Is a Trap Being Set for Jack Layton?

I was going to write about this the other day, and it comes not from a Liberal or a Conservative, but from a longtime NDP supporter.

I'm all over the place today, not knowing what to think. Pollsters say ignore the polls out of one side of their face, while telling us that Jack Layton will be the leader of the Opposition out of the other.

The leader of the Opposition in a Harper government, when we were so damned close to getting rid of him in an election. Not having to depend on a coalition that Harper will fight with every trick in the book.

But is that even a possibility? Certainly going riding by riding, there is a bigger possibility that vote-splitting will give Harper his majority. And how will Jack Layton respond? According to James Laxer, it could actually have been a plan.

Even after Jack tried to make Harper a prime minister in a 2004 coalition, Laxer discusses how he handed Harper his 2006 victory. And then in 2008, he campaigned against the Green Shift, giving the Conservatives a strengthened minority.

So what is the end game here?

We know from Lawrence Martin's book, Harperland, that Stephen Harper passionately hates the Liberals. Some think it's because of Trudeau or Chretien, but they have little to do with it. It's the neoconservative mindset. Republicans hate the liberal tradition. And as we know, Harper's brand of Conservatism is Republican.

And after 14 years under the tutelage of the United State's most famous liberal basher, Art Finkelstein, it's now a religion for Harper.

I mentioned two little books, that define Canadian conservatism. One written by Michael Ignatieff's uncle, Lament for a Nation, represented the Red Tory tradition, or progressive conservative. The other, Political Realignment, by Ernest Manning, was an outline for Canadian Republicanism.

Manning's vision for Canada was that we would be reduced to a two party system, both with clear ideologies. One to the right and the other to the left. He wanted to erase the middle. And in James Laxer's piece on Jack Layton, he appears to have the same goal.

The Progressive Conservatives have already been destroyed, so the only enemy left was the Liberal party. But if Layton and Harper could somehow work together, it might just be possible to destroy them too.

In his piece Fake Left, Go Right: An insider’s take on Jack Layton’s game of chance, James Laxer gives us a bit of history, to a time when a similar gamble paid off big for the Conservatives.

When Free trade and our sovereignty were the issues of the day:

It was a moment of truth for business, labour, social movements, and for the ndp. Rather than joining the Liberals and other nationalists in a full frontal assault against free trade, the ndp reprised its 1984 election strategy, turned its guns on Turner (who was not even in office), and declared that there was no real difference between Grits and Tories. Those running the ndp campaign decided that what mattered most was the party’s seat total and its vote share relative to the Liberals’, not the fight for economic sovereignty.

Amazingly, the strategy worked. On election day, Ed Broadbent was rewarded with forty-three seats, the most ever for the federal ndp. But virtually forgotten in the ndp enthusiasm was the fact that a renewed push by their big-business allies had won the Conservatives a majority government.

Now we are again in the fight of our lives, because our very democracy is on the line, yet Layton is playing the same dangerous game. Does he really think that Harper and his "big-business allies', will allow him to govern? And even small and medium size businesses are concerned.

In my own strategic voting campaigning, three local business people told me that if they thought the NDP could win, they would have to vote Conservative. Which again makes me so damn mad that Layton is going after a riding he has very little chance of winning.

But then again, I go to Laxer's piece, when he asked in 2006:

What was the ndp leadership playing at? Did it actually prefer a Conservative victory? Unlikely as it may seem, there are reasons for thinking so. Since the founding of the ccf, social democrats have dreamt that one day their party would replace the Liberals as one of the nation’s two major political vehicles ...

In the industrialized world, Canada is that rare case where a centrist party has been dominant for many decades, borrowing ideas from the left and the right. Rarely innovative, always adaptive, the federal Liberals have been the bane of their opponents, detested by ndp and Conservative insiders alike ... Under Layton, ndp strategists have resumed the search for the Holy Grail: the realignment of Canadian politics around the centre-left pillar of the ndp through the marginalization of the Liberals. If history and international experience are indicators, for this dream to become reality the ndp will have to move even further to the centre and to abandon its half-remembered social-democratic aspirations.

And since it is in the best interest of both Stephen Harper and Jack Layton to destroy the Liberals, they are working in tandum.

Some people might rejoice at this, but think about it for just a minute.

No party representing the interests of the centre, where most Canadians lie. And one of the parties remaining, represents the money and power of the nation. Corporate interests, who have used their years' worth of tax savings to buy up media and turn it to the right.

How long will the NDP last in that climate? I know how long. We saw it with Bob Rae in Ontario.Given the fact that he governed during a double dip recession, he didn't do bad. But that's not the way revisionist history tells it.

Though some ndp insiders are already speculating about the party becoming the major alternative to the Conservatives, the broader progressive community has a different outlook and quite different aspirations. For one thing, there is the blunt fact of political tactics in a system with a first-past-the-post voting system: an all-out fight between the ndp and the Liberals for control of the same voters is an incalculable gift to the Conservatives. To improve his chances in the next election, Harper must make it appear that those who voted ndp did not waste their ballots. We can expect, therefore, the Conservatives to seek an alliance with the ndp ... Knowing that a unified centre-left vote means the end of the Conservative government, Harper has the ndp right where he wants them.

Layton will not be strong enough on his own to ward off the onslaught of Fox News North or the myriad of Conservative publications and bloggers.

He won't know what hit him and Canada will be reduced to a one party state.

Some are speculating a merger between the NDP and Liberals, but I don't think so. They are not really that aligned. Layton may hate the Liberals more than Harper, and could be happy for awhile in his new position of power.

This scenario is not one where the NDP are in opposition, but with strong progressive MPs from other parties to back them up. This is one where he would be going it alone.

This election should have been about restoring our democracy and getting rid of Harper. But sadly it has turned into a circus. If the NDP wave is real and they win the election cleanly, I'll be celebrating if it means Harper is gone.

Any other situation is too frightening for words.

I hope the NDP gamble is worth it. Stategic voting would have helped all progressive parties. It's looking more and more out of reach.

Vote Splitting Means American Style Justice System

It is no longer useful to remind people why they shouldn't vote for Harper. I think they already know.

The only message I can give now is to not split the vote, because that is the only thing that will give Harper a victory and possibly even a majority.

Layton's only ambition now appears to be more seats, a replay of his election strategies past. According to James Laxer in 2006:

Strangely, in the 2004 election, and much more overtly in 2006, the ndp leader exhibited a penchant for short-term fixes over long-term party-building. He became a servant to the proposition that what was good for working people and for the left was more seats for the ndp—no more, no less. Playing right into Conservative hands, in the 2006 election Layton helped frame the central issue as Liberal scandals. The Canadian Election Study, published just after the election, suggests this issue was responsible for the Conservative victory.

One of his Quebec candidates is still in school and according to his Facebook page, he likes to play videos and collect comic books. He may need a note from his mom to go to Ottawa. How is this good for the country?

To cap it off, in what was billed as his last statement as an MP, Ed Broadbent declared that power “should be taken away” from the Liberals, that the party “no longer [had] the moral authority to deserve people’s votes.” He said not a word about what a Harper government would mean for the country.

Layton appears to be using the same strategy. This election is now about him, and the rest of us be damned, even if it means returning Stephen Harper to power.

And what is the NDP stand on issues of importance? Gun control advocates are warning not to vote NDP if we want to save the gun registry. In a recent interview Layton was quite evasive on the topic, knowing that many of his MPs want to scrap it.

But what about law and order?

According to Laxer, who is an NDP insider:

On crime, Layton cravenly tried to capitalize on urban anxiety, attempting to compete with the law-and-order Conservatives by proposing four-year minimum sentences for certain gun-related offences. Urban advocacy is one thing, but US-based evidence suggests that such punitive policies simply don’t work. Regardless, Harper can now conscript the ndp’s positions in support of his own proposed legislative solutions. On these fronts—government ethics and crime—the party of progressive principle has become an accessory to the Conservative agenda.

So how can Layton possibly challenge Harper's law and order agenda, when he shares the same views, even when he knows they're wrong?

All I can say people is THINK! And please, please, please, DON'T SPLIT THE VOTE!!!!

This election is now about battling egos and we could all end up being collateral damage.

The NDP's Constitution May Be Missing But not Their Agenda

The media has just made it so easy now for Harper to sail to a majority. It'll be like taking candy from a baby.

The CBC is wondering where the NDP's constitution is:

Now that the NDP is within shouting distance - maybe- of forming government, a lot of people might want to take a closer look at the party, at its founding goals and principles. Questions to the NDP's media hotline yield the response that the NDP constitution is "an internal document", available to members only, and that the NDP is running on its platform, not on its constitution. And yet, anyone who wants to join the NDP has to first agree to abide by its constitution, presumably without getting a chance to read it.

The NDP's constitution is hard to ferret out, but there are copies to be found on the internet, dating from 2001 and 2003, and of course there's no way of telling if the ideas expressed in them still represent the NDP's thinking. But, crucially, there are fundamental and seminal ideals expressed, and they are potentially explosive. The principles of "democratic socialism" are laid out, and they might prove troublesome for the party as it heads towards what may be the official Opposition or even more.

And of course the gloating Conservatives who won't post a comment, but email me regularly are absolutely delirious.

I got this wonderful attack from Sun Media:



And another reader couldn't wait to send me a link to this. It will fry the NDP and Harper's smug face will be with us for decades. And with him goes our democracy.

These are the "Socialist Caucus Resolutions for the Federal NDP Convention in 2011"

The first two are fine with me but then they get dicey: 3. Nationalize U.S. Steel. 4. Close the Alberta Tar Sands

Save the jobs of the steel industry but throw oil workers out of a job?

7. Legalize Cannabis is good. 8. Canada out of NATO, NATO out of Afghanistan. Fine with me but I can hear the Cons now. In fact, the National Citizens coalition ran a complete campaign when Broadbent suggested that we get out of NATO.

Skip to 10. Justice for Palestinians, Boycott apartheid Israel. I agree but they gave Libby Davies a dressing down for suggesting the same thing.

Here comes the whoppers: 11. Nationalize the Auto Industry 12. Nationalize the Big Banks and Insurance companies 13. Nationalize Big Oil and Gas

And: 14. No NDP coalition with Business Class Political Parties. And yet Layton was ready to form a coalition with Harper.

It was a Harper supporter who sent me this so I imagine they are drafting attacks around it already.

Sometimes idealism can be just as damaging as ideology. Much of this won't play out well with moderates.

Normally, I would have dismissed this, but with Harper now poised for a majority, I have to do what I have to do. There has never been a more challenging time in this nation's history.

I've spent two years exposing Harper and neoconservatism and I feel like it's been for nothing. He's going to win.

So Will Jack Layton Give Harper a Majority or a Minority?

When Jack Layton told the Star the other day that he was going to change his strategy and start attacking Michael Ignatieff, I knew we were toast. And while Allan Gregg is telling us to ignore the polls, it's not hard to see that what Layton has done is split the vote, guaranteeing a Harper victory.

All our work may have been for nothing.

As Tobi Kohen says: Divided, Harper stands: how the left-wing split could return the Conservatives to power.

As NDP support continues to rise in the polls, will the left-wing vote splitting phenomenon be a serious game changer and prove to be a boon for the Tories in their quest for a majority?

While it's not unusual for the New Democrats to experience a surge during a campaign — Jack Layton often outperforms his competitors in the English-language debate, resulting in a spike — experts say it usually peters out come election day.

Let's hope they're right.

If Layton's rise was at the cost of Conservative support, I'd be thrilled. But it's not. I'm feeling so discouraged right now. But I'll get over it.

Determined to fight until the end.

Harper Says he Won't Try to Form Coaltion. Who Besides Layton Would Join Him in One?

With typical arrogance Stephen Harper is saying that if he doesn't get the most seats he won't try to form a coalition. Who besides Layton would trust him?

If he fails to win his party will replace him.

He knows it and we know it.

And Graham Thomson gives his colleagues a dressing drown:

I'm upset with my colleagues in the media, with journalism professors, with teachers in general and with anyone responsible for informing Canadians how our system of parliamentary democracy works. That list certainly includes myself. We have obviously fallen down on the job.

How else to explain the headlines in newspapers -and the resulting chatter -around the country making it look as if Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff is planning a coup after the federal election if he doesn't win the most seats? To read some of the stories, spiced up with quotes from outraged Conservatives, you'd think Ignatieff was ready to break out the guns and storm the doors of Parliament with his ragtag team of minority Liberals, New Democrats and Bloc Québécois.

I'm ashamed with our media myself. They should know better.

And Harper is saying that even if he gets a minority he sees no reason for compromise. Nothing will change. He will run Parliament like he has a dictatorship.

Giving Canadians the finger.

The Toronto Star says Harper is taking the low road.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper's emotional blackmail is beginning to wear thin. He's been stumping the land stirring fears that a Liberal-led “reckless coalition of losers” is poised to seize power and create a “black hole” if the voters are imprudent enough to deny his Conservatives the majority they crave.

“Michael Ignatieff's ambition to be prime minister trumps everything,” the Tories say. “Even how Canadians vote.” It's clever spin. But it's baloney. Anyone who is following this shallow campaign knows that the Conservatives, not some other clutch of losers, are likely to be back in power on May 2, crafting yet another Tory throne speech and budget. Every poll suggests the election is theirs to lose. This would be their third crack at governing since 2006.

We have to stop him. We can no longer count on help from the NDP so we'll have to slug it out alone.

As Harper and Layton Bask in the Glow of Their Egos, They Might Want to Read This

Over on Twitter Harper supporters are all encouraging Jack Layton to go for it. Attack those Liberal ridings. And Jack is buying into it. The Conbots love him. He's a star. He's doing their work for them and they're giggling in the corner.

What an idiot.

Spurred on by a survey suggesting he could win 40-50 seats (with no seat projections of course and by a firm I never heard of) Layton thinks he can be the Jane to Harper's Tarzan. Leader of the Opposition.

He might want to read this: Up, down, no change? Conflicting election polls confusing, headache-inducing

A new poll suggests the NDP is on a roll, surging to a second-place tie with the once mighty Liberal party. No, wait.

A new poll suggests the NDP is running slightly behind its fourth-place finish in the last election. Or maybe it's slightly ahead. Or maybe nothing's changed. Voters trying to make sense of the raft of contradictory daily public opinion polls during this federal election campaign are likely to wind up with a migraine.

So who among the plethora of pollsters should they believe? "Nobody," says veteran pollster Allan Gregg, an outspoken critic of his own industry and chairman of Harris-Decima, which conducts polls for The Canadian Press.

As far as Gregg is concerned, the election campaign has magnified problems with political polling: methodological issues that are skewing the results of both telephone and online surveys; commercial pressures that are prompting pollsters to over-hype their surveys; and an unholy alliance with journalists who routinely misconstrue data and ignore margins of error.

Well how about that? Layton is either in second or fourth place. His effort to be leader of the Opposition with Harper as King may not materialize after all. But the Conbots had a bit of sport anyway.

It's just frustrating that all of our efforts to get rid of this corrupt and anti-democratic government could go up in smoke because of ego. I want the NDP to do well but I don't want the left vote split to give Harper another mandate. It's that simple.

Jack Layton's Attempt to Get Harper His Majority is Working

With so many Canadians working like hell to get rid of Stephen Harper before he destroys us, what is Jack Layton doing? He's attacking Michael Ignatieff instead, in attempt to make sure that Harper gets his majority.

And it's working.

Twitter is aflutter with news that the NDP are leading in Quebec.

Not this it will transfer into seats, but needless to say the Conservatives are overjoyed. They are even discussing a national Jack Layton Day, right smack dab in the middle of the 364 Stephen Harper days.

I can't believe I actually voted for this man ... twice. What was I thinking?

Oh well. Maybe he'll get to hold Harper's coat while he finishes off our healthcare.

Layton and Harper are not the Only Strange Bedfellows This Week

Jack Layton and Stephen Harper are not the only high profile celebs to tie the knot this week. Looks like Fox News' Glenn Beck and Fox News North hopeful Ezra Levant were also seen snuggling and whispering sweet nothings.

OK, not really sweet, but they are an item.

Ezra Levant is being sued by George Soros, AVAAZ backer, for a column he wrote in September: Billionaire George Soros has made a living wrecking the lives of others. Now he wants to mess with Canadians. It was over the top and Sun media has since removed it.

Now Glenn Beck has come to the rescue also attacking this progressive philanthropist.

Creepy medieval puppets hung from the ceiling on the set of the "Glenn Beck Program" -- a conquistador, a squire, a witch, and a bearded guy who looked like a cross between Santa Claus and the Fiddler on the Roof. "Make no mistake, we are watching a show," Beck gravely told his audience. That much was obvious enough, but Beck did not mean his own television program. "You have to see who's behind the puppets," he continued, "Who is choosing the puppets and the players? Who's the puppetmaster? George Soros."
Glenn Beck, as usual, trumped them all. He told his audience that Soros has a five-step plan:

1. Create a "shadow government" under the guise of humanitarian aid.
2. Take control of the media.
3. Destabilize the state by building anti-government sentiment. (Yes, Beck attacked his opponent for building anti-government sentiment.)
4. Subvert the American electoral system.
5. Take over the world, of course.

This gives you some idea of what to expect from own Fox News North.

Soros has responded to the Beck nonsense:

Speaking about Beck, Soros told Zakaria, "I would be amused if people saw the joke in it," adding that he thinks Beck is "projecting" the views of Rupert Murdoch, who owns Fox News, and who Soros accused of "telling the people some falsehoods and leading the government in the wrong direction." Soros said he thinks Fox News "has imported the methods of George Orwell, you know, newspeak, where you can tell the people falsehoods and deceive them.

People like Beck and Levant are stupiding (yes I made up the word) themselves out of business. They just get more and more bizarre. Maybe Fox News North will be billed as a comedy, though it could be more aptly called a tragedy.