Ignore this post!
Shhhhh!!
This is filler. This is filler. This is filler. This is filler. This is filler. This is filler. This is filler. This is filler. This is filler. This is filler. This is filler. This is filler. This is filler. This is filler. This is filler. This is filler. This is filler. This is filler. This is filler. This is filler. This is filler. This is filler. This is filler. This is filler. This is filler. This is filler. This is filler. This is filler. This is filler. This is filler.
I’m going to predict a Conservative minority m@j0r1ty tomorrow.
Why?
First, I’m an undying optimist.
Secondly, if I’m actually correct then people will look to me as a guru of great predictions (I did call that Sarah Palin thing, oddly enough, and feel that sufficient praise has not yet been heaped upon me).
Third, I think it is a distinctly possible outcome.
Fourth, if it happens, I am assured by my good friend Andrew that we will drink ourselves stupid in celebration.
Think of the headline in Wednesday’s Globe and Mail: Media Predicted Minority, Paul Holmes Knew Better.
If I’m wrong, please ignore this post. I may even quietly delete it.
So, after careful scientific calculation and considering all the odds (for you gamers, I rolled 5d6 repeatedly until I finally got a Yahtzee), I have come up with the numbers that follow.
Conservatives – 156 (37.4172351%)
BQ – 55 (7.96247%)
Liberal – 54 (24.946691%)
NDP – 41 (20.8961%)
Other/Independent – 2
Green – 0 (6.87214%)
Hey kids, SCIENCE IS FUN!
Prime Minister Dion
Here’s something we haven’t had to think too much about during the campaign. But as the latest poll numbers appear closer, it’s something I’ve just started thinking about: Prime Minister Dion.
I find this truly frightening.
Seriously. What if Dion won? What if he was the “leader” of Canada?
I wonder if some Canadians who support Harper are thinking of strategically voting otherwise to “hold the Conservatives to a minority”. If this is the case, I would encourage them to consider what they are really doing.
First of all, your vote is a vote for the leader of the country, not a vote for second place. The ballot question is (and really always is): who do I want to be Prime Minister?
Secondly, if too many small-c conservatives vote strategically to “hold the Conservatives to a minority”, they might accidentally elect Dion and the Liberals.
Consider the consequences. It’s not the economic “living large” times of the 1990s anymore – our largest trading partner, the world’s largest trading partner, is in peril like we haven’t seen in 70 years. While I never supported Chretien, I always felt reasonably comfortable that he wouldn’t leave the country in total ruin, and he didn’t – although we came close a few times, like during a certain referendum. But people must realize that the stakes today are much higher than they were in 1995.
So why would a Liberal government be so detrimental now?
You can start with the fact that Dion is the least inspiring political leader in my lifetime. I wonder about his abilities to govern, make reasoned decisions, react appropriately – in short, his ability to lead. If it was 1998, this wouldn’t be reason enough to worry.
But it’s not 1998 – it’s 2008, and the global economy is teetering.
Despite this, Dion seems hellbent on imposing some pretty radical transformations to our country during an economic period that is defined by instability. While Dion tests his theories on the Canadian economy, there is a geopolitical transformation underway: the decline of America, and the rise of regional conflicts (Israel and Iran, India and Pakistan, Russia and, seemingly, everybody else).
Is Dion the Prime Minister we want dealing with these issues? While I’m sure Dion is a “nice guy” in person, and certainly very book-smart, I can’t imagine anybody thinking he’s the right leader for this day and age.
The Death of Democracy in Canada
There is something quaint about politics in Canada, especially versus the United States. Ordinary people volunteer, and come together with like-minded people and work together, with tremendous passion, to win elections! It’s a beautiful thing to watch. I have a great deal of respect for these people: Liberals, Conservatives, NDPers, Greens, and everyone else. Even if I disagree with them on policy, I have to admire their passion and dedication.
When I became involved in politics, I was inspired by the other volunteers that I met far more than the politicians and the leaders.
In the years since, I’ve seen these volunteer numbers dwindle. In every party.
Why?
1. People lead busy lives, they have other more pressing concerns. This is obvious, and not entirely new. But perhaps moreso than before.
2. People think politics is irrelevant to their lives. This is especially true with young people. This has been said in past generations, but as people “grew up” they would eventually “come around”. This trend is over. The disaffected youth of the 90s have become the disaffected 30-somethings of today.
3. Politics in this country these days has gotten so dirty and partisan, that, instead of inspiring people, I think it turns most people off, or at the very least makes them feel indifferent. And in a day and age when “Mixed Martial Arts” is one of the most popular sports, the slug-fest politics has become just isn’t bloody enough to even inspire teenage boys to join in.
4. These election impropriety allegations flying around disgust people. They are disgusted at the thought they are true, they are disgusted by the allegations, and they are disgusted at the childish way the accusers take delight in the accusations. I’m feeling a bit of disgust myself these days.
This recent witch-hunt for the Conservatives by the “Ethics Committee” and Elections Canada reminds me of another era. Yes, that’s it. In a partisan quest to invent new ways to pretend to be appalled, NDP MP Pat Martin has unwittingly become Canada’s own Joseph McCarthy.
Perhaps somebody should go through his campaign books with a fine tooth comb and question every detail – without implying any misdeed, I’d fathom a guess that the accounting is not 100% perfect, and at least a few items might raise eyebrows or not pass somebody’s “smell test”. But rarely is accounting 100% perfect – even accountants will confess this. And rarely is it 100% clear – accountants won’t admit this. And the “smell test” – nothing like a little bit of subjectivity to make muddy rules a bit muddier. But I’m sure Pat Martin’s Official Agent did his best (for the cause, hooray), as does every volunteer Official Agent I’ve ever known.
5. As alluded in number 4, the interpretation, reinterpretation, misinterpretation, conflicting and unreadable rules and regulations governing elections, which were no doubt meant with good intention to encourage democratic discourse in the fairest possible way, are clearly not working. I’m sure the little old lady who started by passing out brochures for her local candidate at the shopping plaza wasn’t expecting she’d end up in some cold prison cell because she put her hand up to help with the bookkeeping for the local association.
Now let’s consider the rules about campaign spending limits. When was this concept invented? I actually have no idea, but I know it predates the popularity of the Internet. I wouldn’t be surprised if it was invented when most Canadians watched one of a few nightly newscasts pretty regularly, and we all lived in our little homogeneous “CBC and 3 other channels” universe.
PLEASE NOTE: The world has changed!
National Campaigns and local campaigns cannot be considered separately, it’s absurd in this day and age. What qualifies as local or national? If there were ever clearly defined lines, those days are long gone.
Voters vote for different reasons: most commonly because of the party, the stated policies of the party, or the leader. While the local candidate can make a difference, we all know it’s extremely rare that ever amounts to more than 5% (sometimes it’s enough to make a difference in a tight race).
So, if a local campaign promotes the national policies, party or leader in a local publication, is this local or national? If the “local” publication is the Toronto Star, is this local or national?
If the national party produces punjabi ads about a national policy and three Vancouver campaigns share the cost to run them, and one riding has half the punjabi-speaking population of the other 2 and they split the costs 40-40-20, is this national, local, improper expense transfers, or what?
Give me a break!
If the Liberal Party wants to take a bunch of money they would be wasting in Calgary and spend it to print larger ads in the Toronto Star, why should anyone care? I certainly wouldn’t.
Maybe having a “total cap” on spending for an entire party is workable, but even then, our numbers don’t even come remotely close to the U.S. numbers, so what are we trying to accomplish? Fairness? What’s fair about repressing people’s right to free speech during an election anyway?
All these rules, while well-intentioned, have only served to further turn people off of politics in this country.
6. The integrity of Elections Canada is being called into question. Are they biased? Are they favouring Liberals by not focusing on their imperfections (need we say “sponsorship scandal” again), or are they just busy bureaucrats enforcing a dog’s breakfast of rules and regulations that could be interpreted 1000 different ways? In the long run, it doesn’t matter – if people can’t trust the non-partisan elections agency to be non-partisan, we’re no better than Zimbabwe, and that’s not going to inspire anybody to be a part of politics.
Canada’s Cellphone Oligopoly
Gone are the days when cellphones were a luxury, or a tool for a few business elite. They are now a normal and essential part of life – both in business and personal affairs. Many families, like mine, have done away with fixed line phones completely, and this trend is growing. In fact, look all around the world, and you’ll see people getting more connected and benefiting from this amazing technology – EXCEPT IN CANADA.
Yes, Canada, that backwater of cellphone oblivion – nowhere near advanced as some dynamic, modern economies like Uganda and Tanzania.
First Rogers Wireless, stuck in 1989, with their refusal to come up with a pricing plan that will actually promote their new iPhone product (which, thanks to their monopoly on that protocol, and their takeover of Fido, is Apple’s only choice in Canada). Now, Bell and TELUS charging for incoming text messages, including SPAM. Imagine if we had to pay for spam email? I’d be broke!!
It’s time for cellphone executives to pull their collective heads out of their collective behinds. They’re not just hurting consumers, their dragging our country down (in a very real and serious sense, by damaging our competitiveness, productivity and technical innovation). No serious Internet company in Canada (like mine) is going to develop applications for wireless devices – why? There’s no market!
Worst of all for Canada and for cellphone shareholders, they are hurting their own bottom lines as well by limiting their market. But they don’t see it that way – clearly they don’t see a business case for Canadians using new technology en masse.
And isn’t that what this is all about? Larger corporations and Government clients have their blackberries and pay exorbitant fees for them – of course, it’s all expensed, so it’s not real money. If they offered a reasonable price to other people, they’d risk a backlash for raised rates to these lucrative clients, and what if that wasn’t offset by all the new clients coming on?
Could you imagine if the same backwards logic was used with any other technological innovation – radio, television, microwave ovens, etc. McDonald’s can have microwaves, but the rest of us, forget it!
For a better comparison, how about the always-on DSL/Cable internet. Suppose you could use it all you wanted, but as soon as you go over 6 gigabytes in a month, they start quietly charging you some ridiculous rate per kilobyte then slap you with a big fat bill a couple weeks after the end of the month!
Unlimited data plans (and, frankly, voice plans, too) are not the future – they are the “present”, at least everywhere else in the world.
This is ritual idiocy. We shouldn’t be arguing about this, time to join the 21st century!
Welcome to the new Conservatism.ca!
Looking for all the old posts.
Visit conservatismcanada.blogspot.com
Look for more features and more bloggers as the new Conservatism.ca develops!
Here’s An Idea: A Federal Senate Referendum
So, it appears that Saskatchewan is joining the elected Senators club – and then there were 2.
The poll numbers are hard to read: only 46% of Canadians want an elected Senate. There you have it! End of story, we lose.
Of course of the 35% that don’t (the rest are undecided), we must reasonably assume at least half of these would choose “getting rid of the Senate” versus “having the Prime Minister appoint failed candidates”.
So, while the Tories want an elected Senate, the NDP and BQ hold out for abolishing the Senate (which would require, gulp, opening the Constitution), and the Liberals don’t want to lose their well manicured Liberal playground, the status quo rules, with a slim minority of support.
Here’s a grand idea: HOLD A PROVINCE-BY-PROVINCE REFERENDUM DURING THE NEXT FEDERAL ELECTION.
With the exception of Alberta and Saskatchewan (and Nunvaut … which is another Constitutional matter), put a question on the ballot:
“Should [Nova Scotia]:
1. Elect Senators with a province-wide ballot, or
2. Continue with the current tradition of having the Prime Minister appoint Senators at their own discretion.”
If a province selects option 2, well, let the next Prime Minister get on with it.
If a province selects option 1, then the next Prime Minister loses the moral authority to appoint Senators at his (or her) own discretion. It would also give the moral authority a province would need to introduce legislation a la Saskatchewan and Alberta.
You can bet that those provinces that selected option 2 (if any) would reconsider this in the decade or two to come.
Toronto Raiders
I think competition is a good thing. If businesses and colleges and professionals and municipalities should all compete to succeed, why shouldn’t judges?
Well, when it comes to getting a warrant, it seems, the best place in Canada to go is Toronto!
Way to go T.O.!
Canadian Pennies – In God We Trust
Give NDP MP Pat Martin credit where credit is deserved – the penny has to go! Whether we do away with the nickel and change the quarter to 20 cents and introduce a 50 cent piece and a $5 coin, and make the loonie and toonie smaller are pretty secondary.
Step 1. Get rid of the penny.
Step 2. ???
Step 3. Profit!
Now that that’s out of the way, let’s talk about what a Canadian penny looks like. It seems Canwest News Service has very little idea. Check out the picture and tell me what country the second most prominent penny in the photo is from. Hint: It’s not Canada.
Survivor: Parliament Hill
In the beginning, the word “survive” seemed appropriate when the Harper minority government made it through a confidence bill. (Indeed, the word became a routine headline insert sometime during the Martin minority government.)
The thing is, it’s not appropriate anymore. How can you call it “survival” (as most continue to do, see “Harper government survives another confidence vote“, Canadian Press, globeandmail.com)?
Let’s call it “Harper minority breezes through another confidence vote” or “Conservatives yawn off another quiet confidence vote down at the office”.
If anyone survived anything, it’s Dion surviving another day as Liberal leader. The one who’d be panicking the most if the government fell on a confidence vote is him: yet another screw up for the Liberals.
Now the continued use of this word “survive” can be blamed on media “sensationalism”. This is what people tell me when I complain about the word. It’s easy to believe this. Sensation sells, and “survive” makes it sounds like more was going on than what actually was. My suggested headlines would obviously be far less interesting to potential readers.
But I don’t think it’s sensationalism. I think it’s laziness.
Real journalists (unlike myself) should come up with some interesting way to describe the non-event of a confidence motion that Dion cowers from. Let’s hear it for honesty in journalism!
Economic Emaciation
So it seems that “Axis-of-Evil Runner-Up” Robert Mugabe is up for re-election.
Hooray Democracy!
Regular readers (all 3 of you – thanks Mom) will note that I am a big fan of democracy (and, especially elections).
But if this guy wins. Even if it can be proven that it was free and fair (and it won’t be free or fair, much less prove anything), what Zimbabwe really needs is a bullet between Robert Mugabe’s eyes.
Seriously.
This man is responsible for taking a country with incredible prospects for the continent of Africa and instead producing the most horrific thugocracy the modern world has seen.
One might argue that the Zanu-PF party would just replace him with some other ruthless tyrant. Fair enough. But at least there’s a remote chance the new ruthless tyrant might not be as poor an administrator.
This guy kicked out foreign media because they were biased against him. No shit. How on earth could anyone in their right mind not be?
Good luck Zimbabwe – I hope for your sake the thugs in charge of fixing this election screw it up as much as they’ve screwed up everything else.
Network
