Was Harper Risking Canada's Future?
Sound Off!
Got something to say?
Sound off in Comments
Sound off in Comments
Share This Blog Post
Can't see the 'ShareThis' icon? Reload your page view by pressing Shift and clicking Refresh at the same time.There's a feeling you get when you've discovered your child has done something really, really stupid...something dangerous that put themselves and others at risk. You know the feeling - it surfaces when you're about to confront him or her and you realize that you're so relieved that nobody was hurt, it's impossible to be as mad as you want to be.
That's how I feel about Stephen Harper today.
Election 2008 was all about the elusive Conservative majority. Don't let Harper or his spin doctors insult your intelligence by convincing you otherwise. Stephen Harper wanted a majority bad enough that he was willing to put Canadians at risk of waking up this morning to Prime Minister Stephane Dion. Saskatchewan, which would have been hurt the most by the Green Shift (a term that if I never hear again, it will be too soon) was forced to spend thirty odd days wondering why Harper would play games of chance with our hard-won and well-deserved booming economy - and for at least a couple of days, the threat of a Tory loss was a very real thing (again I point out that winning this election should not have been so difficult.)
But, much to the relief of at least Tory supporters (if not everyone with common sense) the only loser last night was Stephane Dion. His Liberal leadership now has a definite expiry date, and my money's on sooner than later. But without the vindication of a majority - Harper needs to fine tune his performance to blend some humility with the strength, convincing both voters and his party that he deserves to hang around despite only having two minority wins and one loss under his belt.
Was it really worth it?
Tammy Robert is the Executive Producer of 'The John Gormley Live Show' - listen live every weekday morning from 8.30am - 12.30pm on NewsTalk 650 or NewsTalk 980.
Comments
If Harper had not called an
If Harper had not called an election, the Liberals would have brought down his Gov't this fall anyway. He just beat them to the punch. Good on him!
Liberals bringing down the govt????
Are you nuts, whoever wrote the previous comment? The Liberals wanted an election like I would want a wart on my nose. No money, no organization and a leader with low ratings...and they want to bring down a govt?? If you believe that, then I do have some land in Florida for you.
Don't buy it, it might be
Don't buy it, it might be Goodale's.
Harper Canada
I have to agree with Morley. The Libs and NDP had several instances where they could have brought the government down and did NOT. It shows me they are nothing more than wind bags, naysayers and not competent to lead this country. It was Prime Minister Harpers misfortune that the "financial crisis" reared its ugly head when it did and, I believe, affected his chances at a majority. When things are not going well, ie: recession, voters tend to blame the government and vote for a change. Maybe next time PM Harper should use some wisdom in calling an election and not just what the polls say.
What Saskatchewan told the
What Saskatchewan told the conservatives was that it doesn't matter how you treat us or what promises you break...we'll still vote for you.
This was a dumb dumb election call. No way were the Liberals going to vote down the government.
If the liberals ever get a good leader...look out Harper.
The $300 million dollars
The $300 million dollars spent on the election was a waste of money. I knew from the getgo Harper wouldn't have a majority. Until both Harper and Dion are leaders of their respective parties, we will continue to have conservative minority governments. Maybe if the conservative party goes back to it's progressive conservative roots rather than the reform roots, maybe then they'll capture a majority. Until then, here's hoping for a NDP government!
I can't agree Ms.
I can't agree Ms. Roberts.
An election is always a gamble to be sure.
But which was the biggest risk? Calling an election right after Dion spent the summer explaining his green shift.. and receiving less than positive feedback out of well outside of Toronto????
Or was the bigger risk allowing the green shift to fall off the radar and Dion to recover? Was the bigger risk allowing Dion to call the election on his terms in a month like he promised? or worse allowing for another year of fund raising and organizing, not to mention 1.85 for each vote they had in the last election. The 850,000 fewer votes the liberals received amounts to 1.5 million in revenue that the liberals will not get in the next year now. That is a big hit. And it is 1.5 million that they had to borrow to run an election today that they wouldn't have had to in a year. (not to mention probably another expensive leadership race now) Should Harper have waited until the economic crisis in the states was at its worst? I don't think that would have helped him much either, and it might have created the circumstances for the opposition to bring him down on their terms.
I think your premise is flawed. Sure it was a gamble as you say, but I think the bigger gamble would have been waiting.
(and travis... go read the Liberal red book from the past few elections and tell me why I should vote liberal instead of Tory based on broken promises)
Reporters should realize
that what happens in the house of commons is simpley for show. The real business of government happens in committee and it was here that the Liberals and NDP were holding up the workings of government. They knew only too well that it would be unpopular to force an election in the house so they (like the true weasels they are and anyone with common sense can see that) held up the conservatives preventing them from getting anything done.
Was it worth it yes!
Add New Comment