • Bob Stanfield, except with hair and no underwear (business).

          • Oh for crying out loud, now I've got a mental image of Lord in cat suit. Thanks, R_R.

          • What makes it really poignant[ as with his earlier beaker remark] is the talking chimp outfit.

          • Excuse me? That's not an outfit. It's my passport photo. I suppose you look just terrific in your passport photo?

          • Wisely i let mine expire. It might as well say spot the terrorist right on it.

          • Is he holding a whip in one hand? I'm not saying I would find that attractive in the least. I'm just wondering.

          • What about Bob Stanfield in underwear?

          • Agreed, Lord is a lightweight.

            If only Mike Harris spoke French he'd be ideal: proven fiscal-conservative bonafides, without any hint of social conservativism. And he's nearly as scary as Harper.

        • Hasten the day when the dapper dolt throws his hat in the ring!

  9. Spooky….

    Harper seems to be quite the prognosticator.

    I wonder who he thinks will win the cup?

    • I'm kinda hoping he'll further explicate his theory on the proper use of
      market timing as an investment strategy.

  10. Woah. Eerie.

    No references to a certain Mayan 2012 calendar in that book, I hope? Paul? Paul? Hey, cut out that evil smirk thing, you're scaring me!

  11. This is just uncanny. Maybe it's one of those million monkeys on a million typewriters things.

    Oh, uh, sorry Paul.

  12. I was thinking if the NDP surge materialized, and Wells wrote a sequel to Ride Side Up, what would the title be?

    Left Side Up? Left Behind? On the Updip?

    • Left Hook.

  13. Watching the giddy media twitter back and forth about the rise of Jack Layton, as if this was some "best dressed" contest at a media coctail party, rather than decisions that will affect every man woman and child in this great land was a shameful specticle to be sure.

    It will be enjoyable to watch the media hangover – intellectual teenagers the lot of you – as the realization of a 5% drop from the polling numbers for "Jack" begins to dawn on you all.

    Oh how I will relish the twitter funeral as Harper takes the majority, while the notion of "Jack…yeah…Jack!!!!" couldn't quite get that 18-24 year old "youth vote" – who were willing to leave their x-box's to answer a robocall, but not to leave the gaming area to go vote,

    dawns on faux intellectuals in the media.

    • Looks like they've completed the recalbration of Kody. Spruced him up and pointed his cannon in a new direction.

      • They should have really put him on a turret. Every general knows the inherent weakness in having fixed fortifications.

  14. The question is, why does the Con want the NDP resurgent? Unless of course he thought it would mean a permanent majority for Harper.

    • They would then occupy the center.

  15. A year and a half of wall to wall plastered hysteria on such important stories as whether two students were kicked out of a campaign, the insertion of a single "not" on a document, etc etc etc,

    and the media reluctantly scurtinizes the half backed ideas of the alternatives to the CPC for…oh….a day or so (hmmmm, maybe 80 billion in new spending plus a tax that will cause a drastic increase in prices isn't such a great thing).

    The media specticle in this election, throwing out any pretense of trying to ….what's that word I'm looking for now…..oh yeah that's it…"inform"….and instead casting a magnifying glass on the CPC hyperventilating on every faux indescretion was sickening.

    Even today a Globe columnist called the attacks on Iggy "disgusting" as if the freakish fact that the Liberals chose as a leader someone who'd decided to leave Canada for his adult life only to dash back at the prospect of ruling us, should not even be mentioned (while publicly mocking a CPC's religios belief [Day] was not only not "disgusting" but lapped up by the same faux outraged media as jolly good fun for all).

    • Yup!!nnPathetic for sure.

    • Yes, how dastardly of those conservatives to mention the fact that he has lived elsewhere most of his adult life.

    • Your insights would carry so much more weight if they were delivered with even a casual appreciation of generally accepted facts and a passing acquaintance with the conventions of Canadian English spelling.

      • Shorter brooster (but in a painfully obvious attempt to make the smear sound high minded):

        "You're a stupid liar!!!"

        You know, your insults would carry so much more weight if they weren't cloaked in faux intellectualism. If you want to throw muck, you're gonna have to get dirty, clean white linguistic garb, notwithstanding.

        • And when all's said and done, one of us is full of endless partisan sh!t and the other can spell.

          • i'm not sure i agree with you that chet can spell, but otherwise you're exactly right.

  16. There's adifference between advising ordinary folks not to panic and cash in all their RRSPs and advising people to go out and look for steals in the midst of a major recession. Harper's advise was completely irresponsible – nuts even.

    • And yet, this evening Harper's little leprechaun, Jim Flaherty, characterized Layton's comments about the bank's regulation of the interest rate as "amateur hour".


      • He also had the chutzpah to go on CBC and trash Rae's fiscal record in apocalyptic terms while blythely sailing by the fact he left ON's finances in a huge mess. Politicians like JF must have their shame circuits cauterized at some point or other.

        • Eves/Flaherty left ON in fine fiscal shape relative to Rae/Laughrin. Eves/Flaherty know first-hand how much work it was to dig the province out of that huge hole.

          If only Rae and McGuinty left office with such deficits.

  17. "criminals are spending minimum sentences in prison, and there is an organizationally strong, united Conservative Party; a divided, discredited, possibly bankrupt Liberal Party; and a resurgent NDP."

    Pity they didn't outline how they would bring this about Paul. Via character assasination, distortion,smears , threats, intimidation, lawsuits, shady election spending, continuous out of writ attack ads, and contempt for Parliament. I doubt even they knew it would come to that themselves?

    Sure it helped to have a liberal party that until recently couldn't organize a piss up at a brewery anymore; let alone run the country. Still, let's give Mr H his due. He knew just what it would take to turn his dream of Canada into a nightmare for many of the rest of us.

    • right. the liberals are only divided, discredited, and bankrupt because of all the bad things the conservatives did.

      i think i've finally figured out the key difference between voters for the three main parties: idealistic voters saddled with invincible ignorance concerning all things economic vote ndp, adults who never matured past the age of two vote liberal, and everyone else outside quebec votes conservative. you would be category 2.

      • Pity you can't read.

  18. Ryan Mallet goes to the NE Patriots, and Jack Layton is in second place and gaining. The Mayans may be right, 2012 might be the end..

  19. Harper just saw what was happening with him and the CPC, and hoped it could happen with two other parties. Nothing crystal ball like about it.

    I don't think he wanted them as resurgent as they seem to be, though.

  20. Is this supposed to be yet another example of Harper as "master tactician"? He points out the only scenario in which his party can survive, and reveals that his strategy is not to govern effectively or gain credibility through policy…no…his goal has been to create a political vacuum in the centre that can be split between the CPC and the NDP.

    Frankly, this just points out how infantile he is. Only he would regard politics as some dungeons & dragons super fantasy, where political parties are entities that can simply be effaced, instead of realizing that they are the embodiment of the political will of the population.

    Maybe in some uber-masturbatory fantasy, voting blocks of people just simply disappear, but in the real world they just lay low or simply lose interest unless there is a reason for them to take notice.

    And it seems that this time around, they are taking notice.

    • And that is different from any other politician or political party how?

  21. I recall Conservatives of pre-2006, and NDPer,s talking about criminal surpluses.

  22. Paging Andrew Coyne,

    paging Andrew Coyne.

    The twittererereers are telling us that you find the reporting of the Jack layton…ahem…"message" story a "smear".

    I see your friends in the legacy media agree, with the Globe's first line describing Jack's visit being to a massage…..


    Ahhh yes, white lab coats, medical professionals, orderly records, sterile surfaces, all the things Canadians have come to associate with the word "clinic" is being used to describe to readers this disgusting well known bawdy house:

    [youtube loUphtRs8v4&feature=player_embedded#at=12 youtube]

    • Well gee, Chet, it looks like a totally normal massage place on the outside. I used to go to one like that in Vancouver's Chinatown, and it wasn't a bawdy house. Or if it was, I sure as heck didn't get anything out of the deal. I was also mostly naked.

    • Well I do see that a Dr. H. Lim practices some kind of medicine on the ground floor. Can't tell from here if he's wearing a white lab coat while he does it, though. The building really doesn't look that disreputable to me, but I suppose, if like Chet, it's your first time in the big city, you might be a more easily alarmed by all those scary ethnic signs.

    • awesome porno tune!

  23. So Andrew,

    what's more of a "smear"?

    An apparently accurate depiction of what happened that night by the evil Sun TV,

    or the dishonest whitewashing by the legacy media in describing the "smear" on poor Jack an "massage clinic"?

    Funny I thought the truth was the truth, and the facts were facts.

    Today's "journalists" in the legacy media are apparently in a different world of "correct" untrue facts, and "incorrect" true facts.

    A smear? You bet. By the one's pointing the "smear" finger.

    • "accurate" and "Sun TV" in the same sentence…………….

  24. Isn't a Conservative/Liberal coalition now the most logical solution for Harper?

    • I think he's poisoned that well far beyond potability. :)

    • I wouldn't say so. If the Liberals are fighting with the NDP for the left leaning, the CPC will gain the center right Liberals.

      The Liberals have been adept at being all things to all people. They have raised taxes and implemented expensive social programs at one time, another time cutting transfer payments for education and health to balance the budget. The moaning about the strategic maneuvers by Harper are amusing; the Liberals would do whatever necessary to keep power including taking any popular idea any opposition party, left or right, came up with.

      Unfortunately during their time in power and since, they haven't done what was necessary to broaden their support in the west and Quebec. They came to depend on big money out of Toronto for funding. This time around they sounded like a marketing campaign instead of an effort to elicit support from voters.

      Harper and the NDP benefit from a weak Liberal party. No need for a coalition. What can they bring to the table?

  25. Getting very interesting