“Hidden Agenda”

Another day, another desperate, fear-mongering attack ad from the Harper Conservatives.

Considering that the “hidden agenda” alluded to involves the possibility that the parties quite probably representing 60 percent or more of Canadian voters might conceivably get together after the election and attempt to work cooperatively in some kind of temporary alliance doesn’t actually strike me as an especially SCARY thing.

That aside, seeing as Ignatieff has already flatly ruled out forming a coalition post-election, at what point does Harper’s incessant fear mongering and negative campaigning against a “reckless Coalition” that exists only as delusional figment of his imagination start to backfire on him? Or will it?

8 Comments

Filed under 2011 Canadian Election, Jack Layton, Michael Ignatieff, Stephen Harper

8 responses to ““Hidden Agenda”

  1. One would think , people would get mad as hell..Harper was uttering this coalition many times in Nova Scotia today.. Michael’s mouth has been touched up to look like he said it too. A complete falsehood

  2. Rotterdam

    They are pounding away at it because they say it will work.
    They will keep bringing up the Bloc. Harper will then use the word “stable” government in his speeches. He will contrast that with “reckless” coalition that includes the Bloc.

  3. Rotterdam: I noticed the repeated references to the Bloc “deciding the government” etc. in a speech by Harper at a campaign stop this morning.

    So yep, I believe you’re entirely correct re the strategy.

    Seems kind of cynical to me tho.

  4. CWTF

    Next time that a Connies tells me about the evils of a coalition I’ll ask about Israel and watch the head explode….

  5. Rob

    What is killing me ever so slowly and agonizingly is that Canadians should all be aware that there is nothing illigitimate about a governing coalition. This strategy the Conservatives are using to try and demonize the entire opposition should be backfiring in the worst way; I cling to the faint hope it still may.

  6. Rob: It would only be backfiring if a majority of Canadians weren’t as clueless and uninformed as they apparently seem to be.

  7. grammins

    With all due respect, it isn’t about being clueless and uninformed, it is that we aren’t comfortable with the Bloq having ANY say in any matters in government. They’re traitors and their presence is an insult to our nation. A Coalition is legitimate, but the NDP and LPC have a 0% chance of having more seats that the CPC, so whatever arrangement is required to govern will require the cooperation of the separatist pricks. It’s not being naive, it just comes down to the simple fact that Quebec should not be able to dictate to the ROC social, economic or any other policy for that matter. They would have a disproportionate amount of power and influence in any arrangement that came into being, and THAT is unacceptable.

  8. Grammins: I get where you’re coming from on that, but I have a different appreciation of the Bloc, having long since reconciled myself to the absurdity of their presence in parliament.

    I guess I’m capable of turning a blind eye to their stated agenda… perhaps because I’m not entirely convinced of its sincerity.

    Aside from their ideological raison d’être, in practice, they have been quite effective as the voice of social conscience of parliament, advocating many positions that I happen to agree with.

    Bottom line is that I don’t view their influence as being a necessarily bad thing.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s