Home FAQ Search Memberlist User Groups Register Login   

BloggingTories.ca Forum IndexBloggingTories.ca Forum Index
    Index     FAQ     Search     Register     Login         JOIN THE DISCUSSION - CLICK HERE      

*NEW* Login or register using your Facebook account.

Not a member? Join the fastest growing conservative community!
Membership is free and takes 15 seconds


CLICK HERE or use Facebook to login or register ----> Connect



Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next  

This forum is locked: you cannot post, reply to, or edit topics.   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Page 8 of 9
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
JBG





Joined: 03 Oct 2007
Posts: 823
Reputation: 93.1Reputation: 93.1
votes: 8
Location: NYC Area

PostPosted: Wed Oct 17, 2007 11:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Craig wrote:
gc wrote:
Harper said he didn't approve of the Liberal throne speech in 2004, but abstained from it in order to avoid an election. Dion is doing the same thing. Not much of a difference there.


Did Harper lay out five items that HAD to be in the speech in order for him to support it? And then support it even though many of those conditions had not been met?

I don't remember 2004 that way. Also, the 2004 speech was immediately after an election. My understanding is that the public expects alleged grownups in Parliament to give a government a chance to work before sending them back to the polls. This has already been a rather long minority government, and a rather successful one.
Triple_R





Joined: 20 Sep 2007
Posts: 111
Reputation: 6.2Reputation: 6.2Reputation: 6.2Reputation: 6.2Reputation: 6.2Reputation: 6.2
votes: 2

PostPosted: Wed Oct 17, 2007 11:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

JBG wrote:
Craig wrote:
gc wrote:
Harper said he didn't approve of the Liberal throne speech in 2004, but abstained from it in order to avoid an election. Dion is doing the same thing. Not much of a difference there.


Did Harper lay out five items that HAD to be in the speech in order for him to support it? And then support it even though many of those conditions had not been met?

I don't remember 2004 that way. Also, the 2004 speech was immediately after an election. My understanding is that the public expects alleged grownups in Parliament to give a government a chance to work before sending them back to the polls. This has already been a rather long minority government, and a rather successful one.


Agreed. Actually, I think that the Tories are buying a bit too much into this "Canadians don't want another federal election" rhetoric. 18 months is the standard shelf life of a minority federal government in Canada - we've already surpassed that. It's no great sin if the government comes down anytime soon.
biggie





Joined: 06 Sep 2006
Posts: 1738
Reputation: 44Reputation: 44Reputation: 44Reputation: 44
votes: 10
Location: Ottawa, Ontario

PostPosted: Thu Oct 18, 2007 8:13 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Triple_R wrote:
JBG wrote:
Craig wrote:
gc wrote:
Harper said he didn't approve of the Liberal throne speech in 2004, but abstained from it in order to avoid an election. Dion is doing the same thing. Not much of a difference there.


Did Harper lay out five items that HAD to be in the speech in order for him to support it? And then support it even though many of those conditions had not been met?

I don't remember 2004 that way. Also, the 2004 speech was immediately after an election. My understanding is that the public expects alleged grownups in Parliament to give a government a chance to work before sending them back to the polls. This has already been a rather long minority government, and a rather successful one.


Agreed. Actually, I think that the Tories are buying a bit too much into this "Canadians don't want another federal election" rhetoric. 18 months is the standard shelf life of a minority federal government in Canada - we've already surpassed that. It's no great sin if the government comes down anytime soon.


I don't think many Canadians want another election so soon... except for conservatives maybe hehe.

Of course... these days likely nobody really cares one way or another. :?
kwlafayette





Joined: 03 Sep 2006
Posts: 6155
Reputation: 156.2Reputation: 156.2
votes: 28
Location: Saskatoon Saskatchewan

PostPosted: Thu Oct 18, 2007 10:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Are we all forgetting here that Canada now has fixed election dates? Harper is committed to Oct 19 2009. I think recent events show just how committed he is to that date. He will not engineer his own defeat, it is just that simple.

Oct 19 2009, mark your calendars.
centrifugal





Joined: 25 Jun 2007
Posts: 100
Reputation: 100.5

PostPosted: Thu Oct 18, 2007 11:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I disagree I think Harper is trying to provoke the Liberals into an election so he has a chance to get a majority. Either way he knows the liberals are not ready to go to the polls so he can pass whatever he wants.

Last edited by centrifugal on Thu Oct 18, 2007 12:19 pm; edited 1 time in total
Ruth





Joined: 07 Nov 2006
Posts: 243
Reputation: 8.5Reputation: 8.5Reputation: 8.5Reputation: 8.5Reputation: 8.5Reputation: 8.5Reputation: 8.5Reputation: 8.5
votes: 7

PostPosted: Thu Oct 18, 2007 12:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

centrifugal wrote:
Either way he knows the liberals are not reading to go to the polls so he can pass whatever he wants.


And as far as I am concerned, he should.
He should just fire away some hardcore legislation. He has proven himself to be a good and very strategically minded leader. Now is his chance to make big changes in this country.
I'm hoping income splitting will be in there somewhere.

--Ruth
centrifugal





Joined: 25 Jun 2007
Posts: 100
Reputation: 100.5

PostPosted: Thu Oct 18, 2007 12:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
And as far as I am concerned, he should.


and he is... and I am loving it.
cosmostein





Joined: 04 Oct 2006
Posts: 7431
Reputation: 297.2
votes: 21
Location: The World

PostPosted: Thu Oct 18, 2007 1:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

As I sit here and think about what has happened in the last 48 hours I really have to think about the logic of Dion's choice.

He is seen in Canada as a weak leader,
Is that his greatest flaw? Is that why the Liberal support in the most optimist polls is stalled and in most polls has fallen?

Let's for a moment take the parties out of this and just look at the man.

He is seen as a weak leader who is "strong" on Environment and little else, but when Environment was the "hot button" item when he was elected it seemed like a good idea.

Had Dion walked out of the throne speech into a face bull of cameras and said that he or the Liberal Party would not be bullied by Harper and the Conservatives and if Harper wanted to go to the polls after a series of poison pills in the speech to undermine the Liberals then he is welcome to do so because the Liberals will vote against the speech.

Does Canada see him as a leader with balls? or a crazy man who just signed his own termination papers?

What if its a split? does that not go against his public persona as a weak leader?

The more I think about it, it would have been better for Dion and the Liberals for them to have shown some teeth.
kwlafayette





Joined: 03 Sep 2006
Posts: 6155
Reputation: 156.2Reputation: 156.2
votes: 28
Location: Saskatoon Saskatchewan

PostPosted: Thu Oct 18, 2007 2:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

What if you are a Liberal MP that needs just one more year to lock in that pension, and the vote was closer than you were comfortable with last time around? What is your advice to Dion then?
gc





Joined: 23 Jun 2007
Posts: 1698
Reputation: 48.4Reputation: 48.4Reputation: 48.4Reputation: 48.4Reputation: 48.4
votes: 16
Location: A Monochromatic World

PostPosted: Thu Oct 18, 2007 2:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

cosmostein wrote:
As I sit here and think about what has happened in the last 48 hours I really have to think about the logic of Dion's choice.

He is seen in Canada as a weak leader,
Is that his greatest flaw? Is that why the Liberal support in the most optimist polls is stalled and in most polls has fallen?

Let's for a moment take the parties out of this and just look at the man.

He is seen as a weak leader who is "strong" on Environment and little else, but when Environment was the "hot button" item when he was elected it seemed like a good idea.

Had Dion walked out of the throne speech into a face bull of cameras and said that he or the Liberal Party would not be bullied by Harper and the Conservatives and if Harper wanted to go to the polls after a series of poison pills in the speech to undermine the Liberals then he is welcome to do so because the Liberals will vote against the speech.

Does Canada see him as a leader with balls? or a crazy man who just signed his own termination papers?

What if its a split? does that not go against his public persona as a weak leader?

The more I think about it, it would have been better for Dion and the Liberals for them to have shown some teeth.


I'm glad Dion didn't vote against the speech. Keep in mind that it is a speech. Words are not going to do any damage to this country. Dion didn't fall for Harper's trap. Now, if Harper tries to pass something very controversial, by all means Dion should vote it down. Then Harper can take that controversial issue into an election campaign...
gc





Joined: 23 Jun 2007
Posts: 1698
Reputation: 48.4Reputation: 48.4Reputation: 48.4Reputation: 48.4Reputation: 48.4
votes: 16
Location: A Monochromatic World

PostPosted: Thu Oct 18, 2007 3:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

kwlafayette wrote:
What if you are a Liberal MP that needs just one more year to lock in that pension, and the vote was closer than you were comfortable with last time around? What is your advice to Dion then?


If I remember correctly, MPs receive a pension after six years of service. In that case, very few MPs will be in that boat, unless they happened to be elected in a by-election in 2002.
Bleatmop





Joined: 03 Sep 2006
Posts: 953
Reputation: 17.5Reputation: 17.5
votes: 10

PostPosted: Thu Oct 18, 2007 5:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

gc wrote:
I'm glad Dion didn't vote against the speech. Keep in mind that it is a speech. Words are not going to do any damage to this country. Dion didn't fall for Harper's trap. Now, if Harper tries to pass something very controversial, by all means Dion should vote it down. Then Harper can take that controversial issue into an election campaign...


I agree. I would like to have an election of a specific issue, and let the Canadian people decide whose vision they like better, ours, or the Liberals. Somehow, I don't see many choosing the Liberals point of view so long as Dion is the head spokesman during an election.
JBG





Joined: 03 Oct 2007
Posts: 823
Reputation: 93.1Reputation: 93.1
votes: 8
Location: NYC Area

PostPosted: Fri Oct 19, 2007 8:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Triple_R wrote:
Agreed. Actually, I think that the Tories are buying a bit too much into this "Canadians don't want another federal election" rhetoric. 18 months is the standard shelf life of a minority federal government in Canada - we've already surpassed that. It's no great sin if the government comes down anytime soon.
Exactly. This is not the same situation as would exist if Harper fell on the April (or maybe March) 2006 Throne Speech.
JBG





Joined: 03 Oct 2007
Posts: 823
Reputation: 93.1Reputation: 93.1
votes: 8
Location: NYC Area

PostPosted: Fri Oct 19, 2007 8:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

kwlafayette wrote:
What if you are a Liberal MP that needs just one more year to lock in that pension, and the vote was closer than you were comfortable with last time around? What is your advice to Dion then?
I would think that's a pitiful reason to keep in power a government one disapproves of. Either they disaprove on principal or they don't.

That reasoning is akin to accepting a bribe.
Craig
Site Admin




Joined: 29 Aug 2006
Posts: 4415
Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8
votes: 36

PostPosted: Fri Oct 19, 2007 9:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

JBG wrote:
Triple_R wrote:
Agreed. Actually, I think that the Tories are buying a bit too much into this "Canadians don't want another federal election" rhetoric. 18 months is the standard shelf life of a minority federal government in Canada - we've already surpassed that. It's no great sin if the government comes down anytime soon.
Exactly. This is not the same situation as would exist if Harper fell on the April (or maybe March) 2006 Throne Speech.


We have a world series every year. Why not an election?
This forum is locked: you cannot post, reply to, or edit topics.   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Page 8 of 9

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next  


 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You can attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Throne Speech Reaction Thread

phpBBCopyright 2001, 2005 phpBB