Saturday, March 26, 2011

Coalition questions

As we all know by now a key element in the Conservative Party election strategy will be to use every opportunity to brand Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff with the "C" word -- Coalition.

On the face of it, this is a pretty good plan.

One of the most powerful emotions in politics, after all, is fear. The Liberals played this card against the Conservatives in previous elections with their "Harper has a scary hidden agenda" tactic.

Now the Tories are turning the tables and trying to whip up fears that if there is another minority government the Liberals, NDP and Bloc will from an unholy "socialist-separatist" alliance just as they did in late 2008.

But while this certainly makes sense, I still have a few questions:

1. How many Canadians today still fear or even remember the 2008 "Coalition"? It would be an interesting poll question to ask voters "What is the Coalition"?

2. In 2008 the Coalition was most hated in Western Canada where the Conservatives are already strong. It was most popular in Quebec where the Conservatives want to make gains. Does this mean ranting against the Coalition could be a net political disadvantage for the Conservatives?

3. Will it be enough of an issue to have any punch by the time Election Day arrives?

Anyway, this is what the Tories will run on so they must have the answers.


Anonymous said...

I really don't understand your point. Is it to question a party strategy, question how voters feel or what?
What I have found while out door knocking is that many folks fear the coalition would give access to the NDP members who have more than close Tye's with Arab extremists, The Bloq would really get their hands on the Treasury and Ignatieff is to weird to lead anything.
So why not take advantage of every tidbit or are we in the habit of second guessing every nuance?

Anonymous said...

Iggy will eventually try to justify his planned Coalition of Losers by the precedence of what happened in the UK. He has that wrong.

Coalitions that do not include the winning party are undemocratic. Iggy’s hidden agenda is a threat to democracy.

In the UK, the coalition that Cameron set up is by his party that had more seats, i.e. by the winner and the party that came second. Iggy cannot use the UK example for justification of a Coalition unless he gains more seats than any other party.

Moreover, for Iggy and Jack and Gilles to band together and say that “ We the Losers are in fact the Winners” is an attack on democracy and the will of the people. That kind of a Coalition would set up a situation where power is removed from the people and put into the hands of politicians who can ignore the will of the people and set up deals amongst themselves to gain power.


Anonymous said...

Harper was going to join a coalition of the losers in 2004.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said Harper was going to join a coalition of losers in 04. That is pure speculation. Yes he said the GG should look at her options. That went nowhere as we all know.
That is by far not a comparison to the 08 coalition where cabinet positions were being decided and the Bloc given veto over anything to do with Quebec. By the way that 08 agreement does not expire until June. 30, 2011.
This is the right strategy. Harper will tie this in to every message he delivers on any subject. Ignatieff blew it because he waffled on the question. Ignatieff said that the confidence of the House is the thing. He will arrange with his buddies to defeat the new minority Conservative government when it first meets then invite the GG to ask him to form a government. Formal or informal the new "Liberal" government then will have to negotiate with all the parties to get anything done. That is no way to run a country and certainly is not a recipe for stability.

L said...

A lot of conservative voters in western Canada were very upset about the coalition. It is top of mind. We had finally elected a leader who understood the west after years of not being considered. You bet, we remember.

Anonymous said...

The west has a long memory...If the Libs don't have a coherent, compelling platform by week 2, they'll be buried by the media and Harper will get the majority that Martin was supposed to inherit.

AToryNoMore said...

I'm hoping Duceppe pulls out the coalition letter that Harper wanted to broker at the Televised Leaders Debates, whenever they are.