Funny but true. Out of curiousity (it’s been so long since a regime change - PMPM wasn’t much of a change, after all), how long of a honeymoon could a Harper minority expect? I figure the first few months will involve some serious housekeeping, but I’m guessing by September we’re all screaming again. You?

Balbulican exemplifies the Liberal problem. You think that leading Canada from any side of the house is some sort of game. You call it entertainment. It’s no wonder that the Liberal Party can hardly keep the stench from destroying their efforts in this election. If you want entertainment, it would be best to go to the movies.

Nope. Reading is out the window.

There’s a book by Ralph Peters, a kind of Tom Clancy cold-war thriller about a war in Europe, except told from the Russian point of view (and with a Russian victory). In it, an young and idealistic artillery officer continually complains of the imperfection of the system, until his CO sets him right.

“Wars are not won by the most competent army,” he says. “They’re won by the least incompetent army.”

Ottawa works the same way.

I grew up in an activist household, and it wasn’t until my late teens that I realized that Canada wasn’t about to be running in blood up to the gutters because of Mulroney. Since then, I’ve been much more coherently political - I’d grown up so basically afraid that I couldn’t actually analyze anything. We are doing extremely well, as a country: I am certainly still worried about an overall cultural shift led by neo-lib/neo-con principles, but I don’t feel like All That’s Good And Pure Will Be Destroyed.
Frankly, the religious fervour is somewhat tiresome, but hyperbole is the instrument of advertisement, I s’pose.

“you, jaded non-Liberal/non-Conservative/essentially undefined voter that you are, have to be impressed with the “babe’s” campaign so far. He may not be as dumb as you think.”

I don’t think Harper’s dumb at all. Neither was Bob Rae. What I was saying was that:

a)being a member in opposition is NOT the same as running a government
b) running a good campaign is NOT the same as running a government.

It requires different skills, attitudes, and knowledge, which Harper and Co. have not had time to acquire. That’s obviously not a reason NOT to vote for them, since any new government would face the same challenge. But it IS a point of vulnerability that the opposition will exploit, as is the probably hostility (or at least suspicion) of the federal bureaucracy.
As far as a honeymoon goes, the attacks will start immediately…that’s all political capital in the bank, to be put in reserve against a future campaign. The opposition will want to keep the government nervous and cooperative, and the best way to do that is to maintain a constant threat of near crisis (does that sound familiar?) without actually precipitating a vote of confidence. I’m guessing the deciding factor will be Liberal leadership replacement, and I’d guess about a year.

Mike, I think that’s by and large true. It’s too bad that our political dynamic has come to require the vilification of the opposition. THEY - the politicians - understand that it’s theatre. But I think too many people think it’s for real.

Opps forgot the beginning bit,… this should have read;

You are correct the Harper would have the same problem that Rae faced, except the CPC could draw on the experience of former PC’ers who could be brought in as advisors. Harper would have bumpy ride, but as a bad as the Bob Rae NDP.

Also if the CPC win a minority, Martin and his circle are goners. They may already be goners now as it is, given the buzz on the rumour mill. That would be a good thing, because the liberals need to clean house a bit. Unfortunately it means that next Liberal government (when ever that occurs) will also suffer from the Newbie Bumpy road problem.

Mean while Happy Jacko will just,… could be playing king maker for next few Governments.

And still there will be the Block and Alberta problems to add to the mix,…

That’s a good question, James. Unfortunately, I was 12 at the time & not paying a heck of a lot of attention.

I do know that when Ralph Klein won first time around (and he was campaigning against his predecessor’s corrupt regime *cough*), the first thing he did was shuffle the Deputy Ministers, i.e. “I’m Boss.” He did a great job of cleaning up but, alas, is proving the adage that absolute power corrupts.

I suspect the new Alberta Alliance Party will be running the show after the next provincial election (Alberta would never elect a Liberal government; they’d have to change the party name, I think), which is interesting, since they currently only have one MLA. Alberta politics are very weird - we elect gov’t with massive majorities, all the time, get bugged because they become arrogant, and throw them out en masse & elect a DIFFERENT majority gov’t.

That’s an interesting idea, James. The fact that the Green party seems financially conservative would be a hit. It will probably depend (I know, I know, everyone’s sick of hearing this) on what happens with the federal election. If the Liberals win the day, the Alliance or SPA (if they get their act together) will likely be in (probably Alliance as they like the firewall but don’t right now, at least, push hardcore separatism). However, should Harper win the day, the Greens could very well pull it off.

Yet another reason for everybody to vote for Harper.
*snicker*

Quite simply…8 consecutive Budget surpluses, a significantly increased standard of living, low unemployment, legislation that helps empower and “strengthen” aborignal governance (its not great, but its better than nothing), saying yes to Afghanistan and no to Iraq, same-sex marriage legislation, and a number of other things.

Of course there are the scandals, and the less than stellar performance when it comes to other issues (gun control), but if you can name a government that hasn’t had a scandal or introduced some unpopular legislation, then I’ll shut right up right now.

A budget surplus isn’t an exceptional achievement. A budget surplus is “met the standard”. The Mulroney PCs balanced budgets too; they just didn’t manage to cope with double-digit interest rates on the $200B+ debt handed to them by the Trudeau Libs and didn’t cotton to the idea of hiding the costs in other political jurisdictions. The first year a Chretien government cracked an operating surplus (1994-95) the debt charges as a percentage of total debt were already under 8%, which compares rather favourably to the nearly 11% during the year in which the PCs produced their highest operating surplus (1990-91). One must also of course ponder whether NAFTA and moving hidden taxes out into the open via the GST served as brakes or accelerators. The funniest part of the whole thing is that the net public federal debt is still higher than it was in Chretien’s first budget year. How’s that for an achievement?

A standard of living increase isn’t something I’d be foolish enough to credit to government. Our standard of living would increase year over year if we left the economy mostly alone.

Neither is bending like a reed before the changing winds of public opinion (SSM, Iraq) particularly an achievement. Remember the great parliamentary debate over the serious security and sovereignty issues of Ballistic Missile Defence? Neither do I.