The Race is On!
Sound Off!
Got something to say?
Sound off in Comments
Sound off in Comments
Share This Blog Post
Can't see the 'ShareThis' icon? Reload your page view by pressing Shift and clicking Refresh at the same time."... and here comes pride in the backstretch, heartache goin' to the inside", as the old country song goes.
By the time that Canadians vote on Oct 14th, there will be plenty of pride -- wounded and otherwise -- and heartache goes without saying, as for every winner in this campaign there will be a handful of those whose ambitions fell short.
This is Canada's 40th election since 1897 and our third since 2004. And much like our friends to the south who elect either a Democrat or Republican president, Canada's head of government is also a two party affair -- either Conservative or Liberal.
But in our Parliamentary system it's the leader of the party that wins the most seats that is asked to form government. In a minority government, where no party has more than one-half of the seats (like Liberal Paul Martin in 2004 and Conservative Stephen Harper in 2006) elections are more frequent and there is typically less political stability.
Much of this campaign -- whether you want Liberal Stephane Dion's carbon tax, the Green Shift or believe, as I do, that it's a wealth transfer targetting Western Canada -- will be about minority vs. majority governments.
Stephen Harper has presided over the longest minority government in Canadian history. Most minorities last less than 18 months -- Harper's has been 32 months. Some say that minority governments are good because they moderate (and ultimately handcuff) governments from being too extreme. Others -- and I'm in this camp -- prefer governments, either Liberal or Conservative, to get on with governing and then be judged in four years time on what they've done.
So, this time -- much like the last -- you'll hear a lot about Stephen Harper on a personal level. Liberals will argue that he is so untrustworthy, so "hidden agenda" laden that he can't be trusted with a majority. Conservatives will counter that Harper has provided good governance and has been as advertised. And, besides, in a leadership comparison he is head and shoulders above the Liberal's Dion.
While the campaign is supposed to be Green Shift vs. Green Shaft -- the environment vs. how to turn around a struggling Central Canadian economy -- this will be a very personal campaign.
Yes, the race is on.
Comments
Selective content
I noticed on the drive to work today that you were taking a poll on how people were going to vote.
I know for a fact that your calls are screened so I am wondering how many liberal and NDP supporters your producer hung up on in order to present you with only conservative supporters for your vote.
Except for one guy and you made damn sure he did not get any chance to point out the flaws and lies and mistakes of the current conservative government. As soon as he tried you hung up on him.
Tell us John, master of conservative 'integrity', why did Stephen Harper break his own promise of a fixed election date? Guess you got no answer for that eh? Typical. If it were an NDP promise that was broken you would be all over it.
Do you really think Canadian voters in Saskatchewan are so stupid that your little tricks to pump up support for Harper are going to work? Maybe they are, but I'm not and I think your approach is a pathetic deception.
Selective content
I think it's a stretch to assume that Tammy the producer is screening calls because so many of the respondants were in favour of the Conservatives. I do think that the poll is more indicative of the audience that Gormley attracts rather than which party is fairing better nationally.
Hypocrasy
If you really believe that governments should just govern for their four years then why is it OK that Harper broke his fixed election date promise? He was NOT brought down by the opposition, he called this election on his own.
What if this promise was broken by a Liberal or an NDP, you would certainly have many negative comments then, and threats of treason (ooops sorry ... 'separation'), etc.
Seems like John Gormley supports liars.
I think I'm going to vote
I think I'm going to vote for Harper this time. If he gets a majority then we'll quickly see if he has a hidden social agenda and if he does it will be a long time before the conservatives have a man in Ottawa again.
Besides, it will force the Liberal party to get rid of their weak leader.
Well it doesn't appear that
Well it doesn't appear that John, directly or indirectly, is filtering his blog so he's being open at least on this medium.
John is an excellent debater, he has wit, he has memory, he has knowledge of politics and he has a dictionary/thesaurus built into his head. He also has a lot of common sense, well at least the conservative version of it.
However, generally speaking, being a good debater does not equate to being correct, nor to being truthful.
I believe John is truthful to his own understanding and is basically an honourable man, but in a number of areas he is simply wrong, and when his error sneaks up on him and bites him, his impulse is to hang up instead of considering information counter to his beliefs.
Give the man a break, he's just doing his job.
A little break ... but no more
I can be a little forgiving of John's screening of calls to ensure only what he personally believes is what is being preached on his show. Depending on the subject this tactic is necessary to keep the flow of the show going but the tactic reduces his value as a political commentator.
He uses the same tactics of simply out screaming the opposition that all other conservatives use. It is the tactic of a poorly educated man with a weak argument so why is John using it so much?
As far as an honourable man goes. I do not know John except on the radio and then only his voice so I cannot speak to this issue. He probably is, I see no reason why he shouldn't be, but I do not know this.
I know he is doing his job, I just wish he would present a more even playing field when he is discussing politics, his audience deseerves at least this much. If he wants to go after the NDP like a pitbull with a rat in it's mouth then OK, that's good, we need our watch dogs to keep an eye on all politicians to keep them honest. But, use the same vehemence when taking on conservatives as well. This is all I ask. Be consistent
I agree with you. If you
I agree with you.
If you re-read my post with sarcasm/irony in mind you might find it more critical.
He debates with me by hanging up on me and then 'rebutting' my point when I can no longer answer him.
Hmm
For the record i voted conservetive last election.
Now I remeber that when harper made his post election speach he said "the west is in"...well i dont remember when Quebec became part of western canada?
He has done nothing but screw Sask and dish out fat hand outs to Quebec inorder to get votes.
I understand that yes we should not get equalization in our thriving econonmy...but dont play us for fools...harper lied about the formula. Just be honest and say that your party lied. I hate surgar coating things!
I think voting for the liberals will not get anywhere this time...because of such a weak leader. Therefore i am going to vote for the NDP...i know sounds nuts...but what the hell at least layton will call a spade a spade.
Hey Gary - sure Gormley's a
Hey Gary - sure Gormley's a smart enough guy - smart enough to milk the talking heads circuit for all it's worth. But come on man, are you really so hot-to-trot to get on this blog that you'd slather up such an act of adoration on the man that even his most ardent sychophants would turn a might pink? Maybe you should dash over and wash his car or take a week off work to shine the Marcos complex - apparently he keeps quite a stable, eh? But you are right on one count - Gormley is a 'shadow' boxer...he only spars when he can win and he has his 'ring' toadies filter and block everything. Thing is though Gar, that's not debate, that's dictate; that's what autocrats do...
As I mentioned to Robinhood,
As I mentioned to Robinhood, reread my post in light of implied criticism. My very last point was sarcasm.
I have my points 'rebutted' after the call more than anyone I can remember.
As far as a desire to get on this blog, I post frequently on several blog/forums. I certainly have no need to be on this blog except as a medium I can use to correct some of the ridiculously bad arguments he uses when he talks about AGW. He certainly doesn't let me do so on his show.
Add New Comment