Holy crap!
What happened?
A number of things:
The attack adds worked.
Scary Stephen frightened all the soccer moms in the 905.
Ontario flinched, held its nose, and voted for the devil they know.
BC turned its back on the Conservatives.
Jack Layton's used car salesman schtick went over with a fair number of non granola-crunching Canadians.
Gilles Duceppe proved that you don't have to flog a referendum even if you are a separatiste.(take note Landry)
and Quebec kicked Poll Marton in the balls so hard he'll be feeling until sometime after Christmas, possibly even well into next year (maybe now that his Quebec support has evaporated, people will stop calling him Paul Mar-tain... the guy is from Windsor, for chrissakes).
I said:
BQ would take 57. As of midnight, they are at 53. I figured Lapierre was toast. Shows what I know.
NDP would take 26. As of midnight, they are at 21. I didn't count on Toronto turning chickenshit.
I was WAY OFF about the Liberal and Conservative totals. CBC has it at 137 to 96 at midnight (I didn't count on the rest of Ontario turning chickenshit, for that matter).
Alot of close races... some may not be resolved for days, maybe even weeks, but no doubt about it... the NDP and the Bloc are the big winners tonight. They can say what they like about being a new party, but you gotta figure the Conservatives are disappointed.
The traitors win big, with possibly their highest total of seats ever (we'll see after the inevitable recounts), and the commies now hold the balance of power in our parliament... I suppose it could have been worse... I could have been the reverse. (can you imagine a parliament --with a 50-member NDP caucus no less-- where the Liberals have to grovel before the separatists? Gak!)
Hell... who knows, maybe some good will come out of this Liberal-NDP minority thing!
Monday, June 28, 2004
My predictions on election day -- because it's fun to speculate and then make excuses for why you were wrong!...
These are completely unscientific. They are based on nothing more than my general impressions, gleaned largely from polls, pundits, and a good old fashioned gut feeling about the way things will go down. I am adopting the Steyn-Coyne nomenclature for the major parties (with terms for the Liberals and Conservatives stolen from the last election in France)
Party Seats
Fascists (CPC): 114
Crooks (LPC): 110
Traitors (BQ): 57
Commies (NDP): 26
Freaks (Green): 1
I really believe that if it is anywhere near as close as I am calling it, and if the Liberals get a higher percentage of the popular vote than the Conservatives (as alot of people are predicting), Paul Martin WILL try to govern with a minority (recent comments about "common sense" notwithstanding).
What does this mean? Mr. Martin prepares for the inevitable fallout within his party, tries to reconcile with the Liberal left wing, cozies up to the NDP and maybe even the Bloc, and staggers along for a few months until the next election, which will be sooner rather than later. After the way his people mishandled his campaign and squandered the lead that the Liberals' enjoyed when the election was called, the question is: will Paul be around to lead the next campaign?
These are completely unscientific. They are based on nothing more than my general impressions, gleaned largely from polls, pundits, and a good old fashioned gut feeling about the way things will go down. I am adopting the Steyn-Coyne nomenclature for the major parties (with terms for the Liberals and Conservatives stolen from the last election in France)
Party Seats
Fascists (CPC): 114
Crooks (LPC): 110
Traitors (BQ): 57
Commies (NDP): 26
Freaks (Green): 1
I really believe that if it is anywhere near as close as I am calling it, and if the Liberals get a higher percentage of the popular vote than the Conservatives (as alot of people are predicting), Paul Martin WILL try to govern with a minority (recent comments about "common sense" notwithstanding).
What does this mean? Mr. Martin prepares for the inevitable fallout within his party, tries to reconcile with the Liberal left wing, cozies up to the NDP and maybe even the Bloc, and staggers along for a few months until the next election, which will be sooner rather than later. After the way his people mishandled his campaign and squandered the lead that the Liberals' enjoyed when the election was called, the question is: will Paul be around to lead the next campaign?
Sunday, June 27, 2004
Yet another tedious update...
Visit Coyne. He is now writing about a permanent change in the Canadian political landscape. As the Liberal's grasp of Ontario and Quebec slips through their fingers --Several reasons for that, including a couple I mentioned in previous posts (the social and fiscal conservatism of new Canadians, the disenchantment of Canadians with "their" traditional governing party...)-- Mr. Coyne brings up the idea that Stephen Harper's ultimate goal may in fact be the establishment of a permanent (American style!!!) two-party system in Canada...
As I watch a chameleonesque shipping magnate Paul Martin aggressively court NDP voters as he attempts to re-cast himself as a left-leaning warm-and-fuzzy politician, I'm starting to think that Andrew may be on to something...
Visit Coyne. He is now writing about a permanent change in the Canadian political landscape. As the Liberal's grasp of Ontario and Quebec slips through their fingers --Several reasons for that, including a couple I mentioned in previous posts (the social and fiscal conservatism of new Canadians, the disenchantment of Canadians with "their" traditional governing party...)-- Mr. Coyne brings up the idea that Stephen Harper's ultimate goal may in fact be the establishment of a permanent (American style!!!) two-party system in Canada...
As I watch a chameleonesque shipping magnate Paul Martin aggressively court NDP voters as he attempts to re-cast himself as a left-leaning warm-and-fuzzy politician, I'm starting to think that Andrew may be on to something...
Update:
HERE, in contrast, is a reproduction of the NP's editorial endorsing the Conservatives. Agree or disagree, you have to admit, it is not a "qualified" or "conditional" endorsement.
This version comes courtesy of the Belinda Stronach site.
Belinda Stronach: Potentially, the hottest Cabinet Minister in Canada's history... damn, she is fine!
HERE, in contrast, is a reproduction of the NP's editorial endorsing the Conservatives. Agree or disagree, you have to admit, it is not a "qualified" or "conditional" endorsement.
This version comes courtesy of the Belinda Stronach site.
Belinda Stronach: Potentially, the hottest Cabinet Minister in Canada's history... damn, she is fine!
I'm addicted to election coverage.
I love the way people like Judy Rebick talk about the horror of "Reagan-Bush-style Government" if the Conservatives come to power. Some people just can't resist kicking the yanks in the nuts every chance they get.
Alan Greenspon has basically admitted that the Globe could have gone either way in their endorsement op-ed. He said the editorial board went 55-45 on the endorsement. It may be an endorsement of the Liberals, but I doubt any Liberals will be crowing about it from the rooftops.
Here is an actual excerpt from this editorial --Remember this is an editorial endorsing another Liberal Government:
To put it succinctly, Paul Martin, or whoever is inhabiting his body, has proved a monumental disappointment since becoming Prime Minister six months ago. His pronouncements have displayed all the consistency of Pablum. Intent on winning every vote in the country, he lived in fear of offending someone, somewhere, somehow. On Iraq and Kyoto, he was incomprehensible. On same-sex marriage, he swung both ways. On missile defence co-operation, first he was openly for it, then secretly for it. He had two Supreme Court openings, but boxed himself into a process corner.
He made enemies of the meritorious (witness Stéphane Dion) and promoted the mediocre (come on down, Jean Lapierre). The only difference between his political manipulations and those of his "friendly dictator" predecessor was that the latter didn't leave bloodied fingerprints at the crime scene.
On health care, we have heard much rhetoric. But Mr. Martin's ideas for shortening waiting lists remain fanciful. As a general rule, he has beseeched voters to count on his reputation for solutions rather than proposing any.
The National Post has highlighted the "outlandish contradiction" of this election:
Many voters, otherwise sensible, believe that the one federal party proven to be irresponsible is the only responsible choice. That would be the Liberals.
Jonathan Kay of the National Post on CBC in response to Alan Greenspon and the Globe's Editorial: "Do you want to give this monumental disappointment another mandate?"
Well, do ya?
I love the way people like Judy Rebick talk about the horror of "Reagan-Bush-style Government" if the Conservatives come to power. Some people just can't resist kicking the yanks in the nuts every chance they get.
Alan Greenspon has basically admitted that the Globe could have gone either way in their endorsement op-ed. He said the editorial board went 55-45 on the endorsement. It may be an endorsement of the Liberals, but I doubt any Liberals will be crowing about it from the rooftops.
Here is an actual excerpt from this editorial --Remember this is an editorial endorsing another Liberal Government:
To put it succinctly, Paul Martin, or whoever is inhabiting his body, has proved a monumental disappointment since becoming Prime Minister six months ago. His pronouncements have displayed all the consistency of Pablum. Intent on winning every vote in the country, he lived in fear of offending someone, somewhere, somehow. On Iraq and Kyoto, he was incomprehensible. On same-sex marriage, he swung both ways. On missile defence co-operation, first he was openly for it, then secretly for it. He had two Supreme Court openings, but boxed himself into a process corner.
He made enemies of the meritorious (witness Stéphane Dion) and promoted the mediocre (come on down, Jean Lapierre). The only difference between his political manipulations and those of his "friendly dictator" predecessor was that the latter didn't leave bloodied fingerprints at the crime scene.
On health care, we have heard much rhetoric. But Mr. Martin's ideas for shortening waiting lists remain fanciful. As a general rule, he has beseeched voters to count on his reputation for solutions rather than proposing any.
The National Post has highlighted the "outlandish contradiction" of this election:
Many voters, otherwise sensible, believe that the one federal party proven to be irresponsible is the only responsible choice. That would be the Liberals.
Jonathan Kay of the National Post on CBC in response to Alan Greenspon and the Globe's Editorial: "Do you want to give this monumental disappointment another mandate?"
Well, do ya?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
