Saturday, May 23, 2015
Why Stephen Harper's Great Con Debate Scam Could Backfire Badly
Well now we've heard it from the horse's mouth, or the horse's ass, or the scary puppet Stephen Harper himself. He will NOT take part in the biggest of the political leader debates.
Prime Minister Stephen Harper reiterated Friday he will not take part in a national English debate that would be broadcast by the major TV networks.
He will not say why he would boycott a debate that is watched by more Canadians than any other. But he will try to suggest that this democratic demolition derby isn't really his idea.
“The position of the party has been clear on this question for some time,” Harper responded. “The Conservative party is ready to participate in a maximum of five debates in total, which is a record for federal campaigns in our country.”
Or suggest, as only a Con man could, that five tiny debates means MORE. When in fact it means LESS, as in a far smaller audience.
And everyone knows that the idea could only have come from the diseased mind of Stephen Harper, who has tried to wreck every democratic instrument that ever crossed his path, from the days when he was in high school and he tried to destroy the student council.
And is now desperately afraid of parading his shabby record before millions of Canadians...
Which couldn't be more cowardly or disgusting.
But of course the big question now, as Stephen Maher writes, is will this desperate gamble payoff? Or will it be his downfall?
If you want to make money playing poker, you have to read your opponents without letting them read you. Stephen Harper sure is hard to read, but in the game of high-stakes poker over the election debates, he seems to have misread the other players.
And I'm betting on the latter. Because if Harper was counting on the other leaders to also drop out of the consortium debate if he didn't attend he was wrong. And if he got the idea from his buddy David Cameron he might have made a fatal mistake.
When British Prime Minister David Cameron stayed away from a similar debate recently, the British consortium went ahead without him. That didn’t help Cameron’s rival, Labour Leader Ed Miliband, because he got beat up by the leaders of smaller parties.
The dynamic would be different here because many voters would like to have a different prime minister, but they disagree on whether it should be Thomas Mulcair or Justin Trudeau.
For as Frank Graves points out, too many Canadians hate Harper, and many of them are just looking for the best candidate they believe can beat him or STOP him...
A big chunk of voters — Graves calls them “promiscuous progressives” — want to see the back of Harper. If the biggest debate of the campaign takes place without Harper, and “promiscuous progressives” settle on one of the other guys as the preferred alternative, that guy would win.
So not only could that prove fatal. As Chantal Hébert points out, Harper's grubby move can also only help fuel the desire for regime change.
It is in the nature of successful ruling parties to develop a blind spot for the rot that tends to set in over their time in office. At some point they stop seeing themselves as voters see them and become agents of their own electoral destruction.
Anecdotally, the sense that it is time for a change is rampant (and growing) in just about every region of the country. The Conservatives seem hell-bent on solidifying that sense at every step of the way to the campaign.
There is no rationale for the prime minister to boycott — as he is currently set to do — the leaders’ debates that will be produced by the country’s main networks in the next campaign. Most voters can only construe that as hubris.
So his grubby little scheme to blow up the debates, could very well end up blowing up in his face. So much for those in the MSM who still think he's a political genius.
Which only leaves the question of how Harper should be represented at the debates he won't attend. So I'm glad to see that Rabble is looking for some suggestions.
Frozen poultry, either turkey or chicken.
Feces throwing primate.
And I must say I am VERY impressed by the list so far. And of course, extremely flattered by this.
Although I have to admit that would be a challenge eh?
For how do you combine a frozen turkey, a ventriloquist's dummy, and a dead leader walking who is more than good to go?
Unless it looks something like this...
I'm sure you can think of something better, or more cowardly and disgusting.
But isn't that a great thought to end the week?
Enjoy it, we deserve it.
And have a great weekend everybody !!!
Please click here to recommend this post at Progressive Bloggers.
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)
Canadians who have been watching for the past few years/months/days.......do Not need to watch the proposed debates!
True to Harper double speak he will launch attack adds portraying the major networks as corrupt left over socialist inspired institutions trying to repress the freedom of choice for all Canadians. He stands for a bright freedom filled future for all Canadians and can no longer abide by the old institutions that dragged Canada down to the mess it find itself in today. Really really sick!!
Slithery steve is the most dangerous type, he believes his own lies. In a debate he has and will say anything with no regard for the truth. Without him in a debate truth will be told and Harper won't be there to slither and squirm and Canadians will hear only the truth. This will be a completely different dynamic than Question period , scrums, managed announcements and photo ops. Think of the panic when it hits - I have no control over the situation.
70-75% will not vote for the reformatories. A debate with 4 rather than 5 can make Harper look irrelevant if Mulcare and Trudeau are reasonable and respectful. Harper has lost his majority: this debate format will erode his minority and may even blow it up.
There's only one thing that the MSM should use to replace the absent Harper...a supposiTORY
I REALLY hope it DOES backfire, but I'm scared.
What would make me happy? The leaders of the progressive parties of Canada standing up at a debate where Harper is absent where they announce that they are going to 'block' Harper from winning another majority. Maybe roll out a map showing where Liberals will NOT run and Dippers will NOT run and Greens will NOT run.
PROVE to Canadians that they are worthy of our votes and that they can run this county like mature politicians and professionals.
And then, when Canadians are back in charge, they offer up 'Phase II' of the plan which is immediate implementation of PR.
A boy can dream, right?
Simon, great news! Big yes in Ireland!!!!
your first picture of Steve taking his ball home, well Steve doesn't have any balls. He is simply a coward. He is afraid of the other leaders. Although they try to poke fun of Trudeau and his ability to "stay on message" what if he did score on one big comment and it went viral. We know what Mulcair can do, we've all seen it and Steve doesn't want to give Mulcair any more exposure. When it comes to Elizabeth May, well we all know she can hold her own, but what if Steve were to be very rude to her? How would that play? Not well.
Now the idiot in all of this is Steve. they don't know how well he will stand up in debate and they certainly don't want the other party leaders to be asking any pointed questions.
Mr. Harper can you please explain why 1,200 murdered/missing First Nations women were not on your radar?
Mr. Harper why do you want to cut $30 Billiion out of federal health care in 2017 and how will Canadians get adequate health care after that?
Mr. Harper why is Northern health care such a mess?
Mr. Harper why do you have such a problem with appointing qualified people, instead choosing to appoint people who wind up in criminal investigations?
Mr. Harper why did you treat our Veterans so poorly?
Mr. Harper why did you cut the budget of the RCMP anti child porn division?
Ya I wouldn't want to answer those questions either. Just being asked them sends a real message.
I've always wondered why people would put so much credence into debates and their "outcome". I guess they play to the lowest common denominator. The commentaries afterward certainly do.
The debates really show nothing about the ability to develop good policies and run a country. They're a "one off". It's like having a shoot-out to decide a game in a team sport. (Actually it's worse. It's probably more like deciding a seven-game Stanley Cup series by having only a shoot-out instead.)
But, then again, it's politics. And, like sports, it's really just about entertainment (when, maybe, it shouldn't be).
will try again, anyhow the whole affair with harper will hopefully end badly, as he is a chicken. He knows mulcair will crucify him in debates and he doesnt want to look stupid or dishonest( he is both)
and the real cons hopefully will have given up on him, I suppose the zealots will never give up on harper but I hope there is few of these types left.
We can always predict the future by reviewing the past and Harpoon's past has been one deficit after another not to mention his spendthrift ways with money he doesn't have so folks if you want more of the same then you know who to vote for.
Post a Comment