FlyerTalk Forums

FlyerTalk Forums (https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/index.php)
-   Air Canada | Aeroplan (https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/air-canada-aeroplan-375/)
-   -   OT: Post-Election Discussion Thread (https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/air-canada-aeroplan/333019-ot-post-election-discussion-thread.html)

ohcanada Jun 29, 2004 1:54 pm

Smilin' Jack's Got Nowhere to Go
 
The fact is that this minority will be more stable than a lot of people think.

- Smilin' Jack and the NDP blew their entire budget (and more) flying around the copuntry in hopes of a big breakthough. They increased their popular vote tremendously, and under the new party funding formula will get lots of $$$$ until the next election. It is extremely unlikely that the NDP will improve on their popular vote the next time around, and there is a good chance that they will fall back to their historical levels of voter support if there is a Liberal resurgence.

- the Bloc is unlikely to enjoy the same level of support and influence in another election. Nobody in Quebec sees this as a permanent move to the Bloc (as opposed to punishment of the Liberals) and the Bloc therefore has nowhere to go but down.

- the Conservatives need time to get organized and try to gain credibility (they are never going to convince parnel and his ilk, but there are some people who are willing to listen if they get their act together). They also need the $$$$ that their respectable popular vote total will provide.

- the Liberals just want to continue to be in power, any way they can, and will not force an election until they are certain that they can win a majority. Based on the shaky campaign that Martin ran, they will be much internal discussion about whether he should stay and for how long. The Gomery inquiry is going to dig up all sorts of embarrassing stuff that will dog the Libs for a while, especially in Quebec. It will be a while before the Libs will be confident enough to go back to the polls.

So there will be very little impetus from anywhere to call an election anytime soon, so despite what you might hear about "lines in the sand" from Smilin' Jack, I think the showdown rhetoric will be just that for some time.

stinger Jun 29, 2004 2:15 pm


Originally Posted by parnel
I vote we trade Alberta for Texas...even those red necks are less radical than the Alberta ones.


If we keep trading away the "have" provinces eventually that will leave us with the "have nots" . Then who will pay for all of Martin's promises.

Since Taupo is going to be in town in July. Let's call our FT get together a festival and see if we can't get some money from uncle Paul. I'm sure if will be started up again in a couple of weeks after this whole election thing blows over. ;)

AC*SE Jun 29, 2004 2:18 pm

Some musings...
 
Well, the Atlantic unfolded in predictable fashion--I didn't think the NDP would lose a seat in NS, but odd things happen. Quebec was not the washout that the BQ hoped, and really only reflects a swing in 16 ridings, that are still likely to vote <<non>> should the referendum come again.

Ontario had a couple of interesting races. I was only mildly surprised at Trinity-Spadina. After all how often has The Spadina not gone Liberal? I was a little disappointed to see Valeri squeak through. I am not a huge Copps fan, but I think she was treated shabbily, and Valeri has not distinguished himself in Cabinet.

I venture to say that BC was the most interesting region to watch. The Tories faced a number of uphill battles. The Tory losses in North Van and New West, and the long night's count in West Van-Sunshine Coast all suggest that the Tories are losing ground in parts of the GVRD, which has very interesting implications for May 17, 2005.

The election of the Grewals is a disappointment. He has been a poor constituency MP, and she was tremendously inarticulate during the campaign. On the other hand, although I don't align with him politically, I am glad to see Chuck Cadman demonstrate that you can't buy a seat in the House of Commons by stacking a constituency association meeting. In a similar vein, Scott Brison's and Keith Martin's wins are interesting, as is John Herron's loss.

I don't think that there is any way to spin the larger result positively for the Tories. With the wind at their backs (sponsorship), a rising tide (McGuinty's budget) and the stars in alignment (low turnout), they still couldn't pull a meaningful nubmer of seats in Ontario.

The establishment of another government by the collective will of Ontario is going to further fan the flames of Western discontent. That will leave the Tories with conflicting priorities within caucus, with the Westerners pushing the old Alliance Agenda, and the moderates (with McKay and Stronach on the front bench) telling them, "we can't win without Ontario, and we can't win Ontario if you don't shut up." Harper is going to have his work cut out for him to stop the usual Conservative habit of eating their young.

Meanwhile, the Liberals don't need 155, even with the NDP, because the Bloc know full well that in the best of all possible circumstances they still only polled under 50%, and failed to reach their target of 60 seats. They know they are not going to improve on this number, so they have no incentive to bring the government down. Only a significant intrusion into what the Bloc views as provincial jurisdiction would serve to turn them away, and frankly, Martin doesn't have a great need to start pulling out large new spending programs. His only real juggling acts will be to negotiate a deal with the premiers on increased EPF transfers, and potentially throwing Day Care into the mix.

As minority government's go, I am betting that this will be a relatively stable one. It will be as long lived as is needed to put the pieces in place for a new majority, whether that is Tory implosion, fading memories of the sponsorship scandal, a PQ victory in the next Quebec provincial election, or a combination of these factors.

Shareholder Jun 29, 2004 2:20 pm

A Conservative couple in a pair of B.C. lower Fraser Valley ridings, part of which were held by him in the last House. ;)

Stranger Jun 29, 2004 2:31 pm


Originally Posted by YUL
Just to give you some hints about the feelings of MOST BQ voters here (including myself):

Don't worry, we don't want any special treatments, we just want our taxes to be spent efficiently.

But we don't:

a. want the "hell to break loose" in Canada each time Bombardier gets a loonie to export, while when feds puts $ in automobile/farming/fishing/gun registry/sponsorship/provincial juridictions, it's always OK and efficient.

b. want federal spendings in provincial fields (using $ it cut to the provinces and direct taxation powers it stole in WW2). That makes for overlapping of programs/endless fighting/conflict of objectives/absence of accomptability/wasted taxpayer $/chaos. Nobody signed for that BS in 1867. The federal then consisted only of Defense, International relations/trade, transcontinantal rail and that was about it.

c. want to be bombarded with overwhelming BS federal propagenda (sponsorship $) telling us how Canadians "loves" us and how a terrible independance would be.


You would be suprised how Quebecers respects Canadians (excluding politicians)and admires Canada. They really don't want to interfer with Canadians affairs. They don't want any money from them either.

The big idea here is to collect all of our taxes and manage all of our responsabilities.

Quebecers would maintain any present aggrements/associations/institutions/ partnerships that Canadians wish to maintain, including a fair share of the present dept repayment.
If Canadians wishes a cut off, well so be it I guess. Worst case we'll still be all part of NAFTA. (And anyways, for some reasons, Quebec has always been so much more successfull exporting outside Canada than inside - so we'll have to drink more milk and get our cars/beef/toasters where it's cheaper :D )

We should all see it as a fantastic opportunity.

No more Quebec whinning.
No need to search and fire separatist federal employees
No more subsidies/transfer paiements/"special treatments" to Quebec.
No more such thing as a "distinct" society.
No more sponsorship programs to protect national unity.
No more BQ/PQ/"Queeebec" in canadian news.
No more language issues.
No more Quebec whinning about Air Canada
Shorter canadian history books (by removing anything to french and pre1759) :D
Best of all, no Quebec prime minister anymore, niet, none, nada. (and no more Stephane Dion as a bonus) :p
(please please provide more examples in your replies)

(Too bad it won't geographycaly go away and as may find yourself in Montreal or Quebec city once a while :( )

You see, Quebecers and Canadians share all the same goals... :D

And believe me, there is no ways Charest's Liberals will stay in power, even in 2007. And we all know the PQ will translates above feelings into a question like "achieve outright souverainty or keep Canadians (who loves us so much)to manage two third of our taxes".

Please don't shoot the messager. I'm just providing a different view on how some Quebecers thinks. It's really not like wanting to have the cake and eating it too. They were 49.5% to think like that in 1995.
I admit there are emotional voters (and not so logical) in there, but believe me they also exist on the other side.

(And I realise that about nobody in this forum will share above ideas)


Sounds like Alberta to me.

Shareholder Jun 29, 2004 2:37 pm

"I don't think that there is any way to spin the larger result positively for the Tories. With the wind at their backs (sponsorship), a rising tide (McGuinty's budget) and the stars in alignment (low turnout), they still couldn't pull a meaningful nubmer of seats in Ontario."

Of course, the Conservatives really didn't have a policy for this election. There was a committee under Peter McKay that hobbled together a mish-mash of a compromise policy comprised of what seems the worst of the Alliance and the worst of the PCs.

As for McGuinty's budget, yes a lot of Ontario residents were mad about that, but even more remembered the Harris years and didn't want to see a repeat of that terror rained down on the cities. [The Conservatives didn't have a policy on cities because to them, cities only exist as a figment of the provincial governments.] And particularly in the GTA where several ex-Harris cabinet ministers were repudiated for a second time in a year. And the Liberals played on this, once Harris popped up in some of the campaign chatter. [As they played on Mulroney, who is still the most despised PM in Ontario history.]

Another problem, the Conservative brain trust had few strategists in this province who were not Harris-ites, and thus were totally out of touch with the rank and file voter here. Rural riding that returned to the fold were the ones that had been lost by vote splitting between PCs and Alliance, so they returned to the blue side. Yes, the federal Liberals were not trusted because Adscam just reinforced all the bad things about the Chretien regime. But where else could they go? It was time to scold little Pauly, and set him on the proper road.

Could the Conservatives have done better in Ontario? Not with the policies they did have: no business subsidies, leaving social matters in the hands of wild eyed Red Necks from Alberta and the BC hinterland...

Now, if Martin does appoint Dennis Mills to the Toronto Habour Commission as Mills has been saying all day on local radio, then it will be same-old, same-old and we'll know the Liberals know they are invincible, even if they do have to govern with minority governments...

exAC Jun 29, 2004 2:53 pm


Originally Posted by parnel
....even those red necks are less radical than the Alberta ones.

Memo to King Ralph:

Ref: The firewall.

Make it higher and stronger.

exAC Jun 29, 2004 3:14 pm


Originally Posted by MapleLeaf
Yeah simple -

Wrong answer, but from living in the East it is not surprising as the Eastern dominated media failed to recognize that a husband and wife both got elected yesterday.

However, it was 'Out West' so not as newsworthy.

parnel Jun 29, 2004 3:42 pm


Originally Posted by stinger
If we keep trading away the "have" provinces eventually that will leave us with the "have nots" . Then who will pay for all of Martin's promises.

Since Taupo is going to be in town in July. Let's call our FT get together a festival and see if we can't get some money from uncle Paul. I'm sure if will be started up again in a couple of weeks after this whole election thing blows over. ;)


Hell, there's more money made in Houston on a bad day than in all of Alberta in a whole year.

ProudEdmontonian Jun 29, 2004 4:23 pm


Originally Posted by exAC
Memo to King Ralph:

Ref: The firewall.

Make it higher and stronger.

As a real Albertan, what a load of nonsense.... :rolleyes:

AC*SE Jun 29, 2004 4:26 pm


Originally Posted by exAC
Wrong answer, but from living in the East it is not surprising as the Eastern dominated media failed to recognize that a husband and wife both got elected yesterday.

However, it was 'Out West' so not as newsworthy.

It made the Globe and Mail with a teaser on page 1, below the fold.

parnel Jun 29, 2004 5:03 pm


Originally Posted by PunishedEdmontonian
As a real Albertan, what a load of nonsense.... :rolleyes:


Maybe that firewall ought to be around Calgary where the real rednecks are.
Jason Kenny for one was an arrogant disaster last night when he was interviewed and there are some other real "winners" from that area.

exAC Jun 29, 2004 5:03 pm


Originally Posted by PunishedEdmontonian
As a real Albertan, what a load of nonsense.... :rolleyes:

What is a real Albertan???

Ken hAAmer Jun 29, 2004 5:04 pm


Of course, the Conservatives really didn't have a policy for this election. There was a committee under Peter McKay that hobbled together a mish-mash of a compromise policy comprised of what seems the worst of the Alliance and the worst of the PCs.
Worse than that, as long as the leadership of the Reform party refuses to reign in, let alone disown, neanderthals like Randy White, they will continue to be seen as a fringe party, even in fringe-friendly BC.

parnel Jun 29, 2004 5:05 pm


Originally Posted by exAC
What is a real Albertan???


Not you apparantly, among most of the real ones I've met.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 2:41 pm.


This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.