« The flipping point | Main | The kaleidoscope of blind spots »

May 30, 2005


Idealistic Pragmatist

Smart and well-argued. Very well done.


A well argued post - nice job. Although I lean to the right I thought the Tipping Point post missed the mark by a large margin.

I think the CPC *can* make themselves into a credible alternative to the natural governing party, however they have to actually talk policy instead of practicing "empty vessel politics" (as explained over at Tilting at Windmills).


I think an important point that Monarchist is missing--implicit in #5--is about where parties sit on the ideological spectrum. The liberals bestride the Canadian center capturing the sweet spot of the ideological bell curve. If people who sit in that centre swell want to abandon the Liberals they have to move away from their ideological comfort level. But if they are going to move, why right instead of left? Shouldn't rising support for the NDP (another Western party, btw) count?


Thirty years ago in Northern Ontario, I attempted to argue a political point. I got the cold shoulder, not because my argument was wrong, not because they didn't agree, not because they couldn't see that Trudeaupian policies would eventually destroy the country. I got the cold shoulder because I was arguing against Liberal policies in "Mr Pearson's Riding".
It's taken half my lifetime, but finally I see that a growing number of non-Ontarians, and maybe one or two Ontarians too, are finally recognizing the folly of Liberal "whatever gets us elected" policies.


I got over most Liberal behaviours long ago. And I've found a political programme that I can live with, in the NDP. And the NDP is not going to form government any time soon, realistically, although Jack's personal popularity seems to be higher than everyone else's.

But it's not enough to point out Liberal flaws. You have to demonstrate you have an agenda people can live with. It has not been done.


A terrific post, Mandos. It is true that many Conservatives simply cannot imagine that their party and its policies are unappealing even in the face of the Adscam scandal. What's interesting is that they consistently claim that only the left wing "doesn't listen to the voters." Clearly they have their fingers in their ears.


"Worse, though, number 12 doesn't follow from number 11, anyway. Rejection of a Western protest party doesn't necessarily mean that its Westernness has anything to do with the rejection. So all that previous logic can be discarded on that final illogical conclusion."

The rejection of the westeren protest party was because of it's policies, those policies are what makes us what we are here in the west. Rejection of the party and policies is therefore a rejection of westerners. Imagine if the tables were turned and the majority of seats were in the west and we elected the goverment of our choice, and any suggestions that came from the east were rejected as "scary" and were ignored. Wouldn't the east feel left out, and feel like leaving?

The comments to this entry are closed.