Friday, December 12, 2008

Stephen Harper: A Leader





15 Comments:

  • New poll out CG.

    http://www.canada.com/topics/news/national/story.html?id=1069355

    By Blogger wilson, at 7:11 PM  

  • Unlike the Liberals who gave their cronies a life long membership to the Senate, Harper at least has told all would be newly appointed Senators that as soon as the reform happens, they will have to give up their seats.

    By Blogger Prairie Kid, at 7:31 PM  

  • "at least has told all would be newly appointed Senators that as soon as the reform happens, they will have to give up their seats."
    That's CONservative propaganda. A PM cannot force senators to resign and run in an election once they are appointed.

    By Anonymous Alex, at 7:58 PM  

  • "New poll out CG."

    Yet, White Man still speaks with forked tonque. You must be proud of him, Wilson?

    By Blogger JimTan, at 11:49 PM  

  • Yes Jim, I am.

    ''The survey results said the Liberals have not improved their electoral prospects - so far - by picking Ignatieff earlier this week to replace the unpopular Stephane Dion.
    Those surveyed favoured the Conservatives over the Liberals by

    (Cons) 45 per cent to
    (Libs) 26 per cent

    when no leaders' names were mentioned.
    The 19-point gap was repeated when the question was rephrased to name Ignatieff...
    "At the end of the day, it turned out to not be about who their leader really was.
    Really, it continues to be the whole concept of the coalition that bothers Canadians."

    By Blogger wilson, at 2:01 AM  

  • Hey wilson. I know you hate to miss a good poll and love running around Liblogs providing links.

    In the spirit of the season, I thought I'd save you the trouble.

    By Blogger knb, at 6:42 AM  

  • knb,

    You are comparing a "best prime minister" poll to a "how would you vote in an election today" poll. They are not comparable. All the second poll tells us is that Ignatieff polls a fair bit better than Dion, but that this hasn't translated into better poll numbers, possibly because of the coalition nonsense.

    By way of comparison Dion trounced Harper in "who would you vote for" polls taken after he won the Liberal nomination.

    By Blogger hosertohoosier, at 7:40 AM  

  • horsetohoosier, my comment was meant more as a bit of levity directed at the gotcha's that wilson often likes to share.

    By Blogger knb, at 7:57 AM  

  • Angus Reid has it at 37-31. That seems reasonable to me...back to the "resting level" we've been at for most of the past 3 years, not that the "coalition/Dion bump" for the Tories is gone.

    But I wouldn't worry too much about the polls at this point, while things are this volatile. The important thing is how Ignatieff gets defined over the next 2 months.

    By Blogger calgarygrit, at 11:04 AM  

  • "The important thing is how Ignatieff gets defined over the next 2 months."

    Well, according to Jane Taber today, he's going to be a controlling bully. Oh, wait a minute, no, he's going for "message discipline." But I guess it's okay if it's YOUR (LPC) controlling bully?

    Such hypocrisy. (On the part of the media, particularly Ms. Taber.)

    By Blogger Candace, at 7:09 PM  

  • "But I guess it's okay if it's YOUR (LPC) controlling bully?"

    Candace,

    Iggy doesn't seem to be like that.

    By Blogger JimTan, at 10:33 PM  

  • Prairie Kid;

    "Unlike the Liberals who gave their cronies a life long membership to the Senate, Harper at least has told all would be newly appointed Senators that as soon as the reform happens, they will have to give up their seats."

    Told; That's the operative word. Given Mr. Harper's record, I would judge his words on that (or any) subject as more of a temporary proclamation for the sake of political expediency, rather than a real statement of intent that can be taken to the bank.

    How about a written contract to that effect with these newly-appointed Senators? That might instill more confidence in his actual intentions.

    By Anonymous rc, at 9:12 PM  

  • Bush gets a size 10 shoe thrown at him in Iraq. How much damage will you allow harper to get away with before you jettison him?

    By Blogger JimTan, at 2:19 AM  

  • We had this great system of government once. How it worked was a government had to have the confidence of house to spend money. If not, an election or a coalition. To prevent an endless round of elections, undesirably as they distract government, alienate public and are expensive, the Queen is generally understood to give the opportunity for a coalition government to form if confidence is lost 6 months after an election.
    Never has it been realized until now that all you have to do is kill government until that 6 month window is up, to eliminate the de facto checks on power our system is blessed with. And the Queen went along with it. Now, all any future Minority government will do is kill Parliament.

    My suggestion (I'd send to the Senate or the Queen of England, not the government or media for obvious reasons) to try to address this horrible weakness exposed by Harper, is to strip a fraction of MP salaries permanently in the future, to account for expected proroguing. If it is expected government will sit 10% future days and be 10% less effective from 2008 on, deduct salaries 10% and have MPs sit without pay (keep minimum wage and benefits) during proroguing. Wow. From 1867-2007 without this happening. Who needs Al Qaeda?

    By Anonymous Phillip Huggan, at 10:19 AM  

  • Thank you, I like this website
    Is really amazing lot some interesting news
    keep the good works my friend
    Bali Driver, Bali Tours, Bali Tours Services and Bali Day Tours

    By Anonymous Bali Driver, at 11:17 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home