The American Influence on Canadian Politics ...

... goes beyond the election tactics.

In recent elections (I guess over the past 10 - 15 years), the tone of elections has changed. Changed for the worst, less about policy more about attack the leader of the party. Do you want this man leading Canada/Ontario? This is probably the result of the American elections. Attack your opponent! Call into question everything, and nothing is off-limits (except for family).

But there is something else that the American system has done to Canadian politics. It is no longer about the MP who represents you; however, the leader of the party. This is a direct result of Canadians seeing Bush or Clinton or Obama being elected as the leader of the nation. The face of the nation. People now have to understand that when they vote, they should be voting for their representative and NOT the leader of the party. The party leader isn't going to do anything for you, but your MP should.

Furthermore, the influence of American politics isn't solely based on voter perspective, but now, the leaders of the party. Harper is strong willed and a non-nonense, I don't take shit from anyone, if you don't vote the way I want you to, not only will I kick you out of my caucus, but I will beat you down so hard that you will never ever be in a political somebody again type of leader. Sound familar? No? Well, look at Jean Chretien, he was the same way, party members have to tow the party line ALL the time, even if its against the wishes of the very people they represent. Need more evidence, Brian Mulroney - although, I feel that he was less abrasive. He had tight control on their MPs. Perhaps the Conservatives were better at hiding it.

Perhaps the importance of the leader the evolution of the party system in Canada, but having the leader, be so brash and bold, so wanting to leave their mark on Canada and how Canada should look in their own eyes ... that s/he never takes a second thought that maybe (just maybe) its not what's good for the country.

Who Said Canadian Politics isn't Interesting ....

... Well, I think I did - actually, I know I did several times, on several different occasions - repeatedly.

If you don't know, Canadian politics is really interesting right now. The Liberals and NDP have formed a coalition and requested the Governor General that there is a viable alternative government in the House with the confidence of the majority of Canadians. Why did this happen? I'll get into that in a later post. Short story, I believe its all about money and Harper's big ego.

But right now, I have an image in my head, it has Dion, Layton and Harper in a car, screaming towards a cliff and the 3 of them are fighting over the steering wheel. Oh wait, can't forget about Elizabeth May, she just jumped into the car with her support of the coalition government and apparent request for a Senate seat with a Cabinet position!

Canadian Politics ...

A few people have mentioned to me that I talk about American politics quite a bit more. Frankly its because there is an election going on down there and essentially its an 11-month election from start to finish. But, here is an entry about our Canadian politics.

The Globe and Mail article, "Ontario set to become 'have-not' province: Flaherty" basically says that Ontario will soon need the support of the rest of Canada. Equalization payments will (eventually - maybe) made to the most populous province. If you think about it, Flaherty is right. With the strong Canadian dollar (against the U.S. Greenback) and the looming recession in the States, its no surprise that Ontario will begin to struggle with its heavy, heavy dependence on manufacturing. This is just yet another volley in the bickering between Ontario and Ottawa. Honestly, I'm siding with Flaherty. Flaherty makes comments earlier that Ontario should cut its corporate taxes. McGuinty complained that there just isn't enough money to do that. Well, that maybe true, but if you CUT taxes, more businesses will come to Ontario and thus you won't lose as much as last year's books would indicate. A little short term pain for long term gain. That's the problem with McGuinty, he seems to be way to short sighted. The thing is that huge deficits became all the rage in the late 90s and early 00s. Then shorted sighted governments passed a law saying deficits should be illegal. This really just handcuffs governments only to look to the very short term. Allowing small (not excessive) deficit spending is a necessity even in the business world.

One of the major sticking points between the federal and Ontario governments, is government assistance for manufacturing companies. Governments have no business in bailing out the manufacturing sector, especially the auto industry (that's an entirely different post). Why should the Federal government bail out (potentially) poorly run businesses? Or companies that are making things people cannot currently afford? The economy will right itself, companies will still manufacture products and there will still be jobs (perhaps not as many, but there will still be jobs). This isn't Ottawa's problem. This isn't a government problem. In times of down turn (which we are rapidly approaching or currently in the midst of), the companies that do survive not only build better products but build them more efficiently. Thus better for international competition. What would people think if oil and gas prices plummeted and the government stepped in and bailed out them out? People would just ask why and say its not justified. They made billions and billions of dollars 'gauching' us already, they don't need it. Its a matter of perspective.

Michigan and Florida ...

... What? You want your cake and eat it too!?

I'm talking about the Democrat Primaries in the U.S. Earlier this year, these two states decided (against the Democrat National Party's wishes) to hold their Primaries 'early', before Super Duper Tuesday (February 5th, 2008). Michigan held their Primary on January 15, 2008 and Florida held theirs on January 29th, 2008. The consequences? Their delegates that they send to the National Convention in August, do NOT get a say. Why did these states do this? I would assume because they wanted to have a 'bigger say' in the selection of the Democrat's presidential nominee. However, in doing this, they got nothing. And what happened? Well, Clinton and Obama are deadlocked in a tight race for the nomination. Not, only did they lose their delegate votes at the convention, but really they had no say or influence in the race.

There should be NO re-vote. It is THEIR fault for holding their primaries early. They knew what the consequences were. This is simply giving both Michigan and Florida what they have always wanted, a bigger say in the selection of the Presidential nominee. That is was the initial reasoning behind moving up their primaries. They had their primaries, they broke the rules, they have to live with the consequences of the rules they broke.

Bad Canada ...

... The Republican nominee for President is John McCain. Hooray. This should have happened 8 years ago. On the Democrats sides, its even more up in the air. HIlary managed to squeak out wins in Ohio and Texas. No thanks to the Canadian Foreign Affairs office. Yes, Canada has meddled in the American democratic process.

For those who don't know, someone in the Canadian government leaked a memo to the Clinton campaign, that there was a meeting with Obama's advisers regarding the NAFTA issue. The memo essentially stated that Obama's position on renegotiations is simply posturing and should be taken with a grain of salt. Essentially, the memo screwed over Obama in Ohio where NAFTA is a huge issue. Furthermore, it allowed Clinton to tighten up the race and have the Democrats continue to fight in the late April.

This is bad. Really bad. This is probably the worst thing a foreign government could do to another country. Its like Bush coming to Canada and saying that he supports Stephen Dion for Prime Minister in the next general election. Now, that would really change the political landscape. Support for Dion would probably take a hit because everyone hates Bush.

There is one positive. Its nice to know that Obama knows where Canada is ...

Neighbours Down South ...

... Yesterday Mitt Romney suspended his campaign bid for the nomination for the Republican Party, essentially handing the Republican nomination to John McCain.

[Quick Note: For those who don't really know me, I sort of have a liking to politics. It intrigues me. I certainly am a right-wing Conservative when it comes to finances. However, when it comes to the social issues, I am certainly not right-wing.]

So the Republican nomination is of great interest to me. Actually U.S. politics is of great interest to me. Because they are our largest trading partner we have to watch and see who the American elect and what kind of person s/he is and where s/he is going to lead the country. Just look at what George W. Bush has done in the like 8 years.

I'm happy that Romney suspended his campaign. I'm a big John McCain fan and I believe that he will do America a lot of good. On the Democrat side of things, Barak Obama and Hilary Clinton continue to duke it out. It is my belief that there will NOT be a 'dream ticket' of Obama and Clinton or vice versa.

Here are my predictions.
I think that if Clinton wins the Democrat nomination. McCain will manage to be elected President. For the last 20 years (5 terms), the White House has had a Bush or a Clinton in it. America truly needs a change and I believe people will truly see that.

If Obama wins, he will become the next President. It comes down to change yet again. McCain is a 4-term Senator and has been in Washington for quite some time. Obama has been a Senator for 1-term. He is also very charismatic and has the ability to truly captivate a crowd. He would be an excellent leader.

No matter what there will be something good that comes out of this ... George W. Bush will no longer be President.