CAPRU had a day skip, but is back yet again with your fun supply of Canadian punditry.

Rick Bell:

When you see Tories doling out more than a half-million bucks for a fancy quad ski lift at an Edmonton bunny hill and the cash is a must, because rich kids from the capital city’s southwest shouldn’t have to wait in line to tumble down what passes for a slope, you know what appears as grey matter under the legislature dome is unplugged from the best of planet Earth’s brainwaves.

Yes, the $600,000 is cash from VLT gamblers but it’s still coin the province gets and can spend as it sees fit.

And it is a small amount but it is a sign of something bigger. The provincial poobahs will have to be dragged kicking and screaming into the rude reality of the current financial calamity.

You see, most of today’s elected Tories are Conservatives of convenience. They’re Tories because that’s how you get elected. It’s just a brand.

Rebecca Walberg: Harper was too much economics and not enough culture war. In these times of economic turmoil and strife, we clearly need more culture war and social division. Harper lost not due to his complete lack of a plan for the clear economic troubles Ontario and Quebec are having or his lack of charisma. No, the only thing that kept Harper and crew from getting that majority was not taking a clear stance on the issues that matter during a recession; abortion and gay marriage.

The Toronto Star:

Dion has accurately diagnosed a major cause of the malaise: a moribund fundraising apparatus dramatically outpaced by the Conservative and NDP machines. Lacking a deep campaign war chest, the Liberals were unable to fend off a negative advertising onslaught that framed him as a geeky, goofy, professorial politician.

“I want to protect the next leader against that,” Dion vowed.

By announcing his departure, Dion signalled the end of a noble experiment in Canadian politics where a principled politician could concentrate on ideas and policies, rather than imagery and advertising. But his formidable intellectual credentials, his political courage during the national unity debates, and his impressive commitment to saving the environment and fighting poverty failed to impress voters.

Paula Arab:

I’ll say it even though it’s unpopular: homeless people have rights, too. We forget that, because those already down on their knees aren’t likely to get up and defend themselves, or remind us they’re part of the human race.

And anyone who says it for them risks a public stoning, being dismissed as a bleeding-heart communist, or told to take in the homeless themselves.

Look at the backlash after B.C. Supreme Court Justice Carol Ross upheld the rights of homeless to protect themselves from the elements, when forced to sleep outdoors.

…

Sleeping in a public park is a last resort, when all other options fail. And everyone facing that kind of dire situation has every right to try and cover themselves from the wind, rain and cold.

If they don’t, they risk freezing or catching a life-threatening illness like pneumonia.

Bob Hepburn is taking bets on who the next Liberal leader will be. His top bet? Former New Brunswick premier Frank McKenna.

Naheed Nenshi:

Almost lost in the discussion has been one very smart strategy: Obama focused hard on the almost-forgotten state of Iowa, a state that had voted Democratic in three elections, but which John Kerry lost.

Not only did Obama win a surprisingly large victory in the Iowa caucuses, he moved the state into the Democrat camp. With Iowa in his pocket, he can afford to lose the traditional battlegrounds of Ohio and Florida, as long as he picks up votes in places like Colorado, Nevada and New Mexico.

So, what’s the Liberals’ Iowa?

If we assume that they can defend their pockets of strength in Toronto, Montreal, and Atlantic Canada, where else do they concentrate their efforts, long before the next election, to build their starting position? Manitoba? Urban mothers? Established suburbs in mid-sized cities?

What is clear is that they need to rebuild a coalition. It’s impossible to win an election when you start by writing off one-third of all the seats.

1h

Now that Dion has officially stepped down, it’s time for the next CAPRU.

Don Macpherson: For those unaware of history, Trudeau lost the 1979 election, stepped down as official leader, but stayed as interim leader. Within a year there was an election and Trudeau won for the Liberals. Contrary to what Dion may think or the Conservatives may think, Dion is not Trudeau.

Neil Waugh: Now that Dion has officially stepped down, I’m just going to add insult to injury and repeat every provably false or misleading Conservative talking point about Dion and the Green Shift one last time. I’ll miss you Dion, you made my job as a Conservative mouthpiece so easy.

Jeffrey Simpson: Second verse, same as the first.

Bob Rae and Michael Ignatieff will surely contend again for the prize, if that is what you want to call the Liberal leadership these days. They did well last time. Mr. Ignatieff could probably have won the leadership if Mr. Rae had thrown him his support. But then lots of things could have happened last time. Either Mr. Rae or Mr. Ignatieff could have won except for crippling weaknesses and errors.

Mr. Ignatieff had not spent enough time in Canada. His support for the U.S. invasion of Iraq was toxic. Now, however, Mr. Ignatieff has recanted his Iraq views, paid his dues in the party, and can fairly say he was ahead of his time accepting Quebeckers as a “nation.” Mr. Rae never really gave the party a set of ideas that defined his candidacy. He gave them rather the gift of himself, a gift with considerable talents and extensive liabilities, including his unhappy tenure as NDP premier of Ontario. Those years are fading in memory. He, too, has paid his dues, running and being elected as a Liberal, something he had not done when running for the leadership the first time.

Les Leyne: Regardless of how effective they are, carbon taxes are not popular. Dion’s green shift seem to have derailed his campaign unilaterally, even though it was a revenue neutral plan. Campbell’s (BC’s premier) carbon tax will likely hurt him come the elections in May. Why? “The tax annoys people and the revenue neutrality confounds them.”

Adam Radwanski:

A confluence of factors has helped turn our election races into schoolyard tussles. The anything-goes nature of online debate — on blogs and even on parties’ official websites — has spilled over into mainstream discourse much the way talk radio infected it south of the border. The media’s obsession with “war rooms” has left their occupants trying to outdo one another with gratuitous attacks. And the clutter of five parties competing in a 24-hour news cycle has left them making increasingly shrill noises in the hope of being heard.

Some parties are worse offenders than others. But Canadians are casting a plague on all their houses. Voter turnout was at a record low in this election, falling to 59 per cent. And anecdotal evidence suggests that most people simply tuned out all the noise until the campaign’s final week.

Nigel Hannaford:

… those with deeper understanding appreciate that Canada is badly flawed by its imperialist, racist, God-fearing past, blah, blah, blah.

…

The unfortunate thing is today’s judging of the actions of people who lived a hundred years ago by the standards of people alive today.

To be fair, would one not judge people by the standards of their day? For instance, let’s say it turns out driving SUVs causes global warming, after all. How accurate, never mind fair, would it be if in 100 years time, a future generation wrote of SUV-drivers as though they were wilful criminals?

… do we condemn a policy of preparing aboriginal people for the world we had imposed on them which, by the standards of 120 years ago, stood out as progressive. Remember, by 1890, the residential schools were up and running. But, in the U.S., that was also the year of the Battle of Wounded Knee: Thus Canadian natives got teachers, the Sioux got the 7th Cavalry.

And so on. Bottom line: We need to be a little more forgiving of our forefathers, and give them credit for doing the best they could without our superior knowledge and morality.

Lawrence Martin believes that the Canadian Obama is not coming and progressives should stop waiting for him. Simply put, Canada is rapidly heading towards a Conservative future while the states become more progressive. However, I believe, unlike the 30s when this lat happened, there will be no great depression to jolt us back. [Ed Note: and most Canadians hope you are wrong Lawrence. Well, at least 62% of them do.]

Erik Rolfsen:

… on March 18, the day he made [the] now-famous “A More Perfect Union” speech in Philadelphia.

When I watched that speech, like so many Canadians I came away wishing we had a chance to vote for a guy like that. A leader who can really inspire comes around only once every 50 years or so in politics.

We haven’t had one since Pierre Trudeau and Americans hadn’t had once since before I was born. I couldn’t believe they were considering NOT making this man president.

Andrew Coyne has an interesting wrap-up on the recent election. He believes that nobody won this election, least of all the Conservatives under their leader Stephen Harper.

This is an indictment, not just of the particular tactics of this campaign, but of the whole strategic vision of the party’s “pragmatists.” They have led the polls since they were elected, yet they have been chasing all the way — chasing the middle, chasing Quebec — only to see their quarries recede ever further from their grasp. All that tacking about, all their attempts to denude themselves of anything resembling an ideology, has not produced a more conservative public: it has never been more liberal. The effect of Tory efforts to woo Quebec nationalists has not been to bring Quebec into the Conservative fold, still less to make them more Canadian: it has only persuaded them to withdraw still further from national life, to consider Canada as little more than a ready source of cash and favours. Think of all that the Conservatives have thrown at Quebec. Billions of dollars in the name of the fictional “fiscal imbalance.” The status of nation. A growing role in foreign affairs. And it all falls to pieces over a few paltry cuts in arts funding?

1h

The infamous CAPRU returns with another late-night edition.

Greg Weston: The Liberals are screwed. Not only was the last election the worst electoral performance in their history, but they are heading very rapidly towards bankruptcy because their few remaining supporters are not likely to open their wallets to the Liberals until they sort themselves out.

Jack Knox: There is a serious problem with homeless people camping out in the parks of Victoria. It’s the fact that there are so many people are being forced to camp out in the parks of Victoria in the first place. City Hall needs to solve the problem, not the symptoms.

Tom Brodbeck: Safe Injection Sites don’t work, don’t listen to all of the “science” and “facts. These random scientists don’t believe they work and neither do the politicians who are ideologically opposed to it, so clearly they are useless. Also, global warming is a myth, evolution is false and the Earth is actually flat. Since I don’t believe in those and neither does this random scientist, they are clearly false. Anyone who tries to convince you otherwise is part of the conspiracy.

Lorne Gunter manages to incorporate most myths that global warming skeptics trot out to desperately protect their position into his entirely disjointed and confusing editorial. For explanations as to why these are conspiracty theories, see Grist’s How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic.

Toronto Star: Ontarians want to be environmental. However, they also want to keep their acreages and cottages, and don’t want any of those big wind power generators popping up anywhere.

Rachel Sa:

I felt dirty after voting last Tuesday.

I’ve voted in every election since I was eligible, casting my ballot in each of Canada’s last four general elections. Now, after 10 years of suffrage, I’m wondering: Will I ever get to mark my ballot for the person or party I really want?

Thanks to our antiquated first-past-the-post electoral system, I’m sure I wasn’t the only Canadian who held her nose and voted for a candidate I don’t support just to ensure the candidate I really don’t support didn’t get a seat.

Steven A. Sovran:

In Mr. Skinner’s column, he admonishes readers about the “hidden costs” of a single-payer health care system as per the Canadian model. He writes that in comparison with the U.S., Canadian health care is in fact cheaper, but only as a result of having fewer advanced technologies, fewer surgeries and fewer medical resources.

Startling statistics presented in the article assert that for the 55 per cent more per capita spent on health care, Americans are certainly getting their money’s worth — 327 per cent more MRI units, 183 per cent more CT scanners and 100 per cent more surgeries. These statistics are striking and undeniable.

Interestingly, however, not a single mention is made about patient’s health outcomes.

Does all this investment in technology, equipment, and physical space change the health of people?

Ian Shanley: Dion didn’t lose this election; Canadian democracy lost it, with a paltry 59.1% of registered voters even bothering to show up at the polls.

Michael Geist: Canadian political parties needs to join the rest of us in the 21st century if they want anyone to vote for them.

This low-risk, low reward approach does little to inspire the public, instead seeking to solidify existing support.

It also leaves millions of Canadians on the sidelines as they see little reason to become political engaged or active. Indeed, by the measure of voter turnout, virtually all the parties were losers with more than a million lost votes combined for the Conservatives, Liberals, and New Democrats (each party received fewer votes in 2008 than they did in 2006).

In fact, it may only serve to propagate the perception of superior care in the public eye.

Ian Robinson: Canadians overwhelmingly voted against the environment in the election. Just ignore the  62% of voters who supported environmental parties!  We clearly should ignore all of this enviromentalism stuff since more Conservatives won seats.

Trevor Harrison:

I interviewed Stephen Harper many years ago. He was thirty-one years old and already the Reform Party’s policy advisor. I don’t remember a lot about the interview. What I do remember, however, is his telling me that, politically, a party did not want (note: “want,” not “need”) the support of a lot of voters, not even a plurality — this would mean too many debts to pay later on — but merely enough to gain power.

This argument — he had a fancy name for it, which I have long forgotten — was already being practiced elsewhere. In Britain, Maggie Thatcher’s Conservatives had narrow-casted its support to concentrate on voters in the English south. In the United States, the Reagan Republicans were already sorting out their cadre of hard-core voters from everyone else, a practice (often today referred to as “retail politics”) that later (under Karl Rove) became even more elaborate. Ontario’s Harris Conservatives — many of whom, including Finance Minister Jim Flaherty, are part of Harper’s cabinet — adopted the same tactics of divide and rule in the 1990s.

1h

Like a 2-4 of stubbies, here’s your daily fix (of Canadian punditry).

Crossposted at DailyKos

Josee Legault:

Whether the next government is a Conservative or a Liberal minority, chances are that historians will register this campaign as the most ideologically-driven in this country’s modern history.

Beyond the strategies, tactics, pooping puffins, powder-blue sweaters or invisible Conservative candidates, this campaign has been marked by a confrontation between the Tories’ neoconservative vision and the more centrist or left-of-centre policies of the Liberals, the NDP, the Bloc Québécois and the Green Party.

…

On the other hand, this ideological narrative confirmed how divided the non-conservative parties were at the onset and how united the neocons remain. But now, with a possible second Tory minority, or perhaps even a Liberal one, one of two things could happen.

Harper and his mentor, Tom Flanagan, could get their wish of seeing the non-conservative votes remain hopelessly fragmented among four parties. Or, with the sovereignty issue out of the way at this time, and without getting into a formal coalition, Dion, Duceppe, Jack Layton and Elizabeth May could cut some productive issue-by-issue deals in the next Parliament.

Hicks on Six:

With the financial world in turmoil, be aware of up coming forced mergers.

Hale Business Systems, Mary Kay Cosmetics, Fuller Brush and W. R. Grace Co. will merge to become Hale, Mary, Fuller, Grace.

3M will merge with Goodyear and become MMMGood.

Zippo, Audi, Dofasco, and Dacro will be known as ZipAudiDoDa.

FedEx and competitor UPS will unite as FedUP.

Grey Poupon and Docker Pants are expected to become PouponPants.

Victoria’s Secret and Smith & Wesson will merge. The new name? TittyTittyBangBang.

John Ivison: Oh noes! Everyone in the country has fallen under Dion-mania. So, I must parrot out the same old Conservative talking points everyone has heard time and again about how since Dion is a Liberal he must be planning to increase taxes. That should scare everyone back in line.

The Toronto Star:

And many Conservative candidates have been missing in action. The Star assigned reporters to do profiles on all 47 ridings in the Greater Toronto Area. These reporters say that many Conservative candidates were hard to reach, dodging interviews and failing to return calls. There have also been reports of Conservative candidates boycotting all-candidates meetings. And all but one Conservative candidate in Ontario refused to reply to Premier Dalton McGuinty’s letter seeking their views on fair treatment of this province.

This overly controlled style of campaigning, with virtually all the messages emanating from one man, Harper, is a perversion of parliamentary democracy. Yes, Harper is the party leader and ought to be the main messenger. But other Conservative candidates – the successful ones, anyway – will also sit in Parliament and take part in debates and committee hearings. Restricting access to them during the campaign reflects poorly on Harper and his team.

Michael Den Tandt:

The irony? Harper is right. Canada is in relatively good shape. What he doesn’t mention: Whatever cushion we might have had in the Paul Martin era is gone. Jim Flaherty gave that away when he cut the GST by two percentage points, at a cost of $60 billion to the treasury over five years. Have you noticed your GST savings? Likely not.

Will you notice the consequences of the deficits that begin to pile up next year if the global economy slips into a deep recession, as it likely will? Yes.

Jeffrey Simpson: I don’t think Dion has really turned this election around. This was just the Liberal brand standing on its own, compounded with Harper making some unfathomable mistakes. [Ed Note: I'd have to say this is the most level-headed discussion of the last few days of excitement.]

Lorne Gunter: I cannot believe that Stephane Dion and Jack Layton are using the public’s fear of losing their life savings to try and garner votes by promising to help them out during a recession. The economy isn’t that bad in Canada, ignoring the 2000 point drop in the TSX over the last week. The fundamentals of our economy are strong, right?

Tom Brodbeck: I came up with a cute story including a demographic for whom the carbon tax will have no noticeable effect. Therefore, I conclude the carbon tax won’t reduce reductions whatsoever. A small family paying heating bills won’t reduce their reductions to save money, thus corporations won’t bother either to try and save money. Isn’t that how this works?

Sinclair Stevens: It’s up to Canadian voters to block a Harper majority.

Harper entered politics with a mission. He wanted to transform Canada into a loose confederation of autonomous provinces with the federal government limited to foreign affairs, defence and an arbitration role among the provinces.

He felt it could be done without a constitutional change. “Just a willing federal government,” he said. He even suggested there should be a firewall around Alberta, his province of choice.

To execute his plans, he needed a majority in Parliament.

Steven Patten, associate professor of political science at the University of Alberta, states in a new book, The Harper Record: “He hasn’t wandered far from the ideological beliefs that first motivated him to engage in politics. He surrounds himself with conservatives who share his strong ideological beliefs and when he compromises on policy or the membership of his team, it is typically a strategic move designed to bring him closer to winning a majority government.”

Greg Weston would like everyone to try to ignore their fears of a Harper majority (a real possibility), and instead concentrate on their fears of a Dion minority (an incredibly improbable outcome.)

Bruce Hallsor:

At some point, if our democracy is to truly reflect the will of Canadians, we will have to decide whether our party system should change, or our voting system should change. In the meantime, political leaders of all stripes are asking voters to patch over this problem through something called strategic voting. Strategic voting asks people to pretend there are only two parties, even when there are four or more on the ballot.

…

If you go to the polls next Tuesday contemplating a vote for somebody you do not like, just to stop someone who you believe is worse, please take a moment to think how much better our democracy could be.

Make this the last election where your choice will be ruled by negatives, instead of by a positive choice.

1h

Your daily supply of Canadian punditry

Crossposted at DailyKos.

Gable:

James Travers points out how vote splitting is naturally incorporated into party strategy and how it can cause incredibly random and undesired results (like a Harper majority).

Every party is counting on the splits to help them somewhere, somehow. Conservatives, after squandering their Quebec edge, have the most to gain where it still matters most, Ontario and B.C. With a solid base and sophisticated database they are best positioned to take maximum advantage of minimal shifts, notably in Ontario’s 905 and 519 area code ridings.

Where Conservatives are poised to be opportunists, Liberals are vulnerable. Stéphane Dion’s much improved performance this week, including a confident speech to the joint Empire and Canadian clubs in Toronto yesterday, helps re-establish Liberals as the Conservative alternative and protect against NDP and Green vote poaching. It doesn’t fix a strategy that isn’t effectively focusing on ridings where the splits will be decisive.

That tilts the election toward Conservatives and is a critical error in a campaign where so few ballots can mean so much. If an 11th hour blitz scatters the vote to his party’s political left, if Harper can bring himself to connect emotionally with deeply worried Canadians, Conservatives will regain some grip on a victory now slipping away.

Hicks on Six does a good job at explaining the credit crisis in a clear manner.

What’s the difference between a stockbroker and a pigeon?

A pigeon can still leave a deposit on a Porsche.

Tom Brodbeck seems to fail to realize that giving a party $1.25 per vote is not a “tax” but rather a way of supporting the party you vote for, regardless if they get elected or not. By his standards, Manitobans are paying a undemocratic “MP tax” for parliamentary members they didn’t directly elect (They pay a lot more in MP salaries than by this new $1.25/vote plan). Either his math is pretty messed up or Manitoba is in a worse state than I think when he says that $1.25 per vote will somehow prevent families from putting food on their table. [Ed note: $1.25 means a maximum of $1.25 per person who can vote in the province every election (ie. four or five years).]

Haroon Siddiqui: Democracy and transparency is finally catching up to Harper as Canadians see what he is really like.

Harper is in trouble in hard-hit Ontario, which is losing manufacturing jobs and $20 billion a year in money transfers from Ottawa. But he doesn’t seem to care. Worse, his finance minister, Jim Flaherty – ironically, an Ontarian – has been badmouthing the province as a bad place to invest.

Besides having a tin ear, Harper has cornered himself politically. Having said that the fundamentals of the economy are strong, Harper cannot now say they are not. He is right to argue that our economy is sounder than America’s. But it is not recession-proof, as he implies.

Andrew Weaver and 123 climate scientists agree: “Vote for the environment”

We are at a critical juncture in Canadian history. The 14th United Nations Conference of Parties to the Climate Change Convention will be held in December in Poland and COP15 will follow next December in Copenhagen. It is at this latter meeting that a post-Kyoto global warming treaty will be proposed. It is critical that Canada play a constructive role in negotiations leading up to this event.

In the last two years, Canada has obstructed international efforts to develop policies to deal with global warming. At the 2007 Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting in Uganda, Canada scuttled attempts aimed at getting consensus on a strongly worded commitment to greenhouse gas reduction.

Neil Waugh: The Alberta Treasury Branch was caught recently with $1.1 billion of junk investments, and the executives were forced to write down $253 million, and yet…

The day began when fictitious ATB employee Kirsten from Killarney was the justification given for ATB Financial CEO Dave Mowatt pocketing $1.6 million last year - a stunning $1.2 million in perks called “variation pay and post-employment benefits” - on top of his already sweet $406,000 base salary.

You’ve gotta love those golden parachutes.

Bob Hepburn: We have too many parties that I don’t support, they clearly are going to take votes away from the party I do support, so I say they should just go away and everyone should just vote for my party. [Ed Note: apparently he hasn't learned about voteforenvironment.ca , someone should drop him a note]

Paula Simons has a great article about Harper’s complete lack of respect for our charter and country.

For a fellow who likes to portray himself as a law-and-order candidate, Stephen Harper shows a remarkable disdain for the law that orders our Confederation — that pesky Constitution.

Last month, Harper attacked Alberta’s jurisdiction to control its natural resources, with his plan to ban raw bitumen from Alberta’s oilsands to countries that don’t conform to Canada’s greenhouse gas emission standards. This week, when the Conservative leader unveiled his party’s platform, he went even further, and suggested his government would also ban exports to countries with lower pollution standards in general.

…

Tuesday, Harper also pledged reforms to create an elected Senate. If Parliament didn’t pass such reforms, Harper vowed, he would abolish the Senate.

That’s quite the threat. … But whatever our impatience with the current Senate, a bicameral Parliament is a fundamental part of Canada’s history and democratic structure.

The Senate isn’t just there to be a retirement home for senior politicians. Nor is it only there to provide “sober second thought.” The Senate is also there to protect regional interests, to provide smaller provinces with a way to make sure the big provinces of Central Canada can’t control the national agenda. What Alberta needs to protect its interests isn’t fewer senators — it’s more of them.

More to the point, no PM can unilaterally ice the upper house.

Jeffrey Simpson believes we are heading into a phase change in Canadian democracy where coalitions and minorities will become the politics of the day and authoritarian majorities are history.

Don Martin: Harper desperately drags his own mother into the fray to try to stop the Conservative support from hemorrhaging any further.

The Prime Minister admits it’s unusual for him to drag a family member into the ugly political fray, but bizarre times call for desperate measures as the party tumbles dangerously into the low 30s in percentage of voter support.

“We’re getting this criticism that somehow I don’t understand the stock market or understand what people are feeling about the stock market,” he told reporters. “I use my mother as an obvious example because she is the person closest to me most worried about the stock market these days. Believe me, I get quicker updates from her on the stock market than from the Department of Finance.”

He might also want her advice on closing a campaign that has turtled.

Naheed Nenshi: If you want to know why a majority of Canadians don’t vote Conservative, just look at Stephen Harper.

I suggest, while people might trust Harper as a leader, they don’t trust him as a person. Or maybe they just don’t like him. The problem here, I submit, is one of his own making — he has been incredibly calculating, and Canadians have seen that.

1h

Image via Wikipedia

If we, the voters, work together on this, we can send a real message to Stephen Harper — Canadians don’t want his politics in Canada. Even though he may win 34% of the federal vote, we can actually have the the 60%+ of Canadians who don’t support him join together to give him less than 100 seats in parliament. How can we do this? By strategic voting.

Now, I know that strategic voting in the past was painful and useless most of the time. In many cases, people simply looked at who had the most signs for the party that they didn’t hate, and voted for them. Commonly, since the Liberals had a bigger budget, this implied the Liberals would win a bunch more seats, even in ridings only contested by the NDP. It especially enraged NDP supporters because it meant that a lot of people voted Liberal even though they supported the NDP.

Well, this year, with the internet, we have a tool which can help us vote strategically in a clear concise way. A great website was set up this year (and hopefully more, less issue oriented ones, will be set up in the future) — voteforenvironment.ca.  Don’t let the name fool you, it’s not just another “Go Green” site. If you visit, and type in your postal code, it will tell you the latest polling, for your riding! This means you’ll be able to see exactly where the NDP, Liberals, Greens, and Conservatives stand and be able to vote intelligently for the party that best reflects your values (and can win your riding.) You will be able to see if you even need to bother to strategically vote. (In my riding, for example, it tells me that it’s a race between a NDP and a Lib, so I’m good to go in this riding.)

For example, if you live in Edmonton-Strathcona, the NDP are a sliver away from winning that riding, and if a few Liberal (or Green) supporters there strategically voted, the NDP would win away a Conservative seat. Another good example would be in Oshawa, where the NDP are running a great guy who has real potential to take back a strong Orange riding (and the Liberals don’t have a chance.) Similarly, it lists a variety of ridings where the Liberals or Bloc are clearly the second place contender, and if people strategically vote, it will take away yet another prize from Harper’s hands.

Unlike previous years, where strategic voting meant voting Liberal at all times, this year things are different. With the internet, we have the ability for the first time ever to truly strategically vote and seriously change the electoral map in Canada. We can regain seats in Alberta even if everyone spreads the word and strategically votes correctly.  The NDP will gain a lot of seats, the Liberals will gain seats, and the Conservatives will lose large swaths of seats they planned to gain by dividing us. (Divide and Conquer anyone?)

Now, no party can be seen officially pushing this, but the more the grassroots get this out, the better. If this can get onto national media by Saturday, it could strongly change the direction of this election.

And this country.

1h

Edit: This means for that those Green supporters polling 8%+ everywhere could actually turn this election back for the environment by voting strategically.

Update (2): I’ve added a strategic voting widget to the right from the anyonebutharper site to help out. Feel free to steal the code.

<embed width="170" height="240" pluginspage="http://www.macromedia.com/go/getflashplayer" bgcolor="333333" allowscriptaccess="sameDomain" name="widgetbox_widget_flash_0" id="widgetbox_widget_flash_0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://www.theundecided.ca/strategic/widget.swf?wbx_stageHeight=240&wbx_stageWidth=170&wbx_framerate=30&widget_appId=d3f6461b-0dac-47f6-9835-da349344cac7&widget_name=Anyone%20But%20Harper&widget_token=92d3972aeb57e5f630e7ad99542d25986b36f0bd0000011cdf476220&widget_id=0&widget_timestamp=1223516709447&widget_width=170&widget_height=240"/>

Your daily supply of fresh Canadian pundits

Crossposted at Dailykos.

Barry Cooper, a pro-Harper, pro-seperatist, global warming denier and politics professor from the University of Calgary, cannot stand the idea that Margaret Atwood would not want a Harper majority. He believes that Atwood saying she would vote for Duceppe is an conspiracy to convince Ontarians to vote against Harper. He defends this by creating an elaborate conspiracy theory where Ontario always votes how Quebec votes, and the voters in Quebec end up really running the country, in order to hurt Albertans.

Mike Stroebel thinks poor people suck.

Don Martin: Harper is doing too little, too late to pretend he cares about ordinary Canadians and the incoming economic storm clouds. Those cute blue sweaters just don’t seem to cut it anymore when your savings are being wiped out.

Jeffrey Simpson: Everyone hates Dion and the Liberals and everyone really hates Harper and the Conservatives. So, who can they vote for? Obviously, no one since those are the only two parties running. Right? [Ed Note: obviously he missed the three other people at the leadership debate table.]

Mindelle Jacobs:

The illicit pot industry generates tens of billions of dollars for criminal groups - money that governments could be collecting in taxes, the report observes.

Think about that as you wince over Edmonton’s proposed double-digit property tax increase. Do you really care that your neighbour smokes pot? If you do, you poor deluded individual, does it bother you enough that you support Canada spending hundreds of millions of dollars yearly on ineffective drug enforcement?

Wouldn’t you rather your tax money go towards something that makes a difference?

L. Ian MacDonald discusses how Harper turned off so many Canadians, and likely will end up shrinking the number of Conservative seats come the 14th.

Rick Bell points out exactly why Harper is not fit to lead.

But Harper, the man who called this election to get a majority and his own way in governing, should know the people he wants to lead feel like they’re left out of the ark, screwed and not in control and not wicked.

And leadership isn’t about who has the biggest skull. A leader should be able to rally the troops, inspire the citizens, offer up something to give hope.

Whatever their stripe, that’s what politically successful number ones do.

What does Harper say?

He confesses he’s “not the most emotionally expressive guy.” Yes, we kind of get that.

He suggests, you know, “there’s probably some great buying opportunities emerging on the stock market.”

Yes, if somebody with cash comes around and buys the scraps left in your portfolio, they could make real dough down the line. The main man also says “stock markets do go up and down.” Thanks for the economics lesson.

At least, he didn’t tell anyone to eat cake.

Carol Goar discusses all of the party platforms for health issues — or the lack thereof.

The Green party comes closest to making disease prevention a centrepiece of its health policy.

It envisions a health-care system that addresses people’s physical, mental and social well-being. It would spend 1.5 cents out of every federal health-care dollar to keep people well. It would restructure medical training, curb the over-prescription of drugs and offer tax breaks to employers with healthy workplaces. It would give seniors, psychiatric survivors and people with addictions the support they need to stay out of institutions. It would launch an aggressive program to get products known to pose a risk of cancer, infertility and auto-immune diseases off the market.

But most voters aren’t aware Elizabeth May even has a health plan.

Jacqueline Best:

In the debates last week, Mr. Harper stuck to the message that Canada will be just fine — as long as he remains prime minister.

Yet, it is still a little early to get smug. Not only will this financial crisis have significant implications for Canadians, but we have also been part of the same culture of debt and deregulation that has driven the current U.S. crisis.

It is therefore time for the prime minister, as well as the leaders of all of the major parties, to take this crisis seriously and start telling Canadians how they are going to help us through this crisis and work to prevent future crises. Liberal Leader Stephane Dion’s promise of a five-point plan Wednesday night was a start but needs to be more ambitious and more specific.

Murray Mandryk: Harper’s bitumen export restriction is likely unconstitutional, violates a good number of our trade agreements, will hurt Alberta and Saskatchewan’s economies and is the closest thing to the National Energy Program proposed by any party during this election. Yet Brad Wall, the Conservative premier of Saskatchewan, is surprisingly silent. Some are left asking Brad Wall, “Who are you standing up for — Stephen Harper or Saskatchewan?”

1h

Your daily source for Canadian-made punditry

Crossposted at DailyKos.

Paul Wells presents a clear example of how much Harper’s Conservatives simply copy John Howard’s Australian Liberal party, right down to their campaign commercials.

Peter Worthington: Palin is amazing, completely won the VP debate. Even though she brought up no good points, didn’t know many “facts” or even speak coherently, she was “likeable” and, as we all know, that is the only qualification that really matters. Also, McCain needs to win tonights debate and I wish I could have his manbabies. [Ed note: Normally I stick to Canadian only pundits, but this was simply unbelievable.]

Don Martin lists a bunch of high-profile races, including Edmonton-Strathcona, where Linda Duncan may turn a seat orange in deep-blue Alberta.

Rahim Jaffer: I don’t believe it, but polling experts with far greater insight than me put this Edmonton riding at risk. A Conservative seat? In danger? In the one-party state of Alberta? Impossible. But New Democrat Linda Duncan came within 10% of taking down Mr. Jaffer in 2006, a nail-biter by Alberta standards. And this formidable environmentalist is back at it again with an even weaker Liberal rival …

Letters to the Star discuss the recent domestic political terrorism (read: brake-lines cut) against Liberal party supporters throughout Toronto. Frighteningly, other than this, most editorial pages across Canada seem silent on this shameful incident.

Margaret Atwood, one of the most-honored authors of fiction in recent history says “Anything but a Harper majority.”

Why do I feel so strongly about this? It’s not just the arts. True, Mr. Harper doesn’t understand the arts — especially the arts math, the $87-billion, the 1.1 million jobs. But his arts position is symptomatic of his deeply worrying, out-of-touch, out-of-date boy-in-a-bubble thinking towards everything. Like George W. Bush, he sticks to his ideology and ignores the evidence - so even though arts-bashing was hurting his polls in Quebec, he didn’t climb down. Instead, as Mr. Duceppe paraphrased in the French-language debate, he seems to think artists are “spoiled children.”

If that is indeed how Mr. Harper views grown-up artists, then what are grown-up voters? They, too, are children: a view Mr. Harper learned well during his University-of-Calgary-Reform-Party-firewall-around-Alberta think-tanking days. I just got back from Edmonton, and that’s what I heard there. People should be managed from behind the scenes by a few superior intelligences such as his; they must be told sugar-coated lies; and you should decide everything really important about their lives without consulting them.

The Calgary Herald applauds Vancouver’s city council for allowing electric cars on their roads and asks for more cities to do the same, starting with Calgary.

Margaret Wente:

Stephen Harper’s reaction to the world financial meltdown reminds me of a cop at the scene of a monumental crack-up. “Move it right along, folks. Nothing to see here.”

Sure, Canada is different. Our banks are sound (aren’t they?) and we don’t believe in deficits (for now). But every time Mr. Harper says we’ve got nothing to worry about, my friends burst out laughing. Their life savings are evaporating by the minute. Their houses are worth less than they were last month, and next month they’ll be worth less than now. Every time I go into the office, people are staring at the stock indexes and going, “Oh God, oh God, oh God.”

Yesterday I phoned my husband from the office. “The stock market went down another thousand points,” I said. “But don’t worry, because the PM says he’s an optimist.”

“Oh God,” he said.

Greg Weston: Harper can be empathic to those losing their savings. You just have to look really really close.

Harper at least tried to sound empathetic towards those losing their savings.

Somehow, it didn’t exactly bring a tear to the eye.

In fact, it is quite likely the prime minister’s heartfelt hug would have gone completely unnoticed had the PM’s official spokesman not summoned reporters.

“What you want to pay attention to is on page two of the speech,” the spokesman announced.

And sure enough, look closely and there it was — empathy.

Paul Wells has a nice catch. Harper apparently has a plan, we’re just not allowed to see it.

Linda McQuaig discusses Harper’s not-so-secret agenda.

While this agenda is not “secret,” my guess is few Canadians know about it. That’s because Harper, realizing it would be unpopular, unveiled it when Canadians weren’t paying attention – in fact, we were sleeping. Sometime in the dark of night last June 20, the Harper government posted a plan on the Department of National Defence’s website – called Canada First Defence Strategy – to spend an eye-popping $490 billion over the next 20 years on the military.

Given all the recent buzz about the size of the $700 billion Wall Street bailout in the United States, it’s striking to note that Ottawa quietly announced a plan to spend nearly half a trillion dollars on the military, almost in passing.

Danielle Smith: Since he’s so unpopular in Alberta, it’s time for Ed Stelmach to go and buy some votes from the people of Alberta with their own money. We all know that worked for his predecessor, Ralph Klein. Personally, I know I could use a $500 cheque.

Martin Regg Cohn: Dion’s problem isn’t a lack of charisma, but a lack of “presence” — None of the party leaders are charismatic.

Get over it, Canada. We need to look beyond personalities and ask ourselves not just what we want in a politician (brains plus charisma) but what we need from our politics.

Who can provide integrity and empathy? Economic growth? Stewardship of our finances? Movement on the environment? Safeguard our social programs? Protect Canadian culture?

Canadians feel trapped between a Prime Minister they distrust deeply and an opposition leader they disrespect deeply. So far, opinion polls suggest voters are favouring the über-politician over the anti-politician.

And choosing sweaters over satchels. We may regret the missed opportunity.

Paula Simons introduces the main players in the upcoming Alberta Liberal Party leadership race.

The room in awash in bright red David Swann signs, buttons and posters. Swann, a second-term MLA from Calgary-Mountain View and a physician with a notable background in public health and grassroots environment activism, has the best campaign props.

His striking posters feature a shot of him, looking soulfully messianic, against a dramatic mountain backdrop. And Swann presents himself as the candidate of ideals, who can provide courageous, inspiring leadership, comparing himself, at one point, to Barack Obama.

…

Mo Elsalhy is the youngest of the candidates, and the most eagerly earnest. He’s also the only Edmontonian, since high-profile veterans Laurie Blakeman and Hugh MacDonald opted not to run for the leadership. In 2004, Elsalhy, an engaging pharmacist, was the party’s rising star, the gentle giant-killer who knocked off Tory cabinet minister Mark Norris.

…

Dave Taylor, the third and final candidate, is a second-term MLA from Calgary Currie and a former radio talk-show host — and his deep voice and ability to hold an audience’s attention stand him in good stead in debate. He’s witty and quick, and cuts to the chase without rambling; it’s easy to imagine his folksy persona selling extremely well on the doorstep of severely normal Albertans.

Neil Waugh: Because Ed Stelmach was cautious, Alberta won’t go into deficit territory. Even though the economy is tanking and the price of oil has dropped, Alberta’s 7 billion dollar surplus provides a nice comfortable buffer to the incoming economic storm. [Editor's Note: Too bad Harper wiped out our federal 7 billion dollar surplus during the last few years, eh?]

1h

Steven Harper is leaving open the possibility of deficit spending during his next government. You know, just in case massive tax cuts don’t work and he needs to do more massive tax cuts.

But we all know he’s not really worried because as far as Harper is concerned:

The fundamentals of our economy are strong (Stephen Harper)

It’s hard to solve a problem you don’t really think exists.

1h

edit: Does anyone remember the last prime minister who left an opening for deficit spending even though he promised to “rein it in”?

A Conservative Prime Minister

The NDP have released a few more advertisements since the last Election Ad Review. However, I’m noticing a bit of a trend of late for them. It seems that Quebec gets the good quality graphic design advertisements while English Canada gets spoken down to with simple easy-to-understand whiteboard drawings.

First, we’ll start with the two new French advertisements

“Le pouvoir de changer”

I like it, it continues off the graphic design from their earlier “Conservateurs” advertisement, but is positive, upbeat, and very modern feeling. The bullet train especially calls out to me when connected to the economy as it points out that the NDP knows that investment in quality infrastructure can actually be more beneficial to the economy than just tax cuts. Very well done

Overall Rating: 5/5 Good job overall.

“Bloc”

Again, maintaining a consistent theme to the commercials is a sign of a well managed marketing team. The word games are well performed, and I especially like the bike right at the beginning with square wheels. The finish with the howling effect in the music is especially great. “Bloc l’avenir du Quebec.” That’s about as hard hitting as you can get. Very very well done.

Overall Rating: 5/5 Again, brilliant job.

Too bad they couldn’t do the same in English.

“Chalk Talk”

Okay, first off: If you are applying for a job and I’m your interviewer, I don’t want you to talk down to me. These commercials simply feel like Jack Layton thinks he is so superior to ordinary Canadians that he needs to draw it out in cartoons and speak in simple easy to understand words. What is particularly frustrating about this is that Harper’s plan seems clear and obvious, while Layton doesn’t actually explain his plan in any significant manner. They’re just sad, awful commercials to me, especially when you consider how well they did with their commercials in Quebec (and some of their earlier commercials.)

Overall Rating: 1/5 (The drawings are pretty at least)

1h