Quote:
Originally Posted by whatnext
As seen in the last Federal election, the days of using the word "deficit" as a bogeyman are over. Joe Sixpack will say who cares what the province's credit rating is, Christy Clark still raised his Medical Services Premiums, the way she has every other year.
|
Gotta say that ya don't have a good political grasp of the "deficit" issue. Remember when the BC NDP won the 1996 election? With a lower popular vote share than the BC Libs? When Glen Clark stated that the budget was "balanced" during the election campaign when afterward it was disclosed that it was not? And the major media focus upon same? Remember the lawsuit launched by numerous 1996 BC NDP voters against the BC NDP due to fraudulent misrepresentation?
In any event, unlike yourself, I will postulate that a "balanced budget" is a major factor in each and every election, not only in BC, but across Canada.
Now back to the fed election. JT's platform was for a "deficit" of $10 billion/annum for additional "infrastructure" spending under current CA economic circumstances. Infrastructure spending as in highways, bridges, transit, sewer, water, etc. Hell, I have no problem with that. As a matter of fact, under GAAP accounting said spending would be wayyyyyyy less, in terms of the fed budget, considering that infrastructure is expensed over the term of the infrastructure's life-cycle under GAAP.
Yet, the actual fed budget was $30 billion... mostly on program spending due to further economic fallout. JT and the Liberals have sooooo much political capital right now, as a centrist party, that the Canadian public gives them considerable leeway.
Yet, on this specific issue on the fed budget, Canadians views in an opinion poll:
1. Federal gov't shouldn't be running deficits at all and should balance budget: 34%
2. Federal gov't should stick to its campaign promise of a $10 billion deficit to spend on infrastructure: 44%
3. Federal gov't should spend as much as needed even if it means significant deficits: 22%
Again, JT and the Liberals have huge political capital right now and won't impact them politically in the short term.
BTW, do ya really believe that BC ridings encompassing Kelowna, West Van, North Van, Richmond... even my riding of SS/WR voted (almost in my case) federal Liberal, which are all demographically centre-right 'cause they don't care about deficits? And 'cause these fed "blue" Liberal"/red tory switchers voted Liberal in 2015 that BC will go NDP? Haha. Man are ya mistaken. Like myself, among all others, we are all "blue" liberal/red tory voters and many switched in 2015. The NDP brand is toxic to these voters. Period.
As an aside, "blue" Liberal finance minister Morneau and other cab mems have convinced JT that both the Kinder Morgan twinning to the west coast as well as Energy East oil pipelines are critical in order to increase fed gov't revenues. And major fed political work behind the scenes is currently underway with the BC gov't in order to meet its 5 conditions. All opinion polls to date indicate that just ~23% here in BC "strongly" oppose the KM pipeline. The feds are working on the "moderately" opposed right now.
http://news.nationalpost.com/full-co...es-on-pipeline
Grab your bag of popcorn as it's gonna be fun watchin' that one play out if the fed Libs, AB NDP, and BC Libs all come to an agreement on KM while the de facto "LM" BC NDP goes bonkers.
As for BC NDP leader John Horgan, they will introduce a universal $10/day child care platform for the next election. Back in 2013, same was already costed at ~$2 billion/annum. Back then the BC NDP stated: "Not an option - Just too expensive". Guess not expensive now. More annual $billion program spending will also be announced by the BC NDP. Again, even here, they are committing political suicide.
Former 1990's BC NDP leader/premier Mike Harcourt publicly stated back in 2012 to the BC NDP "You go left... you get left out". And boy the BC NDP is going left in 2017... and undoubtedly will lose a good chunk of centrist voters.
And ya do know why "red" federal Liberal type Harcourt quit the BC NDP in a nasty public dispute?
Quote:
|
"Harcourt said the party needs leadership that balances an understanding of the Lower Mainland with the resource realities of the province. “Vancouver is an important part of the province, but most communities, about 150 of them, survive on natural resources, and if you say, ‘You can’t log, you can’t mine, you can’t drill wells for gas or ranch,’ you’re ignoring 95 per cent of British Columbia and most of the communities that depend on natural resources.”
|
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/...ticle17751648/
And do you know why Mulcair, during the fed election, came out in favour of balanced budgets? Because the NDP has a noose around its neck as the "tax and spend party". Mulcair and his strategists wanted to allay those concerns in order to keep their lead in opinion polls back then. Simple.
Quote:
|
If you watch what is unfolding in Britain, it's easy to see how one week's crazed bearded lefty is next week's potential PM, if a scandal breaks on the Right. Horgan is not the ideal candidate, but Clark is not liked, it wouldn't take much to sway the voter.
|
Look. When Labour in Britain elected left/far-left Jeremy Corbyn as its leader it committed political suicide. Period. Forget about the current Cameron kerfuffle. During the next election, Labour will suffer major losses. Corbyn is just another Michael Foote from the 1980's - worst political defeat in British Labour history.
Same with Saunders in the U.S. We are just talking about the party nomination here akin to CA political conventions. Not the electorate at large on voting day. Completely different animal. And, for various reasons, Saunders is not electable south of the Mason-Dixon line in the U.S. in terms of the electoral college. Obama was the then JT in political terms back in 2008. So welcome to president Clinton in 2016. Republicans are fricked up and only Kasich would be competitive.
https://morningconsult.com/president...ge-projection/
Concerning political scandals... the major BC historical political scandals:
1. Socred Forest minister Robert Sommers charged with seven counts of receiving bribes and convicted in 1957. Socreds won another majority gov't in following 1960 election.
2. Post-1979 Socred "Dirty Tricks" scandal - largest political scandal to date involving "Gracies Finger" (inappropriately influencing electoral boundaries commission), cabinet ministers (Peter Hyndman) dining at the public expense on high-priced Pouilly Fuisse, fake Socred letters to the editor using prominent BC NDP names, etc., etc. Received major media coverage. In the subsequent 1983 BC election, Socreds received even an even larger majority than in 1979;
3. Post-1991 BC NDP gov't - major scandal involving decades long Nanaimo Commonwealth Holding Society - $millions siphoned from BC charities into BC NDP bank accounts. Criminal charges laid. BC NDP re-elected in 1996.
4. The Glen Clark deck scandal - many prominent BC NDPers involved in shady bingo licence dealings albeit one was charged for offering bribe to Glen Clark.
5. Even prior to the May, 2013 BC election, the ethno-gate scandal received major media attention for a prolonged period of time. Election result saw the BC Libs increase their seats over 2009.
As long-time BC political analyst Keith Baldrey has noted on many occasions... the BC electorate is relatively immune to scandals when it comes to casting their ballot at the ballot box. Political reality.
PS. Horgan is the biggest idiot/buffoon that the BC NDP has ever elected BC NDP leader. Even worse than Bob Skelly back in the mid-1980's. Guy makes public statements in certain interior BC communities/ later causes local public outrage/ later writes letter to the editor of local paper apologizing. Good grief.
Prev
Linear Mode
