So far, the only exciting thing in this election has been the distinct possibility that Jack Layton could be the next leader of the Official Opposition – it would add a new and different flavour to the House of Commons, for sure.

Other than that, though, the election campaign has been dragging on and on, turning on gaffes and wild accusations that have absolutely nothing to do with what voters are concerned about.

So, we saw a puffin drop its excrement on a political leader’s shoulder. Big deal.

Some candidates have had to resign over controversial statements, conduct or blog posts in the past. Big deal.

Now one of the oldest lies is being peddled yet again – no one cares, because everyone knows it’s not even close to the truth. Big deal.

Here’s a newsflash: the election will not fundamentally improve the situation of Canada. The best we can hope for is to slog along as we have for the last two and a half years – and essentially any stretch of time before that.

These guys will continue as before, tossing chump change at us and making us believe they’re giving us actual tax cuts.

These nutters are about to embark on an extensive and far-reaching social(ist) experiment. They tell us it’ll work. What if it doesn’t work? Will they just say, “Oops, we’re so sorry. Won’t happen again. Promise.”?

These clowns here want to run the same experiment, just a slightly improved one from the previous one.

This little party is partying like never before and telling us that we should all gather around the kitchen table.

All the while, one last holdout clinging to the past has not realized yet that the next sovereignty movement will emerge from the West. Difference between the old and the new? The latter will prevail one day.

So, are you prepared to take a look at this poll? Are you sitting down? Hold on to your chair, mouse, keyboard and monitor, because what this poll is about to reveal to you is going to blow you away (very much like getting caught in the slipstream of the TARDIS, I should say):

Sixty-three per cent of respondents said they view the Liberal party as dishonest; 80 per cent as stale; 63 per cent as phoney; 67 per cent as risky; and 66 per cent as “out of touch with Canadians like you.”

The Conservative party didn’t fare much better: 55 per cent viewed the party as dishonest; 63 per cent as stale; 56 per cent as phoney; and 58 per cent as risky.

[...] Meanwhile, the feeling toward the NDP was mostly positive with the large majority of respondents viewing it as fair, honest, compassionate and genuine. However, those surveyed said the NDP was risky.

It was the Green party that received the best rating. Sixty-nine per cent of respondents found them fresh; 74 per cent as fair, 75 per cent as honest; 77 per cent as compassionate; and 65 per cent as genuine.

Plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose.

I just watched Jon Stewart’s comments on the US “Meltdown”. I laughed, I could not help it, not because the situation there is funny, especially for the average middle class citizen, but because I could laugh, feeling like “I certainly do not live in a rose garden” , but I live in Canada…

I am a lucky Canadian. I do not have any risky investments. I only stand to lose on the value of my house and as for my credit? Maybe I am feeling glad that it may become harder for me to live above my income… And no, since I have never worked for a large company which offered any pension plan, I am not any more worried about how and what I will retire with than I did before the great “Meltdown” on Wall Street.

Do I worry about my retirement? Yes! I have only my Canadian Government pension and please let whoever the government becomes next, not blow that away with imprudence based on a risk factor in the markets…

I am also a lucky Canadian because in spite of the fact that I am not rich, I have healthcare which I do not have to pay a minimun of $400 per month to have. I also do not take this for granted, every time I vote… I only hope other Canadians will not vote to have an ultra capitalist, privatized economy where your healthcare insurance company dictates what your healthcare will be according to your specific coverage and what they will allow.

I worked really hard to get my education as an adult student with no subsidies, but in my opinion education should be free for all students who are serious. This would make up for what we, in North America , are not doing by leading the way in technological innovation in world green development.

We are still in a good position in Canada to make Canada stay more like Canada and we should do this. We are not an ultra-capitalist society or economy. Karl Marx wrote before the corruption of socialism by communism, that eventually capitalism would reach an advanced state and ultimately would sow the seeds of its own destruction.

I think we are beginning to see this prophesy come true. It would be nice to see a more balanced planet, in general, one in which we all prosper and survive. Perhaps we are seeing signposts that this might just happen afterall.

De retour à la demande populaire! La première édition des Guides de Vote Stratégique de DemocraticSPACE est maintenant disponible. Voir les liens dans le coin supérieur droit de chaque page. Notez qu’il s’agit de guides non-partisans.

SOMMAIRE Voir la Page d’accueil du Guide de Vote Stratégique
Dans la vaste majorité des circonscriptions du Canada, le vote stratégique NE S’APPLIQUE PAS (en ce sens qu’il n’aura aucun impact sur les résultats). Il n’y a que 13 circonscriptions où il est approprié pour les sympathisants Conservateurs, 17 circonscriptions pour les sympathisants Libéraux, 30 circonscriptions pour les sympathisants Néo-Démocrates et 39 circonscriptions pour les sympathisants Verts.

Les guides fonctionnent de la façon suivante : le vote stratégique Conservateur fait en sorte que les Libéraux ne gagnent pas; le vote stratégique Libéral, Néo-Démocrate ainsi que celui des Verts fait en sorte que les Conservateurs ne gagnent pas. Évidemment, il y a plusieurs autres combinaisons possibles, mais celles-ci sont, de loin, les deux manières les plus communes de voter de façon stratégique.

Alors, à moins que votre circonscription n’apparaisse dans ce guide, NE VOTEZ PAS STRATÉGIQUEMENT.

GUIDES DE VOTE STRATÉGIQUE CIRCONSCRIPTION-PAR-CIRCONSCRIPTION
Sélectionnez le parti que vous supportez afin de vérifier si le vote stratégique s’applique à votre circonscription.

CONSERVATEUR	LIBÉRAL	NPD	VERT

Avis Important :
DemocraticSPACE n’endosse pas le vote stratégique (c’est-à-dire, le fait pour l’électeur de privilégier un second choix afin d’empêcher l’élection d’un autre parti). Nous croyons que le Canada devrait examiner la possibilité d’ajouter un élément de proportionnalité dans le système électoral afin de s’assurer d’une représentation parlementaire juste et adéquate. Cela dit, le vote stratégique se produit au Canada et DemocraticSPACE croit alors qu’il est préférable de faire des choix informés plutôt que désinformés. Par conséquent, ce guide a été conçu de manière à aider les électeurs qui pensent à voter stratégiquement.

Afin qu’une circonscription se qualifie pour le vote stratégique, nous avons le sentiment que 3 conditions doivent être remplies :
1. Il doit s’agir d’une course serrée entre deux partis (c’est-à-dire que l’écart entre les deux partis soit inférieur à 5%)
2. Les chances qu’un troisième/quatrième/cinquième parti d’être élu doivent être minimes (c’est-à-dire un support égal ou inférieur à 20%)
3. Le faible nombre de votes du troisième/quatrième/cinquième parti peut faire la différence (c’est-à-dire inférieur à un électeur sur trois)

Last Saturday, Liberal leader Stephane Dion made a stop in St. Catharines to meet and greet voters at the Niagara Grape & Wine festival in Montebello Park. This is the third time that Dion has visited the riding of St. Catharines since becoming leader of the Liberals. Furthermore this makes Dion the first leader to make a stop in St. Catharines (With Jack Layton & Stephen Harper both coming to Niagara but skipping past this riding.)

Aside from a large contingent of local Liberals there to greet him as he arrived, Dion was working a very non-partisan crowd. Walking to several wine and food kiosks while stopping to talk to several people attending the festival. Overall Dion was very well received, giving a boost to an already surging local Liberal campaign.

Interestingly, while Dion was in Niagara he managed to do what Stephen Harper didn’t do, which is to talk about manufacturing and job losses in the area.

J’ai rarement perçu dans les médias et l’électorat une opinion si polarisée lors d’une élection que celle-ci. À part peut-être lors du référendum de 1995.

Il est vrai que l’utilisation des technologies Web de réseautage social n’était pas très utilisé lors des élections. Même lors de la dernière élection provinciale, les blogues n’avaient eu qu’un impact marginal.

Il me semble que jamais auparavant voyait-on autant d’initiatives citoyennes appellant au vote stratégique, à voter pour n’importe qui sauf Conservateur. Il y a eu la vidéo de Rivard et cie (Culture en péril) qui a reçu un accueil amusé mais mitigé dans la blogosphère. Et voici maintenant Unissons nos voix et Voter pour l’environnement.

Maintenant, pourquoi ces groupes d’intérêts particuliers et lobbyistes mettent autant d’efforts à contrer l’avancée du gouvernement conservateur de Stephen Harper?

Si les Libéraux n’étaient pas si aplaventris, inexistants du débat public, est-ce que les artistes seraient aussi vocaux?

Je ne crois pas. Le confort d’un gouvernement providence suivant le modèle Libéral est réconfortant. En voyant que Stéphane Dion n’a aucune chance de former le gouvernement et qu’il pourrait ne pas former l’opposition officielle, les artistes, les groupes d’intérêts environnementaux, idéologistes de gauche sont pris d’une panique. Leurs groupes d’intérêts sont éparpillés dans plusieurs partis. La droite est tellement unie que même le parti Libéral en vient à passer pour un parti de gauche. Ces groupes percoivent qu’ils n’ont d’autre alternative que de défendre eux-même leurs intérêts, et à défaut de se réfugier tous sous une seule bannière, ils polarisent le débat: Il y a les méchants, les conservateurs, et il y a les bons, i.e. tous les autres partis politiques susceptibles de les contrer.

Ça me fait penser à l’hécatombe qu’avait été le passage de Le Pen au deuxième tour des présidentielles françaises à l’époque. Les gens de gauche du parti socialistes en étaient venus à appuyer Chirac, le moindre deux deux maux pour éviter que l’extrême-droite soit à la tête du pays.

Cependant, je remarque que les messages de la gauche sont démagogiques et opportunistes. Exactement ce qu’on reprochait aux partis de droite, comme l’ADQ au Québec.

Par exemple, Germain Houde va jusqu’à dire que la droite érige ses politiques en dogmes (dans sa vidéo de Unissons nos voix). Laissez-moi rire. Comme si la gauche n’avait pas érigée Kyoto en dogme environnemental. Aussi, les coupes de 45M$ dans la culture. Qu’importe si ces programmes étaient utiles, efficaces où non, il ne fallait pas couper? Où se trouve le sens critique de ces artistes? J’imagine que quand le sujet nous touche plus personellement, c’est le coeur et non la tête qui réagit.

Pour placer les idées, 45M$, c’est un peu moins que le plafond salarial d’une équipe de hockey professionnel de la NHL. En revanche, les besoins en garderie et autres programmes utiles à une majorité de canadiens se chiffrent en milliards de dollars. Pourtant, on a passé plus de temps à parler d’une coupe ridicule dans la culture que des plans d’investissement de chaques partis pour des places en garderies et autres programmes pour aider les familles.

La force du lobby des artistes m’impressionne par sa capacité à réagir promptement et à défendre ses intérêts. Cependant, je ne crois pas qu’ils aient trouvés le mot juste, ce message rassembleur qui réussira à unir cette gauche où tous les partis se battent farouchement et égoistement pour avoir leur part du gâteau.

Triste.

brem

Cet article est aussi disponible sur mon blogue personnel à martinbreton.com

One of the big disappointments of the campaign, given all the controversies over the past year, is the lack of discussion by the parties about our democratic freedoms slipping away. I am speaking of course about Canada’s so-called human rights commissions and their attempt to censor ordinary Canadians.

This isn’t just about Mark Steyn, Ezra Levant, and Maclean’s Magazine. From small pub owners with heart conditions spending tens of thousands of dollars and potentially losing their business for enforcing a ban on marijuana smoking, to Christian pastors being silenced from the pulpit, to doctors being investigated for declining to operate when they lack the medical background to do so safely, Canada’s human rights commissions have created a culture of fear and distrust among ordinary Canadians

Canadians should be concerned with stripping away of our freedoms and civil liberties, which are the foundation of every vibrant democracy. With the federal election underway, I can think of no better time to discuss government censorship and Canada’s human rights commissions. It is time for our politicians to show leadership and insure the rights of every Canadian are respected.

Which is why Kathy Shaidle and I have today released a book on Canada’s human rights commissions, entitled Tyranny of Nice. Mark Steyn has kindly written the introduction. You can find out more about the book by visiting TyrannyOfNice.com.

The first of several Edmonton-Strathcona all-candidates’ forums took place last night at the University of Alberta.

The signs of this riding being a real race were everywhere. The media were there (both print and television), there was a much larger crowd than usual, and perhaps most tellingly, there were young Conservatives handing out highlighted photocopies of a nasty SUN editorial about the NDP in an attempt to scare off anyone who might be impressed enough with Linda Duncan to switch their vote. This is all night and day from 2006, when interest in these forums was minimal at best. Terribly exciting for any armchair politico!

In any case, I didn’t take notes, but luckily there are plenty of other sources you can consult to find out how it went:

• “Exchange of Ideas” (Edmonton Journal)
• “Strathcona federal election candidates take to Horowitz (The Gateway)
• “Edmonton-Strathcona all-candidates’ forum” and “Reflecting on Roy” (Terahertz)
• “Edmonton-Strathcona candidates: a review” and “Live from the Edmonton-Strathcona forum” (Daveberta)
• “Eye on Rahim Jaffer” (No Longer Dormant)

Let me know if I’ve missed any, and I’ll link to them. The Linda Duncan campaign has also released some footage from the debate on youtube.

If you missed this forum, or are simply a glutton for punishment, here are the other upcoming ones that I’m aware of:

• Monday, October 6th at 7pm at Kings University College at 9125-50 St.
• Wednesday, October 8th at 7pm at the Garneau United Church at 11148-84 Ave. (Jaffer will not be attending this one.)

Every Canadian is familiar with this bon mot: When America has the sniffles, Canada comes down with the flu. It does not take a stretch of the imagination to figure out what will happen to the Canadian economy now that America has suffered a massive stroke, which will see the patient in intensive care, in an induced coma, for a long time to come.

Compared to the mess that once used to be the United States of America, Canada is still doing relatively fine. But it is just a matter of time before the American consumers’ inability to shop will seriously eat into Canadian companies’ profits and viability. Most of Canada’s exports are destined for the U.S., yet when Americans no longer have the spending power to buy those products, the Canadian economy could take a major hit.

One of the worst problem areas in Canada is Ontario. Its manufacturing sector has been eroded, with thousands of jobs having been lost in the automotive sector in particular. The provincial government and labour unions have been calling on the federal government to provide the necessary funds to prop up the ailing sector, but any financial injection would be a short-term solution only. Ontario’s problems are more of a structural, than a cyclical, nature: an excessive tax burden, out-of-control government spending and programs that are way too generous by anyone’s standards – not to mention the fact that the automotive sector is not what it used to be, nor will it ever return to its old grandeur.
(more…)

Again, Stephen Harper, the trained economist, fails to understand the true meaning of tax cuts:

Conservative Leader Stephen Harper is targeting families – and hoping to assuage the angered arts community – by promising a new tax credit for childhood arts programs. [...] It would be similar to the $500 Children’s Fitness Tax Credit his party introduced after the last election for children who participate in sports.

That doesn’t mean that families will find an extra $500 in their pockets:

Tax experts said a $500 tax credit on arts activity fees would likely translate into a maximum $75 for families.

In other words, this “tax break” is pure baloney. Canadians, who lose 45% of their hard-earned income to taxes, don’t need targeted tax credits, but major tax cuts across the board and, ideally, a switch to a flat tax of no more than 15% at the very most.

Thomas Mulcair is ahead of the liberal Sébastien Dhavernas by 10 points says the latest Crop poll in french article by La Presse published this morning.

Also, as the headline of the article, Michael Fortier is getting wasted by the Bloc, this one is also available in english in The Star.

And in Saint-Eustache, the conservative Claude Carignan is losing by 10 points to the Bloc.

Strategic voting might not always be a good idea, but in Outremont bloc voters might want to give NDP a chance.

La réaction du Ministre du Travail en est une d’incrédulité. Il ne croit pas le sondage d’hier qui le situe en deuxième place derrière la Bloquiste Chantale Bouchard. Il ne comprend pas que les électeurs ne comprennent pas qu’il est “du bon bord”, qu’il est au coeur du pouvoir à Ottawa et que tout cela fait de lui un choix idéal. Ils doivent avoir la tête vraiment dure parce que c’est à peu près son seul message, en plus de la distribution de subventions.

Deuxième réaction: le sondage n’est pas bon! L’échantillon est trop petit.

Je ne suis pas en mesure de juger s’il a raison de critiquer la méthode des sondeurs. Mais je n’ai rien lu qui en conteste la validité, en dehors des propos du ministre.

Troisième réaction: annuler des sorties en dehors du comté pour se concentrer sur Jonquière-Alma.

Faut quand même pas prendre de chance, au cas où… (Désolé de ne pas pouvoir vous référer aux textes du Quotidien, la version papier n’étant pas mise en ligne sur le site de Cyberpresse. Mais Radio-Canada a aussi interviewé le Ministre.)

Les candidatEs du Bloq disent que le sondage correspond à ce qu’ils perçoivent sur le terrain.

A quoi attribuer ce revirement, si revirement il y a effectivement?

Je ne suis pas dans le secret des dieux, mais j’ai l’impression que la famille indépendantiste se resserre les coudes. La machine péquiste a peut-être commencé à se retrousser les manches. Et qui sait, les conflits de structure et de personnalité dans la coalition du Bloq, suite à la fusion du comté de Jonquière et de celui d’Alma, se sont peut-être résorbés.

Faut dire que les coupures dans la culture et dans les OSBL, et la sortie de Harper contre les jeunes contrevenant n’ont certainement pas aider le Minsitre.

La performance de Harper aux débats et la publication d’une plate-forme conservatrice alléchante pourront-elles sauver le Ministre?

For residents of Willowdale, debates will take place as follows:

1. October 1st Debate @ 8 PM:
Bayview Middle School
25 Bunty Lane
North York, Ontario, M2K 1W4

2. October 6th Debate @ 9 AM
Earl Haig Secondary School
100 Princess Ave Toronto, Ontario, M2N 3R7

3. October 7th Debate @ 7 PM
Willowdale Pentecostal Church
288 Cummer Ave. Toronto, ON M2M 2E7

Someone sent this to me, so I am passing it along.

There will be a 90-minute CBC Newsworld program tonight called “Canada Votes: The X Challenge” with Mark Kelley on Tuesday, Sept. 30.

The debate will be on the Canadian economy and will be televised at 7:30 and 10 p.m. on CBC Newsworld.

There will be an audience of approximately 100 Ontario voters who are leaning towards the 4 main parties running in Ontario in a percentage reflecting the CBC’s latest rolling poll.

There will 5-6 mini debates, each will commence with a question from a member of the audience. Each party will be given will be given one minute to respond, order for first debate drawn by lot. Each subsequent debate by order of vote total from audience in previous mini debate.

At the conclusion of the one-minute statements there will be a 2-3 minute freewheeling exchange between parties and audience.

Once the exchange is completed the audience will be asked, without regard for which party they are leaning towards, who they think did best in that section of the debate. Results will be revealed after the commercial break.

After 5-6 of the debate sections (all will be on the economy) each party will be given 30 seconds for a final appeal to the audience for their support for their party in the election.

The CBC will then take a final poll on voter intentions to see if any minds were changed. There will be a few minutes for final reactions and thoughts from all the parties and some of the audience members.

Last night an all-candidates debate (and I unfortunately mean all candidates) took place in the Toronto Centre riding for Cabbagetown and St. Jamestown residents.

The debate was more like a roundtable discussion since the 6 candidates on the stage left no time for open debating.  The clear loser was David Gentili, Conservative candidate who rushed in to replace Chris Reid in the riding.  Gentili’s positions on a few issues drew booing from the crowd, to be expected in a Liberal area like Toronto Centre.  The consensus seemed to be stopped on a few issues only by Gentili, ones like trans-gendered rights and gay marriage.  The loudest performer was no doubt the Communist Party’s Johan Boyden, a veritable pain in the rear for the serious candidates.  Democracy is of course open and we must sometimes hear the voices of dissent, but the voices of the unelectable candidates were too prominent at this debate for my taste.

The NDP candidate, El-Farouk Khaki had the support of the typical NDP debate room-packers but offered no strong arguments to change the game.  I note that Khaki lecturing Rae on fighting poverty and other issues linked to social class was hypocritical coming from a human rights/immigration lawyer in an expensive suit and diamond earrings.

The big winner: Bob Rae.  Disclaimer: I am a liberal supporter.  Mr. Rae looked comfortable, professional and at ease with the issues.  Unlike the NDP candidate, Communist candidate and Green party stand-in, Mr. Rae did not have a desperation in his tone, a loudness that betrays weakness masquerading  as strength.  He also is experienced enough to know that you shouldn’t allow yourself to get dragged into a defensive posture in a debate, and so he did not.  He stayed on a positive tone and avoided trying to defend all the inevitable criticisms that come the way of an incumbent. He won the debate in the sense that the other candidates were unable to together land a collective knock-out blow to an incumbent who won more than half the votes in the last by-election.  If anyone was the target of collective distaste by the other candidates it was Gentili for the Conservatives, not Mr. Rae.

In short, no game changer which means a win for Rae, the clear front-runner.
A reminder of the candidates in Toronto Centre:

Ellen Michelson (Green) – did not debate due to Jewish holiday
Bob Rae (Liberal) – incumbent
David Gentili (Conservative)
Liz White (Animal Alliance Environment) – at time more or less endorsed a vote for anyone but Gentili
Johan Boyden (Communist)
El-Farouk Khaki (NDP)