Elections in Canada
Big news in the only political system that matters as Canadian PM Steven Harper dissolves parliament and calls for early elections. Harper’s conservatives have been running the government since the last election, but they lack a majority. At the moment, though, the Canadian economy is growing quite nicely (rising natural resource prices are good for Canada) and Harper’s government is popular so they think they can pull it off. The Conservatives’ unpopularity in Québec, where they’re in effect the third party behind the separatists and the Liberals, makes it quite difficult, structurally speaking, for them to ever win a majority so if they manage do to so it’ll be a pretty impressive achievement.
UPDATE: Apologies! It looks like Canada’s changed more than I realized while I wasn’t paying attention and Québec conservatism is back, with the Liberals expected to finish third in the province. The Canadian right, like the American right, contains nationalist impulses and also decentralizing impulses — the former plays poorly in Québec but the latter can be made to work very well.
57 Responses to “Elections in Canada”
Register
RSSLogin
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog RollAbout Matt YglesiasContact Me
Donate
September 7th, 2008 at 3:36 pm
Actually the polls for the past years show the LIBERALS to be squeezed out of Quebec politics and the conservatives to be not far behind the separatists.
It is a major shift of the past years that partly explains Harper’s confidence.
Nevertheless they need to win 28 new ridings to get a majority and that’s quite unlikely.
September 7th, 2008 at 3:50 pm
Actually, the Canadian economy is not doing well. Lots of industrial jobs (e.g. car manufacturing) have disappeared, the stock market is down on the year, and global warming is coming on as a big issue (which the Conservatives tried to ignore, and now try to gloss over and be as close to American policy/denial as they can.
The economy looks relatively good (a) in comparison the the American economy (we actually run a surplus) and (b) only the oil producing regions are doing well right now. The ‘tar sands oil’ is a building disaster: strip mining an area the size of Florida, consuming a lot of water and natural gas, and overall bad for everyone down stream, down wind, or worried about climate change emissions.
September 7th, 2008 at 3:52 pm
My favourite part of the Canadian system is on display here: this election will be called, fought, counted and won in little more than five weeks. That is, the election being called today will be done well before the American one supposedly in its “home stretch”.
Two-year election campaigns are ridiculously tiring.
September 7th, 2008 at 4:03 pm
This will probably go well for Harper because of the weakness of Liberal leadership. However, it has the potential to backfire as well.
First, this is the third election in four or five years, and there was no excuse to call it. The opposition parties didn’t force it. Harper is just being his usual pig self, and if the public comes to see it that way, it could go badly for him. On top of that, he had just passed a law for regular dates for federal elections (so that we could be more like the Americans, I suppose; there’s precious little other rationale), and by calling this election he’s ignoring that law.
Second is the transparent fact that he’s not really calling an election now because of the economy. He’s calling it because he is afraid Obama is going to win the November presidential elections big-time, and as you recall, in the American primaries, he played a rather dirty trick on Obama. Even Canadians who do not care to be overly deferential to their southern neighbour will think twice about voting for a politician who tried unsuccessfully to shiv the incoming President of the United States, and who has been a loyal buttlicker of Mr. 23%. There will be a modest slopover of center and left-wing momentum into Canada if Obama wins, but basically Harper just wants to secure his job again, majority or minority, so that he has plenty of time to kiss and make up.
September 7th, 2008 at 4:04 pm
The greatest part of this election, which was called by the Conservatives in hopes of getting a majority, is that the Conservatives are openly promoting the idea that they’ll get a minority again, because they know most Canadians are scared to death of a Conservative majority. How often do you see a party running against its own potential success?
Sadly, this election will just be one step further down the road of our once-diverse parliamentary democracy’s consolidation into a boring, divisive, two-party system.
September 7th, 2008 at 4:04 pm
Matt:
Not to be unkind, but you want to consider sticking to US politics, unless you’re prepared to do a better job when writing about Canada. As the posters above point out, almost everything about your post is just plain wrong. Have you been relying on dated articles from a quick google search?
Harper called the election now because the economy is worsening. He also hopes to weaken an almost broke Liberal party, which will have to borrow heavily to finance the campaign. The fundraising rules in Canada have changed radically. It’s all about public financing and small, grassroots donations. Conservatives have figured out how to do grassroots fundraising; Liberals haven’t.
The most likely outcome of the election is another minority Conservative government. Harper will consider this a victory.
But it’s our third election in four years — a bit much. Mercifully, the election campaign lasts only 42 days.
September 7th, 2008 at 4:04 pm
Quebec isn’t as important as it used to be. It was once nearly 40% of the country and parliament, now it’s closer to 20% with half of the seats being safe for the separatists.
September 7th, 2008 at 4:07 pm
That is a pretty good summary by Matt. The point about Quebec holding the Conservatives back is an important one, supported by the fact that Harper is starting his campaign in Quebec today.
Most people here in Canada don’t seem to have strong feelings about the election. The stakes are high, though, because the Conservatives have no environmental policy and the Liberals are proposing a pretty serious carbon tax plan with movement toward a cap and trade system. For a simple overview of the parties’ different environmental plans, here is the Sierra Club’s voter’s guide (pdf).
September 7th, 2008 at 4:07 pm
The Liberals have lost Quebec because they engaged in widespread corruption there. If only Americans would wake up and treat corrupt parties similarly.
September 7th, 2008 at 4:12 pm
My sample admittedly is not very large–perhaps two dozen Canadian friends–but they disagree with you that Harper and his government are popular. They consider him dangerous and simply a Bush-wannabe, something they’re not eager to see.
September 7th, 2008 at 4:18 pm
Well, we have a minority Parliament and those in Canada tend to be extending campaigns. Although they don’t usually last all that long.
Still, it interesting the consider why this is. I am guessing that the fact that Presidential candidates have to be selected four years, whereas in Parliamentary system leadership races are far less frequent. Also, primaries have taken the once internal party process into the public, and state control increases the incentive to pushes those dates forward.
September 7th, 2008 at 4:31 pm
ObPedant: Harper didn’t dissolve parliament, the GG did. And that might be an issue that buzzes between now and Oct. 14th, because the Tories promised a fixed four-year term and got a bill passed to do it. Apart from when the PM says it’s necessary. Which is something the GG doesn’t really have any power to question.
I think sagesource is on point: the aim is to slap around the Liberals, and to split the left-of-centre vote outside Quebec. (FPTP voting means that there’s potentially room to squeak a few ridings in if Liberal voters jump to the NDP.) And Harper shat himself at the idea of holding an election with Obama in the White House.
September 7th, 2008 at 4:33 pm
Matt,
A good summary of the electoral outlook, but like others have said, you’re off on the state of Canada’s economy (see here for data showing that we’re currently second worst to the only other G7 country that matters – Italy). In fact, contra sagesource, I’d argue that the economic outlook is the number one reason for Harper to call an election is the worsening economy. If he waits for the coming downturn to go into full swing, he won’t have another shot at a majority anytime soon.
This is going to be a very high-stakes election for a number of reasons. If the Conservatives win a majority, not only will Liberal leader Stephane Dion be axed, but the Liberal Party as a whole may be banished to the wilderness for a while. If the Conservatives fail to even expand on their minority (the current polls may change when the campaign gets underway), Harper’s political career will most likely come to an end.
Aside from the largest two parties, the stakes are quite high for the other party leaders as well. The separatist movement in Quebec has been on the wane at the provincial level. Unless he can make an impressive showing at the federal level, leader Gilles Duceppe of the Bloc Quebecois will be out the door, and the separatist cause may be dealt a near fatal blow. The New Democratic Party has its first real shot at becoming the alternative to the Liberal Party on the left, and leader Jack Layton’s career may depend on capitalizing on that opportunity. If the Green Party can finally have an MP elected to parliament, Elizabeth May’s bold moves of the past few years will be thoroughly vindicated.
But the most consequential question remains whether the Conservatives can pull a majority. The current New Conservative Party is not the same party that was driven out of power in 1993. It is primarily constituted of the western Reform movement (which has more in common with American conservatism than Canadian ‘toryism’), which absorbed the original Progressive Conservative Party (the ‘tory’ party) a few years ago. Basically, aside from the name, the Conservative Party in its current incarnation has never governed in a majority. What it’ll do if it gets the opportunity is still a great unknown.
September 7th, 2008 at 4:33 pm
This election will be decided in the suburbs around Toronto (the 905 area code) and Montreal (the 450 area code). The Liberals can’t win around Toronto and the Bloc needs to hold its ground in the lower Laurentides and the Montérégie areas. If they can’t, expect a Harper majority.
September 7th, 2008 at 5:01 pm
pseudonymous in nc:
Doesn’t the GG just do what the PM wants him/her to do?
ClaudeB:
Why can’t the liberals win in the Toronto suburbs? I am asking as an American who doesn’t know much about Canadian politics other than Harper is a flaming turd.
September 7th, 2008 at 5:10 pm
the GG does, in fact, do whatever the PM wants. Technically, she doesn’t have to, but in practice, it’s rare.
We seem to have a bit of the american redstate/bluestate thing going on here, in that people in overwhelmingly liberal places (new york city, toronto) can’t imagine that anyone likes their conservative opponent. People like Harper a lot more than commenters above suggest
September 7th, 2008 at 5:11 pm
Calvin & Apostle, good question about the Toronto suburbs. They’ll definitely be a battleground. They’re part immigrant, part native-born; middle-class; not urban but not country; etc. It may come down to how the vote splits between the Liberals and the NDP (socialists): if left-leaning voters get scared of a Tory majority, they’ll probably rally round the Liberals & hand them a lot of suburban Toronto seats. The real make-or-break battleground is suburban and rural Quebec, though, between the Bloc Quebecois (French nationalists) and the Conservatives, with the latter hoping to pick up the 20 seats they need for a majority.
There’s been a weird constitutional debate about the GG/PM going on in the dark corners this past while. Normally the GG absolutely positively must follow the advice of the PM (she’s not elected, after all), but the wrinkle this time was that the PM had passed a law specifying a 4-year Parliament (we were only on year 3). So some were saying she should obey THAT law and not the unwritten rule that she has to follow the PM’s advice. Thank God, she didn’t strike out on her own (which would have been extremely hairy), so we’re going to the polls.
September 7th, 2008 at 5:22 pm
Conservatism in North America is going to look like a turd on toast if Obama wins. This is Harper securing his own future in advance of an Obama victory.
September 7th, 2008 at 5:29 pm
I doubt that the Conservatives will make much headway in Quebec. Their particular brand of social conservatism doesn’t find much favour in a largely secular and socially tolerant (except for language) society. The Bloc will likely maintain their control over the Quebec ridings. The minority government has worked out well for Quebec and the Bloc with Harper making numerous political and financial concessions to buy Bloc support for his government.
The economy has been a mixed bag for Canada – provinces with oil and natural resources have done well. Ontario is suffering from losses in manufacturing and forestry. I’m not sure that the Liberals will be able to capitalize on Ontario’s pain or not. Dion is a boring wonk with zero charisma and his ability to communicate effectively in English will be a huge liability in Ontario (and the west.
Personally I’m hoping that people will remember the broken promises and backtracking of the Harper government (income trusts anyone?). And the fact that he passed a low that supposedly forbade him from calling this election shouldn’t be overlooked.
The end result is likely to be another Conservative minority and a populace annoyed by yet another inconclusive election. I can hope for a Liberal minority but I don’t think it will happen this time.
The good thing about it is that it will be over quickly.
September 7th, 2008 at 5:39 pm
I’d love to know what Sarah Palin thinks about all of this. Alaska is, of course, very close to Canada.
September 7th, 2008 at 5:42 pm
I’ll chime in as a Canadian.
Contrary to Matt’s assertion, it is the Liberals who are mired in 3rd place in Quebec, and recent polling shows the Tories poised to make gains there. It is seat-rich Ontario where the Tories have real problems. I also take issue with the commenter who said the Liberals can’t win in the 905 (suburbs ringing Toronto); they hold most of the seats there now.
The truly astonishing thing about the Conservative support is how poorly they do in urban centres. The only major cities they have seats in are Edmonton and Calgary – this is as if the GOP only won city congressional districts in Texas. The Tories did not win a single seat in Toronto, Montreal or Vancouver – and their odds of doing so this election are equally slim; at best they can hope for gains in suburban areas.
Also, contra Matt, the Canadian economy is tanking (we are, after all pretty closely tied to yours), and the Conservatives have squandered what was a decade-long series of large budgetary surpluses. The comment above that the election was timed now so as to get it over with before the worst of it hits seems right.
September 7th, 2008 at 6:01 pm
I’m also hoping for a Liberal minority but fearing a Conservative majority. There are definite signs of regional polarization, with the Atlantic and Ontario having pretty strong Liberal majorities, Quebec mostly BQ and the West a Conservative(former Reform as Khaled noted) stronghold. I am hoping the weak economic news will not obscure the global warming debate which is a much more serious longterm issue. By the way, I think the Liberal GW plan includes both a Carbon Tax as well as Cap and Trade.
September 7th, 2008 at 6:05 pm
Glad people are correcting Matt on his false perception of Conservative’s position in Québec.
While it’s true that many aspects of the Conservative party’s positions on social matters is anathema to Québec’s French-speaking intelligentsia, the underground story of the last few years here in Québec has been the rise of an american-style, honest-to-goodness “conservative movement” and the end of the great myth of the “social-democratic concensus” on which most of our politics (including the separatist movement) was founded on these last 30 years.
The most popular blogs in the French-speaking “Québec blogosphere” are mostly the ones advocating conservatve-libertarian to socially-conservative ideas.
The battle in Québec (outside the Liberal fortress of Montréal) is between the Conservatives and the separatist Bloc Québécois… and it will be decided by the socially and economically conservative “nationalist” vote. (Our equivalent of your red-state archetype)
September 7th, 2008 at 6:12 pm
My hope and fear for this election is the same as Diplaced Canuck. As far as what the Liberal global warming plan involves: the provincial Liberals (in Ontario and Quebec) are proposing cap-and-trade, whereas the federal Liberals are proposing a carbon tax.
However, it should be pointed out that the federal Liberals’ plan is not simply a tax hike, it’s a proposal to increase consumption taxes (specifically, on consumption that increases carbon emissions) while reducing income and corporate taxes. The Liberals have pledged that, should their plan be passed into law, it would include a clause requiring it to be revenue neutral.
September 7th, 2008 at 6:12 pm
First of all… Matt, kudos for even bothering to cover this, Political blogs about Canada are few and far between and it’s frustrating to read thousands of viewpoints on the 2 year American Rock Festival of an election, and literally nothing outside of standard reportage on our Westminster pols. More coverage on the Canadian election (and I agree, some more research to go with) would be greatly appreciated.
I think that polls right now are really underestimating youth vote. Over the summer break, youth opinion on C-61 (the Conservative copyright law) has cooled because people have forgotten about it. However, anytime I talk to friends, people at work, most people under 25 about politics, if the bill is ever brought up… people are pissed. Here in B.C., 18-25 year olds are pretty apathetic about politics (boring, boring leaders), but I seriously think the Liberals and NDP could win a lot of youth votes if they remind younger voters of the infuriating bill.
September 7th, 2008 at 6:39 pm
sorry to nitpick, but it’s stephen harper, not steven.
September 7th, 2008 at 6:52 pm
This is not at all different from the US. New York has one Republican congressman, who represents Staten Island. I don’t think LA or Chicago have any. Most of the large cities are represented by Democrats. Even in states like Texas, the central urban districts are represented by Democrats.
September 7th, 2008 at 7:07 pm
I think a few of the Canadians commenting here are nitpicking. Canadians right now do associate Harper with a decent economy. And, structurally and historically speaking, the Conservatives do face big barriers in Quebec.
Kyle is right that there are hardly any good Canadian political blogs. Try to name 5 good Canadian political blogs. Paul Wells, Warren Kinsella, Daimnation, CalgaryGrit? I’m not even sure about that list of four.
September 7th, 2008 at 7:07 pm
The Conservatives are in a relatively good place in Quebec, though I think it’s unlikely they’ll do well enough there to get a majority. They’ve managed to establish a bastion in Québec city that will still hold and I think have the potential to have a long-term presence there.
From a policy perspective I think it’s fascinating that one of the central policy debates in the election will be around Dion’s proposal of a carbon tax. Now, of course, every economist more or less agrees (including Mankiw) that a carbon tax is optimal, but the conservatives are running hard against it. My worry is that due to Dion’s weak leadership this idea will get shelved for a generation instead of Canada taking a lead (well, relatively speaking) on this issue. Sigh.
September 7th, 2008 at 7:18 pm
The real make-or-break battleground is suburban and rural Quebec, though, between the Bloc Quebecois (French nationalists) and the Conservatives, with the latter hoping to pick up the 20 seats they need for a majority.
On that point: does Brian Mulroney play any kind of active role in Canadian politics these days?
On another point: if the Liberals come out as the largest party, does the NDP push for proportional representation as part of a governing package? Some kind of preferential voting could cripple the Tories, given that they won a bag of ridings with 35-40% and a split centre-left vote.
September 7th, 2008 at 7:23 pm
I don’t know if you all have been hearing this countrywide, but here in Vancouver at least we’ve had those mock radio-talk show ads for the Conservatives deriding the Green Shift/Carbon Tax. The Conservatives have been spending money for this election/precampaigning against Dion all summer. While I think public opinion is going to turn against the Conservatives after everybody remembers politics before the summer cooldown, I am worried about this indicator. The Conservatives do seem so much more prepared, and are not afraid to spend money… their organisational advantage may simply just overwhelm the other parties. Plus, it is always hard to justify a policy with the word tax in its name. Its killer for low-info voters.
September 7th, 2008 at 8:37 pm
pseudonymous in nc, that’s just it! Harper is cuddling up to the Quebec nationalists exactly like Mulroney did in 1984. Hey, it worked then, though with a price, Ugarte, with a price.
Mulroney recently resurfaced when a German lobbyist, wanted for mass bribery back in Bavaria, accused him of gross corruption back in the day; Mulroney was forced to admit he used to keep hundreds of thousands of dollars in a NYC safety deposit box, but otherwise denied wrongdoing. Lots of questions for the historians there.
The NDP is definitely pro-PR, but I don’t know if the Liberals would be willing to bite. This last parliament has shown that you can just squeak by without a majority coalition, governing from day to day, avoiding unpopular legislation, etc., and appealing to right or left or Quebec depending on your mood. My guess is the Liberals would try and play that game rather than give the NDP the PR they want and we probably need.
September 7th, 2008 at 8:56 pm
The wrong frame: Harper is a big right-wing meanie who is Bush-light.
The right frame: This is an election that is step 2 of 3 of permenently destroying the Liberal Party of Canada’s ability to seriously contest elections in the future. The inability of the left to see this is endlessly amusing to me.
September 7th, 2008 at 10:18 pm
Don’t know what you consider a Canadian blog, but John McGrath’s Dymaxion World is a damn good blog by a Canadian. . McGrath writes about international issues more than Canadian ones, but when he blogs about Canada he does it intelligently and clearly.
September 7th, 2008 at 10:53 pm
Harper called this election for one reason. Afghanistan is headed into the tank and it is his one shot at a majority government. The war is already unpopular and in the next 6 months the increased ramp ceremonies and the funeral corteges on the Highway of Heroes will sour people even more. He’s rolling the dice. Best case he gets a majority – worse case he stays in place with a (maybe larger) minority.
If I were Harper my biggest concern would be that I’d left it to late. If the Taliban gets lucky and manages to kill more than 2 or 3 guys he could loose.
September 7th, 2008 at 10:56 pm
Jakcal says:
And might I add:
Soupir.
September 7th, 2008 at 11:34 pm
So, my next question to Canadians: is there enough time to motivate tactical voting across Liberal and NDP (and even BQ) supporters? That usually requires a degree of preparation, or at least a mindset across the centre-left than Anyone But Harper will do. Look at seats that went to the Tories with 35% in 2006, and if there’s a will, you hold your nose and switch from the third party to the second. But is there a will?
September 7th, 2008 at 11:52 pm
pseudonymous in nc, tactical voting was a big part of the 2003 election (second-to-last election – they’re starting to pile up) when the Tories seemed poised for a big win and the public backed off: we ended up with a Liberal minority, under Paul Martin (who has since vanished). Harper was a very unknown quantity at the time, however, and people might be less liable to panic now: he’s been impersonating a centrist quite effectively for the last two years. Still, to my ear the public is still frightened of the phrase “Harper majority” (though I live in Toronto!); it’s interesting that the media is focusing on that possibility right away, and the opposition parties invoked it on Day 1. Methinks that could backfire on them, as it gives the electorate time to try the idea on for size. I do think that, generally, the voters are more volatile in Canada, so that the last week of the campaign for example could be crucial as between Liberal minority, Tory minority, or Tory majority; or big gains vs. big losses for the NDP & Bloc.
Depends, of course, on what transpires! Last time round the Mounties took it upon themselves to hold a news conference announcing that the Liberal Minister of Finance was under investigation for fraud, even though they never announce investigations & he was subsequently cleared entirely – i.e. the police intervened in the election! So it could be a wild ride. Liberal leader Dion is a totally unknown quantity: most likely he’ll fizzle completely, but he could dig deep and surprise us all.
September 8th, 2008 at 12:16 am
Sorry, make that the 2004 election!
September 8th, 2008 at 1:09 am
The important thing for Americans to remember here (aside from the laudible simplicity of Canuck elections) is that Harper’s leading what is essentially a Republican government.
That’s why he forced the election. If Canadians see that America has thrown the bums out, they might get that urge too. As it is, they’ll be too distracted by the Obama/McCain show to realize what’s happening in their own back yard.
Kyle: What strikes me whenever I read Canadian blogs is how dominant the right is. It’s like 2002-2003 never ended, and the progressive netroots never formed. How that happened in a country so well-known for its progressivism that Buchanan called it “Soviet Canuckistan” is beyond me.
September 8th, 2008 at 1:45 am
There will almost certainly be a significant amount of tactical voting in the upcoming election if it seems that a Conservative majority is imminent. However, at the risk of offending fellow liberal Canadians, I would point out the following reason why there may not be enough of it: to date, Harper hasn’t proven himself to be the Bush-lite that so many have accused him of being. There’s certainly a fair amount of evidence to suggest that his “hidden agenda” will reveal itself to be as bad as American Republicanism if he wins a majority. However, unless you are a close follower of political discourse (true of people spending much of their time on the blogosphere, but not of the general electorate), you would be most likely to see Harper as a right-of-centre moderate.
In response to Demosthenes regarding the Canadian blogosphere: political blogs generally represent ‘alternative media’ in whichever country they exists. In America, where the MSM is dominated by O’Reilly, Limbaugh, Hannity, Coulter, and other extreme right-wingers, it’s natural that the most active bloggers would be those opposed to the message dominating the discourse. It is also significant that the blogosphere developed during a disastrous period of right-wing governance in the United States. In Canada, our MSM is more balanced, and therefore the extreme right finds its breathing/venting space in cyberspace. Also, most of the (younger) online community is more used to seeing Liberals in power, and so have less cause for outrage than much of the U.S. netroots.
To avoid being misunderstood, let me say that I don’t consider the blogosphere to be a forum for reactionary outrage, even if there’s a fair amount of that going on out here. But generally speaking, it’s unsurprising that the more prominent voices in the blogosphere would be those opposed to the perceived national consensus.
September 8th, 2008 at 2:00 am
Ironic then, that if the blogosphere general opinion is formed in reaction to national identity, that it has been right wing blogs being formed under a Conservative administration. Although I do find it a bit hard to believe that Coulter-Limbaugh-O’Reilly, etc. are considered MSM by the majority of people. Maybe this is my Canadian lens showing, but most low-info voters and centrists don’t consider Fox to actually be “Fair and Balanced,” do they? (Though you are right, in that CBC generally does a better job at covering elections than, say, CNN.)
September 8th, 2008 at 2:53 am
I don’t see the Conservatives as a particularly nationalistic party. You don’t see much of the symbolic nationalistic issues (who’s wearing a pin) or the militaristic nationalism (don’t question Canadian foreign policy, and Canada should dominate the world as much as possible). The Liberals are more likely to use nationalism on behalf of Canadian social programs. Conservatives, I think, feel a connection to American neocon thought that includes American nationalistic ideas, but this isn’t nationalism when transplanted to the Canadian context.
September 8th, 2008 at 3:21 am
The election predition site at http://www.electionprediction.org has developed into a forum where how the election is going in each riding gets discussed, riding by riding. Its record on predicting elections is also pretty good, despite an insane methodology. The riding discussions make for an entertaining time waster, and incidentally give a good sense of the diversity of the regions within Canada. I wish there was an equivalent site for American elections.
Also, you can make your own election forecast at http://esm.ubc.ca/CA08/forecast.php, though because of the aforementioned diversity there is rarely a consistent enough national swing in votes to make this sort of prediction valid.
September 8th, 2008 at 3:57 am
re: national blogospheres, I’d suggest that the right has a more significant online presence in the UK and Australia too, perhaps (ironically) because they’ve been able to tap into the institutional amplifier of the American right. That might lead me into ideological quibbles with the loud so-called ‘Decent Left’ of the UK, but they can go fuck themselves. Anyway, if you were a foreign righty who got a ‘heh, indeed’ from that glibertarian in Tennessee back in the day, it gave you something of a first-mover advantage. Oh, soft power.
September 8th, 2008 at 8:43 am
The Harper government is not popular right now, but they weren’t popular going in either. The were elected because of dissatisfaction with the Liberals over the sponsorship scandal. Although they aren’t popular, there really isn’t much enthusiasm to kick them out of office either. But a Conservative government in Canada is only bearable as a minority, where they can’t really move their agenda along. A Conservative majority scares the b’jeezus out of most Canadians.
September 8th, 2008 at 9:32 am
Matt, I would ask you to please disregard those posters who say you shouldn’t comment on Canadian politics. As far as I’m concerned any comments you make will be welcome up here. Keep up the good fight!
September 8th, 2008 at 1:16 pm
The Conservatives are actually tied for first in Quebec, and according to recent economic statistics put out by Statistics Canada and The Conference Board of Canada, the Canadian economy is in not so good shape. The OECD has had to tamper down growth forcasts in Canada to about a .8% rate of growth, and even in booming Alberta, homeprises are plummetting. Manufacturing in Central Canada (Ontario and Quebec) is taking a beating due to Canada’s strong dollar. Polls show that the economy is the number one issue on the minds of Canadian Voters, ahead of both healthcare and the environment.
September 9th, 2008 at 1:45 am
Blake, I’d say Harper’s obsession with Arctic sovereignty (something I’m not that opposed to, actually) is pretty damn nationalistic. But overall, yes, I’ve often thought it strange that Canadian nationalism in politics is pretty much the opposite of the entire world (Ie. Serbian right-wing opposes EU; Italian right-winger Berlusconi anti-immigrant; Russians, Japanese, Chinese right-wing strongly nationalistic too). It is pretty weird that the Liberals are more nationalistic than the Conservatives.
Ed, you’ve seen http://www.fivethirtyeight.com , right?
March 1st, 2009 at 5:51 am
viagra
Incredible site!
March 2nd, 2009 at 5:20 am
levitraIncredible site!
March 22nd, 2009 at 6:19 am
tramadol
Incredible site!
March 22nd, 2009 at 10:31 am
buy viagra online
I bookmarked this site. Thank you for good job!
April 2nd, 2009 at 5:25 am
Incredible site!
buy cheap viagra
April 3rd, 2009 at 4:17 am
Excellent site. It was pleasant to me.
cheap brand pfizer viagra